Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 11 December 2012

11 Dec 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Role of Science in Public Policy

Russell, Michael SNP Argyll and Bute Watch on SPTV

I very much agree with Liam McArthur. As the environment minister, I dealt with aspects of the fisheries portfolio, and he puts his finger on a key issue: although science provides information, it is not absolute. Of course, time, cultural connections and other issues need to be taken into account.

SASA is important for Scotland’s international reputation as a producer of high-quality seed potatoes, for example, which is a business that is worth £100 million to the Scottish economy. Scientists from SASA co-led negotiations in Brussels during the formation of the new European Union directive on potato cyst nematode. SASA negotiated an agreement to reduce sampling rates in fields where there was a low risk of finding PCN. That led to a threefold increase in the quantity of soil to be sampled and tested, instead of the proposed tenfold increase, the cost of which would have been simply unacceptable and probably impossible to bear.

Those are just two examples of where we have highly qualified research scientists and engineers working in-house to support Government policy. There are others, of course, in a wide range of public bodies across a swathe of disciplines, including Historic Scotland, Scottish Natural Heritage, Transport Scotland, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, the Forestry Commission Scotland and Health Scotland, to name but a few.

The Government cannot have researchers in all areas, and some of the scientific evidence needed to support policy inevitably must come from elsewhere. Scientific endeavour, by its very nature, can be inherently uncertain. The progression of scientific thinking and understanding relies on open and honest debate about what the results appear to show. In such cases, we need advice on how to interpret the evidence and explain what the degree of uncertainty means.

That scientific advice comes from many sources. We have four eminent independent advisers in the Scottish Government with whom I and Alasdair Allan meet regularly: Dr Harry Burns, the chief medical officer; Professor Andrew Morris, the chief scientist for health; Professor Louise Heathwaite, the chief scientific adviser for rural affairs and the environment; and Professor Muffy Calder, the chief scientific adviser for Scotland. Their role is not only to advise but to challenge, and they complement the roles of other advisers, such as the chief researcher, the chief economist and the chief statistician.

Many specialist science advisers in Government work alongside economists, statisticians and social researchers to feed evidence directly into the policy process. We also have three virtual centres of expertise—on climate change, water and animal disease outbreaks—which bring together expertise across the publicly funded research sector to provide the best available scientific advice and inform Government policy in an efficient, accessible and streamlined way. That innovative approach aligns research with the main research providers and with the wider policy agenda, drawing resources from across Scotland, including from people who can contribute in our universities.

The Scottish science advisory council, Scotland’s highest-level science advisory body, provides independent advice and recommendations on science strategy, policy and priorities. The SSAC is a broad-based group that includes practitioners and users of scientific innovation.

There is £37.5 million investment across the United Kingdom in the delivering assisted living lifestyles at scale—DALLAS—programme. A Scottish consortium, living it up, won the opportunity to implement the programme across Scotland and is establishing work that will reach 55,000 people by summer 2015. The approach comes from assisted living work that is being done by Scottish scientists, working with the Government.

Science has a strong role to play in policy making. It also has a role to play in enabling us to assess critical evidence and material considerations. Particularly in relation to complex or contentious policy issues, the public often have strong views on what the associated science reveals about the benefits, risks and ethical and moral considerations. Those views need to be heard, respected and fed into the policy process—that is an issue of democracy, trust and good governance. Obtaining the public’s views in an open and meaningful way requires rather more than traditional consultation; it requires a two-way dialogue, in which members of the public have the opportunity to interact with scientists, stakeholders and policy makers as they deliberate on issues that are likely to be important.

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 11 December 2012

In the same item of business