Swiss Review 3/2021

Swiss Review / June 2021 / No.3 18 Science dictory statements have been unsettling peoplemore than helping them,” said Lucerne National Councillor for The Centre, Leo Müller, adding that clear communication and clear rules on what and what not to say were vital in times of crisis. Freedom of speech for scientists However, the SP, the Greens, the Green Liberals, and ele- ments of the centre-right and right wing said that the sci- entists had a right to speak out. Berne National Councillor for the Greens, Regula Rytz, referred to an “attempt to si- lence the bearers of bad news”. She said that enlightened liberal democracy would lose all credibility if it failed to take the experts seriously. The media also thought the ep- isode crossed a line, calling it a “scandal”. Limiting freedom of speech for scientists has a detrimental impact on society, wrote the “Neue Zürcher Zeitung”. Scientistsmaking their recommendations public was the only way in which peo- ple couldmake up their ownminds about themeasures be- ing taken by politicians, the newspaper continued. The task force, for its part, tried not to get drawn into the controversy. Its headMartinAckermann, a professor of microbiology at ETH Zurich, whose quiet, objective man- ner had already been noticed, stressed that the task force was not telling politicians what to do. What it was doing was presenting a range of options, “that we know are effec- tive in preventing infections”. The information and state- ments provided by the task force were also of use to can- tons, associations, businesses and the general public. Regarding accusations that the task force was spreading unnecessary alarm, Ackermann said that the purpose of making certain projections was precisely to prevent these scenarios from occurring. End of lockdown – despite the data Even though a “silencing order” never materialised, these projections went unheeded when the Federal Council an- nounced an extensive easing of restrictions in April – con- trary to the prevailing data. Meanwhile, the debate contin- ues on the extent towhich science shouldmixwith politics. This applies not only to the pandemic, but to climate change and environmental issues. For example, the upcoming Clean Drinking Water initiative has highlighted diver- gences between the Federal Council on the one hand and, on the other, water experts from ETH Zurich who have drawn attention to the pesticide issue. “Solution-oriented policymaking must take account of scientific facts,” says Servan Grüninger, a biostatistician at the University of Zu- rich. Grüninger is the president of Reatch, a think tank that wants to bring science, politics and society closer together. Nevertheless, both science and politics must do more to make this cooperation work, he adds. According to Grüninger, who is a member of The Cen- tre, scientists are political amateurs who are unfamiliar with the machinations of power. “They think that their findings will automatically result in the right policies.” Some need to be more aware that policymakers must also take economic and social aspects into account in addition to scientific evidence. Furthermore, they often don’t know how to influence politicians effectively. When scientists start commenting on political issues, politicians can, in turn, quickly interpret this as arrogance or meddling. Sci- entists are only listened to when they concur. Promoting dialogue A project called Franxini now aims to promote mutual un- derstanding. Scientists and politicians across the entire spectrum have launched it as a reaction to the “silencing” controversy surrounding the Covid-19 Act. The project is named after Stefano Franscini, the son of poor Ticinese farmers, whowas quick to recognise the key importance of education. Franscini, a liberal, was elected to the Federal Council in 1848. He founded today’s ETH Zurich and laid the foundation for the creation of the Federal Statistical Of- fice. It is all aboutmaking scientists fit for politics, says Grü- ninger, whose Reatch think tank is behind the initiative. Intensive courseswill equip scientistswith all they need to know about the Swiss political system. The project is already bearing fruit, at least as far asMar- cel Salathé is concerned. The Genevan epidemiologist took a lot of political flak last year and has since left the task force. He now supports the Franxini project and is currently por- ing over the contents of the 900-page Handbook of Swiss Politics. “Read the blasted instructions,” was his tongue- in-cheek comment on Twitter. The article reflects the status as of 1 May 2021. The Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force website: www.sciencetaskforce.ch National Councillor Regula Rytz: “An at- tempt to silence the bearers of bad news.” Biostatistician Servan Grüninger: “Many sci- entists think that their findings will automati- cally result in the right policies.” National Councillor Leo Müller: “The task force’s contradictory statements have been unsettling people more than helping them.”