Examination of Witness (Questions 60-79)
PROFESSOR KEITH
MASON
4 FEBRUARY 2009
Q60 Chairman: According to the September
2008 minutes, "Council discussed the progress being made
by the McKillop/Mier Campus Review. There had been particular
disappointment with the first draft of a report on a similar parallel
review being carried out on the NWDA, which also specifically
included the DSIC report." You should not be getting that,
should you?
Professor Mason: We did not get
a draft. That was a third-party report of a different review.
I think we were expressing concerns about the timescale and process
involved, but we were not commenting on the draft.
Q61 Chairman: "There had been
particular disappointment with the first draft of a report. .
."
Professor Mason: That is a different
report.
Q62 Dr Harris: The minutes go on
to say: "Steps had therefore been taken to ensure that STFC
would be given copies of any developing drafts of the McKillop/Mier
review of DSIC, in order to ensure factual correctness as the
basis for any recommendations which might be made."
Professor Mason: Yes, and I think
that is a perfectly acceptable process. When the report is finalised
I think it is only right that we get an opportunity to address
any factual issues, not the conclusions of the report.
Q63 Dr Harris: That is the final
draft, is it not? That is not "developing drafts", so
if you want to check for factual accuracy you might want to do
it at the last stage, although I have to say that I do not think
we do that. We do not give the government our whole report. If
we have doubts about facts we ask them, but if you are to see
developing drafts how often do you have to check facts?
Professor Mason: We have not seen
developing drafts. We would expect to be able to comment on the
accuracy. If we are to do this sort of review we want to get the
facts and a real assessment of the situation. If it turns out
that that is based on an incorrect interpretation of something
that we or somebody else might have told them I think it is only
responsible that we correct that.
Q64 Dr Harris: But interpretation
is not a fact and I do not think that Sir Tom McKillop is recognised
as a sloppy man when it comes to facts, so this is a bit controlling,
is it not?
Professor Mason: No. I am not
talking about interpretation. I would want Tom McKillop's interpretation,
but if that is based on incorrect factual information then clearly
the interpretation is not valuable. I would like to make sure
that the facts are there and everybody agrees they are correct.
I think that is only sensible.
Q65 Dr Iddon: Has the STFC held any
of its Council meetings on the RAL or Harwell site?
Professor Mason: Yes.
Q66 Dr Iddon: Has it held any at
the Daresbury site?
Professor Mason: Yes.
Q67 Dr Iddon: Will that be a continuing
process?
Professor Mason: Yes. We are moving
around deliberately for obvious reasons.
Q68 Dr Iddon: This morning can you
confirm the funding of the ALICE and EMMA projects at the Daresbury
site? Is the funding for both projects secure?
Professor Mason: You will know
that we have made huge strides in ALICE over the past several
months and have achieved energy recovery which is a primary goal.
Let us pay tribute to the people who did that because it was an
incredibly difficult technical achievement. They have got there.
We intend to continue to use ALICE to develop our accelerator
technologies and it will be available in order to develop EMMA.
Accelerator technology is part of our core strategy. As I am sure
you are aware, accelerators are increasingly relevant not only
for doing particle physics and other experiments but also for
things like medical research. It is part of our translational
activity to develop these advanced, compact, powerful accelerators
so that eventually we can have portable units we can move around
for whatever.
Q69 Dr Iddon: the new detector systems
centre is based jointly at Daresbury and Harwell. Is there a breakdown
of the finance that will go to both sites?
Professor Mason: There is a breakdown
in the Large Facilities Capital Fund earmark. I cannot remember
what that is, but it is at least fifty-fifty; it might even be
in favour of Daresbury. But we are now developing the business
case for that. The reason it is done jointly between Harwell and
Daresbury is because obviously the expertise base on which we
are building, not only internally but from the wider community,
is distributed. Detectors are a fundamental input to much of our
programme and we are taking advantage of our sites to strengthen
the centre and makes sure it really acts as a gateway to the whole
country.
Q70 Dr Iddon: Can you tell us how
the Technology Strategy Board is working with both the Harwell
and Daresbury sites?
Professor Mason: The STFC is working
increasingly closely with the board. About two months ago we had
a workshop with them in which we discussed a number of joint programmes.
