Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[chris gadsden]

>  Received today

CAG
>
> DFO Memo Informs Employees about Downsizing
>
> October 14th, 2011
>
> CBC - HALIFAX
>
> NOTE:  <http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/ID=2153190341> View video with more
> details
>
> Employees of the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans were told
> Wednesday their employer will soon be significantly smaller, and responsible
> for fewer things.
>
> DFO also warned its workers that some of them will definitely not be working
> there once the department completes a $56.8-million budget-cutting plan by
> 2014.
>
> "More savings are expected in the future," said a letter signed by Deputy
> Minister Claire Dansereau and two other top officials.
>
> The letter and supporting documents, which were obtained by CBC News, say
> reductions are part of a "dynamic change agenda," and will apply broadly to
> services that include the Canadian Coast Guard.
>
> The changes incorporate cuts that have already been announced, including a
> controversial move to shut down the Maritime Rescue Sub Centre in St. John's
> and a similar office in Quebec, with service to be provided by staff in
> other provinces.
>
> A background note says that DFO is "winding down or shedding non-core
> programs," as part of "key transformations" intended to render a more modern
> style of managing fish stocks, ecosystems, aquaculture and vessels.
>
> The documents, obtained Wednesday by CBC News, do not include specific
> details on job losses, although the memo said DFO will attempt to mitigate
> cuts through attrition and new assignments.
>
> "We will be phasing-in these and other change initiatives over three years
> to allow time for the Department, employees and stakeholders to adjust," the
> employee letter said.
>
> "We are confident that the cumulative effects of these measures over the
> long-term will be positive, helping us to improve the quality, relevance and
> effectiveness of the Department's programs and services."
>
> DFO, which has sustained deep cuts to its science program over the last two
> decades, is preparing for further cuts in that area. Senior managers will be
> "finding efficiencies and simplifying how science is managed."
>
> The department said it is moving to "an ecosystems approach to science."
>
> The department also intends to make greater use of technologies, including
> moving to a web-based renewal and payment system for fishing licences.
>
>
>
>  
> <http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/10/13/nl-dfo-shedding-
> services-1013.html>
> www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/10/13/nl-dfo-shedding-services
> -1013.html
>
>  
>
>
>
>

No v

[Fish Assassin]

Work better with less. Isn't that typical of government ? If they truly believe that, they should start by getting rid of the Senate

[Dave]

A major cut to the Science Branch of DFO was expected - the writing has been plastered on the wall for years.  I expect select Canadian universities where most (but not all, don’t want to burn any bridges here ) of the very best fishery scientists now reside, will do well financially from this governmental decision.  And it’s a good decision IMO as the past  cuts to DFO’s Science program has reduced it’s contribution to this important research.

The Cohen Commission transcripts have shown, repeatedly, that good and defensible science is the key to managing what’s left of our salmon resource. I believe funding for this research will become available, just not through DFO.

What I don’t want to see is cuts to stock assessments, habitat improvements and enforcement.  Here’s hoping .

[chris gadsden]

A major cut to the Science Branch of DFO was expected - the writing has been plastered on the wall for years.  I expect select Canadian universities where most (but not all, don’t want to burn any bridges here ) of the very best fishery scientists now reside, will do well financially from this governmental decision.  And it’s a good decision IMO as the past  cuts to DFO’s Science program has reduced it’s contribution to this important research.

The Cohen Commission transcripts have shown, repeatedly, that good and defensible science is the key to managing what’s left of our salmon resource. I believe funding for this research will become available, just not through DFO.

What I don’t want to see is cuts to stock assessments, habitat improvements and enforcement.  Here’s hoping .

RAFE HERE – below you will find some very sad words from one of Canada’s most respected fish biologists who, for many years in the Department of Fisheries ands Oceans fought to save our precious salmon.

 

PLEASE READ AND PASS ON

 

Re: New DFO Cuts – Otto Langer.

We knew this was coming but I felt it would be better sugar coated and hopefully not be that severe. The naive belief that DFO is moving to an ecosystem approach is to let the naive believe that it will then be more efficient and more effective. DFO has never really shown that they can relate to an ecosystem approach with the expertise, resources and legislation they have let alone do it better with less (the promise they made when they implemented their new EPMP policy to protect fish habitat better with less resources back in 2006). Also referring to cuts as "a dynamic change agenda" is another line of absolute rubbish. The problem with DFO is that they have been playing musical chairs for many years and it has been too dynamic and they have lost sight for their basic reason for existence ie its the fish and fish habitat stupid! What DFO requires is a major decentralization from Ottawa and more local decision making and a major cut in overly highly paid managers.

