Evidence of
Political Interference

White Paper:

Related sub-page:

Union members who witness such unscientific practices as shown here are afraid to speak up, because of fear of reprisal. Many of them work on term positions afraid to lose the job.

It is time for the Union to provide additional support for this critical  group of professionals who  stand up for Public Servant Values and Ethics for all Canadians.

It's time to introduce the "immunity against political interference" provision in  Collective Agreements of all professionals regulating  health, food and environment products and policies so that they can continue providing  fearless professional advice, on which the health and well being of all Canadians depends .

Background:

Over the past years, through my data projects and the network on GCCollab, I  have become aware of professional Integrity breaches happening across the Government. This concerning reality appeared to be  particularly prevalent in departments with mandate in policy development, where “scientific evidence” is often cherry-picked to support particular political agendas or vendor products. 

This is something that many of us at PIPSC have experienced firsthand and about which none of us can do anything. We can't defend the integrity of our work, and, even more concerning, we can't even complain about it due to the "fear of reprisal" (being disciplined for violating the Code of Values and Ethics of Public Servants on grounds of lack of loyalty and insubordination). 

Such a state of using the work of our professionals and “science” for the purpose of supporting specific predefined political narratives is truly tragic for all Canadians, who assume that Government policies are driven by scientific evidence, whereas, in fact, in some cases (in particular, over the past few years) this has been the opposite  - the evidence is driven by Government policies already made. There are numerous testimonials and facts to prove this is the case. 

Fear of reprisal correlates with level of political interference:

One way to see there is a problem with political interference in policy supporting departments is simply by looking at the PSES results for the “fear of reprisal” for agencies whose key mandate is policy development and product/policy evaluation, notably: PHAC - Centre for Emergency Preparedness and Health Canada - Marketed Health Products (See the White Paper "Where is the highest Fear of Reprisal and Why?"  and Fear of Reprisal page).

Another easy way to demonstrate that the mentioned above departments experience severe political pressures is to examine a simple Case  Study "PHAC and Vaccination Policy" described below.


Case study:  PHAC and Vaccination Policy

The most notorious policy developed by the above-mentioned agencies, where the “Fear of Reprisal” is the highest, is the Mandatory Vaccination Policy.  Canadians were told "the Policy was driven on Evidence". However, the reality (as observed by our professionals who needed to stay anonymous for the fear of reprisal)  was the opposite - "the Evidence was driven on the Policy". You can read more about it  from the White Paper "Examples of Manipulating Evidence to Fit Political/Industry Interests. Case study: PHAC ‘Cases Following Vaccination’ Reports", the images from which are included below.

This is just a single, easiest to show, piece of evidence of political interference on the work of professionals developing health reports for all Canadians.  There are however many more, which can be provided upon the request.


Additional references:

Figure 1: The Evidence published to fit the desired political narrative:  Two PHAC reports showing “Cases following vaccination” data (one dated 2022-07-01 and another dated 2022-10-21).

 These reports published the "Evidence" so that to fit it to the desired political narrative, showing there were many more people dying with COVID-19 among unvaccinated than among multiple-doses vaccinated, when in reality it was the opposite.

Figure 2:  The Evidence published without Politically-driven manipulation:  Actual number of “Cases following vaccination” in the considered period.

The evidence published without politically driven manipulation shows that in reality there were more COVID-19 deaths among multi-dose vaccinated than among unvaccinated. This information was hidden from public, and still is. The professionals who witnessed it cannot report or discuss it in public, because of fear of reprisal.