Ian Gibson takes a bite of the future

I am looking at a diagram produced on innovation spend in the UK which is rumoured to have emerged from the Treasury. It is awesome.

Government departments, universities, charities, EU frameworks, development agencies etc make up an amazing bureaucracy. It can only confuse and baffle.

Since science and technology underpin such large sectors, how do our young people undertaking creative research see their future? And how can they believe their interests will see the light of day in the world of innovation – so beloved of Ministers, advisors and government? (The word ‘innovation’ appears frequently in Parliament, in debates, statements and the media. Like ‘science and technology’ it emerges as a showstopper when the going gets tough.)  The world of the diagram is very fragmented, and arrows between the sections cover up the weaknesses.

Enthusing the disenchanted

In the last few weeks I have met many young scientists: some in forensic science, others still working in the university system, and bioentrepreneurs who take science and form it into products, with the support of the DTI and the Foreign Office. Somehow, they have come through the weak primary and secondary science curriculum. But we know many are left behind, bored, confused and unimpressed by the ‘career’ prospects and the lack of societal value for scientists, engineers and technologists. So how do we change it?

Although I have views about science education from primary school to research degree, as well as on research and its organisation, scientific communication and the need for a total overhaul of UK’s future science, I am starting with the launch of a science think-tank.

Newton’s Apple

A steering committee has evolved the name ‘Newton’s Apple’. We have trustees and support is coming in. It includes a cross section of scientists and age groups and at the launch in October at the Science Media Centre we will outline our first investigation into cancer services and other enterprises.

We will also launch a publication with ten articles from prominent scientists covering various subject areas and their futures. I hope that the think-tank will look down the line of what is happening in science, engineering and technology, what might happen and how the political process should handle it, both in the UK and globally.

With media support and research, we hope to make a difference and take science on into the political world where evidence should be central. The air of a bottom-up approach with full participation in debate, not listening to boring lectures, will, I believe, lead to a novel approach to the development of the science culture and hopefully break down the huge gulf between scientists and politicians.

Politicians in general understand the value of science and technology, but it is rare for them to recognise its pervasive influence on decisions in many less obvious spheres than radioactive waste research and consequent disposal. In fact, there can be an anti-science culture, which may prevent a simple political solution.

Participation and action

The role of the think tanks in policy determination has grown since New Labour with various backers including political parties. I want Newton’s Apple to be independent of party influence and to be attractive to our young scientists whose ideas can light the beacon for a new role for science and technology in policy determination. For far too long it’s been determined by a few individuals whose influence far outweighs their knowledge of what science is about and how it is practised.

Newton’s Apple can start a new dialogue between professionals, the public(s) and politicians. The book and the launch on 16 October are a new beginning.

Scientists need to learn how politics works and take a less arrogant ‘we know best’ approach, come out of the comfort of their laboratories and engage a world beyond their area of understanding. The scientific crowd I talk to are yearning for participation and action. Let’s go!

Dr Ian Gibson is MP for Norwich North