When I was DFO head of habitat potection in the Frase River, Northen BC and the Yukon I did it as a Biologist 3. That same area is now divided into 4 areas and is run by no less then 4 Biologist 5 positions and they have many more bio 4 under them and the pay these bilogist now get is greatly improved over what we got back in 1990. The cost in terms of management staff to just run habitat management  is now four times greater than it was just 20 years ago and that is to now probably do less with less working staff.

This is cruel to employees in that they are already on their knees and do not have the will to do a good job with the resources to to support them and as we have seen in the Cohen Commission a many DFO employees know where their pay cheque is coming from and will do almost anything to keep Ottawa happy.  Its too bad the CCG is part of DFO - would have probably done better in the Armed Forces or MOT.

 I do not believe Deputy Minister Claire D (of BC MOF and MOTH highways background!!)  or anyone else in DFO has a grasp of what are the real ecosystem issues and how you put that into government policy and action. This is why government now hires higher level managers with no experience in the field they are to direct so they will not be attached to the resource. When I left DFO Fraser River Habitat Head position in 1990 the basic qualification for my replacement was - you were to have no background in habitat protection!  They said Otto Langer was too attached to the resource! DFO has now perfected that hands off - do not care approach to a job that most Canadians feel has to be done better.

 We are now nearing the death watch phase of DFO and this will not allow Cohen (in the most sunny and positive day) to say much to change anything to give the salmon a better chance of survival. The future of the environment certainly does look dismal under the Harper government.

 

[IronNoggin]

Know Otto and agree strongly with pretty much all he has to say.

I actually hope he is right in that we are witnessing DFO circling the drainpipe. Their top-heavy form of Political Mismanagement is LONG overdue to go the way of the Dinosaurs! Hopefully it will die a painful death, and we will witness a kind of Phoenix Resurrection of a new, streamlined and Regionally Focused Ministry actually focused on the welfare and sustainability of our marine resources!!

As for the final statement there though, DFO plods along under it's own mindless steam, regardless of who may be In Power for the moment. The Minister doesn't actually run anything, he is simply a figurehead with little to no impact. The functions of The Beast are always run by those "Senior Bureaucrats" firmly entrenched in the system, completely unaccountable to no-one but themselves, and who survive changing governments time after time. Thus IMO, it is time for them to join in the extinction of this corrupt and incredibly inefficient Ministry which pays but lip service to it's very own mandate.

Cheers,
Nog

[StillAqua]

A major cut to the Science Branch of DFO was expected - the writing has been plastered on the wall for years.  I expect select Canadian universities where most (but not all, don’t want to burn any bridges here ) of the very best fishery scientists now reside, will do well financially from this governmental decision.  And it’s a good decision IMO as the past  cuts to DFO’s Science program has reduced it’s contribution to this important research.

The Cohen Commission transcripts have shown, repeatedly, that good and defensible science is the key to managing what’s left of our salmon resource. I believe funding for this research will become available, just not through DFO.

There's a big difference between University science and Government science. Universities aren't interested in the long term monitoring and grunt data collection you need to understand how fish populations and huge freshwater/marine ecosystems are changing...and the sockeye problem is an ecosystem problem....things are changing that are affecting the productivity of the fish and there's a lot of competing and not mutually exclusive hypotheses about what is going on (and it's most likely more than one factor). Universities are only interested in short term research driven by cheap labour graduate students and if the science isn't immediately publishable, they have no interest. We need both types. Unfortunately, Harper isn't interested in any science that might hamper industries ability to exploit our natural resources unimpeded. Look at all the cuts to Environment Canada and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Deregulating environmental oversight is the name of the game. And the cuts are just beginning...there's another 5-10% coming in the next budget.

[StillAqua]

I actually hope he is right in that we are witnessing DFO circling the drainpipe. Their top-heavy form of Political Mismanagement is LONG overdue to go the way of the Dinosaurs! Hopefully it will die a painful death, and we will witness a kind of Phoenix Resurrection of a new, streamlined and Regionally Focused Ministry actually focused on the welfare and sustainability of our marine resources!!

