1/ "Politicians use statistics in the same way that a drunk uses lamp-posts—for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang.

The same can be said of "evidence".

2/ As Greens, we are rightly critical when we see climate deniers using this tactic to cast doubt on the scientific consensus, or to present the climate emergency as "up for debate".

And yet, too often I see us doing a similar thing ourselves.

3/ Human brains have a tendency to cherry pick evidence that supports their existing beliefs & ignore evidence that contradicts them. We all fall into this trap some of the time.

4/ If we are serious about achieving the best outcomes for people & planet, we must be on our guard against this.

We have to honestly assess *all* available evidence, and consider views of a range of professionals and experts; not stop as soon as we find one who agrees with us.

5/ What's more, we have to be prepared to reassess our position and change our minds if the evidence (or our understanding of it) changes. We need to continually ask ourselves "what am I missing?"

6/ This is important, because good intentions do not necessarily lead to good outcomes.

We can have the best intentions, and still end up causing real harm if we haven't properly understood the problem.

History will judge us by our outcomes, not our intentions.

#ROSI4LEADER