Should Scientists Run the Country?

Phillip Ball poses the question 'Should scientists rule the country?', to which one answer might be that they couldn't do a worse job than some of the politicians (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/sep/27/should-scientists-run-the-country). A more traditional and accurate answer is that, politicians are elected to take decisions and scientists appointed to advise them. Science isn't democratic. A perfect pairing would combine intelligent, open-minded politicians with a full range of advice from the various branches of 'hard' and 'soft' science. Politicians making appointments to load the dice in favour of their own preconceptions, is not a good model. The politicians should also clearly be aware of the limitations of Science, especially in the early stages of new challenges. Solly Zuckermann's observation that scientists who want to rule, should first get elected, is highly pertinent. It rarely happens. Winston Churchill's adage that 'scientists should be on tap but not on top' is also relevant. Having said all that, it would be helpful if a few more of our rulers understood the basics of science. Politics, Economics and Philosophy/Classics don't give every politician all the necessary skills to govern effectively. This is especially true when facing technological challenges.