Appendix: Government response
1. The Government welcomes the report of the Select
Committee's inquiry into the funding of science and discovery
centres.
2. This response, as was the case with the initial
memorandum submitted to the inquiry, has been jointly prepared
by the three Departments with an interest in this area, namely
the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS),
Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) and the Department
for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). Her Majesty's Revenue and
Customs (HMRC) and Communities and Local Government (CLG) have
addressed the recommendations relating to VAT and business rates
relief specifically.
3. The Government acknowledges that science and discovery
centres provide a forum for communicating and presenting scientific
knowledge and debate on issues to children, families and the wider
community, often in an interactive, fun and informal environment
which can enhance the individual's formal learning experiences
and capture young people's imaginations. As such, they are one
group amongst many diverse organizations which have the potential
to have an impact on the nation's overall scientific literacy.
4. DIUS and DCSF would particularly draw attention
to the £750,000 that they are providing to Ecsite-UK between
November 2006 and March 2008, which had been specifically provided
with the aim that Ecsite should work with the network to enhance
its financial sustainability.
5. The Government also welcomes the recommendations
directed at the science centres themselves (3, 5, and 12). The
establishment of Ecsite-UK was initially supported on the basis
that Ecsite could act as a strong co-ordinating voice for the
network and enable its members to achieve greater financial sustainability.
The need for collaboration and sharing of best practice within
the sector is also endorsed, and the Government would encourage
all centres to assess how they can develop and build on existing
expertise in this area to strengthen not only their own financial
position, but also the quality and scope of their overall offering
to their customers.
6. In terms of the recommendation relating to diversity
of funding, the Government again endorses this recommendation,
for example, by encouraging a greater focus on sponsorships and
linkages.
7. Finally, the opportunity to respond to the Committee's
report comes at a particularly apposite time. Since the Select
Committee hearing in July 2007, DIUS has embarked on a review
and refresh of its existing Science and Society vision, and the
approach which the Department proposes to take forward can be
seen as one element as it maps out the best way forward to help
it meet its goals into the future.
Notes on Conclusions and Recommendations
Science Centres and Museums
Recommendation 2: We recommend that the Government
review the Museum Accreditation Scheme with a view to creating
a funding stream for educational and public engagement programmes
to which science centres could apply.
8. The Government does not accept the premise on
which this recommendation is based. Museums exist because of their
collections and it is the possession of a collection that distinguishes
a museum from another type of visitor attraction. The collection
is at the heart of all the activities a museum undertakes. The
value to museums of the Museum Accreditation Scheme is that it
takes a holistic view of an organisation.
9. Accreditation is a nationally agreed scheme for
museums to demonstrate they are achieving minimum standards in
four key areas of museum management and the collection is at the
core of these areas. The standard requires museums to have an
acceptable constitution and management arrangements, hold collections
in trust for society, make collections accessible through displays
and meet agreed minimum standards of collections management and
care. Education activity is the focus of only one limited element
within a section on wider user services and the standard indicates
that the collection is integral to this type of work. The Museum
Accreditation Scheme is voluntary and an accredited museum is
one which meets the agreed standards. Currently, of the estimated
2,000 museums in England 1,460 are accredited. The Scheme is not
linked directly to any funding stream. Accreditation does not
automatically ensure core or additional funding for museums from
any source.
10. The Museum Accreditation Scheme is managed by
the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), which is an
NDPB with strategic responsibilities for the museum sector. The
Scheme was set up to address a sector wide need to create and
promote minimum standards to benefit collections and users. DCMS
believes it has been successful in achieving this aim. DCMS operates
in accordance with the arms-length principle and believes the
MLA is best placed to determine priorities for the sector.
MONITORING EFFECTIVENESS
Recommendation 4: We urge the Government to take
a lead and commission independent research to assess what role
science centres and other factors play in encouraging young people
to pursue STEM careers and how effectively science centres influence
public discussion and perception of science issues. A number of
institutions with interests in the promotion of STEM subjects
and public engagement might be willing to co-fund such a project
and we recommend that the Government identify and approach likely
parties to initiate joint commissioning of research into science
centres.
11. This recommendation will be addressed in a number
of ways, some of which will build on existing work already being
undertaken.
12. DIUS will commission research early in 2008,
in consultation with both DCSF and DCMS, to establish how effective
science centres are compared to other delivery agents at helping
Government to meet both its STEM and public engagement goals.
This research will take, as its starting point, the recognition
that there is a scarce and finite public resource available to
help the Government meet its goals in this area, and that that
resource should be directed to garner maximum potential impact
for that expenditure.
13. This research will include economic analysis
of a variety of the Government's delivery partners and mechanisms
in the STEM area, and it is expected that individual science centres
will co-operate by responding to information requests from the
researchers. The tendering process will commence shortly after
submission of this response to the Committee, early in 2008.
14. The Government notes the Committee's view that
research should be co-funded by partners with an interest in this
area. Whilst it would not be appropriate to seek co-funding from
any partner with a potential degree of self-interest, the Government
will explore the potential for other partnerships.
15. The DfES/DTI STEM Programme Report, published
in 2006, sets out the Government's proposals for bringing greater
coherence and co-ordination in the STEM enhancement and enrichment
activities available. DCSF and DIUS are taking this forward and,
as part of the commitment to evaluate the STEM programme actions,
are already planning to look at the impact of enhancement and
enrichment activity across a range of factors including career
choices. In 2008, the two Departments will work to encourage external
partners to sign up to evaluating STEM projects that do not receive
Government funding - this could include the science centres. The
two Departments will work closely together to develop a strong
evidence base for assessing the role of science and discovery
centres in relation to both STEM and public engagement.
