SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. It is not our role to pass judgement on alleged
misdemeanours nor to assess the propriety of personal share dealings
and we make no attempt to do so (paragraph 3).
2. Dr Millar's actions in briefing Perpetual,
while certainly unusual, seem more the product of difficulties
at British Biotech than the origin of them (paragraph 9).
3. In an environment where subjective judgements
and sentiment are so important in determining share price and
company value, and where investors are to a large degree dependent
upon the company to inform those judgements, "the accuracy,
precision and objectivity of information released ... is vital"
(paragraph 12).
4. We recommend that the Government, through the
regulatory system, encourage all biotechnology companies to make
full use of external scientific expertise and advice (paragraph
13).
5. We recommend that the Medicines Control Agency
and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products
work with the Stock Exchange to resolve any potential conflicts
between their respective regulatory regimes affecting the biotechnology
sector (paragraph 14).
6. Biotechnology companies should be able to call
on appropriate expertise for all areas of company activity and
strive to reach a balance among their non-executive directors
between those who can offer crucial business development expertise
and those who are familiar with the risks and vicissitudes of
drug development (paragraph 15).
7. It is too early to determine precisely what,
if any, will be the long-term impact on investor confidence and
future investment in the biotechnology sector (paragraph 16).
| 
