Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-19)
2 FEBRUARY 2005
PROFESSOR IAN
DIAMOND AND
MS HELEN
THORNE
Q1 Chairman: Can I welcome you here,
Professor Diamond and Ms Thorne. I think you have both been here
before. Have you been before, Ms Thorne?
Ms Thorne: Not
to give evidence before, no.
Q2 Chairman: You are welcome and thank
you very much for coming. You are the last of the research councils
to receive our scrutiny and we welcome that. We put you in place
because we knew you were evolving and that things were happening,
so we are looking for some fireworks from you today really. Let
me ask the first question. Why have a lead spokesman for RCUK?
Do you think it has helped your visibility? We have only had five
people write to us about you. I think you are a secret, unknown
organisation, and I wonder if a lead person has made any difference
whatsoever. I know you are reasonably new to the job, because
you will remember we first questioned the Director-General who
was somewhat compromised by his position. How has your appointment
made any difference whatsoever to RCUK as an organisation?
Professor Diamond: I am not quite
sure what your question is there.
Q3 Chairman: Let me try again.
Professor Diamond: Are you asking
me a question as to what difference I have made in the time that
I personally have been the leader of the Executive Group? I stress
in so doing I am not in any way elevated above my fellow chief
executives, and were you to ask RCUK for a response on whole set
of issues you would get the appropriate chief executive. I am
simply here as the chair.
Q4 Chairman: You just keep the chair
warm, in other words?
Professor Diamond: I do not just
keep the chair warm!
Q5 Chairman: You were sitting around
when they could not get anybody else? Is that what happened?
Professor Diamond: If you would
like me to give you the full election process, I can. There are
two potential questions you did ask. One is, what difference has
it made having a chair, and the second is, is RCUK a visible organisation.
I guess my question to you is, which one of those questions were
you asking?
Q6 Chairman: Tell me first of all how
having a chair has made the organisation more visible than invisible?
Professor Diamond: Let us be absolutely
honest. I have been the chair since the autumn of last year and
what that does is enable us to have a focal point who can comment
broadly on issues which cut across research councils, and when
Helen needs someone to speak on a particular issue or when you,
helpfully, write to us for advice or on an issue, then I am able,
if appropriate, to respond to you, or if you write on a particular
topic then the chief executive does. The whole idea of having
a chair is not in some way to, "Let's have a spokesperson",
instead what we are trying to do is to move the RCUK into having
some governance and to be able therefore properly as a set of
research councils to have ownership of the actions which we are
working on together. I think that works very well. If your question
had been, how is the new structure of RCUK helping to improve
things, I would say I think we have now evolved in the right way.
I think the starting position was the right way to start, we have
evolved in the right way into what I believe is the optimal position
for the UK at the moment in terms of its research council structure.
Q7 Chairman: We will come back to that
because people will ask you about the detail of how it has changed
and in what areas it has helped British science. I am still interested
in the chair business, you have said research councils have an
autonomy, as it were, on what they do, so you are not an executive
in any way, you do not have any authority over them, you do not
speak for them?
Professor Diamond: I speak for
the research councils on any subject which you might ask where
we have a common view. We do have common views. We meet as a group
of chief executives monthly, but I should say we are in contact
much more often than that to ensure there is a common voice for
the research councils when appropriate, but at the same time individual
research councils where appropriate too are able to have the independence
to speak for themselves. That to me is the optimal strategy and
one I think which is going to work beautifully for this country
in the future.
Q8 Chairman: Do you feel compromised
in any way? You are two chairs, in a way. You also speak for the
ESRC, which is part of the RCUK. Do you feel compromised in any
situations? Have you had to remove yourself from the chair or
get a substitute in? How does it work?
Professor Diamond: I am elected
by my fellow chief executives. What we have agreed is that if
there is something which comes up in our discussions which would
compromise ESRC then I would step down from the chair and somebody
else would take the chair. That is entirely appropriate. Up to
this time we have not had such a situation. I have to be honest,
I have never stepped down from the chair for any item of business,
because the things we discuss tend to be overall strategy for
research councils, tend to be the way in which we are harmonising
our administrative functions, and tend to be, if you like, our
interaction with other people. For example, at our last meeting
we had very helpful meetings with Graham Spittle, who is the chair
of the new Technology Strategy Board, and with Keith Peters, who
is the co-chair of the Council for Science and Technology. At
the previous meeting we welcomed the new president of the European
Science Foundation.
Q9 Chairman: Why do we not have an independent
chair so you are not put in that compromising position once the
going gets rough?
Professor Diamond: I do not find
myself compromised.
Q10 Chairman: Not yet.
Professor Diamond: Frankly, I
do not see a situation where one is going to be compromised in
such a way that if I were to have to, for some reason, remove
myself from the chair and somebody else took the chair, it would
not be the most appropriate way of working. I am absolutely clear
in my mind that the best way of this working is to use RCUK precisely,
as our strapline says, as research councils together in research,
and RCUK to be a group of research councils working together for
the good of this country.
Q11 Chairman: Your appointment is only
an annual appointment. Should it be a three-year appointment?
