Examination of Witnesses (Questions 540-559)
TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY
BOARD
20 NOVEMBER 2008
Q540 Miss Kirkbride: So the Department
of Health produces its spec. You could argue that the Department
of Health could have just put it on its website and companies
could have come forward with an idea. You then go out and pick
the person who is going to deliver this technology and give them
a grant to do it. Is that right? Or do you give a few people a
grant for it and see which one comes up with the best idea?
Mr Bott: We advertise the challenge
to the community and we work very hard to get out to the non-usual
suspects because, as I said earlier, some of the most innovative
ideas come in from out of field. Then we invite them to submit
an application which we have independently assessed for technological
grounds and business appropriateness. We have our own selection
criteria that our governing board has given us. We actually then
rank order them and we fund them until we run out of money.
Q541 Miss Kirkbride: Do you give
a grant to maybe five companies all seeking to do the same?
Mr Bott: Yes.
Mr Gray: In presenting a particular
challenge the key thing is drawing different parts of the community
together to try to identify the potential solutions and the opportunities
that are out there. Once we do that then we would put in place
formal competitions for which different collaborative ventures
can bid. There are some quite unusual collaborations and some
of the most successful ones are where we have brought together
businesses that previously had not been talking to each other.
I cite the example of electronics and sensors companies that are
suddenly entering into partnerships with bioscience type companies
in this sort of territory. The competition itself encourages companies
to come together and bid and we then go through a process of assessing
submissions to a competition and making decisions in terms of
who we grant those offers to.
Q542 Miss Kirkbride: Who awards the
contract?
Mr Gray: Quite specifically the
Technology Strategy Board puts in place contracts with collaborations,
collaborations that could go to business and business and academic
partnerships.
Q543 Chairman: You took the detection
of infectious agents, this is a sixth innovation platform, is
it? This is one of the five you said you would roll out in the
next three years.
Mr Gray: Yes, that is correct.
We said we would have 10 by the end of this spending review period.
Q544 Chairman: Do these platforms
have different levels of funding attached to them or do they evolve
over time?
Mr Gray: In absolute terms the
innovation platform is a framework rather than a specific budget
allocation. A very good example is low carbon vehicles which is
an innovation platform where one of our key roles has been to
facilitate and bring together funding from different sources.
The low carbon vehicle innovation platform has actually pulled
together £100 million of public sector funding from across
four or five different funding sources. In terms of ranking, the
important message is that it is a framework under which you can
hang a number of different initiatives. Some of them are funding,
some of them are not funding; it comes back to the issue of regulation,
it comes back to the issue of procurement and standards. The innovation
platform is a framework under which you hang a number of different
initiatives.
Q545 Mr Binley: I want to clarify
your budget because, as I understand it, your budget has a minimum
from 2008 to 2011 of £711 million plus aligned funding from
RDAs of £180million and at least £120 million from research
councils. Can you clarify that for me and do you have any more
money that is within your gift, or does that collate the whole
of your funding together succinctly?
Mr Gray: Can I turn to Graham
Hutchins to provide clarification on the numbers themselves?
Mr Hutchins: Yes, you are correct.
The £711 million is the grant in aid that comes from government
via DIUS, our sponsoring department and £180 million comes
from the regional development agencies and £120 million from
the research councils.
Q546 Mr Binley: Is there anything
else at all? So your money is within that framework.
Mr Gray: I would come back to
the question that one of the roles we play is in terms of facilitating
and bringing together other public sector funding sources. The
very clear answer to your question is that our budget is £711
million plus £180 million plus £120 million, but one
of the key objectives we have and one of the key benefits—things
like the innovation platform approach—is actually that we
can draw in funding from other sources and although that budget
is not necessarily Technology Strategy Board funding in its own
right we are taking a leadership role in terms of how that money
is being distributed.
Q547 Mr Binley: Give me a handle
on how much you gather together for that specific purpose then
in the three years that we are talking about.
Mr Hutchins: Realistically we
have leveraged, specifically on the low carbon vehicle project
innovation platform there is a leverage of funds of—
Q548 Chairman: Rather than guess
do you want to write to us?
Mr Bott: We have had £20
million out of the Department of Transport but the money that
we have had out of the RDAs is out of that aligned funding.
Mr Gray: I will provide a written
response to that question.
Q549 Mr Wright: As well as the RDA
funding could you also give us a breakdown in terms of which each
RDA provides for. Is it based on a percentage of their income,
is it based on a percentage of the work that you actually do?
How do you come to the £180 million from the RDA?
Mr Gray: Again can I provide a
written response to that?
Mr Wright: Thank you, that would be very
helpful.
Q550 Miss Kirkbride: How do you decide
which research councils are funded?
Mr Gray: One of the evolutions
of the Technology Strategy Board is that it has moved away from
what was a very traditional territory of technology links with
just one research council which was EPSRC to a situation where
we now have relationships with all seven research councils. If
you look at the innovation agenda then quite often the arts and
humanities and the social side of things and behavioural side
of things is as important in terms of implementation of an innovation
idea as some of the pure physical technologies. So we have £120
million worth of aligned funding with the research councils. This
is an area where we actually have very specific alignment targets
with each of the seven research councils. I have regular meetings
with the chief executives of the research councils to share information
about what their priorities are in the pure science end of the
spectrum and what our priorities are in the exploitation end of
the spectrum. We work together to see those areas where they can
contribute to some of our programmes or perhaps where we can contribute
to some of theirs. We work across all seven research councils
and that again is a very big departure from the situation of some
18 or 24 months ago.
