| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
12 noon
Mr. David Chidgey (Eastleigh): I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute to the debate, but frustrated that there is so little time available. I shall try to be brief. I am grateful for two reasons--first, because my constituency owes its very origins to engineering development and prosperity and, secondly, and perhaps more important, because I am a chartered engineer. Indeed, I understand that I am one of only five hon. Members who are fellows of the Institution of Civil Engineers. The hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) said that civil engineering is the largest profession in the country, yet we are clearly sorely under-represented in the place where decisions are made that affect the advancement of my first profession.
In considering the future of engineering, we need to understand how we have developed in the past. It is important to remember that, until 200 years ago,all engineering was military engineering. As we began to think about clean water, transport and public health, a
distinction between civil and military engineering became apparent. Indeed, the very first articles of association of the ICE's charter say that the society was set up to direct the
The remit of engineers is much broader than is often interpreted.
Civil engineers and others of their ilk are responsible for many of the essentials of modern life, including the muscles and sinews that hold society together such as bridges, roads and railways; the heart and lungs of our society where natural resources go in and waste comes out to provide clean water, and so on; safe, sustainable and effective transport to enable us to move around; energy to make it work such as gas, oil, hydro-electric, tidal and wind power, and most important, renewable sources of energy. Engineers are also deeply concerned with the environment, reducing pollution, containing coastal erosion, restoring contaminated soil and disposing of hazardous waste. They are trying to create sustainability in our economy and perform most important tasks and bear great responsibilities.
History shows that advancement in engineering and science is exponential. Only 50 years ago, the concept of intercontinental air travel was considered rather like taking an expedition into the unknown, with all the vagaries of a safari in darkest Africa. Rocket science was hit and miss. I remember reading a book when I was a boy entitled "Will Man Ever Reach the Moon?" Computers were virtually unknown, and certainly unimaginable to most people. Yet only 50 years on, we take flights to New York, Moscow and Sydney and are given the same assurances on such trips as our grandparents were when they booked a train journey from London to Birmingham. We plan and execute interplanetary voyages to the further reaches of the universe and they hardly warrant a newspaper headline. Computers are expanding at such a rate that something called Moore's law has been established, which tells us that microchips double in power and halve in price every 18 months. It is therefore clear that opportunities for the advancement of engineering and science are phenomenal.
It is against that background that we need to consider the future of engineering--especially in the United Kingdom--the provision of human resources, the strengthening of our economy through engineering and the importance of engineering to the well-being of our nation. It is appropriate that we are debating the future of engineering in National Engineering, Science and Technology Week. It is also important to note that, in September, the Year of Engineering Success will be launched, to which reference has been made, which will celebrate engineering and show our confidence in the future.
Science is about discovery driven by curiosity. Technology is about how to make things work, and engineering is about creativity driven by a desire to make a better world. Making that happen is a tremendous responsibility for the profession and the Government to bear.
The future of engineering depends on the future of engineers, technicians and crafts people. As a chartered engineer, I am very conscious of the failures of my profession. I understand that the Engineering Council is
striving to unite all sorts of engineers under one umbrella, which has been required for some time. We need to maintain high standards in education, training and experience if we want more high-quality engineers.We must allocate adequate resources to premier engineering faculties in Britain's leading universities and to industry. Planning is vital to the future of engineering. How many mechanical, electrical, civil and aero-engineers will we need?
Mr. Sheerman:
I know that time is limited; I shall not be making a speech. Do not let us replicate the problem raised by my right hon. Friend the Member for Halton (Mr. Oakes). All our universities have great strengths in engineering. They are diverse and we should not be referring to a premier league. Some of the new universities have streaked up the innovation and enterprise ladder.
Mr. Chidgey:
The hon. Gentleman makes a good point that is certainly within my concept of the future of further education and engineering.
Britain's engineering schools are competing with schools in France and Germany to produce international engineers. We must get away from the idea of British engineers training and working only in this country.We must accept that more and more undergraduates are undertaking four-year master of engineering degrees to develop the skills that they need, and are spending a year at universities in other parts of Europe. I note your signal, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I shall conclude soon.
