Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220
- 230)
WEDNESDAY 10 JANUARY 2007
PROFESSOR KEITH
MASON, PROFESSOR
RICHARD HOLDAWAY
AND AIR
VICE-MARSHAL
CHRIS MORAN
Q220 Mr Newmark: So the taxpayers'
funding of expenditure on research ultimately will have a benefit
to society but maybe shifting the financial benefits to the private
sector. That is what it looks like is going on here. Is that right?
We are putting in money as taxpayers and society is benefiting,
but the financial benefits are not being seen by the taxpayer
but by the private sector.
Professor Holdaway: The financial
benefits come through to the taxpayer and to industry in 10, 20
years' time. That is the real crux of it; we need the investment
now.
Professor Mason: It contributes
to our GDP which benefits the taxpayer.
Q221 Adam Afriyie: It seems to me
from what I have been reading that PPARC—Keith, yourself
and your team—are energetic, talented, hardworking and you
have played a key role in the negotiations—
Professor Mason: What is coming
next?
Q222 Adam Afriyie: You have played
a key role in the discussions in Edinburgh over the last couple
of days. To what extent would you say PPARC is managing the UK's
relationship with the European Space Agency as opposed to the
BNSC?
Professor Mason: First of all,
BNSC co-ordinates everything, so everything we do works through
the BNSC. Our director of space science is also a director in
the BNSC. Where PPARC takes a lead through BNSC is in the mandatory
space programme, because that is entirely paid for by PPARC without
subscription to that, and also now in the Aurora programme. So
our director, Dave Parker, is seconded to the BNSC and that is
the way the partnership works; he takes the lead for PPARC but
he is also a BNSC person.
Q223 Adam Afriyie: What are the main
outcomes of discussions over the last few days?
Professor Mason: On what?
Q224 Adam Afriyie: On the discussions
with the European Space Agency. You had a stakeholder consultation
over the last few days.
Professor Mason: Are you referring
to the conference in Edinburgh?
Q225 Adam Afriyie: Yes.
Professor Mason: This is part
of an ongoing series which is aimed at putting together this global
exploration strategy we have talked about. This was primarily
European focused but it also involved space agencies from around
the world and is increasingly becoming a worldwide effort. There
are no concrete outcomes; this is part of a planning process for
putting the process together that will deliver a global space
exploration strategy. So it is one cog in that chain, but I think
it is very gratifying to see the enthusiasm with which our partners
are approaching this and, indeed, the enthusiasm with which they
are seeing our efforts to play our full role in that exploration
strategy.
Q226 Adam Afriyie: You mentioned
that you are instrumental in the discussions of the Aurora programme.
£75 million was given towards the project to 2009 because
that was mainly to do with robotics and the mechanical exploration
of space. It seems—is there something sneaky going on—that
the next stage may be manned space flight, in which case part
of our investment may be undermined. What is your view of the
situation?
Professor Mason: No, I think that
is not the case. If you recall, the history of the Aurora programme
is originally as a bright idea started off very much with a man
focus. Largely due to the efforts of the UK, it was diverted into
the short to medium term, into robotic exploration. As I said
before, I think we do need to take a sensible, grown-up look at
the role of humans in space for the future, and I think we are
entirely singing from the same hymn sheet as most of our European
partners, in that there are no current efforts in that direction
but we are looking at the options. This is part of the strategy
construction, part of the consultation we are doing to decide
how we should position ourselves for that in looking at the 15,
20-year horizon.
Q227 Adam Afriyie: My final question
is really about the UK's return on its investment in the European
Space Agency. It would appear that we are not achieving a proportionate
return for the investment we are making in ESA. I think we are
supposed to get a return of about 0.9 of our subscription fee
of £60 million and we have achieved 0.79, so we have, approximately,
a £7 million deficit on what we put in to what we get out.
Do you think that situation will continue? Is it a temporary blip
and how did the situation develop in the first place?
Professor Mason: David Williams,
in the previous session, gave you a more detailed answer on the
underlying causes, and there is no single cause—a change
in the GDP of the UK, the fact that our funding is doing well,
etc—but I think it does also play into the concerns we have
about technology development, because in order to win contracts
we have to be prepared, we have to be competitive with our international
partners. Certainly if we move into a situation where the ESA
rules on juste retour are forced to change because of enlargement
we will have no protection against not getting a contract. Right
now we do have the protection of juste retour. The only
way we are going to achieve that in the future, if the rules change,
is to be competitive. So we have to really consciously make sure
that we put in the R&D in order to ensure that we are competitive.
Q228 Chairman: Finally, Keith, there
is a huge amount of interest in NASA's $100 billion programme,
and particularly the invitation to the UK Government to be part
of that. I think that has fuelled a lot of the interest at the
moment in terms of human space flight, so I think that is understandable.
You have talked today about ESA and we have mentioned NASA briefly,
and certainly the special relationship we have with the US in
terms of satellite surveillance. Where do we stand with other
nations, like China and India, perhaps even Nigeria, who are going
into space policy in a much bigger way? Where do we stand on that?
Professor Mason: I will refer
to Richard in a minute because he has been directly involved in
this, but we have an ongoing dialogue with both the Chinese and
the Indians, and some real hard collaborations, through ESA, in
those areas. I found it very gratifying that in this global exploration
strategy now the Chinese are involved as well, which is a new
development (as of a year ago they were not); the opportunities
are certainly there and if we need to capitalise on them we need
to invest. This comes back to the idea that we do need a resource
in order to enable some of these, frankly, huge opportunities
that are appearing over the horizon. Richard has been directly
involved in these activities.
Professor Holdaway: It is a very
interesting issue. Of course, the UK already works with China
and we have one operational science programme with them, although
the interface is through the European Space Agency. We are two
years away from the launch of an Indian mission that will carry
UK scientific instruments on board, and we are just about to start
negotiations with the Brazilians. With the Chinese the issue is
really interesting because the Government, as you know very well,
has a strategy for doing business with China, and although we
have been doing scientific business with China for many, many
years we are only now just beginning to work with them on the
technology side, on the spacecraft instrumentation side. What
we have missing in this country, however—we have the funding
to go and talk to the Chinese—is we have no money to start
initial programme developments with the Chinese, and that would
be part of the CSR bid. Certainly the Chinese now are offering
a lot of support to our programme; they are offering technology
that we do not have access to; we are offering to share unclassified
technology with them, and those discussions, led by the previous
Minister (and I am sure the current Minister will take over) have
gone extremely well, and we are just about to have a second set
of joint meetings with the Chinese. It is looking, I must say,
extremely promising.
Q229 Chairman: So we are not putting
off those avenues.
Professor Holdaway: No, absolutely
not. Nor with the Indians, nor, in fact, with any other country.
We currently work in my own laboratory with 34 different countries.
Q230 Chairman: It would be very useful
to have a note on what negotiations you have with which countries,
so we can include it in our overall report.
Professor Holdaway: Yes, we will
provide that.
Chairman: On that note, can I thank Professor
Mason, Professor Holdaway and Air Vice-Marshal Moran very much
indeed for the session. I am sorry we have gone through it at
a pace but we are very grateful to you, and thanks to the Committee
for being so patient.
| 