We can dream Nog.....but if you read the senior bureaucrats Cohen testimony and do little digging in the DFO website they talk about finding cost efficiencies through "multi-year fishing plans", "integrated fisheries management" and "improving industry stability". Basically cutting out the annual data collection on fish abundance used to set annual quotas when stocks fluctuate, reducing overall harvest rates to manage using a precautionary approach (since you aren't collecting the data you need anymore), and giving industry long term stable access using fixed quotas. And they aint' talking about the sport/recreational industry.....

[shuswapsteve]

As for the final statement there though, DFO plods along under it's own mindless steam, regardless of who may be In Power for the moment. The Minister doesn't actually run anything, he is simply a figurehead with little to no impact. The functions of The Beast are always run by those "Senior Bureaucrats" firmly entrenched in the system, completely unaccountable to no-one but themselves, and who survive changing governments time after time. Thus IMO, it is time for them to join in the extinction of this corrupt and incredibly inefficient Ministry which pays but lip service to it's very own mandate.

You are underestimating the signiificant impact of years and years of budget cuts and instead putting way too much focus on "figureheads" and "Senior Bureaucrats".  While I can understand and partially agree that some people in Ottawa do not know much on and make some boneheaded decisions on what goes on out here you simply cannot keep making cuts like this and expect the best management or service possible.  The department does not print it's own money - it comes from the Treasury Board and the policies that direct where that money goes is determined by parliament - namely the Conservative Government.  If I were to cut your budget you would have to make some tough decisions of your own also.  If you seem to know the people in "the Beast" so much why don't you ask them sometime how effective they are doing their jobs when they have their budgets repeatedly slashed.....or have to deal with policies from the governing party which favour streamlined development over a responsible approach to protecting fish habitat.

[shuswapsteve]

There's a big difference between University science and Government science. Universities aren't interested in the long term monitoring and grunt data collection you need to understand how fish populations and huge freshwater/marine ecosystems are changing...and the sockeye problem is an ecosystem problem....things are changing that are affecting the productivity of the fish and there's a lot of competing and not mutually exclusive hypotheses about what is going on (and it's most likely more than one factor). Universities are only interested in short term research driven by cheap labour graduate students and if the science isn't immediately publishable, they have no interest. We need both types. Unfortunately, Harper isn't interested in any science that might hamper industries ability to exploit our natural resources unimpeded. Look at all the cuts to Environment Canada and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. Deregulating environmental oversight is the name of the game. And the cuts are just beginning...there's another 5-10% coming in the next budget.

While I agree that governement needs to be involved in long-term monitoring I think you underestimate the impact of university science with respect to fisheries out here.  I think university science is totally relevant in our understanding on how fish population and huge freshwater/marine ecosystems are changing.  Look no further than the years of research done by Scott Hinch and many of his graduate students (who have gone on to do even more things on their own in this field).  How do you think our knowledge improved with regards to physiology, behaviour, ocean climate, and salmon migration stresses (i.e. Fraser water tempertures)?  This was presented at the inquiry.  I agree with Dave that universities are going to be called upon more and more....and part of this is due to the fact that many of the really good people that do this work reside in those institutions.  However, this does not mean that DFO and universities cannot work together.  They already do.  I do agree with your opinion on deregulation and the other cuts you mention.

[StillAqua]

While I agree that governement needs to be involved in long-term monitoring I think you underestimate the impact of university science with respect to fisheries out here.  I think university science is totally relevant in our understanding on how fish population and huge freshwater/marine ecosystems are changing.  Look no further than the years of research done by Scott Hinch and many of his graduate students (who have gone on to do even more things on their own in this field).  How do you think our knowledge improved with regards to physiology, behaviour, ocean climate, and salmon migration stresses (i.e. Fraser water tempertures)?  This was presented at the inquiry.  I agree with Dave that universities are going to be called upon more and more....and part of this is due to the fact that many of the really good people that do this work reside in those institutions.  However, this does not mean that DFO and universities cannot work together.  They already do.  I do agree with your opinion on deregulation and the other cuts you mention.

Not at all Steve...my point was they do totally different types of science and we need both, ideally in government/university partnerships. Hinch would be the first to say that his collaboration with DFO Science and the data they collect is key to his work. Only governments can afford to do the long term data collection that is fundamental to understanding ecosystem changes such as stock abundance, oceanographic conditions, habitat status, etc. This is a current problem in all the natural resource management sectors in Canada whether it's fish, water, forests or wildlife....provincial and federal governments cutting out the expensive long term data collection that's not flashy science but is key data to managing resources in these ecosystems. We can't expect Universities to pick up the slack. That's not what they are designed to do.

