Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
theguardian.com
Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#2What am I missing here? What's the logic behind the government's decision in the first place?
Edit: thanks for the clarification HN!
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#3If true, this has to be the most asinine idea in government ever. If the government produces a report that says a department, program, or policy is ineffective, what better source of research to provide to policymakers?! Using government research against the government is gold!
Source: I'm a lobbyist. GAO, CRS, and CBO reports are absolutely gold mines when it comes to discussing the issues with harmful policies.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#4What am I missing here? What's the logic behind the government's decision in the first place? Edit: thanks for the clarification HN!
The idea appears to be that gov't funds cannot be used to lobby for political or policy changes, so that, for example, funds given to Greenpeace would have to be spent on non-political activities. But the rule is so broadly written that it basically poisons any gov't-funded research; rather than simply regulating the use of funds, it would prevent a researcher from speaking out in favor or against policies based on their research. This probably isn't by design. Probably.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#5What am I missing here? What's the logic behind the government's decision in the first place? Edit: thanks for the clarification HN!
It's poorly elucidated in the article:
"The aim of the Cabinet Office edict was to stop NGOs from lobbying politicians and Whitehall departments using the government’s own funds. "
The idea is to stop organisations, specifically charities, from using their government grants to lobby on political issues (i.e grants should fund only the charitable activities of the organisation).
Unfortunately it seems the law may not be specific enough in it's focus.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#6The thinking, such that it is, is broadly this: the government funds research, therefore it is in favor of the research, therefore it is a waste of such (scarce) funds having the recipients lobbying the said government in favor of the findings, given the government was in favor in the first place.
This is the best explanation I've come across.
Of course, anyone with the slightest bit of intelligence will see that this is either incredibly stupid, or incredibly devious.
Given the trajectory of the current UK government (for example privatising the probation service whilst bragging that not only did it not have any evidence this such a plan was a good thing, and that it was not going to look, because sometimes trusting 'gut instinct' is a smart idea), this has all the hallmarks of shutting down dissenting voices, rather than trying to spend money wisely.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#7What am I missing here? What's the logic behind the government's decision in the first place? Edit: thanks for the clarification HN!
The idea appears to be that gov't funds cannot be used to lobby for political or policy changes, so that, for example, funds given to Greenpeace would have to be spent on non-political activities. But the rule is so broadly written that it basically poisons any gov't-funded research; rather than simply regulating the use of funds, it would prevent a researcher from speaking out in favor or against policies based on t…
> rather than simply regulating the use of funds, it would prevent a researcher from speaking out in favor or against policies based on their research.
I'm not sure it does, the clause is about "allowable expenditure":
> “The following costs are not Eligible Expenditure:- Payments that support activity intended to influence or attempt to influence Parliament, Government or political parties, or attempting to influence the awarding or renewal of contracts and grants, or attempting to influence legislative or regulatory action”
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#8If true, this has to be the most asinine idea in government ever. If the government produces a report that says a department, program, or policy is ineffective, what better source of research to provide to policymakers?! Using government research against the government is gold! Source: I'm a lobbyist. GAO, CRS, and CBO reports are absolutely gold mines when it comes to discussing the issues with harmful policies.
There's nothing stopping the work from being used, as far as I can tell. This is a clause about how the money from the grant can be spent.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#9Goodbye, economics, political science, sociology, atmospheric science, civil engineering...the list goes on. Your insights were welcome in their day, but we must now bid farewell. Godspeed on your merry way.
Re: Britain’s scientists must not be gagged
#10Yet more leftist political spin from the Guardian hits the HN front page. For a bit of balance, here's the equivalent story from a rightwing (aka taxpayer) perspective:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12143479/Charities-...