Examination of Witnesses (Questions 742
- 759)
MONDAY 10 MAY 2004
DR DAVID
GRANT CBE AND
MR BRIAN
MORGAN
Q742 Chairman: Welcome to the Committee.
We had a very good session this morning with the academics. For
the purposes of the record, could you introduce yourselves, starting
with Mr Morgan?
Mr Morgan: Good afternoon, Martyn,
I am still at the Cardiff Business School with the Small Firms
Research Centre, which I think I was when I was adviser to your
Committee a couple of years back; and I am also still very much
involved in the private sector and small firm development. My
interests at the moment include the Bluestone Project in West
Wales, and I am very glad to say we are moving that along despite
the National Parks. I have another involvement with Welsh Whisky.
That is going very successfully at the moment. In a moment I want
to talk about one or two of those private sector ventures.
Q743 Chairman: I am sure we will.
I am sorry I could not come to the launch of Welsh Whisky. We
were hoping to do that collectively, as a committee.
Dr Grant: David Grant. I have
been Vice Chancellor of Cardiff University since October 2001.
My previous career was 35 years in industry, the last decade as
technical director of GEC. In that period, and indeed now I am
still involved in various other activities outside the university.
I do not think I need give you a list but I have various other
connections. That may help inform some of the answers. As an example,
I am a member of EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research
Council), one of the OST research councils. I have a number of
external connections as well. The Council spends about £300
million per annum on research in universities across the
UK. I am a Council member.
Q744 Chairman: Mr Morgan, would you
like to make a short statement, since you did not put in a written
statement?
Mr Morgan: I will hand in a chart
in the context of some of the points I wish to make. Looking at
the first chart, the relative GDP, I am just putting into context
there what everybody knows of course—where Wales is, in
terms of relative GDP per head in relation to our competitive
regions across the UK. I wanted to look at some of the ideas as
to why we have been languishing at that low level. The first one
that typically comes up is the main interest of this Committee,
which is manufacturing. As you can see there, manufacturing trends
in Wales have really been downward since 2000, and Wales has lagged
behind the rest of the UK in this area. That particular down-trend
is quite stark. To understand what is happening, we need to look
at what is happening with individual firms. We need to distinguish
between these national statistics and individual businesses. Macro
level output figures, for example, have very little resonance
with chief executive officers of large organisations, but they
are very keen to understand organisational performance and organisational
changes. We need to make that move. I will just give you some
figures on the stock of firms in the UK. These are the VAT registered
businesses. As you can see, at the UK level they have been rising
reasonably healthily since 1994. It has been rather more up and
down in Scotland, but the trend is still very much upwards. When
we come to Wales we can see why to some extent we have this problem.
We have a falling stock, and that means essentially that the death
rate of firms is greater than the birth rate. The stock is going
down because we are one of the few regions of the UK where the
death rate is higher than the birth rate. You have a conundrum
here, and one that regional policy has had to deal with over the
years. How do you rate relative GDP when you need a large stock
of firms to raise GDP and sustain it, because firms need a local
market to sustain their products? The conundrum is how can you
support a large number of SMEs when you have a low level of GDP.
Objective 1 should be focusing on addressing that conundrum, and
that is what the funds should be there for.
Q745 Chairman: This is a question
for both of you and concerns attracting academics. We have been
focusing on the relationship between academia and industry. Is
there a tension between attracting world-class academics and fulfilling,
in this case, Cardiff University's role as a development driver
in what we acknowledge is a lagging economy?
Dr Grant: It will vary according
to academic discipline. In my opinion—and recognise that
I have been a vice chancellor for just two and a half years—people
are attracted primarily by the other academics, and indeed the
research environment and teaching environment into which they
move. In one or two disciplines they may be affected by local
companies, the economy and so on, but I am not sure that that
would be an overriding factor. Where I am more concerned is for
students, and research students in particular to be able to connect
with local companies. In engineering disciplines, you often do
want to connect with companies locally. As an academic, that is
not always possible. I am well aware that in our own school of
engineering we have connections that truly have to be world-wide,
and, sadly, not enough opportunities exist locally. I believe
that you spoke with Professor Pham this morning, and maybe he
would have confirmed some of those points because he is more directly
involved, as is Brian, with a lot of the smaller companies we
do connect with. To attract academics into a university like Cardiff,
it really is our research and teaching position, and our size
and facilities that will be the primary factors.
