Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)
SIR LESZEK
BORYSIEWICZ, DR
MARK WALPORT,
PROFESSOR MALCOLM
GRANT, AND
MRS LYNN
ROBB
17 DECEMBER 2007
Q60 Dr Iddon: How many are at the
Mill Hill site, Sir Leszek?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: About
700.
Q61 Dr Iddon: So there will be an
expansion if you say the British Library site can house 1500.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: It is
very dependent on how the proposed building is configured, which
is in turn dependent on the nature of the science that we undertake.
For example, the size of animal facilities, the opportunity for
UCL staff who would also be coming into this area would need to
be very carefully considered, so just taking the simple numbers
against gross areas is the appropriate measure that we should
be using at this point. We have to take a step back and think
precisely what the science is that we want to do, what are the
right circumstances to provide the physical infrastructure and
then ensuring that we get the best value for money in terms of
the site.
Q62 Dr Iddon: Is it your intention
to vacate the Mill Hill site completely, including the animal
laboratories that are there too at the moment?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: The decision
that Council has taken remains at the present time the decision
that has been ratified again by Council, that we do not intend
to remain on the Mill Hill site beyond the development of this
new site.
Q63 Dr Iddon: So the preference is
to move the animal laboratories into central London.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: That will
certainly be being considered, I am sure, by Sir Paul Nurse in
relationship to this area. Will animal facilities be required
on a site of this sort? Any site that is actually undertaking
biomedical research is going to require animal facilities on such
a site and there are other sites in central London which already
have animal facilities to enable the science to go forward. The
scale and size of that particular development is something that
Sir Paul Nurse's committee will have to consider.
Q64 Dr Iddon: Have you considered
the intimidation that the staff who are building the institute
and occupying the institute eventually will get from the animal
rights activists, who have not gone away?
Dr Walport: May I just comment
on that because actually the Government has taken an extremely
strong view on animal rights activists. They are operating outside
the law and this is a form of terrorism, and it is good news that
the Government and Parliament in general have taken such a strong
stance on this, which I hope this Committee supports.
Q65 Dr Iddon: We have had an almost
weekly demonstration, very weak at the moment, up at Mill Hill,
I gather, but in the past we have had quite strong demonstrations
outside the Mill Hill facilities. I agree with what Mark has said,
but nevertheless these are pretty ruthless people and moving into
central London just, in my book, makes it easier for them to demonstrate.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: I would
reiterate that to my knowledge there are many sites in central
London where they could demonstrate in the same way. Clearly,
we would take guidance from the security and other services in
relationship to this, and this will be part of the consideration
we will have to take, but the primary consideration at this point
for me is really what is going to be required to deliver the very
best science that we envisage.
Q66 Dr Iddon: On this footprint,
Sir Leszek, do you think you will have room for future expansion
as new ideas are evolved?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: I believe
we will, but we will have to watch this very carefully because,
again, the scope and scale of that expansion as to filling the
site as of day one is something that has to be very carefully
considered. My own view again is that we are dealing with a timeframe
that we have to make allowance for in terms of the changing nature
of the science. Secondly, we have to ensure that whatever facility
is actually constructed is a very flexible facility to be able
to accommodate changes in science and, thirdly, we have to consider
very carefully what we already have that is of world class quality
that Sir Paul Nurse's committee may want to move to that site.
It is a balance between those three that I do not think I can
strike that balance here and now, it is something that I can only
strike with the advice that that committee is going to be able
to give me.
Dr Walport: Science is something
that evolves, so it is not a question of continuous expansion
in a sense. If you look at the Sanger Institute, which is the
institute that the Wellcome Trust largely funds, that started
as an institute that was there to sequence the human genome and
then subsequently other genomes. If you go there now, which you
are very welcome to do, you would find that what that institute
is now doing is working to exploit that genome sequence by looking
at genetic variation, bringing it to patient populations, and
every scientific institution if it is being kept on its toes—which
it should be—is actually going to do different science at
different periods.
Q67 Dr Gibson: But that is on a greenfield
site, is it not? The Sanger Institute is on a greenfield site,
it is well outside Cambridge.
Dr Walport: Yes, it is, and you
can argue that that is a limitation because it does not have the
same ready communications that this site would have.
Q68 Dr Gibson: Would you move that
into Cambridge, next door to Addenbrooke's?
Dr Walport: The Sanger Institute
is doing very well at the moment.
Q69 Dr Iddon: Could I look at the
other more important bio-security issue and that is category 3
or category 4 containment. My understanding is that the original
plans for the Temperance site put in place a category 3 facility
which was capable, I think, of handling avian flu, but in terms
of this being one of the leading medical research centres in the
world, would it not be better to gear yourselves up for the worst
eventuality of handling category 4?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: I am sorry,
but I would defer that very much to Sir Paul Nurse's committee
because that is precisely the kind of question that he is going
to have to address in the context of what is going to be undertaken
on this site, so it would be wrong for me to actually prejudice
the judgment that his group are likely to make in this regard.
