Editorial
- 19
March 2001
The past several weeks have seen the focus of our political
leaders trained on the Brisbane electorate of Ryan to what appeared to be the
exclusion of just about all other issues. The fact of the matter is that the
Ryan by-election is a topic of minor importance so far as its immediate outcome
will be. The Howard Government will not fall; Mr. Howard will not be replaced
whether or not Ryan changes hands. Looking further ahead, will any significant
lessons be taken from the results? Most probably not, the Coalition is still
speaking of "fine tuning" and accusing Labor of being "policy
lazy" while Labor if it has been developing significant policies, is being
careful not to be too specific in order to avoid tipping its hand and/or being
caught out. Perhaps the result of most immediate consequence will be the effect
of the almost 40% drop in the vote for the Australian Democrats, from 8% to 5%
and the consequences to the leadership challenge.
But certainly the fundamental issues which will
affect our population's well being were not raised, presumably because they were
not perceived to be of significance for attracting votes by the two major
candidates or the cadre of minders that descended upon them during the campaign.
It's as though the nation were suffering indigestion but coincidentally had a
slowly progressing malignant tumour. The one is instantly uncomfortable and
readily treatable, while the other,
although a potential death sentence, may cause much less immediate acute pain
and will require much more rigorous treatment. Alan Bromley in his Op-Ed
piece for the New York Times put it about as succinctly as possible when
he said , "No science, no surplus. It's that simple." We would add,
"no education, no science."
It's not a matter of science being everything, far from it,
but in this age it is and will continue to be the basis on which our economy can
flourish and the arts, our living standards, and our standing in the world are
dependant on science the support we give it and the use we make of it. In
the first instance it is the responsibility of its practitioners to convince the
Australian population of the fact as well as our elected leaders. But it is also
the responsibility of our elected leaders, as well as the nation's opinion
shapers, be they the Governor General, talk back radio hosts or those in between
to seek out our scientists and educators. These pages have advocated a wide
ranging education summit with universal endorsement from all the political
parties. We would like to see science and education policy be placed above party
politics. Perhaps the problem is that unless a situation is perceived as an
acute crisis, consensus isn't possible; chronic crises don't push the right
buttons.
John Glenn in his forward to
Before
Its Too Late: A
Report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science
Teaching for the 21st Century wrote
"[A]t the
daybreak of this new century and millennium, the Commission is convinced that
the future well-being of our nation and people depends not just on how well we
educate our children generally, but on how well we educate them in mathematics
and science specifically.
From
mathematics and the sciences will come the products, services, standard of
living, and economic and military security that will sustain us at home and
around the world. From them will
come the technological creativity American companies need to compete effectively
in the global marketplace. 'Globalization' has occurred.
Economic theories of a few years ago are now a reality.
Goods, services, ideas, communication, businesses, industries, finance,
investment, and jobs the good jobs are increasingly the competitive currency of the
inter-national marketplace."
Alex
Reisner
areisner@bigpond.com