Science4Parliament Podcast – Introduction – Denis Naughten
SPEAKERS
Denis Naughten, Olivia Crinion
Olivia 00:00
Welcome to Science4Parliament. This is the first podcast which aims to foster the relationship between science and decision makers and show how research and innovation are vital to the equitable and sustainable functioning of our societies and economies. And from now on, it will be presented by Denis Naughten, who is a directly elected MP in Ireland for the last 26 years. He served as an Irish cabinet minister and also on the Council of the European Union of ministers. He is Chairperson of the Inter-Parliamentary Union Working Group on science and technology, which is based in Geneva, whose aims are to inspire global parliamentary action through legislative work in the field of science and technology. So the next five episodes in the podcast will be with the Science Foundation Researchers who were seconded to the Irish Parliament Library and Research Service as part of the SFI, which is the Science Foundation of Ireland's Public Service Fellowship programme. They're going to be telling us all about the research and their experiences in Parliament. And that is going to be hosted by Denis Naughten. But we thought it was only fair that the host has the microphone turned on him to set the scene and tell us why he got involved in trying to bring science to work with him. And to add something different to the conversation, he has been asked to pick two numbers, each of which are related to one of 10 random questions, and he might be asked some of those during the interview. So, if you don't mind, I'm going to ask you to pick two numbers between one and 10.
Denis 01:46
Can I pick three and eight?
Olivia 01:4
You can indeed, three and eight okie dokie. keep those in mind for later. So first of all, how are you?
Denis 01:55
I'm fine. I'm getting used to being on the other side of the microphone for a change. But I'm being put onto the thumbscrews again today on the receiving end of questions.
Olivia 02:09
So if you don't mind, could I first ask you? Where did your passion for science come from?
Denis 02:15
Well, I suppose look, I grew up on my family farm at home in County Roscommon in the middle of Ireland. As I tell my colleagues that I meet internationally, the constituency that I represent in Roscommon /Galway has I think, more sheep than people, definitely in the southern part of that constituency. And I suppose growing up on a farm, you see life, you see how things work? And I suppose that was always there, subconsciously, in my mind. And I think when I went to secondary school then started to learn about science, chemistry, biology and physics really give me an interest.
Olivia 02:59
So then you got into politics, and how did you then relate politics back to science? Or was it always something that was in the back of your mind?
Denis 03:09
Not really, I suppose for me. When you're trained as a scientist, you're trained to think differently. And I think that was something that has always stood out to me throughout my parliamentary career. But I recall being on the front bench of the the main opposition party, so a shadow minister, for different various departments, and we would sit on a weekly basis around the Shadow Cabinet table. And I found myself arguing on on a regular basis regarding the approach that was being taken in relation to politics and policy. And it got to such an extent that I actually considered throwing in the towel and giving up politics altogether, because clearly, I was at odds with all of my colleagues. Until one day I was sitting around the table, and I realised that I was the only scientifically trained individual around the table. Everyone else was humanities trained. And they could only look at problems in a particular dimension and perspective. Whereas a scientist, you're taught to problem solve, you're taught to try and look at problems from different perspectives. And the penny dropped would mean that that was the reason why I was arguing with them. So I had to make more of an effort to try and explain my approach and my perspective to things.
Olivia 04:38
I suppose politicians like anybody else aren't just politicians there, as it was, in your case, a scientist, humanitarian mother, father, so they're bringing all of that to it, but you were the only one that was bringing science.
Denis 04:52
Yes, I was. And I suppose look, the one thing that every member of parliament brings to the table is the view and perspective of their constituents. And we all are have those glasses on in terms of anything. And any proposal comes before us. How does this impact on the people that I represent? Not necessarily the people that vote for me or the people that live in my constituency, but society as a whole? And that is all was the first test? And the first question, how do we bring this to the public? How do we explain it to the public? Where's the benefit for them in relation to it,
Olivia 05:31
but I suppose you're talking there of your constituents, that even if constituents wants something done, for their benefit, they will assume, in most cases, that whatever is done, will be in everybody's benefit, or is based on the best knowledge. So people would assume that policy is based on science?
Denis 05:53
Yes, I'm sure they would assume that. But I suppose having served in cabinet, having served in the most technically challenging department, in government and served at EU level it, that is not always the case. Sometimes, there are ethical issues that come into it. Sometimes there are policy issues or ethos within a particular party that come in to the development of policy, a lot of the time, it goes back to what is in the original party manifesto, or of the political parties that are in government, they are then used to draft the programme for government, which is the policy document that all governments operate on in Ireland. And that really taints a loss of the approach that's taken with regard to political issues and policy issues. And a lot of the time, particularly in coalition governments, there are compromises in relation to that, in terms of what the final policy is. And I was talking to scientists recently, and the made the point to me, that a lot of occasions, the scientific evidence that gets noticed is the one that it has been clearly communicated to the politicians. So it may not be the best possible advice. It may not be even the right advice, but it's the one that's been clearly communicated. And I was trying to explain to them that whole concept and I said, Take this, if you go home from work in the evening, and all the ingredients are left out on the counter for a meal, and there's no recipe, or there's also a meal, just prepared, which one are you going to eat, you're going to eat the one that's already there and prepared for you. So that's what scientists need to do. There's no point giving us the ingredients and telling us, you work that out from there, they actually need to prepare the meal for us and explain to us how they prepared that meal. That's the key thing.
Olivia 08:04
I suppose politicians, like a lot of the rest of us are under time pressure, always under time pressure. So like that, if you get something that's easily understandable, it might not be exactly correct. It might not be exactly what you want. But if you can understand, and it fits the bill, I suppose that is,
Denis 08:23
yes politicians are hugely time poor. You know, on any one day, you would conservatively been dealing with maybe 20 different and varied issues, from constituency issues, to policy issues, to legislative issues, you know, and other issues that come up on a day to day basis. So you can't be across everything. And you will look and try and consume the information that is as clear as possible to you, and supports the case and argument that you're trying to make or the approach in relation to the piece of policy or legislation.