Mr Morgan: I agree entirely with
Dr Grant. The other issue that I think we are all very interested
in is that link with the business sector. If we are going to attract
world-class academics, more and more of them these days are looking
to participate with other research centres that have access to
large research grants from the government. Typically, those large
research grants follow some of the commercial activities that
are going on—and more and more with the way the research
assessment and other things are going. Ultimately, the collaboration
with the business school will be absolutely vital in attracting
those world-class academics.
Q746 Mr Caton: Dr Grant, in your
written submission you quote the analysis of the Vice Chancellor
of Swansea University, which shows that compared to Scotland and
England when they were looking at 5 and 5* staff in departments,
Wales comes off fairly badly. Why do you think Wales is lagging
behind the other parts of the United Kingdom in this respect?
Dr Grant: I think firstly there
is a quantity question here. It is my belief that if we take Scotland
as an example, there has been greater funding over a longer period
of time for their premier institutions, and that has led to increases
in research income and an increasing number of good academics.
Across the whole of Wales, as I also point out in my paper, if
you add it all up it is equivalent to just one institution in
England; and of course here it is divided amongst 13 institutions,
with in some cases quite different missions. Cardiff, I am pleased
to say, performs quite well in comparison with other Russell Group
universities, but there are a number of universities in Wales
that are not really research-led universities; they do not see
research in the same way and they have different missions. This
is a complex picture. I know that in Swansea Richard Davies was
performing his analysis, to see where to focus in order to raise
up to a higher level a number of fairly small research groups
in that institution. There is no simple answer to the issue, but
for the future I believe that the main requirement is greater
investment in order that we can get staff in place, because good
staff will soon earn money from external sources, like research
councils, industry and a myriad of other funding sources. In Cardiff,
as our research quality has risen, so too has the research income
from many sources. That link, which I can show you, is quite dramatic.
I cannot pass it round, but if you can see this picture, we have
doubled our research income in less than five years. That has
happened because we have got 5 and 5* departments which are attracting—and
it is all competitively bid—research funding to go with
the quality of people. Within Wales we obviously have not got
an adequate number of people who will attract those funds.
Q747 Mr Caton: Can central government
play any part in providing more equitable distribution of those
top-flight academics?
Dr Grant: It is difficult because
academics will follow the others who they think are important
in their field of studies and research. Government can help through
increasing the funding that is available for both teaching and
for research—and indeed these days third mission activities.
I do not know that you can channel it in the sense of being selective.
In fact, I find a lot of the question of selectivity very difficult,
because academics, as I have now discovered, are very much driven
by their own individual issues and interests. It is very difficult
for government and certainly difficult for vice chancellors to
say who goes where. We want people who are very strong in their
discipline and they are very strong-willed and strong-minded people,
and they will follow success.
Mr Morgan: The Vice Chancellor
mentioned the huge number of similar numbers in Scotland. I have
a note that even before devolution, the Scottish Executive were
in touch with all of the research councils, the ESPRC and other
research councils, to question any of them that were allocating
less money proportionately to Scotland than they felt Scotland
deserved. I put this question to the Welsh Office at the time,
as to when we actually asked the Social Sciences Research Council
what allocation rules they were working to; and the answer came
back: "Never". They have been much more proactive in
Scotland in making sure they get that research resource.
Q748 Mr Edwards: On the suitability
of the RAE, when we took evidence from Professor Pham this morning,
the amount of advisory work that his unit is giving to companies
throughout Wales and elsewhere is very, very impressive. Some
of it generates income and some does not. That sort of work cannot
really be recognised, can it, by, say, the RAE, and so it does
not get the prestige which RAE 5* assessments get? Could we not
quantify that sort of work better that will help to show the relevance
and applicability of the expertise that you have to industry out
there?
Dr Grant: That is a very good
question. As a former industrialist, I often felt that the research
assessment exercise was perhaps not taking adequate account of
the economic third mission activities, and I am hopeful that in
the next research assessment exercise greater account will be
taken. However, as you are well aware, it is only in some disciplines
that that measure would be important. In engineering and the physical
sciences, and increasingly I suppose in the biosciences, these
are important measures. It is up to the new rules, the new panels,
for the research assessment exercise of 2008 to take cognisance
of these factors. I agree with the concern. I think that it should
be a measure that is taken into account in order to assess the
value of research that is carried out. At present, as you are
aware, research assessment looks for published papers in the high-quality
journals, irrespective of subject. But I had hoped that one of
the influences of Roberts would be in some disciplines different
additional measures. Economic activity would be a suitable candidate
for that.
