Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ

Just before he went off to Kuwait, I asked John Wakeham, the energy
secretary, about the support, or lack of it, for the ‘noise tool’ being
developed by John Harper at Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh. Full development
of the tool, more exactly a directional acoustic surveying instrument, was
held up when the university failed to obtain the requisite funding. Had
the ‘noise tool’ been fully developed, it could well have helped in the
drilling of relief wells to deal with the fires in Kuwait’s oilfields.

Wakeham agrees, although he adds that ‘current plans for controlling
the burning wells are concentrating on surface methods rather than this
type of relief well drilling’. On a brighter note, he adds that a company
involved in drilling tools which supported the first stage of the project
‘still retains an interest in developing such a tool’.

The energy secretary has asked his Offshore Supplies Office to keep
in touch with Harper and his team to assist wherever possible. All the same,
I can’t help thinking that if as a country we spent on coping with the consequences
of war even a modest proportion of the funds available for war itself, we
would not so often have to think in hindsight.

How much is a wood worth? Or to put it another way, can you put a value
on the environment to set against the assumed economic benefits of a new
road? Transport ministers are waiting for the report on this matter, due
in from the Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Appraisal, SACTRA.
For the ministry, Christopher Chope has told MPs that the report is not
now expected until the late summer.

The issues involved are complex, but the committee is taking a long
time to come up with recommendations. I had hoped for action in the next
session of Parliament, that is, in October. We shall almost certainly have
to wait until next year.

Why, I asked the education secretary, Kenneth Clarke, has there been
no recent increase in the number of women doing scientific and technical
work? And what action is the government taking to convince girls and young
women to take up such careers? The reply, from Tim Eggar, the number two
at education, was generally supportive, even if he did start off by gently
passing the buck.

‘The employers concerned have the prime responsibility for making scientific
and technical careers attractive to women,’ he began, adding: ‘Nevertheless,
this government’s education reforms include some relevant initiatives. The
science component of the National Curriculum will reinforce that aspect
of the education of pupils to age 16, both boys and girls.’

Eggar also mentioned WISE, Women into Science and Engineering, which
continues to be promoted-sponsored and maintained by industry, with support
from the government. In addition, there are some Access Courses catering
exclusively for women as mature students.

But although the tenor of the answer was supportive, I’m not so sure
myself. When the science component of the National Curriculum was introduced,
several voices were raised (including that of the Association for Science
Education) arguing that the choice allowed between a full science curriculum
and a lesser one could lead girls, in particular, to shy away from science.
The lesser science course, I recall, was said by the then education secretary,
Kenneth Baker, to be suitable for ‘pupils who may need, for whatever reason,
to spend more time on other subjects, for example, to develop a special
talent in music or foreign languages’-in other words, principally for girls.
I wonder what is actually happening in the schools.

I also get the impression that despite much excellent work the WISE
campaign appears to be running out of steam. I may, of course, be completely
wrong about WISE. All the same, it must surely be a priority, especially
in the light of demographic changes, to ensure that potential scientists
are not lost to the nation before they are even found.

Three weeks ago, in this column, I wrote that the horror of a climatological
‘flip’ could not be simply dismissed as fanciful (Thistle Diary, 20 April).
Encouragement comes from David Sugden, a distinguished glaciologist and
professor of geography at the University of Edinburgh. Sugden writes that
one very good example of the phenomenon has emerged recently from work on
the Greenland ice cores:

‘It appears that at the end of the last cold pulse of the ice age 10
000 years ago the mean annual temperature in South Greenland rose 7 °C
in no more than 50 years. Probably this represents a flip of the North Atlantic
Drift from a clockwise southerly circulation towards the west of Spain,
to the present circulation north of Norway. If so, a similar change could
have affected much of western Europe and Britain. The significance of this
is that there are elements of the world’s physical environment which appear
to change in a nonlinear way.’

My piece has found a number of echoes. Sir Peter Hordern, MP for Horsham,
has passed me a letter from Paul Vodden, a constituent of his, urging that
time be set aside for a full debate on the rainforest this July. And Vodden
neatly sums up one aspect of the danger facing us, namely ‘to assume that
this degradation is leisurely, always gradual and that there is plenty of
time to do something about it’.

Few people bother to write to thank MPs for their support-and I speak
from the heart on this. So hearty appreciation goes to CRAB, otherwise known
as Cardiff Residents Against the Barrage. They have sent us a beautiful
picture postcard of Cardiff Bay. Let us hope that the government does not
bring the bill back as an official vote!