next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects greenweb@fox.nstn.ca wrote: > Hi, > Sorry it took me a while to respond. I often don't have the quiet > time for thinking. > > Owen Herzman made the comment: > >Helga questioned my integrity because I do consulting work for > >people she considers questionable. > > It's not only me who considers the fossil fuel industry "questionable". I feel that you are entitled to form your opinions about a type of industry or person, based on some sort of fact. I would respectfully suggest that you are very wrong to criticize a person simply because he worked for an organization or industry with whom you disagree. The mere fact that Owen did consulting work for an oil company in no way impunes his integrity or compromises his ethics. The Oil Company may have hired him for his views, and his inputs may very well have leaned them in a manner which you would find pleasing. On the other hand, a sleazy Consultant, with low ethics, could very well mis-apply facts and truths in a way that would enable the Oil Company to justify a perverted course of action. What, exactly, was the nature of the work Owen did for the Oil Companies? Did he provide balanced, competent, and responsible advice? Or did he prostitute himself, and compromise his ethics and give them a basis for justifying a sleazy and irresponsible course of action? If you have evidence that Owen acted in the later manner, then you are justified in slamming him as you did. If not, then you have made a significant error. > > The question of funding and integrity is not something to be taken > lightly. The problem for ANYONE who at times works for industry > (and often government too), is that the perception of bias will be there. > Whether or not it exists is often beside the point. (And harsh, > non-reasoned comments on the PR on hurricane Mitch certainly > enhanced that perception.) This statement is totally wrong. If an Oil Company hired me to find a place to dump a particular waste safely, and I reported back that I could find no place where they could safely dump this waste, and as a consequence, they found another way to safely dispose of the waste, anyone who would be biased against me and my report would be shallow, illogical and irresponsible. > > Owen also wrote: > >I even wrote sections of an EIA on the subject > >which raised questions about the effects of natural gas, if it were being > >used to increase overall fossil fuel consumption. Some of those sections > >made it into the final draft and some didn't. The point is that I'm paid > >for my honest opinion and I give it, here or there. > > I would say the key point is that the company would not use any > information/advice that goes against its interests, but will use > the consultant's name to bolster its list of experts who gave advice. A company hires Consultants for advice. It may choose to follow or ignore the Consultant's advice. An unethical Company can quote the Consultant "out of context". An ethical consultant concerned for his reputation will attack an unethical employer, to set the record straight. Can you name one ethical Consultant whose work was abused by an unethical Company, and who let the abuse go unchallenged? > We had a discussion about this with a friend in Quebec, who is a > botanist, poor as a church mouse and who was considering doing > work for one of the pipeline companies. We discouraged him. You did your friend a great disfavor. > Here at Dal and other intitutions, there are a number of people who > have been involved with consulting jobs for industry. Once one knows > this, one will always be skeptical and wonder if their advice is not > tainted by an interest in obtaining further contracts. (Of course, > some are notorious for their pro-industry views. I don't put Owen > in this category.) I feel that your initial posting did, indeed, put him in this category. You criticized him simply because he did work for a company whom you dislike, without knowing specifically the content of his work. > Once in a while you hear in the media about scientists who were > muzzled by industry or the government, e.g. in the fishery, drug > industry, Health Protection Branch, etc. But this information > rarely comes out, so we are usually left with the 'official' position. OK.... so there are indeed ethical people whose views are ignored by their employers. Are these people tainted simply because their employer does not go with their views? > The same situation often happens to environmentalists - the question > of whether one should join a government/industry advisory body, etc. > Rare is the advisory body which genuinely wants the best for the > planet. It is usually the industrial/growth interests that take > precedence. So for an environmentalist to be on such a panel, all it > does is lend environmental credence to a biased report/decision. Are you advocating "environmental isolationism?" > A case like that is presently being discussed in the environmental > movement in PEI - it concerns the Farm Practices Review Board, > coming out of the pro-pesticide Right-to-Farm legislation. > Another example is the issue of Forest Certification, e.g. the Forest > Stewardship Council, where big companies like Irving want > environmental blessing. Is it perhaps possible that the so-called "Environmentalists" are presenting incompetent suggestions? Is it possible that the so-called "Environmentalists" have "second agendas" which are above and beyond the problem at hand? Is it possible that their "good points" get discarded with their irrelevant and impractical demands? > > > So, Owen, it's not personal - it's political. Ahhhh!!! Politics is getting confused with a wish to make an environmental improvement. I would respectfully suggest that the environmental movement would prog\ress further, and quicker, if the focus was on the environment, rather than on peripheral political issues. Kevin Chisholm
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects