Examination of Witnesses (Questions 280
- 296)
MONDAY 5 MARCH 2007
PROFESSOR SIR
DAVID KING
Q280 Mr Wright: You say you try to
pull them together. For instance, in terms of the science aspects
of UK trade policy, how is that co-ordinated to any different
bodies?
Professor Sir David King: I think,
for example, the Year of Science in Brazil is going to bring together
the whole science and innovation agenda including all of those
bodies you are referring to.
Q281 Mr Wright: Who would take the
lead? Would you take the lead on that?
Professor Sir David King: I take
the lead in chairing the body but, of course, then UK Trade and
Investment will develop its own agenda alongside this bigger agenda
that we are developing together.
Q282 Chairman: I have just been handed
something by the Clerk which draws my attention to the March 2006
Science Innovation Investment Framework 2014, next steps, outlining
a £9 million UKTI programme. Are you actively involved in
advising them, assisting and developing that programme?
Professor Sir David King: I would
say minimally. I am fully aware of it, and it is certainly reported
through the Global Science and Innovation Forum, but my engagement
is not direct.
Q283 Chairman: That is more to attract
investment in R&D to the UK rather than to promote collaboration?
Is that the distinction?
Professor Sir David King: Yes.
Chairman: I am sorry to have interrupted.
Q284 Mr Wright: Going on to the interplay
between the Global Science and Innovation Forum (GSIF), the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office's Science and Innovation network and the
UKTI sectoral and country staff, can you tell us how they interplay
together?
Professor Sir David King: The
most important part of that, and this is my personal view, would
be the Science and Innovation network. This is the network of
around a hundred people in our embassies around the world which,
by the way, has doubled in my tenure, so I am very pleased that
we have raised the profile in our embassies around the world.
Many of these people are locally employed, by the way, so they
really understand the local system. We have a very good capability
of supporting visitors to each of those countries, and I hope
they provided you with some support on your visit, and these are
people who have really become very knowledgeable about the country
they are serving. I think as the single most important factor
I would pick out the Science and Innovation network. I meet the
entire network team once a year here in London, so we get them
together and information flows into those people involved in the
network.
Q285 Mr Wright: Your organisation,
the GSIF, identified Brazil as an initial priority country on
the "influence axis", but not on research or innovation,
unlike India and China, for instance, nor notably on development.
What does the "influence" mean in that particular context,
and what does the GSIF hope to achieve through focusing on influencing
Brazil?
Professor Sir David King: Influence
is what I have been describing as strategy where it is in the
strategic interests of Britain to develop closer interests with
the country. So we are back to the discussion in G8 plus 5, Brazil
being one of the five members, around African development and
climate change, so one of the outcomes was the bio-ethanol project
with southern Africa, and Brazil met both agenda items on climate
change and African development.
Q286 Mr Wright: So what you are saying
is that is where the influence was in terms of the direct output,
in terms of the bio-ethanol?
Professor Sir David King: Yes.
Q287 Mr Wright: Much of the most
productive "innovation" for businesses comes from development
in business procedures or use of IT, not from scientific research.
Does the "I" in OSI encompass this, or is it just a
scientific breakthrough? Who supports "innovation" under
the wider definition?
Professor Sir David King: There
is an innovation team and the innovation team within the Office
of Science and Innovation is by far the biggest team, and that
team is focused directly around the agenda you have just spelt
out, so it is not just focusing on the science and innovation
agenda. I suppose the Technology Strategy Board has to include
that, although I would have to say the Technology Strategy Board
is really rather looking at strengthening the manufacturing industry
base out of the high added value potential from our science base.
But behind your question, I think, is another very interesting
question which is that our manufacturing base is now roughly one
sixth of our economy—it is still growing but is being dominated
by the services sector—and there is a very real question
as to whether we focus enough on delivering strength into the
services sector in terms of innovation, IT, research, et cetera,
and I am looking at that.
Q288 Mr Wright: And your indication
would be that we do not invest enough in that aspect?
Professor Sir David King: Yes.
This is not a query coming to me from the services sector and
it may seem strange to point to a sector which is so dynamic,
but it does seem to me that our universities and our R&D effort
needs to have a good look at this very large part of our economy
to see how it can better serve.
Chairman: My colleagues on the Committee
do not know this but this is an issue I am hoping to persuade
and encourage them to look at in more detail in a future inquiry.
Q289 Mr Wright: You mentioned a lot
about strategy. Following the October 2006 strategy document has
GSIF developed implementation plans yet? Also, what is planned
for 2007-08, in particular for Brazil but also generally?
Professor Sir David King: Well,
for Brazil we have the Year of Science and Innovation and this
is very much going to determine the agenda as we move forward
in time. At the moment we are simply committing that £50,000
to the networking budget from which we will then establish how
we take it forward. Just by way of explaining that, if UK Trade
and Investment will be developing its own strengths out of this
Year of Science, within the Office of Science and Innovation we
would therefore be looking separately at questions of scientific
networking. The scientific networking is most successfully developed
by direct engagement of our research councils and the research
councils have the science budget of the order of £3.4 billion
at the moment—and I have already deducted the £100
million that your Chairman referred to!—so the research
councils have that annual budget and, quite clearly, engaging
top scientists through that budget is an in-depth way of getting
involved with scientists from abroad. Research Councils UK is
now establishing a building in China, for example, to foster that
process, so it would be when we have raised the profile to the
ultimate level that RCUK would take that step.
Q290 Chairman: I do get a bit bewildered
sometimes when looking at the number of acronyms and organisations
that are involved—
Professor Sir David King: So do
I, Chairman!
Q291 Chairman: —and I am not
entirely sure what your involvement is with the Technology Partnership
Initiative, which I believe looks to "facilitate the transfer
of UK environmental technology and expertise to developing and
rapidly industrialising countries (including Brazil) on a commercial
basis". Is this something that has crossed your orbit?
Professor Sir David King: I would
have to be honest and say "Pass".
Q292 Chairman: I find that very encouraging,
to be honest.
Professor Sir David King: I do
know about technology partnerships but in relation to Brazil—
Q293 Chairman: My ignorance is perhaps
excusable; that is why I say that. Another point that worries
me slightly more, perhaps, is that I touched earlier on a question
about UKTI initiatives with R&D and so on, and we are doing
a separate inquiry into UKTI which we have recently concluded,
but they are developing a sector strategy on life sciences, as
they have got with the financial services sector, for example.
Have you had any involvement with that?
Professor Sir David King: No direct
involvement. That does not mean my office has not.
Q294 Chairman: No, exactly, and a
nod behind suggests your office has had an involvement and a further
nod reassures me that that interpretation is correct, so perhaps
a note from you on this would be helpful because joined-up government
is the flavour of the day.
Professor Sir David King: Certainly.
I would be delighted to send a note.
Q295 Chairman: Sir David, it has
been a small, intimate session in a large cavernous room but we
have covered a lot of ground very quickly because of the economy
of your answers, which is a compliment not a criticism. So is
there anything you would like to say by way of conclusion about
the relationship with Brazil which we perhaps have not covered
with our questions?
Professor Sir David King: I think
I would want to conclude by saying that I do see Brazil as a very
significant opportunity. I would want to leave on a positive note
which is to say that, given the opportunity that Brazil represents—not
only in terms of its resources and in terms of its strategic importance
to us but also in terms of the science base that it offers—I
very much hope that our degree of collaboration and interaction
with Brazil will increase substantially through the Year of Science
that we are entering.
Q296 Chairman: And I hope the hunger
which you have not yet been able to assess will be demonstrated
by the end of the year and continue thereafter. Sir David, you
have brought our whole inquiry on Mercosur and Brazil to a conclusion
this afternoon, and we are very grateful to you. We may see you
again on other subjects in the future, I trust.
Professor Sir David King: Thank
you. Can I offer some numbers against the figures I gave earlier,
just to save us sending you a note, on the collaborative papers?
I have the figures in front of me. For Brazilian scientists with
United States' scientists it is 39%, and I think I said 40% earlier
on; with French scientists it is 13.8%, that is the number two;
and with British scientists it is 12.8%, so in terms of Europe
we are doing rather well.
Chairman: I am always glad to hear that,
Sir David! Thank you very much indeed.
| 
