Malcolm
Wicks: This is about the betterment of our society as well
as about ensuring that science has a societal purpose and that it is
good for the economy in the broadest sense. I am not sure whether to
say that the board is science led might be too narrow in the same way
as to say it is commercially led would be too narrow, but I will
reflect on that point. This issue is about betterment, technology
transfer and ensuring that our best science supports the wider
economy. The hon.
Gentleman talked about blue skies research and it is very important
that, in Britain, the Government and the research councils spend large
proportions of their budgets on what some people call pure or basic
research. We do not want a situation in which everything must have a
commercial pay-off within a few years and there are numerous examples
of ways in which society has gained when we have enabled our best
scientists to undertake basic or pure research. I am still within a
month of my appointment and I am happy to confirm that as it is an
important fact.
Members will be appointed to the
board by the Secretary of State, which is a common procedure. The draft
charter states that a majority of members will be appointed to the
board by reason of their knowledge and experience of science and
technology, and their concerns about business.
I confirm to the Liberal
Democrat spokesman that money will not be taken from other research
councils to fund the new board; the money will be allocated in the
normal way by the DTI. However, we are, of course, anxious to ensure
that research councils work together where
appropriate—regardless of which research council we are looking
at. Indeed, there have been significant strides on that in recent
years. I was perfectly
properly asked about the difference between a reference to £750
million and £900 million. We accounted for this difference by a
recent call for collaboration on research and development grant
proposals. Prior to that call, 500 projects worth £750 million
had been supported, but with this new call that rises to 600 projects
and £900 million.
The hon. Member for Bournemouth,
East, asked about the appointment of the chairman. As we have said, the
chairman has wide experience of business, a commitment to innovation
and a distinguished career at IBM. Salaries for the STFC will be
£15,000 per annum for the chairman, and members of the board
will receive some £6,000. Those seem appropriate figures for the
work that people take on because of their commitment to our
country. My hon.
Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith made a change from
talking about wind turbines. He was anxious to remind me, not that I
needed reminding, that this is a united kingdom, and that much of the
new board’s work will benefit all parts of the UK. Given
Scotland’s great track record of innovation in science and
engineering, I did not need him to remind me of that point, but I was
pleased that he did
so. The Chairman of the
relevant Select Committee asked why there would not be more savings. I
shall reflect on that and try to give him more information, but, as I
said earlier, I think that the move from
advisory to executive is part of the issue. He also mentioned
Britain’s leading role in aspects of astronomy, and I certainly
take that on board, as I believe the research councils do. Without
going into detail in this answer, may I say that I recognise the
importance in science of international collaboration and the
international subscriptions that are therefore required for Britain to
maintain its leading role in many aspects of world
science? I was asked
when the chairman’s appointment will start. Of course, he is
already the chairman of the advisory board, but he will take up his
appointment as soon as the new board is formally established. I have
already discussed
salaries. The Liberal
Democrat spokesman asked about business simplification, and I am sorry
to move around on these issues. May I simply say that the management
statement of the new board will ensure that its activities are in line
with the Government’s ongoing and ambitious programme of
business support
simplification? I
apologise for the fact that I probably have not answered every
question. I need to think further about one or two and take advice on
them, but I welcome the Committee’s general and, I believe,
enthusiastic support for the establishment of the new board. Britain is
very good at science. We are getting better at knowledge transfer and
innovation, but we need to improve on our record and will do so in many
ways. The establishment of the new board is a major focal point for
that activity in the years to
come. Question put
and agreed
to. Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Science and Technology
Facilities Council Order 2007.
Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Technology Strategy Board Order
2007.—[Malcolm
Wicks.] Committee
rose at twenty-seven minutes past Five
o’clock.
| 
