Memorandum 32
Submission from the Council for the Central
Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
— Space science and technology
affects virtually the whole UK population, either directly or
indirectly;
— The UK already has a space programme
that is diverse, world-leading, and of immense benefit to the
UK economy and to the quality of life;
— The balance between the UK National
Space Programme and the UK contribution to the ESA programme needs
to be addressed;
— A Joint Space Technology Programme
is being prepared for submission to the Comprehensive Spending
Review 2007. This addresses the imbalance between the UK space
programme and the ESA space programme. If successful, it would
also enable UK industry to position itself more favourably for
participation in future ESA missions, and as a result would deliver
an even greater benefit to the UK economy;
— BNSC must be better positioned
within government. The establishment of the Large Facilities Research
Council presents an ideal opportunity to reconsider its current
role, as well as providing an option for locating a UK National
Space Centre on the proposed Harwell Science Innovation Campus;
— The Select Committee may wish
to consider visiting some of the UK centres of space activity
(eg EADS-Astrium, RAL, and SSTL), and also an ESA site such as
ESTEC in Holland, in order to benchmark UK activities;
— With a government investment
of £200 million and a £4-7 billion annual industry,
government should recognise that space research and development
plays a significant role in the UK economy and in government strategy
in general, and the timeliness and potential to increase both
even further should now be exploited. In addition to the economy,
Space R&D also plays a vital role in, for example: security;
in understanding climate change; and in providing training for
young students in science and engineering.
1. Whether it be through the reception of
live television programmes; the transmission of international
telephone calls; the use of GPS for transport, leisure or military
purposes; the monitoring of natural and man-made disasters; national
security; climate change; weather forecasting; remote medical
diagnostics; remote village education; or even the detection of
near-Earth objects, space research and development directly affects
the lives of the vast majority of the UK population, and indeed
a large percentage of the global population.
2. Space R&D is big business in the
UK. Although government currently invests around £200 million
per annum in the UK space programme, the industry annual turnover
is of order £4-7 billion per annum. UK scientists and technologists
clearly punch well above their weight in terms of scientific leadership
within the European Space Agency. The UK is the leading proponent
of space value-added products and services, and our space industry
is one of the most innovative industries in Europe.
3. The UK has a number of space "jewels
in the crown" which are recognised at an international level,
including EADS-Astrium, Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd, Avante,
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory (RAL), and the planetary research
group at the Open University. There are many other leading "high-tech"
companies in the UK, as well as high-quality university research
groups and world-leading institutes such as the Met Office Hadley
Centre.
4. There are many examples of successful
spin-out companies emanating from the UK space programme which
benefit the UK economy or add to the quality of life. An excellent
example of this is Thruvision Ltd, (a high-technology spin-out
from the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory's space programme). The
Company is currently developing terahertz technology for the security
market, enabling detection of weapons and explosives. This technology
was originally funded as part of a small (£100k) grant from
PPARC and NERC for the remote studies of planetary atmospheres.
Thruvision is now a multi-million pound 35-person SME.
5. However, despite the above benefits,
the UK Government has not in the past regarded space science and
technology as particularly strategically important, in contrast
to most other developed nations. This represents a very significant
loss to the UK economy and the strategic use of space-based information
for the government. Without access to space systems, government
departments which use space data (in many cases being unaware
of the source), would be seriously handicapped without such data.
This applies to MoD, DEFRA, DTI and DETR in particular.
6. The UK currently does not have a Space
Agency. Instead, space policy in the UK is coordinated by the
British National Space Centre (BNSC), a quaintly British organisation
that is a voluntary consortium of Research Councils and other
government organisations, and has an insignificant budget of its
own. In most other cases (ie within Europe and most developed
countries), national space activities are coordinated by funded
national space agencies. BNSC works well within ESA and its Council,
and has done a remarkable job in guiding ESA to reduce its own
costs and become more efficient and effective. However, by its
very constitution BNSC is not able to lobby government in terms
of the strategic benefit to government and society, and has little
in-house scientific or technical expertise. Agency status may
not necessarily be the right solution for the UK, but both of
these are weaknesses which need addressing in order for the UK
to maximise its exploitation of space technology, reap the return
from its investments, and continue to contribute to the UK economy.
7. Despite the disadvantage of not being
an agency, the recent appointment of Dr David Williams as Director
General, BNSC, enables BNSC to continue to demonstrate a highly
professional and experienced leadership. BNSC has also reorganised
its management structure by establishing a Space Board (chaired
by Prof Keith Mason, CEO of PPARC) and a Space Council (chaired
by Prof Richard Holdaway of RAL). PPARC successfully directs the
space science programme and NERC successfully directs the Earth
Observation programme.
8. The reorganisation of BNSC is clearly
a very positive step forward. However, BNSC could be better positioned
within government. With the creation of the "Large Facilities
Research Council" (LFRC) a more suitable "parent body"
will shortly be available. With the LFRC strategically linked
to the development of the Harwell Science and Innovation Campus
there is now the opportunity to establish an appropriate National
Space Centre for Science and Technology on the Campus, along with
a number of high-technology industrial space and university groups.
The Centre would provide the catalyst for a co-ordinated space
innovation and knowledge transfer programme, as well as a focus
for training in space technology, on behalf of industry. An independent
Space Council, with representatives from industry and academia,
could also be constituted to advise both BNSC and government at
ministerial level on the performance and strategy for a UK space
programme.
9. The UK is also alone amongst major ESA
member states in not having an ESA centre on its soil. This is
a strategic disadvantage for the UK, but could be addressed by
including an ESA base on the Harwell Campus if government so wished,
to work alongside other UK and European space companies currently
considering relocating their R&D centres to the Harwell Campus.
10. A final factor critical to the future
success of UK Space is to achieve the appropriate balance between
the UK's involvement in ESA's programme, and the national programme.
The latter is very small, whereas the majority of other ESA national
space agencies have a national programme that is funded to at
least 20% of their contribution to the ESA programme. A solution
that is being proposed by the BNSC partnership and supported by
UK industry is a cross-research council cross-government department
CSR2007 bid for a co-ordinated Joint Space Technology development
Programme. This is being submitted through the OSI by CCLRC, and
is seen as critical to the ongoing and increasing benefit to the
UK economy and of the government investment in space.
October 2006
|