Mr. John Battle (Leeds, West):
I, too, welcome the debate. We are indebted to the hon. Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone) for getting engineering on to the agenda. The fact that not all the hon. Members who wished to speak have been called and that some have had their remarks curtailed proves that the debate could have lasted much longer--perhaps it should be allowed to do so at some other time. We are also indebted to the hon. Member for Lewes for his insistence that we debate this matter.
The debate is more than timely because it coincides with a report published today by the Engineering Employers Federation which presages gloomy prospects for the engineering industry. The Minister might think this is humorous, but the federation's survey, which covered 16,000 firms and monitored trends in late February and early March, spells out that, in business terms, engineering is in a worse state than it has been for years. Growth is slowing and there is a danger of it tilting backwards, and it is proving harder to gain entry to export markets in France and Germany.
The best that the survey suggests is that the engineering industry is still under incredible pressure and is not springing back from recession, as some other industries might be. Our manufacturing industries are still in a very difficult position, and engineering is absolutely fundamental to that manufacturing base.
This is Science, Engineering and Technology Week. Some people ask why it should be called SET Week, but it is important that we keep science, engineering and technology linked and never let them be prised apart. The vital role of engineering in our scientific and technological development is sometimes missed entirely.
Many hon. Members have mentioned speaking to young people. It is the young who should be encouraged to understand, embrace and take up engineering. Our society is plagued not only by a lack of understanding of mathematics--I am tempted to say that we are in a culture that is anti-science and anti-technology--but by a fundamental lack of understanding of many of the processes of engineering and technology.
I have with me a piece of exemplary engineering--a titanium hip joint. I remember taking it to a school and asking children to tell me what this wonderful object could be. They could tell me about the high technology involved in hip joints being put into their grandfathers and knew how, after the operation, their grandfathers could walk, at first with a stick, and later run and play football again. When I asked where a titanium hip joint was made, few of them could link the object to a forge. Few could understand the process of modern forging or how such objects were made.
Professor Alec Broers, vice chancellor-elect of Cambridge university and head of its department of engineering, called for the quality of engineering students to be increased and mentioned the need to encourage women to go into engineering. He recently said that too many leaders in all areas of national life were ignorant of technology, and that their ignorance
My own city of Leeds was built on manufacturing and, in this century, that has meant principally engineering. The clothing and textile industries were the largest employers until the end of the last century. The clothing industry was in decline from the 1870s, and engineering and printing have been the key manufacturing industries of the city in this century.
It is interesting to recall that, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, 17,500 jobs were lost in manufacturing while,at the same time, another 17,500 jobs were developed in the service industries--in the public service, such as in shops and offices, and in financial and retail services. Those of us who were concerned about our declining manufacturing base at the time were met by Lord Young of Graffham, the then Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, who, amazingly, dismissed manufacturing, remarking that Britain would thrive if only more people would eat out. I hope that that radical market view--that we need not worry about manufacturing but should look more to tourism, hairdressing and McDonald's for our economic future--is now being dismissed.
It was not until the publication in 1985 of a House of Lords Select Committee report on British manufacturing, however, that the Government began to acknowledge
once again the need for manufacturing--and the underpinning of manufacturing, as the technology foresight reports now acknowledge, by a strong engineering base.
As has been said, Britain has for centuries embodied discovery and application in science, engineering and technology with names such as Newton, Faraday, Watt, Brunel, Bell, Rutherford and Whittle. We are the birthplace of the television, the computer and the jet engine, and we are now at the forefront of the new biotechnology industries. What we take for granted in everyday life is developed from British engineering skills, but we must not allow our very maturity and the richness of our tradition to limit our vision, our capacity to learn or our readiness to respond to new challenges. We need to raise our sights out of the fag end of this century--if I can put it like that--well into the next century. Next year is to be the Year of Engineering Success and could be used as a platform to carry forward a positive vision of the future of engineering.
It is important to dwell for a moment on what the Government have done. They have reduced spending on research and development by a massive 12 per cent.in the past 10 years. In other words, when it comes to budget priorities, it seems that science, engineering and technology are being pushed down the ladder. According to the Government's own figures, spending on science is projected to fall a further 7 per cent. in real terms by 1997. The number of United Kingdom researchers has fallen whereas the number in our competitor countries has risen.
"great sources of power in nature for the use and convenience of man".
"distorts judgement and slows the acceptance of advances essential to business, industry, government and services."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |