APPENDIX 103
Memorandum from Sir David Cooksey, Advent
Venture Partners
My principal activity is as Chairman of Advent
Venture Partners, a substantial venture capital firm investing
in innovative early stage companies in the fields of life sciences,
information technology and communications. I have also been involved
in public policy issues having been Chairman of the Audit Commission
and the Small Business Investment Taskforce. I am currently Chairman
of the Committee of the Non-Executive Directors of the Bank of
England and of Diamond Light Source Ltd (DLS), the joint venture
between the Office of Science and Technology and the Wellcome
Trust. DLS is constructing the new synchrotron light source at
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. I was formerly a Governor of the
Wellcome Trust.
Most recently I have been invited to chair the
MRC/DH Health Research Delivery Group to oversee joint working
between these bodies to improve the effectiveness of clinical
research in the UK. The Chancellor announced extra resources for
clinical research building over four years to £100 million
per annum for the MRC in his 2004 Spending Review and a similar
figure was allocated to the NHS R&D budget in his 2004 Budget.
The Delivery Group is responsible for ensuring that these extra
resources significantly improve medical translational research
in the UK.
This concentration of resources for translational
research followed two reports that were issued in November 2003.
The first was from a group headed by Professor John Bell at the
Academy of Medical Sciences which pointed to the current shortcomings
of clinical research in the UK and the second was from a joint
DH/DTI/BioIndustry Association study group, the Biosciences Innovation
and Growth Team (BIGT), chaired by me. It demonstrated the opportunity
to build a substantial Biosciences sector in the UK by 2015 but
showed that this could only be achieved by co-ordinated efforts
between the DH, NHS, MRC and the biosciences industry. Government's
immediate response was to set up the UK Clinical Research Collaboration
under the leadership of Sir John Pattison (and since his retirement
by Professor Sally Davies). This has been complemented by the
MRC/DH Health Research Delivery Group. Much needs to be done but
a good start has been made with a real commitment from the NHS,
academia and the pharmaceutical/biosciences industries. The prize
for success is very large in terms of better health for patients
and more successful pharmaceutical/bioscience industries located
in the UK.
In the case of NIMR, I must emphasise that I
have no direct involvement in it myself, and I would not wish
to comment on the decision to move it to central London or on
the specific choice of a partner organisation. On the other hand,
I am well aware of the scientific reputation of NIMR and of the
very significant contribution it has made to the field of medical
research in this country. Its international reputation for scientific
excellence is without question. It is very important that we preserve
this continuing contribution in whatever form it may emerge.
In the broader context, it has been very pleasing
to see the way that the MRC is responding to the new translational
research agenda. It has embraced the requirements of the BIGT
report and is redirecting its efforts alongside the revised approach
by the NHS R&D function to implement the BIGT recommendations.
In this regard it is important that NIMR can
play its full part in the evolving translational research agenda.
I am persuaded that more progress will be made if the NIMP is
located in a medical school environment with good access to clinical
medicine where the broadest range of supporting disciplines relevant
to its fields of research are available. This should include access
to secure animal facilities, which inevitably will reduce the
choice of partner organisations.
I commend the Committee to address the issues
identified above in their overall consideration of the future
of NIMR.
17 November 2004
| 
