Australian Senator Speaks Out On Open Access

Australian Senator Kim Carr, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, says what we desperately need heard from his Canadian counterpart:

"We are and will remain a net importer of knowledge, so it is in our interest to promote the freest possible flow of information domestically and globally. The arguments for stepping out first on open access are the same as the arguments for stepping out first on emissions trading – the more willing we are to show leadership on this, we more chance we have of persuading other countries to reciprocate. And if we want the rest of the world to act, we have to do our bit at home."

The same obviously applies in Canada and the election campaign provides a perfect opportunity for Canadian leaders to identify the same policy goal.


  1. Stevan Harnad
    (Actually, Kim Carr is a he…)

    With three OA mandates adopted and one more proposed, Canada is not that far behind Australia’s seven (see ROARMAP). But factoring in our relative sizes, and the fact that we have no ministerial level advocate yet like Mr. Carr, this certainly looks like a good public issue for the forthcoming election campaign: Maximize research access, usage and applications, for the benefit of the tax-payers who fund it — by mandating OA.

  2. wow
    Wow, what a great quote. I wish a Canadian had said it.

  3. Interesting, because Australia has a compulsory copyright licensing scheme that generates 3 times as much as in Canada, which means they insist content is shared BUT they pay copyright owners very generously for it

  4. Allan Maxwell says:

    Let’s not forget that the Australian people had the wisdom to throw out their neo-con trash in their last election. We Canadians must do the same in the forthcoming election or continue to suffer the abuses of government policy that is defined solely in the interests of big business and foreign powers and in which the Canadian people have no voice.

  5. woot
    ya but look they have a dmca style law due to that neo con crap, kids are being sued, its a mess.
    They are paying there new american overlords without even knowing it.


  6. Australia
    When it came down to it, Australia agreed to the US’s copyright demands in return for benefits in trade in tangible goods. They didn’t like what the US demanded regarding copyright, but considered it a fair price to pay for what they were offered.

    Contrast that to Canada, where our governments (Liberal and Conservative) seem to want to give the US what they want regarding copyright and get nothing in return.

  7. Maynard G. Krebs says:

    More US laws brought here
    This little gem is now in Congress

    [ link ]

    I note that they don’t consider abrogating NAFTA but they do talk about abrogating any international government procurement process.