Sir David King -hero and villain

Science free

I hold Sir David King, the Government Chief Scientist in admiration and contempt. Admirable are his quietly expressed scientifically based opinions on subjects within his expertise. Contemptible are his off-the-cuff views on subjects of which he has only a superficial knowledge.

Twice I have had the chance to question him at select committees. He was great. I wish I could probe his science free rant on badger  culling.

ONE of the world's leading scientific journals, Nature, has slammed him for recommending a cull of badgers. They accuse him of "mishandling" the question of whether to cull badgers and says that his behaviour "is an example to governments of how not to deal with such advice, once it has been solicited and received".

The respected journal reports that: "... in Britain, scientists have enjoyed a better relationship with their government and - prior to the badgers episode - little evidence has come to light of advisory recommendations from scientists being cooked or spun to match the government's intentions".

It also says that scientists and MPs "rightly criticised" Sir David King "for seeming to go back on the Independent Scientific Group's advice, which the Government had itself sought". Nature says that King's later insistence that his conclusions are not very different from those reached by the ISG "ring hollow".

Nature concludes that the Government should base its TB policy on the "unfettered" advice of the ISG, not least because this would be "deeply appreciated" by "scientists in all spheres who choose to participate in painstaking advisory processes in the earnest belief that their advice will actually make a difference to government policy".

Unlike the Government and Sir David, Nature is entirely impartial on this. The Badger Trust commented: "It is indicative of how low Ministers are prepared to stoop over the question of bovine TB, when it leads to the office of the chief scientific adviser being subject to very personal, damning criticism by one of the world's leading scientific journals.

"But at the root of this fiasco is the constant whispering in the ears of Ministers by cull-mad state vets. Unless Ministers can distinguish between the genuinely independent scientific advice of the ISG and their pseudo-scientific state vets, there is no hope of controlling bovine TB in cattle.

"This disease is costing tax payers millions every year. It is perverse that the biggest obstacle to addressing it are the state vets whose obsession with a badger-killing dogma blinds them - and therefore farmers - to the massive, largely hidden reservoir of TB in cattle.

How do Sir David's thought processes lead him to a conclusion that is science-free ? I would not question his integrity, but his common-sense ....?

Donor-gate v Plaid-gate

On the Politics show today,the normally sensible  Hywel Williams MP, one of the 'Plaid-gate three',  said  you cannot compare  Donor-gate with Plaid-gate. Let's try.

Honesty

Donor-gate: Labour Party members giving money to the Labour Party anonymously. Few, if any,  MPs culpably involved.
Plaid-gate: Plaid using taxpayers money illicitly to fund their Assembly election campaign. All Plaid MPs deeply involved.

Truth

Donor-gate: Rule-breaking blame accepted by Party Leader immediately. Culprit resigned.
Plaid: Denied responsibility until condemned by Standards Committee and Electoral Commission.

Hypocrisy

Donor-gate: Officials in breach of laws set up by Labour government.
Plaid-gate: Plaid MPs voted against the CA, then immediately plunged their snouts so deeply into the trough that all you see of them was the soles of their Gucci shoes.

Reality Grip:
Donor-gate: Blame for ruled breaking fully  accepted by Labour.
Plaid-gate: Still claim complete  innocence even though two versions of advertisements were different from  one submitted for approval.

Publicity
Donor-gate; Hysterical seven day  coverage of Sunday Mail malign Labour bashing story, which hyped  alleged sleaze without little evidence of any harm done.
Plaid-gate: Under-reported , especially by papers that profited from Plaid ads. Blustering  Plaid defence given equal space as Standards Committee's authoritative ruling.

Police

Donor-gate: Police investigation welcomed by Labour.
Plaid-gate: No police investigation, yet.

You are right Hywel. They can't be compared.

A period  of silent repentance would be appropriate from Plaid.

Comments

[Chris Gale]

Kings 'evidence' was nothing of the kind, just another scapegoat attempt to justify the slaughter of badgers to appease the farmers and Prince Charles.

[Roger Thomas]

Sir David built his reputation in part on the risk assesment that climate change was a greater threat than terrorism. He wasn't the author.
It was borrowed from a submission to a United Nations Environment and Development report by me.
Also the source of the 2005 G8 agenda climate change and Africa

DEFRA has taken the original ofits website now but the original is here. He really should have followed etiquette in science and cited the original and source.

http://www.mp2.worldfriend.com/sustainable_development_forum.htm

[paulflynn]

Thanks Roger Thomas for that clarification.
David King is baffling. He ignores the sounds science based evidence on the badger cull and the economic disaster that nuclear power has been. Yet he has been courageous on global warming - even if his evidence was not correctly acredited.

[Roger Thomas]

Thanks. I am not too sure on courageous though. The submission to the report was before the invasion of Iraq. If you read it, it is more of a case gainst war than the promoting of the climate change agenda. I have hard copy of the UNED summation from the DEFRA site and all the points were carried through.

Sir David only published (Science Jan 2004) the assessment after the invsion of Iraq. Though he, the UN and UK Government had access to it long before. It would have been part of a case against war.

After Sir David published a next significant step was PM Tony Blair's keynote speech on the environment and climate change, 14th September 2004. Similar themes. Also similar to other work I had done for the Government.

This paved the way for the agenda of the 2005 G8 in Perthshire which was climate change and Africa. The main themes in my article and in the UN summation I had.

Blair wanted to be seen as a leader on climate change. I don't really think Sir David was being courageous. I think there has been a lot of spin.

There were claims Sir David had been muzzled by Downing Street, but not long after Blair made his speech, then the G8 and Stern etc. It was all policy.

The scary thing was writing it, when it was a virtual lone voice in Government. Dissing the war and drawing attention to climate change. In a Government website.

I had only just been invited to a conference to set up the new generation of UK climate models, then on the recommendation of DEFRA advised the Cabinet Office on sustainable development and Regulatory Impact Assessment. The of course we had Dr Kelly.

Sir David only published after the "Abrupt climate change scenario.." Pentagon report (Oct 2003)to the President, which got good coverage and gave the foundation to Sir David.

Unfortunately with Sir David getting the media attention my work never got the exposure, which a retrospective would show would have been more beneficial to the UK than the focus on Sir David.

The BBC News 24 in 2004 admitted I was the original author, but pointed out Sir David was a media personality, and news is about ratings. So continued promoting Sir David as the author,though they knew he wasn't. They liked my assessment better than Sir David's, found it more authoritative and reference etc, but decided to go for the cult of celebrity rather than scientific accuracy etc.

[paulflynn]

Many thanks.
It is certainly true that the cult of celebrity rules. The information you provide is a the gteatest interest and I am grateful to read it. I hope your work will receive its due recognition.

[Roger Thomas]

Thank you for those kind words. There is a lot more of a story with the back catalogue of my work. This also relates badgers and the present flooding. Once again thank you for your interest.