He told them. They didn't like it. So he got the sack.

It's all too predictable, of course. But that doesn't make it any less depressing.

By dismissing Professor Nutt, Home Secretary Alan Johnson has managed, at a stroke, to both undermine scientific advice and elevate it to a status it really doesn't merit.

Yes, in some instances scientists disagree and we know that long-held theories are sometimes disproved.

There's a lot of false science around too. Increasingly science is sponsored by companies to "prove" their particular products or activities are advantageous or to rubbish evidence that suggests their products or activities may be harmful.

And scientists are, first and foremost, people, just like the rest of us. For every scientist, whether or not he or she is aware of it, there's science on one side and his or her own personal preferences and prejudices (potentially) on the other.

But for many subjects there really is a very clear scientific consensus. There may be the odd research paper pointing in a different direction, but often such papers have methodological weaknesses or simply represent random freak results.

People appointed by governments to advise them on science are normally at the top of their trees with very distinguished careers. They are not science's freak outriders who allow their scientific analysis to be diverted into fulfilling their own personal prejudices.

They have a level of intellect that allows them to look at the evidence with a critical eye. Was this research project funded by a company with a particular axe to grind? Was the research thorough and as unbiased as it could be? Is there a lot of good, robust, unbiased research in this field? Is it pretty well all pointing in the same direction? These are the issues Professor Nutt and his ilk have to address in their day-to-day work.

If political decision-making was just about science, it would be easy-peasy. We wouldn't need governments to do it, just committees of scientists. We could save all that money on elections and MPs' and MSPs' salaries and expenses. We could sell off the Houses of Parliament and the Welsh and Scottish Parliament buildings too.

But political decision-making isn't just about science. It's far more complex than that.

On any subject the government of the day may have to weigh the scientific evidence against the economic implications, the cultural background, the potential social effects, perceived moral requirements and any possible political and geo-political ramifications. That's what we elect them to do. That's why we spend all the money we do on the workings of our democratic system.

Alan Johnson's decision to sack Professor Nutt is an appalling one. Professor Nutt knows the science, Alan Johnson doesn't. What Alan Johnson should know is how to weigh up David Nutt's scientific advice against other relevant factors.

He should have simply accepted the advice as it stood and thanked Professor Nutt for it. He should then have set out the other economic, cultural, social, moral and political factors which, in his view, outweighed the science. Public properly informed. Debate stimulated. Science presented in its proper context. Job done.

But the other problem is the extent to which Alan Johnson has undermined the credibility of scientific advisers.

Nutt goes. Who will replace him? Well, we all know the answer to that, don't we? The main - but unstated - qualification for the job will be that applicants must agree unreservedly with Alan Johnson's position whether supported by the available evidence or not.

They will be required, not to report on the actual science of any issue, but to put forward a version of science which is entirely tainted by politics. And that comprehensively defeats the object of the exercise.

Because when governments and their scientific advisers really need us to listen to unvarnished scientific information about a real and major threat no-one will believe them.

However compelling future scientific evidence really is, many people will simply assume that the adviser is no more than an animated political mannequin.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---