Select Committee on Science and Technology Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60 - 66)

WEDNESDAY 18 MARCH 1998

DR ALAN RUDGE and PROFESSOR RICHARD BROOK

  60. Is the trend upwards in terms of the percentage you give or does it stay much the same?

  (Professor Brook) These are not large changes. I think the council does benefit from the position at the moment. About 35 per cent of the proposals sent to us are successful. At 35 per cent you can persuade people that they are not wasting their time when they write a proposal. I have written to the academic community to warn them that they increased the number of proposals coming to us last year by 20 per cent and if they carry on doing that, when we look forward to the budget lines for the EPSRC as they are currently instated the success rates will drop dramatically.

Mr Beard

  61. In relation to the exploitation of work when it gets further down stream and developed, particularly in small- and medium-sized companies, do you think tax credits have got a role to play?

  (Dr Rudge) I guess I am putting my citizen hat on rather than as Chairman of EPSRC. I start off broadly from the position which says almost anything you do in that area to encourage innovation is something which ought to be investigated. I cannot say that is going to be necessarily a great success. I do believe that we should be experimenting. If I could make a general point. Over the past four years in the managing of the EPSRC we have taken on board these principles of flow, of the landscape, of generating the right kind of knowledge, of emphasising and improving the flow into industry and have tried to manage it. When the council meets we discuss these things and the executive come up with ideas about how we can improve this or that aspect in a managed way. It is a managed process. You can say that preceding that it pays to do some piloting to try to find out what works. I think we need to look at the whole innovatory cycle, if you like, particularly including small companies, to see what is it we can do to improve it. Tax credits is one idea and I do not know if that is better or worse than another but it is certainly something that is worth experimenting with.

Dr Williams

  62. How does our situation compare with other countries in the European Union in terms of tax credits? If we had better incentives here, would it help to attract more research and development in this country?

  (Professor Brook) My response to that is that it is always extremely difficult to compare systems because you can look at one variable and say that it may be different in Germany than it is in the UK but the whole context is different, the training systems are different, and therefore it is difficult to make valid statements about the influence of one parameter without looking at it very closely. I have not got that experience.

  (Dr Rudge) You have to look at the total industrial environment and the cost of money is one of the key elements in that people will risk at a certain ratio and they will not at another. When interest rates were very high I remember particularly that it was very difficult to get people to invest and long-term research was 24 months.

  63. Could I ask more generally about the balance of flow in terms of the siting of international investment in research and development. Is there an outflow from this country or do we profit internationally from more research and development being placed in Britain? Is there any kind of evidence of a drain from R&D?

  (Dr Rudge) It is a very difficult one. First of all, research and development is about people primarily. They are the people who contain the knowledge, if you like. We benefit in the UK from foreign students coming in, bright foreign students, and have done in the past. We benefit to some extent from industries coming into the UK and putting research centres here. At the same time there is no doubt that a lot of the research activity that is done by research organisations in the UK is for overseas companies, a very significant amount goes overseas. I have not tried to sum the balance.

Chairman

  64. If, on reflection when you leave this Committee, Dr Rudge, you have further thoughts on that particular subject you might like to drop us a line. If you have nothing to tell us we will not expect a letter from you. If there are things you find out when you get back and talk to your staff, we would welcome a little bit more on that particular question from Dr Williams. May I put the final question to each one of you in turn. Do you think, Dr Rudge and Professor Brook, that a case could be made for creating a separate organisation specifically charged with technology exploitation to encourage the exploitation of research supported by your council and which could have a similar type of set-up to the Medical Research Council? My main question is do you think there is a case for creating an organisation specifically charged with exploiting technological inventions?

  (Professor Brook) First of all, I am impressed by the precedent of the British Technology Group.

  65. You are not impressed?

  (Professor Brook) I would be impressed by it as an example. I think you can learn something from it and the experience which it has had. I think my personal reaction to the question would be to say that a very profitable line would be to strengthen the initiatives which the EPSRC has taken in these schemes involving collaboration between industry and the university sector. There is no doubt that they elicit very strong enthusiasm from industry. The industrial CASE award where we give the studentship to the company and say we will do the same next year and the year after gives them a longer perspective, it is worth making sure that the studentships are effectively placed. We have now a sufficient portfolio of what I would say are really persuasive collaborations between the industrial sector and universities. I would like to see those driven forward and appraised rather than looking back to BTG. That would be my personal reaction.

  66. You would rather water the existing plant than pull it up and look at the roots?

  (Professor Brook) That is my initial reaction.

  (Dr Rudge) I think I would follow that up by saying I explained to you that we have adopted this principle of flow as being the key. I would summarise it by saying knowledge flow. I would rather if there were resources available that we concentrate on making that more effective than start some organisation that is investing in technology. I made the point about technology, that it is a small component of what we are talking about. What we really want in this country is to ensure that we are investing our research investment and we are building knowledge in the right areas, the right skills, and we are getting a good flow of that knowledge into the community at large. That is really what we are about. Anything that would benefit that would gain my support certainly. I think there are better ways of doing it than just picking on investment in technology.

  Chairman: Thank you very much. On that note we have come to the end of our time. It has been a long session with you. We thank you for tolerating our questions. We thank you for the quality of your answers. If there are one or two points we still have, would you be kind enough to respond to a letter from our Clerk. Many thanks in getting our new inquiry off to a good start. We will make sure you have a copy of the report in due course. We are most grateful to you. Thank you.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 1998
Prepared 1 May 1998