Q749 Mr Edwards: Can you confirm
what Roberts is? Is this the review of RAE?
Dr Grant: Yes, the next exercise.
The intention was to have different criteria, although my present
expectation—because we have not seen the criteria—is
that it is not going to be very much different to previous ones.
Q750 Albert Owen: If I could just
return to the issue of the comparator between Scotland and Wales,
in your paper, Dr Grant, you mentioned that Wales received 3.6%
of the UK Research Council expenditure, whereas Scotland got as
much as 12% with only 8.6% of the population. Before devolution,
the Scottish Office, compared with the Welsh Office, was already
lobbying. Has this changed since devolution? Is the Wales Office
and the Assembly making a more concerted effort to get those additional
funds that you are aware of?
Mr Morgan: I am not aware that
there has been a focus on that.
Dr Grant: No, I am not aware,
but remember that that money is given out to bidders irrespective
of where they are located.
Q751 Albert Owen: That is my point
really. Is it the quality of the bid? Could you honestly say that
the quality of the Welsh bids are not as good as the Scottish
bids?
Dr Grant: They are as good.
Q752 Albert Owen: So what is the
factor then?
Dr Grant: The factor is the number
of academics in 5 and 5* departments. It is simply down to having
enough good people. When you look at the statistics—certainly
the ones I see in EPSRC—you find that institutions in Wales
are as successful, and indeed in some cases more successful at
winning funds than academics in other UK schools. It is a question
of numbers.
Q753 Albert Owen: This is the feedback
you have had from the Research Council itself, is it; or is it
just the opinion of vice chancellors like yourself?
Dr Grant: No, I have seen the
publicly-available statistics, which show that we are not disadvantaged
when we bid for research funding. It is just that not enough people
in Wales are bidding for research funding.
Q754 Dr Francis: I thought there
was another factor. I thought the main reason why we were unsuccessful
was a lack of aspiration, that we were not bidding enough; that
the academics in Wales were not ambitious enough in the numbers
of applications they were putting in.
Dr Grant: I do not think that
is true. Certainly, in the 5 and 5* departments within Wales,
I do not think there is any evidence of that at all.
Q755 Dr Francis: Who is doing the
lobbying on your behalf if the Wales Office is not doing it and
the Welsh Assembly Government is not raising the question that
Mr Morgan was raising? What about the heads of higher education
in Wales? Are they proactive in raising this issue?
Dr Grant: I certainly am, within
our institution. It is, after all, a question of constantly working
with our academics to make sure they are taking every opportunity
to bid for new research contracts. The Research Councils operate
slightly differently; each one has a slightly different way of
operating; but they often have calls for proposals in a new subject
area. This is where the vice chancellor and senior academics roles
are to make sure that the university puts in good bids when there
is a new call for proposals. That is the kind of internal action
that should take place. Within Scotland, I am well aware at present
that a number of universities are getting together. There is support
from Scottish Enterprise and the Funding Council in Scotland to
do a kind of Team Scotland act in certain subject areas. In my
past, I have worked in optical systems, optoelectronics, where
Scotland was particularly strong with a consortium of really good
universities. There are opportunities to work in a consortium
within and country.
Q756 Mr Caton: We have mentioned
the work of Richard Davies, the Vice Chancellor of Swansea University—and
you, Dr Grant, said it was to give evidence to form the restructuring
that he is currently undertaking in Swansea. One of the things
that has come out of that—and certainly as a Swansea MP
it is obviously hugely controversial at the moment, and there
are real concerns—is that RAE is being reviewed itself.
Why make fundamental decisions about closing departments on the
basis of the old RAE? Why not wait? The other thing is a concern
about the impact on teaching opportunities, particularly if resources
remain the same. If Wales decides to chase the 5/5* departments,
will teaching and indeed undergraduate opportunities have to suffer
as a direct result?
Dr Grant: They will benefit as
a result. There is a strong base of evidence that shows that universities
with the best research also have the best teaching. I am very
proud of the fact that in Cardiff we have an excellent record
in teaching, and I believe that that goes hand in hand with having
people who are at the leading edge of their research field, are
enthusiastic about the research they are carrying out—and
that enthusiasm comes over to the students they teach, so it does
go hand in hand.
