8 Conclusions
229. There are three key phases of any emergency;
preparation, response and recovery. Scientific advice and evidence
can have a key role to play in every phase. We found that, although
the Government generally seeks and acts on scientific advice and
evidence in the response phase, it was not clear how science was
used in the preparatory stages, particularly in the National Risk
Assessment. The volcanic ash emergency of April 2010 was a clear
example of how a lack of risk assessment and preparation can hamper
the emergency response. To a certain extent, the Government is
learning the lessons of previous experiences. We are pleased that
space weather is currently being considered for the 2011 National
Risk Assessment and that scientific advice is being integrated
from the start. The Government Chief Scientific Adviser's review
of some of the concepts used in risk assessment is also welcome,
although his involvement is certainly overdue. However, we
are concerned that the Government's attitude to scientific advice
is that it is something to reach for once an emergency happens,
not a key factor for consideration from the start of the process.
We conclude that scientific advice and an evidence-based approach
must be better integrated into risk assessment and policy processes
early on.
230. The SAGE mechanism was apparently useful to
Government, but we are not sure what codes, principles or guidance
govern its operation. We
do not accept that SAGEs should be given a carte blanche
to operate however they please just because an emergency is occurring.
We conclude that the Government Office for Science should take
responsibility for ensuring that all future SAGEs operate in a
more organised, transparent and accessible manner and adhere to
a published code (existing or new).
|
