Proposing a law is dangerous to science, says Brenda Valderrama of the Biotechnology Institute at UNAM

The Common Law for the Humanities, Technologies and Innovationsent by the President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador to the Chamber of Deputies, contains conceptual and structural flaws that seek to focus the budget and decisions on Mexican scientific research “in the hands of a very few,” said Dr. Brenda Valderrama Blanco From Institute of Biotechnology affiliate UNAM.

And the scientist saw that the proposal, which arrived two years late and which was added to another two years remaining in the Senate and another in the House of Representatives, is part of the misperception of considering science as a product of well-being and not as a generator of knowledge: He said: “The attempt to direct scientific policy towards well-being in a budget Science takes it away from its purpose and renders it ineffective.”

Valderrama noted that the proposal, which includes reform of the Federal Law on Quasi-Governmental Entities, and the Federal Planning Law, also seeks to focus in Conacyt no less than 1.3 billion pesos from twelve ministries dedicated to scientific research.

“What the director of CONASSET (Maria Elena Álvarez-Buella) has sought from day one is to control the entire scientific budget; for that she has to take the reins away from the dozens of secretaries and the way she intends to do it is to concentrate everything not in her because she is a lower rank but in The president intends to return it to her.”

With the proposal, appreciate the secretariats such as SEP, economy, energy, environment, citizen security, culture, marine or

See also  Movies with major scientific flaws

Agriculture, among other things, must direct the budget that it allocates to science to Conacyt, “It is very risky for researchers because the double discourse says that academic freedom and research will be respected, but at the same time the money will only go to researchers. The projects they decide on.”

More than that, he added, “disciplines that do not support what is a priority for them will be excluded: well-being, food self-sufficiency, security, benefits not generated by science; there is no way to draw a straight line. The separation between science and well-being, or security or prosperity It is a dotted line where everyone gets a little and in the end benefits are obtained but it is not a straight line, and welfare is not obtained by funding science.”

Valderrama added that it is necessary to stop the approval of the law until at least February and not allow the approval of the “accessory” amendments. He stressed that in the coming days, the responsible committees in the Senate and House of Representatives will analyze the four proposals, which represents a hope to stop the approval.

“This is not for us, for the investigators, the president is wrong there, it is for two or three generations of young people, from now until this law can be amended, it will take a long time and at the same time we will have a disruption of the law that will exclude thousands and thousands of young people, and that the transfer of knowledge It’s going to be broken, and the Mexican-style flag is what we’re going to lose,” he said.

  • 4 science bills displayed on the rooms
  • 1.3 billion pesos for science is at risk
See also  Streets and science: streets to unite (2) - Opinin News


Myrtle Frost

"Reader. Evil problem solver. Typical analyst. Unapologetic internet ninja."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top