Young geneticists speak out

Hester Wain PhD

As a new member of the Genetics Society Committee, I thought I would put fingers to keyboard to introduce myself and tell you what I have been up to.

I am a bit of an “old” young scientist at 33, and have been a member of Gen. Soc. since about 1995. I started my career as a Zoologist and have progressed up the evolutionary ladder from a PhD in Chicken Genetics to working as part of the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) where I assign approved symbols to human genes.

“The Voice of the Future” on 19th March, organised by the Royal Society of Chemistry, gave me, and 150 other young (age 24-35) scientists, the opportunity to ask questions of the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology.

• Do you know this exists?
• Do you know what it does?
• Do you know who’s on it?

If you don’t you’re in good company because neither did I! However, I do now and will give you a brief summary.

The House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology has eleven members (including one woman who was not present at this event). Ranging in age from 30 to 63, they come from a variety of backgrounds: Genetics, IT, Journalism, Ophthalmology, Accountancy, Organic Chemistry, Maths, Medicine, Business Studies, and Engineering. The Committee’s aim is to raise the profile of science and technology and to tackle some of the key issues that need public and Parliamentary attention.

Six members of the Committee were at the event and we were assigned just over an hour to ask our pre-submitted questions. In reality though we took an hour and 40 minutes of their time and asked just over 30 questions on a number of topics. These included: the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), career structure, salary, short term contracts, child care, career breaks, discrimination against women, blue skies research funding, the Prime Minister’s lack of clarification over the teaching of creationism, science communication, the public’s perception of scientists, public understanding of science, scientist role models in schools, the glass ceiling effect, commercialism and industry, the brain drain and student loans. I don’t have space to go into any more detail on these, but the panel from the Committee agreed with most of our comments and were very sympathetic to our requests. However, they also pointed out that there is no “crock of gold” available to address the variety of funding needs and
that scientists in the future need to look elsewhere for funding, specifically from industry. This discussion ended with lunch and the day finished with an address by the Rt Hon Tony Benn PC (who is an excellent speaker!) on Science Government and Parliament.

So what happens about “The Voice of the Future” now? Well that is a good question and one which the MPs seemed unable to address directly except with the usual platitudes! The Royal Society of Chemistry offered to host further such events, possibly even yearly, but will this really get the voice of young scientists heard... I wonder?