Dr Michael Borgas, Science Alert 16 Nov 09;
The CSIRO Staff Association represents more than 3000 scientists and staff in CSIRO and we support the freedom and independence of science, and the charter that governs our comment on political policy. We hope to debate issues and inform but not instruct the public on major issues in society.
Coal policy and freedom of speech is a vexed problem for CSIR(O), and the politics of energy are often controversial, which the recent organisational angst on gagging shows. But this is nothing new.
In the 1920’s Stanley Bruce, later Lord Bruce of Melbourne, was instrumental in establishing CSIR and exploiting coal was prominent in its fuel research portfolio.
Industrial relations heavy handedness was another hallmark of Bruce. He enacted legislation in 1925 under the Crimes Act to deal with ‘industrial extremists,’ largely directed at coal-industry activism.
In the U.K., coal-industry troubles sparked the famous 1926 general strike, and invigorated science trade union activism, with the Association of Scientific Workers established in 1927, including links to many Australians.
Economic, political and coal-industry events in 1929 terminated Bruce’s leadership (and seat in Parliament), but CSIR, still a political cleanskin, powered on. Around the world, left wing political activism aligned more and more with progressive science hoping for a better planned world.
The Australian Association of Scientific Workers formed in 1939 and growing numbers of Australian scientists participated in political activism throughout the 1930s. The AASW was active and influential in planning the economy during the second-world war.
Stanley Bruce received an FRS (Fellow Royal Society, London) in 1944 for service to science, particularly for linking science to global programmes for food production, development of global aviation and securing Australian uranium supplies.
In CSIR, a Staff Association had been mooted from as early as 1929, but it was Bruce’s protégé Richard Casey’s rejection of a re-classification scheme in 1939 that began industrial organisation in CSIR.
Coal and nuclear energy were political issues post war, with the famous sacking of a CSIR scientist, Tom Kaiser. He was observed in London publicly protesting at the gaoling in Australia of striking coal miners, which stoked fears of communist influence in Australian science.
Right wing politicians riven with conspiracy theories attacked CSIR and its chairman Sir David Rivett. His defence of scientific independence and freedom was tarred as treachery and CSIR was reorganised in 1949.
Lord Casey, again Minister in charge of CSIRO, combined his duties with being head of ASIO and national security (and he was later on the executive of CSIRO too). The boom times of the 1950’s were not times for public comment in Australian science.
As we switch to today, the policy and science issues resonate with the past. Right wing conspiracy theories abound from parliament, scientists have much to say about planning for sustainability, and organisation of world affairs is on the minds of policy makers. As in the past, coal is at the heart of the issue.
History shows that Australia is prone to gross over reaction in such situations. Tom Kaiser, forced from Australia, eventually had a productive career in the U.K., including a Gold Medal from the Royal Astronomical Society in 1994, although one suspects that some sceptics may still have issues with astronomers. Sir David Rivett (FRS awarded in 1941) is of course iconic in Australian science and he will be honoured again with a named lecture in CSIRO early in 2010.
CSIRO still has people speaking out, these days with a charter to guide us rather than secret Machiavellian control. Overall, there seems to be more pressure from society to be more open even in our inherently conservative society. Rivett’s calls for scientific freedom are still relevant and we all still have to work towards this goal.
The affinity of both physical and social scientists to want to contribute to world affairs is long standing. In fact the post second-world war ‘contract’ with science for disinterested pursuit of the endless frontiers of knowledge, was simply a reaction to cold war sensitivities. It is widely acknowledged that this contract has run its course and new modes of science and innovation are on the rise, although we are yet to have a clear new ‘contract’ for science in society.
The climate debate is a broad metaphor for all aspects of an interconnected and finite world, and a scientific approach to help the organisation of the planet is overdue.
The dialogue in Australia remains at a very primitive level. The world-government conspiracy fear promoted by Lord Monckton, and remarkably uncritically accepted by even the wisest so-called sceptic, is a hallmark of those frozen in time. Lady Thatcher, a former U.K. Prime Minister, was once advised by Lord Monckton. However, she was also once a member of the Association of Scientific Workers, and an early supporter of global warming, at least when it suited the political debate vilifying coal workers. The Lady was for turning some of the time.
It just goes to show that advice to government is an important thing, no less than when it is science. It is perhaps always useful to have some scepticism about received wisdom, but even better to have more about mad conspiracies.
Dr Michael Borgas is the president of the CSIRO Staff Association.
