The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), established in 1889, has long recognised the importance of fostering dialogue between science and policy. Over the past two years I have spearheaded the development of a toolbox, a set practical resources to assist parliamentarians in their engagement with, and use of science and technology. However, a significant challenge remains: many parliamentarians do not know who to ask or what to ask when it comes to scientific advice.
Engaging with the public is a fundamental responsibility for scientists, especially when their research is publicly funded. It is essential to communicate the potential benefits of scientific advancements to society as a whole.
Historically, the relationship between science and policymakers, including Parliament and Government, has been reactive, often waiting for questions rather than proactively providing solutions. This approach has proven to be too slow in addressing urgent issues.
Building trust in science requires translating complex scientific concepts into language that the broader public can understand and accept. This task has become increasingly difficult in today's fast-paced world.
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted a troubling trend of indifference towards scientific evidence within the Oireachtas. A study conducted after the pandemic has revealed that current TDs are less inclined to heed academic advice compared to their predecessors. This shift may be attributed to the perceived patronising tone of scientific authorities during the pandemic, which has deepened the divide and echoed historical tensions.
As politicians, we often grapple with rapidly evolving technologies that we do not fully understand. These concepts can be elusive and lack clear definitions. While it is crucial to safeguard against unintended consequences, we must also foster innovation rather than stifle it. The IPU’s Ethical Charter on Science and Technology provides a framework for navigating these challenges.
If policymakers do not fill the void of scientific guidance, others will. The impact of the disregard for facts in some political discourses, even the questioning of what constitutes a fact, underscores the importance of evidence-based policy.
Evidence can offer a fresh perspective and a third way that avoids the partisan blockages to reform. A 2016 study in the Westminster Parliament found that select committees, despite lacking formal legislative decision-making power, had significant influence on government bills through committee reports and government amendments.
Furthermore, directly presenting evidence to a Minister via Parliament, rather than through the circuitous route of the civil service, can be more effective.
It is also important to note that the process of policy formulation and implementation has evolved, with Parliament gaining more power through mechanisms like Pre-Legislative Scrutiny in terms of domestic legislation and the Lisbon Treaty, which allows national parliaments to submit 'Reasoned Opinions' to the European Commission opposing legislative proposals. The Oireachtas Library & Research Service is another valuable avenue to feed evidence into the policy process.
To identify the areas of science needed by policymakers, we should consider the Programme for Government, legislative programmes, and even party manifestos. Other valuable indicators of what will be needed is the EU Commission, as well as horizon and foresight tools such as GESDA.
To help support the demand side for research evidence the IPU toolbox recommends that
(i) at the start of the parliamentary cycle, parliament could identify and publish a short statement on Areas of Research Interest (ARIs). ARIs would offer insight into specific policy areas where Government Departments or parliament is keen to hear research evidence or insights, and
(ii) Parliaments should encourage Government to include more research evidence in its policy papers through the inclusion of citation, as well as facilitating open consultations in the policy formulation process.
While TDs and Ministers have access to more sources of information than ever before, much of it remains unusable. Sometimes, a simple conversation over coffee can be the most effective way to communicate complex ideas.
In conclusion, engagement between the scientific community and decision-makers is crucial for embedding evidence-based decision-making in the policy system. This ensures that decisions are made fairly, inclusively, and justly, based on the latest research rather than populist views, misinformation, or self-serving interests.
Share this post