Q757 Mr Caton: For those departments
that remain and get the improved quality; but, as we are seeing
in Swansea, there is a quid pro quo; if you want to do
sociology or anthropology and you are in south-west Wales, you
may not be able to do it within Wales and it will disappear if
the current plans go ahead. If you want to study chemistry at
undergraduate level, that option is no longer there. It is not
all plus, plus, is it?
Dr Grant: Vice chancellors and
councils of universities have to make difficult decisions. Can
you invest in every subject in order to keep everything at a high
level, because you have to do that. Even though you cannot always
have 5 and 5* departments, you have to invest where you are able
across the group of subjects. I am pleased to say that in Cardiff
we do not have the same challenge that I know exists in Swansea.
We are quite keen to keep the present spectrum of activities all
targeted on having both research and teaching excellence, but
I am well aware that in universities that do not have the financial
position of Cardiff you have to make difficult decisions. I can
understand Richard's dilemma.
Q758 Mr Caton: Dr Grant, there is
one last question on the 5/5* department issue. You state in your
written submission that those we have got are making a huge contribution
to the knowledge economy in Wales. Can you give examples of where
the HE sector is interacting with industry?
Dr Grant: One of my problems is
that I have got too many examples. We have hundreds of research
contracts with our best departments. Let me give you a few examples.
We have Cardiff University Innovation Network as a way of bringing
academics and business people together. Because of that network
we have annual awards. I have gone to the annual awards, just
to pick out a couple of examples, because we had the annual awards
just last Thursday. I thought I would pick out a couple of examples
where people have come to us because of that expertise, and they
are now award-winners. Cellular Design Services is a company that
exists to position radio transmitters around the country for the
mobile network. Their challenge is to locate them so that you
get best coverage with the least number of transmitters, taking
account of all sorts of geography, planning regulations and so
on. I am sure you are aware of the kind of challenge. They have
come to our school of computer science because we have people
there who have got mathematical models that optimise the position
in order to get the minimum number of transmitters in connection
with the maximum number of mobile phone users. They have won a
prize here, and they will win other prizes. This saves millions
of pounds in terms of companies' business, by going to people
who are not just best in the UK, but which I would rate world-wide
at the top. That is just one example. I could go on, but that
gives you an example of what can be done. That involves computer
science, mathematics, very clever algorithms, applied to a very
practical problem.
Q759 Dr Francis: Before I ask about
academic support for manufacturing in Wales, can I pursue the
question Mr Caton was asking in relation to critical mass. I was
very interested in what you have to say about the Team Wales approach
and the way in which the Assembly and the HE institutions in Wales
have been grappling with this question of rationalisation. Can
you say a little bit more about how—and this is not a question
about the University of Wales and its future—you see your
development as an institution in Wales impacting itself now in
the next decade in relation to the other institutions? How can
that reconfiguration occur in the light, for example, of the Daniel
Report 10 years ago, which anticipated the need for greater collaboration?
Dr Grant: Let me give you a specific
example of collaboration that is working and showing that it can
be done, and that is the Wales Gene Park. I am not sure whether
you are familiar with that, but there were six centres to be built
in the United Kingdom in different locations, and they were all
bid for. We bid as a consortium, comprising Cardiff University,
the College of Medicine, which two years ago was a separate entity,
Aberystwyth, Bangor and Swansea, together with Techniquest and
one or two other partners. This was very successful. It won one
of the positions of centre status. It attracted the funding from
the DTI, WDA and various other bodies, and has been in existence
now for two years. It is going to continue to grow, and we hope
that it will eventually have its own building. This is for genetics
research witrh various applications in medicine, but also for
educating the public about genetics. That is why Techniquest were
an important partner in this, with their ability to help on the
educational side, particularly with schoolchildren. As a result
of that, we have got excellent relationships with academics in
Bangor, Aber, Swansea and Cardiff, the two Cardiff centres, just
playing to their strengths—playing as a team, working as
a team and working with WDA and other bodies. The NHS are of course
a part of this. That shows that it can be done. There are other
examples. In physics there has been a long history of collaboration
between some of the institutions in Wales. The important thing
is that it is driven by the academics themselves. This is not
a funding body saying, "you will do the following";
this is academics saying, "we know that we would like to
work with other academics in Wales that happen to be able to have
complementary skills to the ones that we are bringing to this
consortium. That is a good example, and I am sure there are many
more. I am aware of discussions taking place this afternoon on
nano-technology, for a Wales-wide network.
|
