News & Views item - March 2011

 

UK Parliamentary Report Addresses the Matter of Government - Scientist Interaction. (March 7, 2011)

The Science and Technology Committee of the UK's House of Commons' report Scientific advice and evidence in emergencies, released last week, should have some bearing on the Australian government's garnering and use of scientific advice, particularly in view of the recent resignation of its Chief Scientist for unspecified "personal and professional reasons" after serving less than half of her 5-year appointment.

 

While the report was principally triggered by the recent emergencies of the 2010 ash cloud caused by the eruption of Iceland's Eyjafjallajökull volcano, and the 2009-10 H1N1 influenza wherein the scientific advice and instruction from both the government's own advisers and that from the wider scientific community was heeded too late, it also noted that from the government's overall viewpoint, scientific advice was "something to reach for once an emergency happens" and wasn't sought for consideration for proactive planning.

 

As the committee's chairman, Andrew Miller, put it: "The current approach smacks of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted."

 

To sum up the committee's overall recommendation:

 

Our chief concern was the uncertain role that the Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA) [John Beddington] played in the National Risk Assessment (NRA)—the assessment of risks to the UK carried out by the Cabinet Office. We consider that science should be at the heart of the NRA process and have recommended that the GCSA has greater involvement. We urge the Government to do better at embedding scientific advice and an evidence-based approach in risk assessment and policy processes before emergencies occur.

 

Below is the full summary from the report: