Is CSIRO's Apparent Self-Censorship Behind an Attempt at Gagging a Researcher? (November 5, 2009)

The Australian has decided that it is worth pursuing the matter of the "gagging" of CSIRO's economic researcher, Dr Clive Spash, as regards a paper that was to be published in a peer reviewed journal which questioned the efficacy of the Australian government's proposed emissions trading scheme (ETS)^{1, 2,}.

Now the broadsheet's Nicola Berkovic has been digging deeper. She finds that CSIRO some three weeks ago issued "a new public comment policy that limits what scientists can say publicly about issues within their area of expertise", and according to Ms Berkovic: "The new policy forbids scientists from making comments, even in their private capacity, if the remarks might affect 'public confidence in CSIRO as a trusted adviser'. If such a perception could arise, scientists are required to discuss the issue with their supervisor to 'effectively manage risks'."

In explanation, CSIRO's Manager for Media Liaison, Huw Morgan, said the new document did not change existing policy, merely clarified it, but what Ms Berkovic has uncovered is that: "The head of the CSIRO's sustainable ecosystems group, Daniel Walker, decided to block the publication of the paper because it commented on government policy. Dr Walker told Dr Spash that any critique of emissions trading schemes in general breached the CSIRO's charter, which states that scientists are not permitted to 'debate the merits of government policy'."

It was this charter that the Minister for CSIRO, Kim Carr trumpeted at ensuring freedom of expression for the public research organisation's personnel.

The real point at issue is that Dr Spash's paper is an assessment of the proposed ETS based on his research and analysis as an economist and was accepted by a journal after peer review.

CSIRO lists Dr Spash's qualifications as:

• Bachelor of Arts with Honours in Economics and specialisation in Environmental Economics, from the University of Stirling, Scotland, 1980–84
• Master of Science Degree in Interdisciplinary Studies: Resource Management Science, from the University of British Columbia, Canada, 1984–87
• Doctoral Degree in Economics with Distinction: Resource and Environmental Economics and Public Finance, from the University of Wyoming, USA, 1987–93
• Master of Arts gratiis, from the University of Cambridge, UK, 2000.

So just perhaps Dr Spash knows what he's writing about.

There is another nagging question, did the head of the CSIRO's sustainable ecosystems group, Daniel Walker, have any discussion regarding the matter of the publication of Dr Spash's paper with anyone in Minister Carr's department?

According to Ms Berkovic: Senator Carr told The Australian scientists should be able to contribute their personal opinions to public debate.
"Individual opinions should be subject to debate, and as I've always said science is contestable," he said. "People have the right to be wrong."

 Perhaps in this case the question is: "Does Dr Spash have the right to be right?"

Dr Spash told the ABC today that when he offered to have the paper published as a private individual, he was told that was not an option. We don't know, however, if it might have been allowed if he were to introduce a disclaimer that the conclusions expressed are his and not necessarily those of CSIRO. Were that to be the case he might have added the one-liner physicist Bob Park is noted for in his What's New blog... "but they should be".

But listen to Senator Carr stating his views. He was not asked how he viewed the report of the behaviour of the head of the CSIRO's sustainable ecosystems group, Daniel Walker in this matter or if anyone in his department had been approached in regard to the paper's publication.

_________________________________________

To listen to a short assessment of "Censorship at CSIRO" Click here.