Q551 Miss Kirkbride: Can you give
me an example where what the humanities and arts research councils
are doing is as important as the science and technology base in
the UK from your point of view?
Mr Gray: If you take a sector
like the creative industries, the creative industries is very
much a sector where the UK is establishing a very significant
world leadership role in a number of different areas and they
look at things like the application of serious games into a business
type environment. We have been doing work with the Arts and Humanities
Research Council around that whole creative industries arena.
We have established a creative industries knowledge transfer network
and the Arts and Humanities Research Council is playing in that
space so are working on that together. We had a creative industries
collaborative R&D call late last year. The Arts and Humanities
Research Council helped influence and shape some of the very specific
competitions that we ran. We ran those together in a joint way.
It is in those kinds of territories that AHRC has played a very
strong role and there is a good strong relationship between us.
Q552 Miss Kirkbride: Do you take
a view on skills or is that not part of your remit?
Mr Gray: Skills is something which
is not part of our objectives in an absolute sense. There are
a lot of other bodies responsible for the skills agenda itself
but we have a role to play in two different respects. There are
a number of different areas, the knowledge transfer partnership
scheme, for example, is one way in which we participate in the
skills agenda. The knowledge transfer partnership scheme is one
of the UK's leading graduate recruitment schemes. As part of that
scheme we are playing in the area of managerial development, project
management development and some of the collaboration skills. The
associates that sign up to the knowledge transfer partnership
scheme are developing skills in new areas. The other area is in
terms of the technology for tomorrow and working with the Sector
Skills Councils. If you look at subjects like plastic electronics
or something which will require completely different technology
skills tomorrow to those that we have had in the past, one of
our key roles is working to make sure that people understand what
the skills needs for tomorrow are. As an organisation we do not
have a skills objective per se; that is not part of our
remit. We have an influencing role and I would just cite those
two specific examples in areas where we have strong links into
the skills agenda.
Q553 Miss Kirkbride: At what level
do you do that, given that there has been a very significant drop
recently of stem cell students going into universities from school?
What level are you pitching your thing at because part of the
problem is lack of supply?
Mr Gray: Again in specific terms
if you look at relationships with Sector Skill Councils for example
we recently had discussions with Semta on some of the science
skills requirements. We have pretty regular conversations with
universities and HE institutes. I, personally, have conversations
with vice chancellors to try and look at how we can make linkages
in that regard. I would say from a structural point of view, again
as an organisation, we are not a skills agency; we do not have
a specific objective relating to the skills agenda. It is through
networking and through the contacts we have with the HE community
with the skills sector councils and through the industry trade
bodies as well that we make those linkages between skills and
technology.
Q554 Miss Kirkbride: What are you
doing about the nuclear industry?
Mr Gray: From a nuclear point
of view we have been in discussion with a number of science and
industry councils. The North West in particular is looking at
instigating a review in terms of the R&D area as to what the
capabilities here in the UK are and what the gaps are and what
role perhaps the Technology Strategy Board can play in that sector
either from an underpinning technology point of view (materials)
or from things like a waste management point of view. There are
a number of areas. To date we are involved on the fringes in one
or two underpinning technology areas but what we are planning
to do is a review to see how we can contribute in that space.
Q555 Miss Kirkbride: Is that not
a bit urgent? You have been going for a year, you have known they
are going to build nuclear power stations in that timescale; there
is a big demand from key industries from the UK. It is our future
and we know we are really short on all fronts whether it is technology
or skills. You have been around for a year and it has not been
part of your fundamental document.
Mr Gray: I would just restate
that it is something we are planning to do and we are going to
do.
Q556 Chairman: I am a bit confused
about how you take your position on what research facilities you
fund. I am not quite sure how you do that and particularly what
the relationship is with the RDAs in this area. Are you just again
treading on the toes of the RDAs and replicating what is being
done by other people? How do you make these decisions?
Mr Gray: In terms of relationships
on facilities, there tends to be a reasonably good split. In terms
of the primary role that the Technology Strategy Board plays in
facilities is actually support to businesses and projects within
facilities rather than support to the facilities itself. If you
look at something like Daresbury or you look at something like
the Babraham Institute in Cambridge or you look at Ansty Park
or something like that, then our contribution would be primarily
through innovation projects with businesses rather than in the
facilities themselves.
Q557 Chairman: You would be selecting
those businesses on the basis of open competition.
Mr Gray: Absolutely.
Q558 Mr Weir: One of things you are
involved in I believe is the development of clusters. Can you
tell us what factors contribute to the success of a cluster? Do
you have any role in coordinating the development of clusters
to prevent duplication between different regions?
Mr Gray: The whole role of clusters
is something that is being looked at in a very broad sense at
the moment. From my perspective it comes back to some of the issues
we talked about in terms of innovation climate, about networks,
about creating environments where small businesses can get together,
share ideas; it is about building communities. I believe the relevance
of clusters in the UK is hugely important. From a perspective
of what role do we play, coming back a little bit to the question
about facilities, our support tends to be in terms of projects,
in businesses that are in clusters. I have been round and visited
a number of these clusters and there are some common themes. There
are common themes about creation of space, about social networking,
about the exchange of information. If you look at some of the
great cluster models in the US again it is that socialising technology,
socialising and innovation culture and climate. That is the kind
of thing that we have to do. I think in that innovation climate
space we can play a very important role in creating successful
clusters.
Q559 Mr Weir: I do not know the answer
to the question about the development of duplication. You can
have a cluster developing in a university in the Midlands and
perhaps another one developing at a university in the south, if
they are doing the same thing do you have any role in bringing
them together and creating one cluster instead of two competing
clusters?
Mr Gray: Yes, we do.
| 