Professor Diamond: I believe an
annual appointment is the right length of time, particularly in
the context of chief executive appointment times. Of course one
of the beauties is that my successor will be another chief executive
who will have been part of the process.
Q12 Chairman: Will it be Buggins' turn?
Professor Diamond: Absolutely
not. That is why we have an election and that is why the way it
will work is for the most appropriate person to take the role.
Q13 Chairman: And that is decided by
the Committee?
Professor Diamond: Absolutely
right.
Q14 Chairman: There has not been any
competition presumably yet?
Professor Diamond: It would be
pretty difficult to have a competition thus far.
Q15 Chairman: Is it hands in the air
stuff?
Professor Diamond: Absolutely
not.
Q16 Chairman: It is a secret ballot?
Professor Diamond: It is a secret
ballot. People who are interested put their names forward to the
electoral officer, who is the senior chief executive. The choice
of senior chief executive is because he or she will likely not
be a candidate because he or she is likely to be towards the end
of their role. That person then announces those who are standing
and there will be a secret ballot held in October every year.
Chairman: Enough of this, let's move
on.
Q17 Dr Turner: Professor Diamond, I trust
you will not take this personally because it is not meant to be
so, but there does seem to be a certain lack of clarity about
what the RCUK is, what its remit is, what it actually does. The
Ruffles Review refers to a lack of clear objectives. Do you actually
have a clear mission statement? Can you state clearly and briefly
exactly what your role is and what RCUK has done so far to make
a difference?
Professor Diamond: I think our
role as a set of research councils is very clearly set out in
the objectives which have been given to you in the submission.
We are operating as a group of research councils together in research
to maximise the way in which interdisciplinary and cross-council
research can take place, to give one voice where appropriate for
the research councils in lobbying with particular organisations,
and to maximise the spend of the public pound by minimising the
amount of money that is spent on administration so, where appropriate,
harmonising our administrative services. I will pass over to Helen
and just ask her if she would like to highlight one or two of
the things which have been real successes which show how RCUK
has made a difference.
Ms Thorne: Thank you. I think
Ian is right, we have made significant progress against all of
the original objectives which were set for Research Councils UK.
I think the work we have done facilitating and enabling multi-disciplinary
research has been particularly important. I would single out the
work we have done together to put collective submissions together
to make the best case for the science budget through the Spending
Review process, and also our A Vision for Research which
was an invaluable input to the 10 year investment framework. As
the Ruffles Review says, we have made a real difference influencing
policy both in the UK and in Europe. The Ruffles Review mentions
the work we have done on influencing the direction of Framework
Programme 7 and the establishment of the European Research Council.
We have made it easier for our stakeholders to work collectively
with the research councils. The Ruffles Review cites the work
we have done with the CBI and Regional Development Agencies. Finally,
the joint electronic submission system we have put in place has
been hugely welcomed by the academic community, both researchers
and university administrators, in making their life easier in
reducing the academic burden when applying for research grants.
Chairman: We will come back to some of
those things.
Q18 Dr Turner: How much has your life
as RCUK changed since the appointment of Sir Keith O'Nions and
his adoption of a less hands-on and controlling approach than
the previous DGRC's? What I am getting at is, I guess, what is
the actual distinction between the DGRC's role and RCUK's role?
Clearly there must be some overlap. Is the DGRC becoming redundant?
Are you becoming a self-governing group of research councils?
What is left for the DGRC if he takes a hands-off approach?
Professor Diamond: Frankly, I
think Keith O'Nions is doing a very good job and I think there
is a clear role for him. What we have is a natural evolution,
if you like, of a child into an adult, so when the RCUK was originally
set up it was entirely right the DGRC chaired and set the thing
and gave a clear vision and worked with us on processes. As one
grows up, it is time in some ways to cut the umbilical cord and
we now have the situation where the RCUK does work together on
the administrative functions, and it is entirely right that that
has ownership within the research councils. Keith O'Nions' role
now is to work with us, and he does work with us and leads us
on strategy and on the allocation of budgets and on making the
case and lobbying for the research councils and for research at
other levels of government and in higher areas. So they are two
extremely positive and distinct roles. I have to say that you
need not think, and I hope you do not think, that Keith O'Nions
somehow sits down the road in Victoria Street and gives us a ring
once a year to check things are okay. We have a very, very close
and good relationship with OST. I meet with Keith once a month,
and we have a Joint Strategy Group every quarter when all chief
executives are there. As I have said, and I am going to say it
again, we get the maximum benefit for UK science where ownership
and operational activities are able to take place where they should
take place—amongst the research councils—where the
strategy is then discussed with OST. There is a huge amount for
Keith O'Nions to do and I know he does it very well.
Q19 Dr Turner: I would like to ask you
about the Joint Strategy Group, which is another new grouping
which has emerged. How does the decision-making process work between
DGRC, the Joint Strategy Group and yourselves, in the strategic
direction of, say, the division of resources between the research
councils? What messages do you give to the research councils in
seeking to advance primarily Government objectives like tackling
climate change or third world poverty? Where do the relationships
sit? Who is calling the shots?
Professor Diamond: In exactly
the same way on most of the decisions as they did in the past
in many ways. Keith O'Nions clearly is in charge of deciding where
the budget is spent.
| 
