Examination of Witnesses (Questions 585-599)
DAME DEIRDRE
HUTTON AND
DR ANDREW
WADGE
10 MAY 2006
Q580 Chairman: Can you manage without
a scientist at the helm, Andrew?
Dr Wadge: I would not like to
suggest that the only reason that we managed in the past was because
we had a scientist as a Chairman. What we do have in the Agency
is about 40% of our staff are scientifically trained. There is
no separation between the policy divisions and the scientists,
so scientists are integrated in the policy work, so all policy
work within the organisation is done by people trained in science
alongside administrators and what is key in terms of getting the
science right is making sure that there is someone overseeing
that and that is why the organisation has appointed a Chief Scientist
to make sure that the scientific processes are correct, to act
in a representational role for the Agency with Whitehall, with
the outside world, with the academic community, with the media
and also to ensure that there is a head of profession role for
the scientists within the organisation to make sure that we are
recruiting the right people, that they are developing the right
skills and maintaining their expertise and competencies and that
we retain the very good people within the organisation.
Q581 Adam Afriyie: Dame Deirdre,
you have separated the role of Chief Scientific Adviser and the
Chief Executive, that must be a reflection of something that was
unsatisfactory in the past; what was that?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I think it
is simply a new Chairman come with new insights and new reasons
for doing things and I reflect also on my experience in financial
services that when you had the Chief Actuary as Chief Executive
it led to problems and there was a conflict of interest. I do
not think there had been any actual problems in the Agency because
of that joint job, but I did feel quite strongly, as did the Deputy
Chairman, and she had started the process before I got there,
that it was right that those two jobs should be separated. The
Chief Executive has the role of balancing various things that
happen across the Agency and various interests which are both
practical as well as scientific and we believed very strongly
that we needed a Chief Scientist who could focus absolutely on
the science, making sure it was robust, being a champion of the
profession, who could also, at times, because he was senior enough
in the organisation, put his hand up and say, "Hang on a
minute, you are not doing this right".
Q582 Adam Afriyie: That function
was missing beforehand, this is what you are saying?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: That is my
perception, yes, but then I think, and it goes back to the point
the Chairman made, I think a lot of the offset of that was done
through having Sir John Krebs as Chairman.
Q583 Adam Afriyie: In due course
will you be appointing an external scientific adviser or is this
it now?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Andrew, as
we said at the beginning, is Acting Chief Scientist so from that
you can tell that we are going through a process of developing
the role and thinking about it, but I think there are a couple
of things that we are thinking about, because I am not going to
give a straight answer to your question because we have not got
there yet, but I would point out that we have nine independent
scientific committees that advise us which involve about 140 scientists
who are external to the Agency who are there as an independent
source of advice to the board and internally, so we have got an
awful lot of independent external science coming into the Agency
already and I think that slightly changes the balance around what
it is you might actually need in Chief Scientist.
Q584 Adam Afriyie: Does the role
of Chief Scientific Adviser in the Food Standards Agency differ
in any way from the other departmental Chief Scientific Advisers?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I am terribly
sorry, I find that quite difficult to answer, I do not know enough
and I think it might be helpful if Andrew answered that.
Dr Wadge: I think it does. There
are a number of similarities, but I think the main difference
will be the point that Dame Deirdre has just said that we have
these nine independent scientific advisory committees who are
very specialist experts in areas of microbiology, toxicology,
nutrition, who are there with a role of bringing that independent
advice into the organisation. In addition to that we have contacts
within all of the different research bodies, the royal societies,
where, if there are particular problems where we need very rapid
advice, we have the opportunity to bring expert advice in on an
ad hoc basis, so I think that it is different in the sense that
we have this network. I think the similarities in the roles are
around representing the importance of science within the organisation
and around the head of profession role that I mentioned earlier.
Q585 Chairman: Could I just ask who
actually appoints the people to these committees, how do these
so-called experts get on these committees?
Dr Wadge: I mean it is all done
under the Nolan procedures, but they are appointed by Dame Deirdre.
Some of the committees are jointly run with other departments,
some of them are jointly run with the Department of Health, the
committee on nutrition, for example, SACN, is jointly appointed
by Dame Deirdre and the Chief Medical Officer.
Q586 Chairman: They are appointed,
they are not in any way openly advertised?
Dame Deirdre Hutton: Yes, they
are, it is done through Nolan procedures.
Dr Wadge: Through Nolan procedures,
yes.
Q587 Adam Afriyie: You are new in
your job, what are your key challenges?
Dr Wadge: My chief challenge is
to build on the work that we have done on establishing the Agency's
reputation for basing its policy on sound science and to do that
I want to raise the profile of science within the organisation.
I particularly want to focus on the head of profession role around
competencies and skills of the staff within the organisation and
I think as well I want to make sure that, I think there is a tendency,
no matter how hard you try, you may be getting the science right,
but your external stakeholders may not see the process by which
you have reached your conclusions all of the time and I think
that although we work very hard on transparency and openness,
I think that there are challenges for us to do even better.
Q588 Adam Afriyie: How many days
per week are you working?
Dr Wadge: I work four days a week
within the Agency as Director of Food Safety and as the Acting
Chief Scientist.
Q589 Adam Afriyie: About 50/50 two
days a week on one and two days on the other?
Dr Wadge: I would say it was more
three days a week on the Director of Food Safety and one day a
week on the Chief Scientist role.
Q590 Adam Afriyie: One day a week,
do you think that is enough?
Dr Wadge: Well I think that what
we are doing at the moment is we have set up a project board within
the organisation, we are in discussion with the Office of Science
and Innovation about the role and we are in the process of developing
the role, what exactly it involves, what sort or support we need,
and I think that those sorts of issues will come out of that project
management work that we are doing.
