General Election 2010 survey
These questions were sent to Dr Michael Taylor on April 12, 2010 and answers were provided on the same day.
1. Do you support the use of public funds to provide unproven alternative “treatments” such as homeopathy?
2. Should schools be allowed to teach creationism as an equivalent theory to evolution?
3. Do you believe that religious belief should be legally protected from ridicule?
ANSWER: No. All religions should be able to stand up to being laughed at. As a Quaker I’m used to it.
4. Should an independent government adviser whose views in their area of expertise conflict with government policy be able to express those views publicly without fear of being sacked?
ANSWER: Yes. Why have advisors if you sack them when they disagree with you?
5. Should Sharia law be allowed as an alternative system within UK law?
ANSWER: No. We should have one system of law for everyone.
6. Do you agree that testing on animals (within strict criteria) is a necessary part of the development of medicines?
ANSWER: I’m really not sure. I am reluctant to use animals for experiments and would be keen to find alternatives. In the short run at least the answer is probably yes.
7. Should policy-makers trust scientific evidence even when it appears counter-intuitive?
ANSWER: Policy makers have to use their judgement. Debate in a free society means that decision makers take advice and then make decisions, which may not always follow the advice they have been given. That’s why we have elections so that we can choose which direction our decision makers will take us in.
8. Do you think that abortion time limits should always be determined by the current scientific and medical consensus?
ANSWER. Broadly speaking yes. If abortion information were much more widely available then late terminations could be avoided. I am in favour of abortion being available but accept that time limits are necessary except in exceptional circumstances.
9. Should religious leaders be entitled to vote in the House of Lords?
ANSWER: I want to abolish the House of Lords and replace it with a wholly elected second chamber, elected by proportional representation. Religious leaders would not be in it unless they were elected. I would not support religious leaders having appointed places in the second chamber.
10. Do you support the reform of English and Welsh libel law to allow a stronger ‘public interest’ defence?