Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180-187)
PROFESSOR SIR
ROY ANDERSON,
MR TREVOR
WOOLLEY, MR
MARK PRESTON
AND DR
PAUL HOLLINSHEAD
28 NOVEMBER 2006
Q180 Mr Jenkin: Can I ask what role
you think the European Defence Agency is going to play in all
of this?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: Clearly
we are being encouraged by our French partners to contribute to
the R&D budget of the EDA. My own view, and of many of my
colleagues in the MoD, is that we need to take this very slowly.
The EDA has no experience of managing R&D and no skilled infrastructure
to both commission peer review and manage it and this will evolve
over time. At the moment our Ministry of Defence strategy, which
I believe is absolutely correct, is to work with partners, particularly
France because they have a big R&D investment, equivalent
to ours, the others have a very small R&D investment, and
choose areas where our joint activity would be more than the sum
of the parts. In other words, there would be synergy. I can think
of areas of missile guidance technology where France is very,
very good. From the French aspect, I can think of areas of CBRN
protection detection where we are stronger than France. It is
a matter of choosing areas where synergy makes sense to us.
Q181 Mr Jenkin: You believe essentially
that bilateralism is far more in the national interest than working
through a European institution which is inevitably going to be
horse-trading on other issues rather than what is in the direct
national interest?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: In
the SIT and R&D community at the moment that is our attitude.
We feel these bilateral relationships are very good, particularly
with the French, and we see great benefit from continuing those.
Q182 Mr Jenkin: Have we placed ourselves
under any obligations by agreeing to the establishment of the
European Defence Agency, or is it just a cipher of an institution
which need not do anything unless we want it to?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: I
cannot judge; I am going to focus on the R&D. My benchmark
or metric is how quickly they develop a capability to manage R&D
programmes and we will see how that evolves over the coming years.
Q183 Chairman: Without any money
I doubt it will be very quick, will it?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: We
will see.
Q184 Chairman: You said just now
that the gap between Western Europe and the United States was
closing and yet you said a little while ago that the United States
was spending 15% of its large defence budget on research and technology,
whereas we were spending 10% of our small defence budget and everybody
else was spending less. How is the gap closing? Is it because
we are cleverer than Americans by a factor of two or three, or
is it that we spend the money better or what?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: My
comment was related not just to defence, it was related to the
science and engineering outputs of the nations across all sectors.
If you take Germany, for example, Germany has a low defence R&D
expenditure but a very, very high civil R&D expenditure in
certain fields, in engineering, the motor industry, et cetera.
My comments about the metrics of scientific output—these
are published figures compiled by OST—if you sum Western
Europe and you look at the United States, then the United States
are still well ahead but the derivatives of the slope, there is
evidence of Western Europe becoming more influential as a whole.
In the defence sector, as you quite rightly point out, the United
States is hugely ahead. I am making the argument in that earlier
comment that we will close the ground in the defence R&D field.
Q185 Chairman: And that is widening,
is it not?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: Probably,
yes.
Q186 Chairman: Certainly, yes.
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: In
some areas, no.
Q187 Mr Hancock: Is there any real
reason why we should not want to close the gap?
Professor Sir Roy Anderson: Defence
and security are getting fuzzier now, so in the American jargon
of homeland security, there are many technologies there which
have dual use, in both defence and in protecting against terrorist
activity in the UK. This is a hugely expanding commercial market
and I can see interesting opportunities for UK industry in that
field. There could be fields there, like detection, imaging and
information processing, which will be of great advantage to the
Ministry of Defence, the civil sector and the more homeland security
sectors where, in my view, we should sustain a significant investment.
Chairman: I think we have covered the
ground, and we are going to allow you away for some lunch. Thank
you very much indeed for a very interesting session and a very
interesting morning altogether. Thank you to all the witnesses.
| 