Q591 Adam Afriyie: On one day a week
you are also looking to produce a new science strategy, I am not
quite sure how you will fit it in with the timing, but what specific
benefits do you see from the new science strategy that you are
working on?
Dr Wadge: I should say that I
am not the only person there working on issues such as the science
strategy.
Q592 Chairman: No, we have gathered
that, Andrew.
Dr Wadge: Science strategy actually
will be published later this month and I believe that you have
seen a copy of that, if not we can provide you with that. That
is a process that we have put together, we have been very specific
about our strategic planned targets and what science we need to
meet those targets, so it is very much about saying, "Here
are the policy aims of the organisation, what science do we need?
What is the process? What sort of information do we need to do
that? How are we going to go about getting it?" In that process
we have consulted very widely with our scientific committees,
with the outside world, to a large extent with the academic community
and we have taken on board a lot of comments around that, so I
would not like to give you the impression that it is just me,
there is quite a large team of people within the organisation.
Q593 Adam Afriyie: And in the new
science strategy, you did not have one before, you have got one
now, what will be the difference between the past and when this
new strategy is in place?
Dr Wadge: I think the main difference
is a very specific focus and link between our strategic planned
targets around food safety, around choice, around diet and health
and what science we actually need as an organisation to meet those
very challenging targets we have set ourselves to reduce food
borne disease, to improve dietary health, to increase consumer
choice, what sort of science do we need, what is the best way
of getting that science, how do we interpret that science once
we get the science and how do we make sure that it then influences
policy and, finally, how we evaluate it at the end of that?
Q594 Adam Afriyie: The final question.
What safeguards do you have in place to ensure that you have sufficient
in-house expertise in social and natural science to be an intelligent
customer and communicator of scientific advice?
Dr Wadge: It is absolutely true
to say that as an organisation when we were first established
in 2000 we were largely focussed on the natural sciences, but
we have been very specific in our strategic plan about the need
to do more work on the social sciences and in the course of recognising
that we have held with the Royal Society a meeting last September
on social sciences. We held a seminar just two weeks go with leading
social scientists from across the academic community to identify
how social science can influence the work that we do, but also
during the last few years we have been recruiting economists,
operational researchers, people working on consumer attitudes
and consumer science, so we are starting to recruit people from
the social science world as well as engaging more.
Q595 Adam Afriyie: And how are you
monitoring or measuring the outcome of these changes or of this
input?
Dr Wadge: I think that the way
that we monitor all of our science is around reviewing. If we
have got a research programme, for example, on economics, we will
always conduct a review at the end of the period to see whether
that research met the policy needs that we set ourselves, whether
the research was of a high scientific standard and then how that
research then influenced the policy.
Q596 Adam Afriyie: This is a rigid
system? Is everything you undertake is measured and monitored
afterwards?
Dr Wadge: We certainly have a
very specific programme in relation to the research and development
function so all of our research programmes are formally reviewed
in that way. I think that in terms of our more general policies,
then I think it is a case of saying, "Well, how has that
policy been developed and what input has there been from the scientist,
from other stakeholders?" In the end it is a case of is that
policy one that is fit for purpose.
Dame Deirdre Hutton: I think there
are a more general set of outcomes for the Agency, have we got
to where we want to get to and of which the policy will be an
underpinning part. We also do regular tracking of public opinion
around levels of trust so, for example, trust in the Agency's
ability to look after their interests in food safety last year
was 67% which is quite high; in fact it has gone up 8% in the
last year. The science is the basis of that, it is a fundamental
building block. If I could just add one point which I think Andrew
has not said, is that it is very important to the Acting Chief
Scientist role that Andrew is a member of the executive management
board, so he has a senior position within the Agency and therefore
a platform to say, "No, hang on, this is not right".
Q597 Chairman: Just before we leave
this particular area, Andrew, I am interested in how, for instance,
non-scientific staff within the Agency actually get scientific
training. I am also interested in how your permanent scientific
staff actually maintain their competence, can you just talk me
through that?
Dr Wadge: We do not specifically
train our non-scientific staff in science because we have a mixture
of competencies and skills.
Q598 Chairman: But they have to communicate
it, do they not?
Dr Wadge: If we need to communicate
science, and it needs to be a very skilled complex bit of science,
then someone such as myself will do that communication, we would
not have an administrator doing that work, but administrators
will bring a range of other skills to the party and help out.
We would not look to specifically train our administrators in
science, we would make sure that we have got the right mix of
skills. Moving on to the point that you asked about, how do we
maintain the skills? A number of our scientists are quite expert
in their own right and are appointed on to world health organisation
expert committees, European food safety authority expert committees
and so they are recognised in their own right and contribute to
international discussions around regulation and risk assessment,
but I think that the other two areas is that through the scientific
advisory committees we have a network through which our scientists
engage on nutrition or microbiology and keep in touch with those
who are at the cutting edge. We also fund a significant amount
of research on food safety and individual scientists within the
organisations will act as the project officers and will regularly
visit the different research organisations and discuss that research
and so there is an on-going process of keeping an eye open on
the horizon as to what the scientific developments are that could
be influencing—
Q599 Chairman: The point I am making,
Andrew, is you have obviously given us that assurance that your
scientists are actually at the cutting edge rather than in fact
dealing with yesterday's science in terms of applying them to
what are very obviously very complex issues regarding food safety.
Dr Wadge: I think that we are
in touch with people who are at the cutting edge I think is how
I would like to put it, but I do want to develop this role of
the Chief Scientist to specifically develop that head of profession
role, linking in with the Cabinet Office initiative on professional
skills for government, because there is clearly a tremendous need
for people within the Food Standards Agency to act as the intelligent
customer in terms of scientific information and advice.
| 
