“Ever dreamed about being an MP?” That’s the Rationalist’s Association line for its latest venture. Well, actually, I can honestly say I’ve had nightmares about being an MP. When I stood in the 2010 general election, my worst nightmare was that I would, by some weird twist, end up as an elected parliamentary representative. My wife had promised to divorce me in that eventuality. The constituency I stood in was four hours drive from home. It would have been a disaster. Fortunately, I was pipped at the post by the narrowest of 23,000-vote margins.
The MP I stood against, David Treddinick, was never terribly worried about being beaten – even by the other parties. His seat is in a Tory heartland, and rock-solid safe. He was the only MP to be re-elected after being caught up in both the 1997 cash for questions and the 2009 MP’s expenses scandal – that’s how safe. But both of Tredinnick’s gaffes also serve as a useful pointer to a much wider problem with politics.
Tredinnick is a frustratingly unthinking chap (he really is a proper chap: Eton College; St John’s, Oxford; stockbroker; officer in the Grenadier Guards…). His cash for questions episode arose when a journalist persuaded him to accept £1,000 for asking a parliamentary question about a drug. Astonishingly, Tredinnick didn’t even check the drug out first: it was, in true Brass Eye style, an entirely fictitious pharmaceutical.
His expenses scandal experience was another jaw-dropper. He had made a claim to cover the cost of some astrology software (read this: it’s wonderful). Tredinnick has suggested in the House that the NHS consider employing Chinese astrology in healthcare. He is also a staunch advocate of homeopathy: during the 2001 foot and mouth crisis, he lobbied for homeopathic remedies to be rolled out as a countermeasure. Tredinnick also thinks that blood doesn’t clot well during a full moon – surgeons, he says, would do well not to operate on their patients at this point in the lunar cycle.
I’m not actually against people holding such opinions. It is unscientific to insist that human beings all be rational, when we know the human brain is not really wired that way. But I am against people who don’t make any attempt to fight their innate irrationality when they hold important public office.
Tredinnick is working as an elected representative with access to the machinery of government. For many years, he was on the House of Commons Health Select Committee. He is now on the Science and Technology Select Committee. What really angers me is that Tredinnick was the only candidate that the Conservative party put forward for the S&T committee post. Such decisions make a mockery of the process of governance. Put bluntly, they’re taking the piss.
The question is, do you think you could do a better job? I do, and I have no doubt that almost all of you reading this could too. Which brings me back to the point. Why not have a go?
On 10 September, the inaugural session of the Rational Parliament will take place at Conway Hall in central London. The idea is simple, and brilliant. Everyone in attendance will be a sitting member of the Parliament. They will listen to evidence. They will bring evidence. They will debate the merits of that evidence. There will be a place for well-presented “gut feeling” too: it’s important to acknowledge that not every valuable contribution to a debate is published in peer-reviewed journals. The members will have the chance to propose and amend motions. And then, at the end of the evening, with everyone having had their say – and even the odd moment of hush for thought and reflection – they will vote.
The first motion is a firestarter: “This House agrees that genetic modification is a rational approach to meeting food demand.” The aim, eventually, is to parallel some of the issues being debated in the House of Commons so that a public debate can compare and contrast with (and perhaps even influence) what our elected representatives are making of the hot-topic issues.
I have never believed that being a scientist, or even science-literate, is essential to being a good MP. But I do think that an ability and a willingness to listen to evidence without prejudice, and to incorporate its arguments into your decision-making, should be. That was the reason I stood against Tredinnick in the election, and it is also the reason I’m willing to bet that the Members of the Rational Parliament will turn out to be better suited to public office than some of our current representatives. Ever dreamed about being an MP? You can do better than that: come and be an MRP.
Michael Brooks will be Speaker for the inaugural debate of the Rational Parliament, which takes place at London's Conway Hall on 10 September. There are still a limited number of seats available – book your free ticket now.