Olivia 09:04
And I suppose you don't have time to actually go and find the expert, or go and find what you're looking for in the first place. Because I mean, there's so much information out there. So what what do politicians need from the scientists?
Denis 09:17
I'm going to be quite honest with you. And I've spoken with quite a number of politicians recently, and probably the single most effective tool that they use is Google to try and get information and then try and verify the source of that, whether it's a credible journalist, whether it's coming from a particular credible university and so forth, looking at the author of a news article, or the university that actually generated the research to see the credibility with regard to it, rather than actually delving into the detail of evidence and I think what academics need to do is to look at how they could clearly explain what they want to do with their research to their grandmother. If they can explain it to the grandmother, In simple terms, they'll be able to explain it to politicians. And they need to do that. As my former constituency colleague and former prime minister in Ireland, Albert Reynolds used to say, keep it to one page.
Olivia 10:27
So your podcast is going to be about the researchers who came in to the Houses of the Oireachtas to talk to politicians. Do you think that initiatives like that are helpful?
Denis 10:44
Yes, I think what we need to do is to get the conversation going between scientists and members of parliament, members of parliament are vitally important in terms of the whole decision making process. Because look at the moment, there are unprecedented challenges out there today are wicked challenges. Climate change, pandemics, artificial intelligence. So there are huge questions, ethical issues, policy issues, legislative issues that we all have to deal with as members of parliament in passing new laws, adopting new policy approaches, and also providing and approving the funding for government departments and agencies to deliver on that. So we need to know these issues, we need to be able to understand them. And the only way we can really do that is to be able to have a very open and frank conversation with scientists. And I think if we can actually get them to sit down around the one table, having a cup of coffee, then scientists will understand what politicians and members of parliament need from them in terms of simple language and understandable concepts. And members of parliament will understand what wealth of information is there, we asking the right questions.
Olivia 12:06
So what is the overall aim of this podcast, would you say
Denis 12:10
that the overall aim of this podcast is serendipity, this is hopefully to try and whet the appetite of both members of parliament, and scientists across the globe, to actually start that engagement, to think about how scientists and academics can break their research down into simple understandable concepts that can relate to real people and make a real impact in society. And how members of parliament can start that conversation with the scientists to give them an understanding and appreciation of the policy issues, the challenges, the issues that they're facing, from a legislative point of view, but also from a representational point of view, because ultimately, we will look at all of these issues through the perspective of how does this impact on the people we represent in society as a whole.
Olivia 13:16
So I asked you at the beginning of two numbers, and they related to questions, so I'm just going to jump back a little bit. And I will pick one of those questions, which is have you ever lost your car in a car park?
Denis 13:32
Yes, I have. I have lost my car in the carpark, a Dublin airport, which is a very, very big car park, multi story car park. And he spent half an hour walking around the car park trying to find the car, pressing the button, until out of the corner of my eye seen lights flashing in the adjoining multi storey carpark and realised that it was in the wrong block,
Olivia 14:00
just as well. It picked it up from that far away. And nowadays, you never know AI find it for you. Maybe it might have to. So to go back to podcasts that are coming up, what do we have to look forward to?
Denis 14:14
So look, I'm going to be talking to people that have come into the Irish Parliament and produced a piece of work where they have taken their research field and area and produced a publication that has been specifically targeted at consumption by members of parliament and the public in fields like law tech eHealth, artificial intelligence, drones and geothermal energy. And what all of these researchers have been asked to do is to scope out the fields at the moment, what the emerging issues are, and what are the policy and ethical issues and challenges that members of parliament have to address in terms of of maximising the opportunities that arise in terms of these particular technologies for society for our economy, would also balance that against the risks of what protections need to be put in place to ensure that those risks do not become a reality.
Olivia 15:18
So I suppose research like this has gone on the whole time. And there's a lot of time energy money that goes into it. So really, the onus is on both sides to make sure that each other knows about it, because otherwise, what's the point?
Denis 15:35
Look, I think the frustrating thing about all of this is that the one thing that scientists and researchers have in common is that they are all trying to solve problems, at the impact on the lives of people on a day to day basis. We don't speak at the same language. And going back to that point I made regarding having the ingredients versus serving a meal, people will consume the meal far quicker. So communication is key, in relation to this, and in an environment where we have an ever increasing amount of information, evidence that is clearly presented. And that advice will take on far greater significance than by far the most cutting-edge research in the world that is not being communicated to politicians, and that is vitally important. And I think if we can get science, and along with our practical knowledge as practising Members of Parliament, then I think we can deliver on a whole broad range of cross cutting objectives, breaking down the policy silos that are there, across government departments, which, of course, is probably the single biggest objective a set out with the sustainable development goals, is to try and address these policy silos that don't solve the big challenges that we're facing in our own countries, and right across the globe.
Olivia 17:09
And I suppose, as you said, everybody's aim is to make life better for humanity. So we will try, we have to try to do that. We have to communicate,
Denis 17:17
yeah,we have to try and communicate. And we have to try and do it in a manner that people can understand the concepts. And I think, you know, the members of parliament in the United Kingdom were asked a couple of years ago, you know, what are the factors that they take into account in using research? One, it's the redibility of the source. Secondly, is the relevance of that research to the work that they're doing. But the third most important thing was time, the ease of use of that information, and the ease of sourcing that information, and that's where the scientists really need to help us.
Olivia 17:58
Thank you to Deputy Naughten for talking to me. And remember, you can find all the Science4Parliament podcasts wherever you get your podcasts.
