24 Nanotechnology
| (25678)
9621/04
COM(04) 338
| Commission Communication — Towards a European strategy for nanotechnology
|
| Legal base | — |
| Department | Trade and Industry
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 9 September 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 42-xxix (2003-04), para 3 (21 July 2004)
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Introduction
24.1 The Communication proposes a programme of action to maintain
and strengthen European research and development (R&D) in
nanosciences and technologies.
24.2 When we considered the Communication on 23 June,
we noted the Government's reservations about the proposals. We
concluded that the Commission's two most important and controversial
proposals were for a threefold increase in Community expenditure
on nanotechnology R&D by 2010; and for resources to be concentrated
in a limited number of "infrastructures" (such as advanced
facilities, equipment and instrumentation for researchers to use)
to meet what the Commission sees as Europe's urgent need for world-class
"poles of excellence" in nanotechnology. We noted that
the Science and Technology Committee had recently made a Report
on the application of nanotechnology in the UK.[47]
So we asked the Committee for its opinion on the Commission's
Communication.
24.3 In our report of 21 July, we reproduced the
Committee's Opinion and asked the Government to comment on two
points in particular. The first of these was the Committee's view
that the Government could be urged to develop world-class
large-scale nanotechnology centres in advance of awards of funding
from the European Union's 7th Framework Programme for
research and development. The second was the Committee's view
that further financial measures are required as part of the European
strategy if a successful, internationally competitive nanotechnology
manufacturing sector is to be established in the United Kingdom.
The Minister's letter
24.4 The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for
Science and Innovation at the Department of Trade and Industry
(Lord Sainsbury of Turville) tells us, in response to the first
point, that:
"The UK's industrial strengths need the support
of a dynamic and vibrant MNT [micro and nanotechnology] infrastructure
within the UK. It is important to get the strategy right to satisfy
the needs of UK industry, and a good deal of time and effort has
been spent crafting the strategy in the last few months. This
is an organic process, and the strategy will develop with time.
"In the short term it is important to provide
support to the existing operational centres in the UK with world
class facilities, to strengthen their industrial focus, and to
enable them to become product oriented. We expect to invest further
funding in these centres through the DTI's Micro and Nanotechnology
Manufacturing Initiative.
"The ideal model for the MNT Network of facilities
is world class distributed manufacturing centres with focus on
strategic areas for the UK eg nano-particles, nano-bio, micro/nano-metrology,
packaging, etc; with one or two strategically placed major centres
having open access catering for a wide range of techniques and
technologies to provide incubators for companies, access to expertise,
and training facilities. These will be particularly important
for SMEs. Government does not believe this is a significant departure
from the Taylor report.
"However, it is vital to get the structure of
these major centres right, with good skill levels, appropriate
equipment to meet the needs of industry, a strong industry/product
focus, an identified business plan, and strong management. There
are examples in the world where such centres have been built in
haste without these attributes, and have become white-elephants.
"We are currently examining bids from suitable
consortia to provide such nanotechnology centres, largely based
on existing academic or industrial facilities. Thirty-three bids
were considered in the latest round of proposals and we have just
announced that the first of these centres will be based at INEX,
University of Newcastle. More announcements are expected in the
coming months and I will keep the Committee informed of progress."
24.5 Commenting on the second point — whether
further financial measures are required as part of the European
strategy if a successful, internationally competitive nanotechnology
sector is to be established in the United Kingdom — the
Minister tells us that:
"The evidence available to us suggests that
there is no shortage of funds available through venture capital
or other funds such as Regional Venture Capital Grant Funds, Enterprise
Capital Funds and Proof of Concept Funds. Witnesses to the [Science
and Technology] Committee from the investment community described
the main problems as a lack of 'investor-ready' proposals and
a 'management chasm'. We will continue to review funding mechanisms
and will work with the Commission to develop a European strategy
for funding."
Conclusion
24.6 We are grateful to the Minister for his comments.
They appear to us to elaborate helpfully on the Government's approach
to the Commission's proposals for a programme of action to maintain
and strengthen European research and development in nanosciences
and technologies. We shall send the Science and Technology Committee
a copy of the Minister's letter.
24.7 We have no further questions to put to the
Government and we are now content to clear the Commission's Communication
from scrutiny.
47 Fifth Report, 2003-04, Too little, too late?
Government Investment in Nanotechnology, HC 56-I. Back
| 
