I'm saddened by the reaction of too many MPs who signed EDM 908. In response to the recent report on homeopathy by the Parliamentary Science and Technology Sub-Committee Why aren’t more of our MPs as capable and focused as Evan Harris and many of the other MPs who serve on the Committee? Too many MPs seem to reject scientific evidence; something I find bizarre for a country where the sciences are promoted as being essential to the UK economy.
Is it really fear of upsetting a scientifically illiterate group of voters? Should I ask how scientifically literate are our MPs in general?
Are they simply afraid to challenge what seems like scientifically illiterate journalists in the press or perhaps the press editors and cheap magazines who may try to create a fuss in order to steal headlines? That just can't be an excuse can it? Well you might think so if you look at some good reporting on what is going on with the press. Try here, or here both by the energetic Ben Goldacre. And do not forget, the poor level of scientific literacy is expertly on show regularly on our TVs and radio programmes too. Take a look at this critique of just one radio programme on BBC Radio 4, a station normally considered to be the bastion of the highly educated among us by David Colquhoun.
Do I want MPs who show so little regard for evidence to sit in a jury let alone make decisions regarding the running of this country, preferring instead to court incompetent journalists rather than skilfully deal tabloid headlines, and poor programming the contempt they so obviously deserve? I do genuinely ask myself that question. There would rightly be outrage if a conviction failed due to a jury disregarding solid scientific evidence on the basis of not wanting to upset a particular group of society, wouldn’t there? Really, I do wonder sometimes if there are enough people in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords who have any idea why we no longer live in ‘The Burning Times;
Do they value evidence in their decision making, decisions that can and do affect our laws and freedoms, the health of the UK population, our standing as a world force in science and many, many other arenas, our security and even decisions that may send our armed forces to war? Aren’t enough of them trained in the evidence-based legal professional to understand the value of evidence after all?
These days, we come with both a vote and an expensive education, something MPs would do well to remember as they fight for the political lives. For years now, the MPs have informed the public that leaving education at the age of 16 is no longer a realistic option, not for those who wish to secure employment. Our way to success personally and nationally, they told us, is to improve our level of education by going up to university or find better skills training for the new post-industrial world we find ourselves in. More and more of our young people have risen to the challenge set to them by our political leaders. More and more adults have followed the advice too, increasingly studying successfully at colleges and universities as mature students. They have indebted themselves, immersed themselves in learning, working hard for the education our political leaders had for free. We are now a far more educated electorate than we were in the 1960s, the 1970s and 1980s.
Our politicians must meet those same challenges if we are to meet our national goals, our personal dreams. They must improve their skills, demonstrate strong valuable talents, abilities and qualities, if we, as a nation, are to continue to succeed in all areas of life. It should come as no surprise that, armed with our world-class educations, we are demanding world-class, capable political leaders; thanks to our educations we now understand what that means and are can communicate what we expect. We expect them to be just as capable, just as educated, and just as aware as we are. We will obviously be expecting significant talent with a wide range of capabilities and understanding to take their places on the benches. Just as our leaders demanded of us, we too are now demanding of them.
Could a group of MPs be so afraid of science that a refresher course in the basics would do them a great deal of good? For many years our politicians, our leaders have informed us we must take up the challenge of lifelong learning. They are responsible for performance, their ability to work to a high standard if they are to meet the expectations of their employer; you’d think they’d knuckle down particularly after recent parliamentary scandals. The employer, remember is every member of the voting public. Perhaps they should make use of their Individual Learning Accounts and take a science course at their local college.
The politicians of the UK should understand that they must demonstrate their ability to be professional, fair and just to the electorate; their employers. MPs will increasingly be required to demonstrate they have the necessary ingredients to lead us toward a future where we will rely more heavily on science and technology. If they don’t understand medical advances or space research, then how can we rely on them to ensure adequate decisions are made about the sciences, our technologies, new industries, and how we will resource them?
After all, it has been 300 years or thereabouts since the Enlightenment. In future years, we may well find ourselves facing more challenging, more technological and yet more complex scientific questions. Yet, the demonstration that homeopathy is no more than a placebo at best, has been straightforward and intellectually simple. But we still have sugar pills sold as remedies, we still make them available on the NHS, we still have them labelled in misleading ways shamefully fooling our parents and grandparents. This just isn’t rocket science!
Expertise in the art of spin is no longer be an effective tool for our leaders; we now have the experience, the tools and we have gained the confidence a world-class education provides. With that confidence we are increasingly demanding leaders who are fit for the job. We will no longer tolerate a system of leadership where those in government see themselves as the sole holders of expertise and knowledge, who rule on our behalf taking the difficult decisions we do not understand. Because, now they are no longer the keepers of expertise and understanding. We possess expertise and understanding of equal if not greater than theirs.
This small country gave us so many scientific greats including Joseph Black, James Watt, Alexander Fleming, Robert Watson-Watt, Joseph Lister, James Clerk Maxwell, Watson & Crick, the recent Nobel Laureates Paul Nurse, John Sulston and Tim Hunt among so many others.
Surely our politicians can appreciate, and use good old-fashioned Enlightenment? They can begin by withdrawing their support for EDM 908 now.
Find out about the candidates standing for election in your constituency. Don’t accept what they will spin to you, instead make it clear you want substance and ability; they are after all, attending an interview and you are the employer. Be a good employer and communicate clearly to your potential MP exactly what performance standards they are expected to meet; they don’t necessarily need to have earned a doctorate though that might be useful, but they do need to understand what science is and what it can be used for. Like all employers you should regularly review your employee’s performance over the coming years.
