Has Mandelson got Cox?

A rather disturbing event happened earlier today. When flicking through the various messages tweeted during the day, I noticed one from Brian Cox lauding Peter Mandelson for a speech he had made. Cox had used it to suggest Labour would ring fence science spending and that they were leading the twitter campaign for science votes.

Looking a little closer at the substance of the speech, it would seem we’re reading entirely different reports. Lord Madelson made much of his government’s investment in science, which has fallen dramatically as a proportion of GDP since 1997 and continues to fall despite increased private investment in recent years and investment in other countries. Mandelson states that the rate of growth of monetary allocations would be cut (so we’re back to the flat cash or worse settlements that dogged the last years of PPARC) and that the part ring-fencing would continue (so knock-on effects like the structural deficit in STFC would continue). He talks about the science budget, so those half billion pounds worth of cuts in the Universities budget that filter through to science through reallocation of university funds will be going ahead, and also talks about “efficiency savings” – ie cuts – that will be looming for the future. Then there’s the part of the main science budget that isn’t ring-fenced… This is no different from the bleak outlook Conservative Shadow Science minister Adam Afriyie gave before Cox and other attacked him. Moreover it is no different from the scenario Cox and others have been fighting hard against. To summarise, Mandelson is saying that after the years of plenty, science will be tightening its belt a little, or to put it another way, following years of underinvestment, further cuts are on the way.

What exactly were you reading Brian? Is this part of the reason you only ever seem to tweet Drayson, the science minister, and not his Shadow or other members of both the main opposition parties? Is this apparent change from the neutral position anything to do with the sudden proliferation of this photograph and others on the web? I wouldn’t put it past Lord Mandelson…

I not, on a slightly different but related matter, Nature has a guide for scientists dipping a toe into politics for whatever reason, to help with engaging a non-scientific, politicised audience. After the main article, these tips are given:

  • Know your audience. Communicate your science in a clear, concise but intelligent manner.
  • Consider other implications aside from just the budgetary — how should the science initiatives be prioritized?
  • Recognize the perceptions of different fields and disciplines — for example, some US congressmen have a negative view of scientists associated with environmental groups.
  • Be aware that explicit advocacy activities, especially if allied with a certain political party, could cause some tension with colleagues who disagree.
  • Be careful when reaching outside of your area of expertise. Don’t be afraid to state the limits of your knowledge on a subject.
  • Consider advocating through a science society that knows the issues.
  • Recognize that a full-time career move to advocacy could affect your prospects for returning to research.
  • Recognize that other factors, such as values, jobs and economics, play into science policy. Laws rarely grow out of scientific evidence alone.

3 responses to “Has Mandelson got Cox?

  1. To be fair, Brian Cox, and others, tweet Drayson because he has demonstrated that he reads twitter and responds to comments and he IS the science minister for the moment. As for tweeting Afriyie, you might like to look at the time he last used his twitter account to judge how useful that would be.

    • Yes, I’m aware of Alfriyie’s approach to twitter (and Lord Drayson’s), which is why I added in the bit about other members of the two shadow teams. But this is supposed to be about an election campaign, looking forward to who ever will form the next government in an election that presently looks to be in the balance and we need all parties to be engaged, or at least continuously spoken to. Also, the point wasn’t just about general tweeting, which obviously involves the minister more than any other politician, but, for example, specific ‘election’ tweets on why the minister believes scientists should vote for Labour – he is quite able to produce those unprompted, as anyone in his position is – and today’s earlier tweet on Madelson’s speech.

  2. Apparently, Cox is going to vote Lib Dem . I share Cox’s respect for Evan Harris and will also be voting Lib Dem (again). Harris and Phil Willis form an impresive duo on the Science and Technology Select Committee.

    In any case, I’ve always thought that Drayson’s apparently avid use of Twitter is simply the “bleeding edge” version of New Labour’s big conversation nonsense a few years ago.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s