Technology foresight : first report. Volume II, Minutes of evidence and appendices / Science and Technology Committee.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology
Date:
1995
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Technology foresight : first report. Volume II, Minutes of evidence and appendices / Science and Technology Committee. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    39/204 (page 29)
    24 October 1995] [Continued [Chairman Cont] purchasing policy can have a grave effect on it. At the same time, again in a regime of stringency, I do worry, and I have expressed my worries, that from the perspective of the Ministry of Defence, if you are having to meet economies by slowing down purchasing then that is an argument for differentially greater spending on long-term research, because the long term is going to be more relevant if you are buying things more slowly. So, in short, it is a very complicated picture. Sir Trevor Skeet 37. So you see the era of stringency now ending? (Professor May) Iam speaking out of turn here. Chairman 38. I think Sir Trevor is a bit out of turn. (Professor May) 1 would regard the entire western - world, as a result of the rise of Asia and the Asian tigers, to be in a time of greater competitiveness and a time when greater efficiency and greater cost-cutting, and thus stringency, is incumbent upon all of us; and I speak in that broad historical sweep, I had no intention to convey any sense of the immediate goings-on of this PES Round. That is something that has been true for the last ten years and is going to be increasingly true for the next ten years. 39. Thank you, Professor May, for that tour d’horizon. President? (Mr Lang) No, itis Mr Taylor. (Mr Taylor) Having recently been at the OECD and listened to the various Science Ministers there, talking about the problems they are facing, and having recently had talks with my European Union colleagues, there is no doubt there is going to be stringency right across the board and within the European Union, not least to meet the Maastricht criteria. Therefore I do not think that we are any different from the pressures that are placed on others. What we need to do is to improve the output of research, and that is one of the targets we have got. Chairman: We must now move on. The LINK programme. Sir Gerry Vaughan. Sir Gerard Vaughan 40. Can we ask you now about the role of the technology demonstrator programmes, and particularly perhaps ask you to expand a bit more on where you see the LINK programmes have got to, and how you are going to pursue these, is there going to be extra money, which we understand there is going to be, for _these programmes, will it go up year on year—we can go on with a lot of questions on this—has the bureaucracy really gone down? Some of the LINK programmes are reported very favourably, but as one travels round the country other ones, one hears, are not at all satisfactory. It is a rather broad question? (Mr Lang) Yes. Chairman, perhaps I can start. Obviously, we cannot anticipate the outcome of decisions yet to be taken in the present Public Expenditure Round, but the SMART and SPUR schemes, which I think are the ones amongst those that Sir Gerard is interested in, have an enhanced budget of £76 million over three years, and the LINK programme in the current year has an extra £6 million, including matching funding from the private sector; it is a very useful piece of our overall scientific infrastructure. I cannot anticipate, I am _ afraid, decisions yet to be taken for next year. 41. Many of the LINK programmes have been widely criticised as being ineffective and overbureaucratic? (Mr Taylor) There was some criticism about it, but I think that the criticism was looking at the system before we reassessed it this year. At the time of the Forward Look it was announced that we were going to realign some of the aspects of the LINK programme and that was at precisely the time we announced that there would be more funding, certain more targeted approaches. The figure of £6 million is, of course, a matched funding with industry. I think that the LINK programme is a very interesting one; it is certainly one of the key parts of the delivery mechanisms for the Technology Foresight process, and therefore it is a crucial part of what we are attempting to do and the relationship between DTI and the OST fits very neatly with that. The SMART and SPUR projects, which I was responsible for the year before I became Science Minister as well, are also crucial to the development of new ideas, many of which come out of the universities; as I award the prizes, it is Professor this and Professor that who is coming up to collect them. So I am very much in favour of them and we have now got the SMART, the SPUR and the SPUR-plus awards. 42. Are you expecting to be able to progressively channel more money into this type of programme? (Mr Taylor) 1 do not think I would wish to be drawn on future commitments, but I can say that we have actually relaunched it this year and I think, over several years, we are now talking about £70-odd million that we are putting into it for the three categories. There is the large unit size of grant, which is SPUR-plus; SPUR, which is for companies that are employing, I think, above 50; and SMART, which is the first stage, and for smaller companies. It has been widely welcomed as a fairly integrated package and now we are backing it up with resources through the Business Links, because the companies that succeed and some of those that do not succeed will be getting ongoing advice from our Business Links network. Chairman 43. Thank you for that. Can we move on, and, if I may, President, I would like to address a couple of questions to your two Chief Advisers, Professor May and Sir John. What do you consider—and welcoming you to this, your first appearance—to be your prime responsibilities, as CSA? (Professor May) To answer in the broadest terms, I would say my primary responsibility is to be aware across the entire spectrum of Science and Technology in the UK, arguing the case for its central importance in our future and the wealth of the country and the