Science, most people would agree, has been quite a success. It has improved life expectancy, given us the wonder of the internet and the tools to feed vast numbers of people. It has taught us the history of the universe and shown us the wonderful secrets of life. It has even been able to put your entire CD collection neatly in your pocket.

So why don't we value it in this country? We have taken this shining example of the best that human beings can do, and put it in the care of people who don't really don't care about it.

I'm talking about our MPs. Many of them don't seem to get just how important science is. They allowed the government to bail out the financial sector to the tune of billions but barely raised a murmur when the government declared that science can't expect to be properly funded in this financial climate. When the industries built on physics inject as much money into Britain's GDP as the financial services sector, that's not rational.

But that's the point. MPs don't have to be rational. It's not a standard we've ever held them to. Which is why we now have 70 of them trying to suppress a science-based recommendation that the NHS stop funding homeopathy.

Their ringleader is David Tredinnick, MP for Bosworth. When the science and technology select committee recommended that taxpayers not foot the bill for what seems to be a placebo, he tabled an early day motion suggesting the committee's analysis was flawed.

No surprises there. Tredinnick is a believer in the power of the stars to direct our fate and heal our bodies. He claimed more than £700 of taxpayers' money – repaid earlier this year – for astrology computer software and training. Today in the Leicester Mercury he asks why, when healthcare systems in India and China have linked medicine and astronomy for centuries, we don't think about doing the same. "Are we really just dismissing their views?" he asks. Well, yes, we are. We've done the analysis and are reasonably sure that balls of burning gas millions of miles away in outer space won't directly affect our health.

The worldview that links the position of the stars with your wellbeing has no trouble with homeopathy, of course. The real surprise is that, so far, 69 other MPs have signed Tredinnick's motion. No wonder that, despite all its successes, science struggles to get the funding it needs. A significant number of MPs display no respect for science whatsoever.

Part of the problem is that scientists are such a pushover. Their obsessive interest in finding out how everything in the world works means they're not like bankers. You can treat them like dirt and they'll still turn up to work in the morning. They won't necessarily like it, but they will accept low-paid jobs that have absolutely no security. Just ask any post-doctoral researcher working in a university.

In many ways, working in science is its own reward, but it's time we stopped taking scientists for granted. Maybe, for the sake of all our futures, we need to start protecting them. The first step in that direction would be to populate the House of Commons with people who understand what science is, what it can give and what it needs to function well and deliver even more prosperity.

We need more MPs who will make it a priority to attend meetings about scientific issues, protect science funding, respect the conclusions of scientific advisers, turn up for votes on climate change motions, that kind of thing. Which is why I'm willing to start things off by standing against David Tredinnick in the general election. It's the Battle of Bosworth II: The rise of the nerds.

Michael Brooks is a consultant to New Scientist magazine and the author of 13 Things That Don't Make Sense: The Most Intriguing Scientific Mysteries of our Times (Profile)