All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2020-12-03#9
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-07-29 12:24:24
|
Title
Motions — Scientific Research- Motions - Scientific Research - Reflect
Description
<p class="speaker">Gerard Rennick</p><p>I move:</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2020-12-03.75.2) introduced by Queensland Senator [Gerard Rennick](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/gerard_rennick) (Liberal), which means it passed. Motions like these don't make any legal changes by themselves, but are politically influential because they represent the will of the Senate.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- >
- > *(a) recognises that:*
- >
- >> *(i) there are many approaches to epistemology, including rationalism, empiricism and scepticism,*
- >>
- >> *(ii) data backed up by robust quality assurance is the recorded evidence that scientific theory often relies on,*
- >>
- >> *(iii) all hypotheses and theories should be tested against observations that are measured and recorded consistently and accurately,*
- >>
- >> *(iv) data that does not demonstrate cause and effect is open to scrutiny, and*
- >>
- >> *(v) as attributed to the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics winner, Richard Feynman, 'I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned'; and*
- >
- > *(b) calls on the Senate to reflect on these principles when reviewing scientific research and considering policy.*
<p class="italic">That the Senate—</p><p class="italic">(a) recognises that:</p><p class="italic">(i) there are many approaches to epistemology, including rationalism, empiricism and scepticism,</p><p class="italic">(ii) data backed up by robust quality assurance is the recorded evidence that scientific theory often relies on,</p><p class="italic">(iii) all hypotheses and theories should be tested against observations that are measured and recorded consistently and accurately,</p><p class="italic">(iv) data that does not demonstrate cause and effect is open to scrutiny, and</p><p class="italic">(v) as attributed to the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics winner, Richard Feynman, 'I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned'; and</p><p class="italic">(b) calls on the Senate to reflect on these principles when reviewing scientific research and considering policy.</p> <p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>This motion is just another sad example from self-described tinfoil-hat-wearing Senator Rennick on his war on science and his war on scientists. Labor will not be supporting this motion, because we support science and we support scientists and the work that they do. We do acknowledge that the more extreme elements that appeared earlier this week in Senator Rennick's motion, referring to 'indoctrination, intimidation and shoddy mathematical modelling' have disappeared, but the fact this this motion appears today reflects poorly on the government and shows their inability to contain the frequent and getting-more-erratic outbursts from Senator Rennick. Whilst you're trying to make it look perfectly reasonable, we will not support it. We on this side of the chamber will not be providing the senator with more ammunition in his crusade against science.</p> <p class="speaker">Janet Rice</p><p>I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Janet Rice</p><p>The Australian Greens support a scientific approach and we support scientific research. Senator Rennick is a climate denialist and he wants to challenge other science that he happens to not agree with. The subtext of what he is trying to say here is that climate science isn't legitimate science, and he's undermining the excellent, high-quality work of climate scientists around the world and here in Australia. The Greens support science. We support the science that is done here and the quality climate science as is reflected by the excellent work done by the international panel on climate change. The government needs to act rather than to fiddle around with Senator Rennick's climate denialism. It needs to act on our climate crisis and act on the good science that our climate scientists do around the world.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The question is that motion No. 902 be agreed to.</p> -
-
|