Examination of Witnesses (Questions 270
- 279)
MONDAY 28 FEBRUARY 2005
DR BOB
BUSHAWAY, MR
NICK BUCKLAND
AND DR
ED METCALFE
Chairman: Thank you very much for
sitting through the last session. Thank you for coming.
Q270 Dr Harris: What evidence do
you think there is for a link between the volume of science and
in a sense the volume of science graduates—assuming that
is associated with the volume of science-based work in industry
being done in the country—and economic performance?
Dr Metcalfe: If we compare ourselves
with other countries, and we aspire to have a stronger research
and development base in the country, there seems to be quite a
direct correlation between the R&D investment in the country
and the number of researchers in the country, so we do not have
as many researchers as other countries maybe. If we do not have
as many researchers as other countries do, then it does raise
a question as to whether we are going to continue to be competitive.
Q271 Dr Harris: So do you believe
that having more researchers and therefore more research is a
prerequisite or important component of economic growth?
Mr Metcalfe: I think it would
be dangerous not to assume that.
Q272 Dr Harris: So RDA money is best
spent in respect of economic growth on science and research investment
than say arts and museums simply from a measure of economic growth?
Mr Metcalfe: We have both a regeneration
and sustainability function and also a need to promote the knowledge
economy within the region. If you like, it is left hand and right
hand and we have to do both those things.
Q273 Dr Harris: You heard the previous
session where it was not clear whether there was any good data,
as opposed to anecdotes, which is not really data and certainly
not information; but there is not good evidence about what the
shortage is. There is a feeling that we do not have enough. Do
you have, from your knowledge, what the appropriate proportion
is?
Mr Metcalfe: We know when we ask
our companies that they will not make predictions. They will not
say how many workers they will need in five or ten years' time.
The best evidence we have is comparing ourselves with our international
competitors. The OECD data, which we quoted in our references,
suggests we are quite a long way behind. One interpretation of
that is that we need about another 50,000 researchers if we are
going to match a 2.5% GDA target of expenditure in R&D over
the next 10 years, so we need another 5,000 researchers per year
on that measure. It is not just a question of standing still,
it is a question of increasing the number of researchers.
Mr Buckland: We are looking at
trying to get that data, and looking at the various key sectors
that the RDAs are working with. We are asking those companies
who are engaging in those sectors what their requirements are.
It is extremely difficult to get exact data from them.
Q274 Dr Harris: The second part of
my question is about the role that government should play, because
government has an interest in economic growth, and you have just
agreed that the number of people feeding through into science
active areas is important, and government funds in this country
the bulk of the level 4 training and higher of scientists, so
you would have thought that government has an important interest
in managing the system. Certainly, for medical graduates there
is a quota, meaning there is a controlled number, and then there
is a controlled number through. Yet whenever anyone mentions having
more control of how the Government spends its money in universities
in order to achieve government policy, which it has been voted
to do, people say, "get away; it is university independence;
how dare you!" What is your perspective on that debate?
Mr Metcalfe: The evidence of history
on teacher training is that it is very difficult to predict what
we will need, so control must not be over prescriptive. I think
we probably have to use carrots rather than have very specific
targets. It is not just asking the universities to take on more
science undergraduates; the problem is much earlier and is about
getting 11-year olds engaged in being interested in science, and
16-year olds beginning to make the right career choices, and all
the way through to graduates. There are a number of choices that
they will make. Just saying to universities "you must produce
more scientists" is not really going to answer the problem.
Q275 Dr Harris: Is that right, because
I still have a very good argument to say that government should
not say to the people it funds almost 100% for a policy that everyone
is agreed with, that they do not want more places for—I
do not want to pick on media studies, but let us use that—they
want more places for scientists. They will pay, and they will
pay for scientists, not for media studies. A company, when it
has a training programme for the shop floor does not say, "we
will let our employees choose what they want to do, and if they
want to do something that is less useful to us that is fine because
we want our training department to be autonomous and independent".
No, they do not say that. They say: "This is what we want;
this is what we have paid for and we are going to measure you
on these outcomes. How you deliver it may be up to you, but that
is what we want." Please argue with that!
Mr Metcalfe: I can understand
the argument, and it is very tempting, but I think it needs to
be done through influence and encouragement rather than giving
very specific targets, because I am not sure that we know what
the targets are.
Q276 Dr Harris: I did not mention
targets. I just meant that you require them to do it more.
Mr Buckland: A good example is
in answer to the closure of Exeter's chemistry department. Across
the region in the south west we have worked with HERDA and HEFCE
in looking at the level of chemistry provision across the region,
and that has been taken up by Bath and Bristol; so the level of
offer within the region is still at the same level. It is also
the fact that the level of offer from Exeter in terms of its science
base is about the same because the biosciences, medical sciences
and physics are available there. It is done through working together
and in partnership.
Q277 Dr Turner: There is some evidence
to suggest that employers are not making the best use of graduates
that are available to them. To what extent do you think this is
the case? Do you think there is a problem there?
Mr Buckland: I see no evidence
of that.
Q278 Dr Turner: It would be consistent
with the criticisms of the Lambert report that businesses are
not making enough potential connections with universities. If
they are not doing that, you would not be surprised to find that
they were not making the best use of graduates either.
Dr Bushaway: We would certainly
agree, in AURIL, with the Lambert conclusions that there were
demand-side problems on graduate recruitment and employment particularly
in the science/technology areas as far as employers were concerned,
and particularly, as Lambert identifies, there is a problem with
the smaller sized business where, if they are not already a hi-tech
spin-out, there simply is not the experience of graduate recruitment.
Q279 Chairman: In the States, when
they recruit students, industry fund the open days, put the mums
and dads up in houses and so on, and their whole emphasis is to
try and keep those people that go through their system in that
region so that the skills do not migrate elsewhere. In every county
I go to, they are always complaining about skills migrating to
London or somewhere. What do you say about that? What are you
doing about that?
Mr Metcalfe: It depends whether
you are talking about undergraduates or postgraduates. We lose
undergraduates to other regions, but we have a net in-flow of
postgraduates. Some of the regions have developed graduate retention
schemes, which are to encourage graduates, particularly with SMEs,
which are the most important group to get to. There is evidence
from work that East Midlands have done that that has been quite
beneficial. It is still at early stages. There are schemes in
place. The multi-nationals by and large will recruit wherever
they can get—
| 
