Readers letters
My previous letter (PE February 2012) highlighted Parliament and the paucity of engineering representation; now this missive focuses on two of the technical advisory bodies and how science and technology has been subverted and warns of a threat to a third.
The Council for Science and Technology is that collection of eminent men and women who are charged to proffer professional advice to the Cabinet. No less than eight, out of the twenty, represent academia. The chair of the group is the Government Chief Scientific Advisor; the current holder of this title being a population biologist. No, he does not dissect frogs in a laboratory because his calling has nothing to do with biology in the traditional sense. Population biology is really political spin for human economics, no relation to true science. A couple more on this prestigious committee are so called social scientists and they are joined by an economist and a geographer. Twenty-five percent are medics and the remainder are split between true scientists and engineers.
After the 2010 General Election the Council for S & T were moved from the administration of the Cabinet Office into the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills; and at the same time dropped the prestigious preface “The Prime Minister’s... ” That is commentary enough on the esteem afforded this body by the present administration.
The House of Commons Select Committee for S&T is mirrored by one in the Lords, but unlike the Commons the Lords Select Committee for Science and Technology actually does have a couple of engineers on it. However should the ambitions of certain politicians come to pass, and the Lords becomes a wholly elected body, then even that limited representation will be under threat.
POST is the acronym for the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. The governing board of POST includes four noble lords (two of whom are FREng), nine MPs, and four non parliamentarians (two of whom are distinguished engineers). One of the MP’s is also an engineer, her biographical details on her Party website allude to having achieved Chartered Engineering status (a quaint way of saying Engineering Council subs not paid – for the record her registration was suspended as of January 2012). Well done PE for sussing her out (PE February 2012 supplement).
A fuller analysis shows that apart from the three electronics engineers on the Board there two geologists and a geological lab technician, three medics, two bean counters, a teacher, two businessmen, a marketing specialist, a bio chemist, a multi-discipline lecturer, and an ornithologist. Hardly a fair scope for either science or technology!
So what does POST do or not do? To quote www.parliament.uk POST's aim is to help parliamentarians examine such issues (science and technology) effectively. By writing briefings, organising events and assisting Select Committees, we have supported parliamentarians in their decision-making since 1989. Either Parliament has ignored POST all together since its inception or the quality of their efforts has been grossly inadequate which is no surprise given the restricted technical expertise on the Board.
At the moment engineers are tarred with the same brush as the pseudo-scientists that pervade the government’s expert advisory panels. Either science gets its own house in order or breaks the link with technology. Engineers should be allowed to stand alone and get the true recognition they deserve.
Roy Mason, Lindal, Ulverston, Cumbria
Next letter: Is the environment being well surved?