Should we really keep Politicians away from Scientists?

Sir Paul Nurse has ‘weight’ when it comes to science. His position is the head of The Royal Society in the United Kingdom and in an address in Melbourne he suggested that we need to keep politicians away from scientists: “It also emphasises the need to keep the science as far as is possible from political, ideological and religious influence,” he said. And I’m wondering whether he is right? Should we really be keeping these areas separate?

Industry Search reported that ‘…Sir Paul told some his peers at the University of Melbourne on Monday that scientific advice should be based on the consensus of scientists who are experts in the area concerned, who are fully aware of conflicting explanations and the evidence on which these divergent views are based. “As a further check this advice needs to be challenged through peer review carried out by other expert scientists to ensure the conclusions reached are reliable and secure,” He says if there is no strong consensus it is important that should be reflected in the advice, homing in on the global warming debate to illustrate his point…’

So I’m wondering if what Sir Paul is really discussing is the difference between interference and involvement? Because laced within Nurse’s suggestion is that Political influence is always a bad thing and that pursuit of science is always ideology free. There’s no doubt that there are plenty of examples where science and politics have been used poorly or erroneously whether deliberately or not. A great example is John Grant’s book ‘Corrupted Science: Fraud, Ideology and Politics in Science’ which provides some great case studies.

Yet Sir Paul’s suggestion raises some questions for me – Isn’t scientific inquiry the process of building knowledge? Isn’t politics the art of societal management? Doesn’t the polity need to be better informed? Doesn’t society benefit from the ongoing improvement in understanding that scientific inquiry almost always leads to?

Arguably the answers to each of those four questions is Yes. Which brings me to the thought bubble – Isn’t the INVERSE of Paul Nurse’s question required? – we need politicians to be CLOSER to science not further away from it. We need our politicians to be more informed, more engaged, more involved. That of course comes with the risk of interference but we have that now anyway. The difference with the current situation is that often the interference occurs through a poorly informed polity and perhaps the reason for that is due to a lack of connection between the areas. So maybe, just maybe, we need these two areas more closely aligned?

So I’m not convinced that the idea of ideology or political ‘influence’ is be default ‘bad’ for science. What we may need is more scientists using politics as a sounding board and more politicians as scientists – a blending not an isolation?

Terrorism the Games wild card

Jan 31, 2010

In a recent article in The Age, Clive Williams of Macquarie University’s Centre for Policing, Intelligence and Counter Terrorism suggested that athletes booked in to attend the Commonwealth games in India need to consider a terrorist attack as a potential wildcard. Whilst an interesting perspective, I’d like to suggest that a potential terrorist attack at…

For Valentines Day, its Tigers all ’round

Jan 10, 2010

If my information is correct, the 14th of February is the start of the New Year and instead of the usual flowers and chocolates, you might be wise to invest in another gift for your heart’s desire Because Feb 14 is the start of the Chinese New Year – the year of the Tiger. So…

What can we expect in the next decade?

Dec 28, 2009

Had any thoughts yet? I have – plenty and judging from the number of media inquiries it appears lots of other people are also curious to know what might lie ahead in the next year or next decade. I’m putting my thinking hat on so that we can consider what 2010-2019 might hold, the second…

Copenhagen Consensus is likely – just not the type we want.

Dec 7, 2009

I’m tipping that Consensus will be reached at Copenhagen this week. Alas it will be a consensus for more talking, thinking and commitments to agree to a proposal to set a time for a discussion around more concrete targets. In otherwords, a commitment to not commit. The politicians waver whilst our planet is being poisoned.…

Counter Mantra to Christmas Credit

Nov 30, 2009

The cycle of consumption rears its head as it has done for quite some time. Consumption is neither good, nor bad, it ‘just is’ and right now the majority of media exposed potential consumers are being lured, enticed and occasionally conned into parting with their hard earned money to satisfy needs and whims. Some consumers…

What kids can teach us about Goal Directed futures

Nov 16, 2009

Our son has just celebrated his fifth birthday and although we don’t make a huge fuss about milestones (the kids get a party every second year), there’s no doubt that he is learning about desired future outcomes and goals. I doubt he is different from most kids in his ability to spot something and declare…

How Will You Prove You Are Who You Say You Are?

Oct 21, 2009

Here’s a little something I’d like you to think about. Are you really who you say you are? And, how do I know that I can trust you? Identity Theft is one of the most debilitating crimes a person can suffer for it strips away the very core of your own belief system and that…

Can GM food rescue the planet’s appetite for Food?a

Oct 15, 2009

‘World – we have a problem’ (apologies to astronaut James Lovell). We are killing ourselves with food and it’s happening at both ends of the continuum – millions starve each day whilst a gluttony caused obesity epidemic is killing others off in different ways. We have a growing global population requiring sustenance, whilst Climate Change…

2009 September rainfall – still ‘above average’?

Sep 30, 2009

Anyone looking at the final rainfall figures for Melbourne’s rainfall might be heartened by the news that the final result was about 10mm above the September average. Compared to last year’s disastrous result where we had about 12mm, it was over 50mm better. But I wonder if the final result, and the current ‘average’ isn’t…

Marcus Barber at ANTOR discusses the future of travel

Sep 23, 2009

Strategic Futurist Marcus Barber discussed the future of travel at the ANTOR session at The American Club in Sydney, NSW on the 24th of September. Along with Angela Smith from Roy Morgan Research, Martin Kelly from Travel Trends and Gail Rehbein from the Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility Marcus proposed some of the emerging…

« Previous
1
…
23
24
25
26
27
…
31
Next »