The British people have earned that appreciation and respect over the past few centuries. Our would-be representatives would do well to follow suit.
Is it really fear of upsetting a scientifically illiterate group of voters? Should I ask how scientifically literate are our MPs in general?
Are they simply afraid to challenge what seems like scientifically illiterate journalists in the press or perhaps the press editors and cheap magazines who may try to create a fuss in order to steal headlines? That just can't be an excuse can it? Well you might think so if you look at some good reporting on what is going on with the press. Try here, or here both by the energetic Ben Goldacre. And do not forget, the poor level of scientific literacy is expertly on show regularly on our TVs and radio programmes too. Take a look at this critique of just one radio programme on BBC Radio 4, a station normally considered to be the bastion of the highly educated among us by David Colquhoun.
Do I want MPs who show so little regard for evidence to sit in a jury let alone make decisions regarding the running of this country, preferring instead to court incompetent journalists rather than skilfully deal tabloid headlines, and poor programming the contempt they so obviously deserve? I do genuinely ask myself that question. There would rightly be outrage if a conviction failed due to a jury disregarding solid scientific evidence on the basis of not wanting to upset a particular group of society, wouldn’t there? Really, I do wonder sometimes if there are enough people in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords who have any idea why we no longer live in ‘The Burning Times;
Do they value evidence in their decision making, decisions that can and do affect our laws and freedoms, the health of the UK population, our standing as a world force in science and many, many other arenas, our security and even decisions that may send our armed forces to war? Aren’t enough of them trained in the evidence-based legal professional to understand the value of evidence after all?
These days, we come with both a vote and an expensive education, something MPs would do well to remember as they fight for the political lives. For years now, the MPs have informed the public that leaving education at the age of 16 is no longer a realistic option, not for those who wish to secure employment. Our way to success personally and nationally, they told us, is to improve our level of education by going up to university or find better skills training for the new post-industrial world we find ourselves in. More and more of our young people have risen to the challenge set to them by our political leaders. More and more adults have followed the advice too, increasingly studying successfully at colleges and universities as mature students. They have indebted themselves, immersed themselves in learning, working hard for the education our political leaders had for free. We are now a far more educated electorate than we were in the 1960s, the 1970s and 1980s.
Our politicians must meet those same challenges if we are to meet our national goals, our personal dreams. They must improve their skills, demonstrate strong valuable talents, abilities and qualities, if we, as a nation, are to continue to succeed in all areas of life. It should come as no surprise that, armed with our world-class educations, we are demanding world-class, capable political leaders; thanks to our educations we now understand what that means and are can communicate what we expect. We expect them to be just as capable, just as educated, and just as aware as we are. We will obviously be expecting significant talent with a wide range of capabilities and understanding to take their places on the benches. Just as our leaders demanded of us, we too are now demanding of them.
Could a group of MPs be so afraid of science that a refresher course in the basics would do them a great deal of good? For many years our politicians, our leaders have informed us we must take up the challenge of lifelong learning. They are responsible for performance, their ability to work to a high standard if they are to meet the expectations of their employer; you’d think they’d knuckle down particularly after recent parliamentary scandals. The employer, remember is every member of the voting public. Perhaps they should make use of their Individual Learning Accounts and take a science course at their local college.
The politicians of the UK should understand that they must demonstrate their ability to be professional, fair and just to the electorate; their employers. MPs will increasingly be required to demonstrate they have the necessary ingredients to lead us toward a future where we will rely more heavily on science and technology. If they don’t understand medical advances or space research, then how can we rely on them to ensure adequate decisions are made about the sciences, our technologies, new industries, and how we will resource them?
After all, it has been 300 years or thereabouts since the Enlightenment. In future years, we may well find ourselves facing more challenging, more technological and yet more complex scientific questions. Yet, the demonstration that homeopathy is no more than a placebo at best, has been straightforward and intellectually simple. But we still have sugar pills sold as remedies, we still make them available on the NHS, we still have them labelled in misleading ways shamefully fooling our parents and grandparents. This just isn’t rocket science!
Expertise in the art of spin is no longer be an effective tool for our leaders; we now have the experience, the tools and we have gained the confidence a world-class education provides. With that confidence we are increasingly demanding leaders who are fit for the job. We will no longer tolerate a system of leadership where those in government see themselves as the sole holders of expertise and knowledge, who rule on our behalf taking the difficult decisions we do not understand. Because, now they are no longer the keepers of expertise and understanding. We possess expertise and understanding of equal if not greater than theirs.
This small country gave us so many scientific greats including Joseph Black, James Watt, Alexander Fleming, Robert Watson-Watt, Joseph Lister, James Clerk Maxwell, Watson & Crick, the recent Nobel Laureates Paul Nurse, John Sulston and Tim Hunt among so many others.
Surely our politicians can appreciate, and use good old-fashioned Enlightenment? They can begin by withdrawing their support for EDM 908 now.
Find out about the candidates standing for election in your constituency. Don’t accept what they will spin to you, instead make it clear you want substance and ability; they are after all, attending an interview and you are the employer. Be a good employer and communicate clearly to your potential MP exactly what performance standards they are expected to meet; they don’t necessarily need to have earned a doctorate though that might be useful, but they do need to understand what science is and what it can be used for. Like all employers you should regularly review your employee’s performance over the coming years.
The British people have earned that appreciation and respect over the past few centuries. Our would-be representatives would do well to follow suit.
No comments:
Post a Comment