16. The Ecsite-UK project currently being funded
by DIUS and DCSF has uncovered serious gaps in knowledge about
the impact of science centres per se, made more difficult by the
disparate nature of the type of centres which are grouped together
under the heading "science and discovery centres".
17. The time which it will take to answer the necessary
questions about the relative effectiveness of various approaches
to promoting STEM will depend crucially on the availability of
relevant data. This will be an early task for the researcher appointed,
but the timetable could be extended if new longitudinal data needs
to be gathered.
CO-ORDINATION
Recommendation 7: We recommend that responsibility
for science centres be formally written into the Minister's portfolio.
However, we recognise that input from DCSF and DCMS is necessary
and the Minister for Science and Innovation should ensure that
decisions and assessments are co-ordinated between all three Departments.
18. The Department for Innovation, Universities and
Skills should act as first point of contact and, in effect, policy
lead in relation to issues on science centres, given its overall
responsibility for science policy within Government. As has been
the case to date, DCSF and DCMS will continue to be included and
involved in policy decisions dependent on the requirement of the
relevant policy environment. This is particularly relevant in
the response to recommendations 4 and 8. Officials will continue
to collaborate as appropriate.
19. However, it should be made clear that science
centres are independent organisations, established outside of
Government, and it would not be appropriate for any part of Government
to take responsibility for them in the sense that Ministers take
overall responsibility for the actions of Government Departments
and Agencies.
FUNDING OPTIONS
Recommendation 8: We agree that a Government commitment
to long-term revenue support for science centres should not be
made unless independent evidence of effectiveness is obtained.
If independent research, which we hope the Government will commission
as a matter of priority, does confirm that science centres make
a positive contribution to science education, the promotion of
STEM careers and public engagement, then we expect the Government
to review its policy on long-term funding for science centres
along similar lines to museums and galleries. We recognise that
there may be an issue in whether the differential admission prices
between museums and science centres act against Government policy
of encouraging early engagement of pupils in STEM subjects and
we recommend that this be part of the review.
20. To ensure rigour, validity and robustness of
the outcome of the research discussed in the response to recommendation
4, the Government would not wish to prejudge or pre-empt its outcome.
21. In relation to the second half of this recommendation,
the vast majority of museums in England are funded either by local
authorities or are independent charities and the policy on admission
prices for these museums is a matter for the relevant Council,
its councillors and the local community or the trustees of the
organisation, respectively. Only a very small number of museums
are funded directly by central Government. The free admission
policy introduced by the Government saw the reintroduction of
free access for all visitors at nine of the fourteen national
museums and galleries sponsored by DCMS in December 2001. As part
of its ongoing research agenda the Museums Libraries and Archives
Council (MLA) monitors trends in visits to all museums in order
to assess the impact of free entry. Surveys by Visit Britain and
other MLA funded research find that attendance to all museums
has grown over this period, while other sorts of attractions have
similarly seen an increase in visitor numbers. The cost of admission
by itself is not the sole determinant of decisions as to whether
or not to visit particular attractions, and it may prove misleading
to compare admissions policies for science centres against those
for museums alone. Therefore, the issue of pricing policy will
not be an issue for consideration in the research to be commissioned
by DIUS.
Recommendation 9: It is vital that existing science
centres do not disappear before the results of research on their
effectiveness is forthcoming. Therefore, we recommend that the
Government make available limited, competitively-awarded, short-term
funding to support those science centres that are struggling financially.
Criteria for selection should be devised in consultation with
the science centre community, including funders and other partners,
and should be clearly set out by the Government. (Paragraph 44)
22. The Government's position has been and remains
that funding failing institutions does not represent a good use
of public money. A science centre failing in financial terms could
not be an effective delivery agent or Government partner. Given
that financial resources are limited, the Government's view is
that the research on the relative contribution of science centres
to the STEM agenda needs to be undertaken before further funding
to this sector is considered. The £750,000 funding made available
by DIUS and DCSF to help Ecsite-UK in its current project was
precisely designed to help the network achieve greater levels
of financial sustainability.
Recommendation 10: We recommend that the Government
give serious consideration to a reduced rate of VAT of 5% on admission
fees to science and other educational centres, as permitted under
Article 98 of the EU Council Directive 2006/112/EC, subject to
independent research verifying the effectiveness of science centres
in achieving Government policy objectives.
23. The availability of VAT reduced rates is governed
by the European VAT agreements signed by successive Governments.
These agreements allow a reduced VAT rate of 5 per cent to be
applied to "admissions to shows, theatres, circuses, fairs,
amusement parks, concerts, museums, zoos, cinemas, exhibitions
and similar cultural events and facilities," where these
supplies are not covered by the VAT exemption for cultural services.
While all taxes are kept under review, where available under EU
VAT agreements, reduced rates of VAT are used sparingly, and only
when they provide the best-targeted and most cost-effective support
for Government objectives and priorities.
Recommendation 11: We urge all local authorities
to offer 100% business rates relief to science centres
24. This is a matter for individual local authorities,
not central Government.
January 2008
| 
