Editor:
I write to respond to Giorgio Magnanensi's letter of March 29 taking me to task for a vote on the science motion.
The mover of the motion included two key aspects leading to my reluctance to support his motion - one dealing with the government's deep-seated commitment to control our national deficit, the other, a statement that implicated the government unfairly in cutting off access to scientific information.
As we too often tend to forget, the federal government is working hard to eliminate the deficit. Yet the motion would have committed our government to extend funding to the Experimental Lakes Area facility even though the government has proclaimed its intention to cease operating the facility. In order to keep the facility running and in private-sector hands, negotiations are progressing with the International Society of Limnology, a non-profit organization that may take over the facility, and the province of Ontario.
With over 1,500 scientists and technical staff, DFO's spending on science has been consistent since 2006 and we are continuing important fresh water research in other facilities across Canada, such as the Freshwater Institute in Winnipeg and the Bayfield Institute in Burlington. Science continues to be the backbone of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Finally, I have been meeting for years with a group of active fisheries advocates called the Sea to Sky Fisheries Roundtable. Through their expertise, I have been able to supplement my own knowledge and stay in touch with priorities of the riding, reflected directly in the questions I ask officials in Ottawa.
Conservative and other MPs who are committed to balancing the budget had no choice in how to vote on the science motion. It's quite consistent to vote the way I did and still support an open scientific environment.
John Weston, MP, West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country
