As always, I am listening with great attention to what the hon. Gentleman has to say. Does he agree that part of the problem is that policy has to be based on behavioural science, but behavioural science is one of the most imprecise of sciences? The difficulty is that it is not like chemistry or physics. It means that we have to have a wider margin of error when designing policy, and what that means, in effect, is erring on the side of caution and safety, which I think is the burden of the direction that he is urging on Ministers. In a sense, it is about getting ahead of the curve by bringing in measures that we would all regret. However, if we are going to base policy on behavioural science—it being fairly inexact and difficult to predict, as we have seen over the weekend—we have to have that margin of error and caution, which I think he is recommending.
Coronavirus Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Andrew Murrison
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 23 March 2020.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coronavirus Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c53 Session
2019-21Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-26 21:20:04 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-23/20032324000029
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-23/20032324000029
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-03-23/20032324000029