The idea is to form a political party based on building support for Education and STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths. Not a single-issue party, but a party that is unashamedly and solidly grounded on improving education, and on educating our elected representatives as to the importance and benefits that flow from an educated population.
For far too long, the major political parties in this country have targeted everything they do towards society's "lowest common denominator".
Meanwhile, so many of our nation's scientists, educators and health experts are left seething as their funding is raided yet again to pay for nonsense like marriage bonuses, and their reputations as objective researchers is disparaged in the pursuit of cheap political points.
And along the way, we've managed to make senators of a gun nut because 318,000 people didn't know the difference between Liberal Democrats and Liberal Party, an unheard-of motoring enthusiast on the back of just 3% of a quota or less than 13,000 votes, and a sports party person who got just 2070 votes! These people will hold the balance of power in the Senate from July 2014, and determine what Abbott promises make it into law...
Some people think we should just throw our support behind the Greens. But the stark reality is that many voters will not vote for the Greens no matter how much they try to portray themselves as mainstream. The recent election has clearly demonstrated that an unprecedented proportion of the voting population were casting about desperately looking for an alternative they could vote for. A full 32% of first preference votes went to parties other than the ALP, Liberals and Nationals. That's almost 3.4 million people. For Pete's sake, more than half a million people voted first for Clive Palmer's party!
I've been asking scientists for years about them getting involved in politics, but it often gets laughed off. But as this discussion via Twitter this week shows, some scientists no longer feel it's a laughing matter. They are angry, and they are looking for a way to step up to the plate.
Clearly there's room for a new party, and after three years of Tony Abbott it's likely there'll be even more.
What do you think? Would you get behind this?
Please make this happen. The focus on STEM should be more than just a curriculum for 4 years during school, rather something to which everyone can contribute throughout life. Imagine the advancements and achievements humans could accomplish if STEM enjoyed the same passions we see among religions. I'd love such a movement in society that focuses on the future, the REAL future and not just the next 3 years. We need this ideology represented in our leadership.
ReplyDeleteThis is entirely possible. I have been having almost exactly the same thoughts in my head about a science based political party.
ReplyDeleteHere are some of those (brief and random) thoughts:
1. The idea of STEM based political party is strong.
2. A scientific approach to a political party would be a very interesting one. I would love to see some evidence based policy.
3. Peer reviewed policy. I like the sound of that.
4. There are a few scientifically literate people that represent us and it seems as though the scientific part of them is lost in the political system/game. It would be nice to have that focus on proper scientific process brought back.
5. Imagine a question time that resembles a Q&A session at a conference. Scientists are less afraid to say "I don't know" I'd love to see that in a politician.
I had a look at how to register a political party on the AEC webiste, and to seems pretty easy. There's even a very easy to understand flowchart to help. (http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/Party_Registration/files/images/process-flowchart.gif)
I think the first step is to gauge if enough people are interested. There are many forums where this can be discussed, conferences, comes to mind straight away (ASC conference for example, TAM is another one). Next would be to decide on what are all decisions are to be grounded on. STEM is a bloody good start here! Then we'd start getting into creating policy. It'd be great have policies the stretch far beyond just STEM, but with a basis on STEM.
These are random thoughts I know, and there are more...but I think that'll do for now. I'd love to be a part of the discussion and look forward to it.
We need viable alternatives in a political landscape that is increasingly just pissing people off. The success of these one-issue niche parties begs the question of what we could do if scientists, science communicators and science policy makers joined forces to address issues around education, industry and economic growth. If the current trend is to appeal to the lowest common denominator, why can't we change that by simply doing it differently? I would like to become involved in such an initiative.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking about creating such a party since the last election. It seems very possible that a science research based member could take a seat in the senate. The senate, as a house of review, would be an excellent place for a politician that is bases their decisions on scientific consensus. Unlike many of the new micro-party senators the science based senator would not be a one platform senator but would be able to make an informed decision about many different aspects of political life, as long as their was scientific research to fall back upon.
ReplyDeleteI would be very interested in taking this idea forward
I spent this campaign so frustrated that everything seemed to be political machinations. I'd back a party that was able to point at the research to back up it's policy.
ReplyDeleteIs this party concept distinct enough from Future Party?
ReplyDeleteI've had similar thoughts around "what I'd do if I was emperor of Australia" and evidence-based policy/decision making would definitely be among them.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it would be terrific to just stay focused on science/tech research issues - I suspect that trying to get too broad too soon means picking sides on distracting issues that would easily alienate a lot of the people who are otherwise invested, employed or interested in STEM related fields. Which is a shame, because it's a cause that should be easy to rally support for...
We're far too diverse a bunch to rely on the Greens and in fact I'd love to see a STEM party that was far more neutral than the Greens in terms of ALP/LNP alliances. I've voted Greens in the past but this time I preferenced them last, right next to ALP and LNP. I just can't see any party that represents me.
If there had been a party quoting Carl Sagan ("We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology") I would have voted for them in a heartbeat, and perhaps even got involved.