6 CONCLUSIONS
215. There are lot of positives to take from our
inquiry. We have been impressed by the seriousness with which
the Government takes the issue of specialist advice from scientists
and engineers. Significant strides have already been taken—for
example, the increasing use of Chief Scientific Advisers and the
growth of a scientific and engineering community in the civil
service—and we were pleased to hear that the Government
is planning to make further improvements, such as install a Chief
Scientific Adviser in the Treasury.[199]
The recommendations we have made in the report will hopefully
go some way to enhancing the good work that has already taken
place.
216. During the course of the inquiry, we have considered
a number of important issues: the structures that deliver science
and engineering advice; strategic priorities of research funding;
consultation; funding principles; accountability and scrutiny.
What we believe is missing is a broad vision for science and engineering
in the UK; a vision for how science and engineering fits into
the Government's strategic plans for UK plc. We close this
inquiry by urging the Government to raise its game. When it turns
its attention to updating the Science Framework, we recommend
that the Government consult widely with a view to producing a
successor ten-year science and engineering strategy that is both
tangible and ambitious. We suggest that built into this strategy—in
the spirit of scientific and engineering endeavour—should
be an assessment of what benefits, if any, are delivered by putting
science and engineering at the heart of Government policy.
199 Q 324 Back
|