They will be proffering us advice on that area and we will be
considering that advice very carefully.
Q70 Dr Iddon: There is still room
to put a category 4 facility in there.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: It would
have to be one of the considerations; I do not want to lock off
that as a possibility from the advice that they may actually be
able to give us, but having received that advice, as I have said
before, we would certainly need to look at the security issues
and the necessity for the build that would actually be required
to deliver that safely and effectively at this location.
Q71 Dr Iddon: Can we control extremely
dangerous pathogens in a major city?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: Yes, I
believe we can. There are other locations, both within London
and other major cities, that house major pathogens that are being
very effectively monitored and controlled in this regard.
Q72 Dr Iddon: I am glad you said
that because obviously that is a very important consideration.
Turning now to your relationships currently with Camden Council,
this site, the British Library site, was originally to be a mixed
development of housing and community facilities. Those facilities
are desperately needed in the Camden area; indeed, the whole of
that area is undergoing regeneration at the moment, and in order
to regenerate you need people living in the regenerated areas.
Have you been in consultation with Camden Council to see whether
they are going to press that mixed development or whether they
are going to be prepared to relinquish the site for what Des has
called the St Pancras Institute?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: First
and foremost let me just say that we have not been in direct contact
with Camden Council, it would have been wrong for us to be so
while we were actually bidding for this particular site. What
we will be looking at is that this site is going to be very full
if we are to achieve the sorts of levels of occupancy that I have
actually dealt with, so I do not believe that we are going to
have much opportunity to provide additional housing on this particular
site. Maybe what I would like to do is pass this over also to
Professor Grant who has been in contact with Camden during these
times.
Professor Grant: We operate, obviously,
within Camden. We are the largest employer within Camden and we
have a very good operating relationship with the council. The
site was the subject of a planning brief published in 2003 which
did indeed indicate a desire on the part of Camden to have housing
on the site as part of a mixed use development and 50 per cent
of that is affordable housing. The planning brief was then accompanied
by the adoption in 2006 of the unitary development plan for Camden
and in that plan there is reference to facilities being provided
by the public sector and paid for by public money and involving
universities, in which it is indicated that the affordable housing
requirements would be looked at perhaps in a different way with
greater flexibility. We understand from our initial relationships
with Camden that they will wish, of course, to try to secure housing
and affordable housing in the borough; that is a primary ambition
for any inner London council, but that at the same time they recognise
the sheer importance of being able to encourage within their area
a world-class biomedical research operation, so we will, I think,
wish to have discussions with them to try to see how best we can
achieve both of those aims, but I have to say, for all the reasons
that Leszek has just indicated, this is very early times. We did
not want to broach these discussions with them when we were in
the process of buying the land because that would have been thought
to be unfair to other potential bidders for the land. We would
have been seen to be canvassing which we did not want to do.
Q73 Dr Turner: Have you offered them
the NTH site for housing?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: No, we
have not offered it because we have not been in contact with Camden
to have those levels of discussion so we could not conceivably
have offered them any alternative site.
Q74 Dr Gibson: How much would it
cost to buy that land, is your estimate?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: Which
land?
Q75 Dr Gibson: The British Library
site.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: It was
£85 million.
Q76 Dr Gibson: Did you beat them
down from £100 million?
Dr Walport: No. We made them an
offer which they accepted.
Q77 Chairman: In terms of the Temperance
Hospital site, does that become part of the overall bargaining
with Camden? That is the question we would like to put.
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: At the
present time what can I say in terms of the MRC? If we were to
go ahead with this particular development then clearly the Temperance
Hospital site is above the requirements of the MRC and we would
be looking to dispose of that site in due course, but that is
as far as I can take it at this point.
Q78 Graham Stringer: I understand
the current estimate of the total cost of this project is £500
million. What is the breakdown between the partners of that figure?
First of all, is that figure accurate?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: It is
a broad figure at the present time that is being used by many
in terms of the area and it is a reasonably accurate figure overall
but it does have some caveats. It does not have, for example,
the land costs built into those sorts of numbers. The current
breakdown, I think, is that the MRC are looking at round about
£260 million overall for that budget, and I think it is £150
million for Cancer Research UK and £100 million for the Wellcome
Trust.
Professor Grant: And £46
million for UCL.
Q79 Graham Stringer: Of the MRC contribution
how much is to be met by a grant from the Large Facilities Capital
Fund?
Sir Leszek Borysiewicz: At the
present time we are in discussion with DIUS as to what would be
the appropriate sum that we would come forward for from the Large
Facilities Capital Fund. We certainly expect that to be quite
a large bid at this stage, certainly in the order of £180
million to £200 million, but it would be for a bid that would
be for expenditure outside the current CSR because of some of
the other calls that are there.
| 