[chris gadsden]

Here they come, a report from Global TV.

Up to 68,000 jobs to vanish under federal public service spending cuts: reportJulian Beltrame,  Monday, January 23, 2012 12:00 AM

OTTAWA - Federal government spending cuts could chop between 60,000 and 68,000 jobs from the public service in the next few years, a report from a progressive think-tank estimates.

The conclusion stems from a review of three separate rounds of restraint since 2007, and it suggests once completed in 2015, the federal public service could be trimmed to the lowest staffing levels since 2000.

Already, about 6,300 salaried positions are in the process of being eliminated as a result of department reviews launched between 2007 and 2010, designed to save $1.8 billion.

But that is the "tip of the iceberg," says the report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. The major impact on jobs will derive from the $2-billion departmental spending freeze announced in 2010, which is only now being put into effect, and the $4-billion Strategic and Operating Review that will be part of the coming budget.

In total, the three waves of cost cutting are intended to yield the government $7.8 billion in annual savings upon completion in 2014-15.

Government ministers have yet to reveal how they will apportion the cuts, but have conceded jobs will be lost through attrition and likely also layoffs.

Report author David Macdonald, a senior economist with the Ottawa-based think-tank, said he does not expect all savings will come from jobs and salaries inside the public service, although the majority will. Consulting firms, maintenance companies, non-profits who depend on Ottawa funding, may be impacted as well.

"But no matter how the cuts take shape, the job losses will be significant," said Macdonald.

"One of the main issues is transparency. There is no government detailing of where the jobs are being cut, or why they are being cut."

Parliamentary budgetary officer Kevin Page said the 6,300 figure in the first wave coincides with his calculation, but his office has not yet done an estimate of future job losses.

"This is something we will look at in our Budget 2012 analysis," he said in an email.

In a paper issued earlier this month, Page concluded the Harper government was well on its way to meeting its cost-cutting objectives.

Overall, government spending during the first six months of the current fiscal year fell by three per cent to $123 billion. On the operational side, the target of the spending restraint, expenditures have been trimmed by four per cent in the same period.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty insisted this week he does not plan to introduce a "slash and burn" budget, but has suggested in the past that some departments may be asked to find more in savings than previously expected.

Macdonald's report posits three scenarios of public service implications ranging from the extreme — where all the savings come from jobs losses, resulting in 68,300 fewer salaried positions — to a mix, where departments achieve administrative efficiencies and job losses are limited to 60,100.

Under all scenarios, the impact varies geographically and by department.

The Ottawa-Gatineau capital region is expected to absorb the lion's share of reductions, ranging from 11,200 at the minimum to 22,000 jobs in the extreme.

Coincidentally, the Conference Board of Canada recently tagged the job reduction in public service in the Ottawa region to the end of 2012 at about 9,000.

Big losses of up to 5,400 jobs are also likely in the Atlantic provinces, where the federal presence is strong.

Macdonald said he believes departments such as Corrections Services and CSIS, the spy agency, will be spared and will even grow.

But judging from the first wave of cuts, he expects sizable cuts to occur at Revenue Canada, Public Works, Human Resources, Health Canada, Fisheries, Foreign Affairs, Aboriginal Affairs and among civilian staff at Defence.

How the cuts will impact services is difficult to ascertain, said Macdonald, because the government has not been forthcoming about its plans.

"I think it's an open question whether Canadians would agree to see staff in aboriginal programs, food and safety inspectors as well as programs accessed by the working poor be cut, while Corrections and CSIS grow," he said.

"But without a detailed accounting of what is going on it's impossible to carry on that debate."



Read it on Global News: Global News | Up to 68,000 jobs to vanish under federal public service spending cuts: report

[Sandy]

what else can we expect!
 why have staff on payroll if Harper's politico's are just going to over ride any science based conservation decisions anyway. Harper is not going to be happy until we have stepped back half a century in what has been gained by big and small "E" environmentalists.

[Fish Assassin]

Harper should cut the extravagant pensions of MP's and abolish the Senate

[Sandman]

Well, we all knew what was coming should Harper ever get a Majority Government.  With 6 out of every 10 of Canadians voting against him, now we all get to live with his policies for the next 4 years.