Clearly, the TSB is a key element in the chain from research to
market in whatever shape or form and we are discussing with them
how to optimise that linkage. For example, we have a joint funding
scheme to take particle and nuclear physics technology and expertise
and to export that into the security and medical world. We are
also working with them on a number of other initiatives. I do
not know whether you have had an opportunity to look at our strategy
document, but we have what we call a number of futures programmes
which provide seed corn for developing concepts so we can move
them out. We see that as a chain which we start, TSB pick up and
eventually the commercial world takes on.
Q71 Dr Iddon: My final question concerns
the Astronomy Technology Centre in Edinburgh which at one time
was at great risk. What is the state of play now as regards that
centre?
Professor Mason: It has been clear
for a while that the volume of the astronomy programme will not
be sufficient. Since we joined ESO at the beginning of this decade
the demand for astronomy technology has naturally tailed off.
This was well known and anticipated. The Astronomy Technology
Centre is now part of the technology department under Roger Eccleston
who is based at Daresbury. We actively seek to broaden the base
of the work that goes on at the ATC. There are some absolutely
fantastic technologists, engineers and scientists at the ATC.
In particular, the technologists and engineers have generic skills
which we can apply not just to astronomy but to a broad range
of areas. Roger is working actively to maximise the use of that
base alongside the other skills that exist among the technology
partners. It is a huge resource for the country.
Q72 Dr Iddon: I am not quite sure
what you are saying. At the moment the centre is at Edinburgh
and you are talking about Daresbury. Are you suggesting that there
will be a transfer of skills from Edinburgh to Daresbury?
Professor Mason: Not at all. There
are people based in Edinburgh, people based in the technology
department in Daresbury and people based in the technology department
at Harwell. Roger is the overall leader of that. We seek to migrate
work up to Edinburgh to broaden the areas of application using
the specific expertise.
Q73 Dr Iddon: Away from astronomy?
Professor Mason: In addition to
astronomy.
Q74 Chairman: To follow up Dr Iddon's
question, when we visited ATC in Edinburgh one of its big concerns
was that because of the limitations placed on it by STFC it was
not able to bid for what were called commercially risky contracts
particularly in the United States and elsewhere which wanted it
to build large telescopes. One of the attractions of going in
with the University of Edinburgh was that it would enable it to
do it on a much more commercial basis. Are you saying that all
of that is off now?
Professor Mason: No, it is still
on the table. You will appreciate why an organisation like STFC
which is publicly funded cannot take on those risks. It would
be a risk to the public purse which clearly it is not appropriate,
but we are very keen to pursue alternative models with the University
of Edinburgh or the wider university, technical or industrial
base in Scotland to produce a vehicle that can compete for any
sort of contract, commercial or otherwise. There are various ways
in which one can do that, but it would be perfectly appropriate
to use the expertise that exists in the ATC to enable that to
happen.
Q75 Chairman: But nothing has happened?
Professor Mason: We are talking
to people in Scotland about this which is clearly not trivial.
It also depends on the current financial climate and various other
uncertainties which pertain to Scotland as well.
Q76 Chairman: When we met the then
minister, Ian Pearson, on 20 February he and I had a little exchange
about world-class science at Daresbury. When we visited Daresbury
a great concern was that without a major world-class science facility
this would become basically a business park. Do you still see
the need for a world-class piece of science kit on that site in
order for us to put that tag on it?
Professor Mason: I certainly agree
there has to be world-class science on that site, as there is,
and we are growing that science. As an illustration of it, I am
sure you visited the innovation centre at Daresbury.
Q77 Chairman: We did, but when we
visited the Cockcroft Centre the director said that unless there
were major procedures on the site basically it would have to think
about its future.
Professor Mason: Let me finish
the story which is very brief. If you talk to people at the Innovation
Centre, which is an incredibly exciting place to be, and ask why
they are there the reason is that they interact with the strong
scientific and technical people who are on the Daresbury site,
so it is the capability rather than facility that is important.
We are working very energetically to grow those possibilities.
The Cockcroft Centre is a perfect example of scientific expertise
that we absolutely need on that site in order to make the campus
work. We have talked about the detector centre. There is also
the Hartree Centre. We are looking at other opportunities going
forward and in the future they may or may not include a so-called
large facility. What I am anxious to do is avoid putting all Daresbury's
eggs in a single facility basket and to broaden the base of activity
so it is more resilient against anything that might pop up in
the future, and we are doing that.
Q78 Chairman: There was a purpose
in the Daresbury laboratory and a world-class group of scientists
worked on a major facility that is now closed. I am not criticising
that; it came to the end of its life. What is the point of all
of them staying at the moment?
Professor Mason: Essentially,
the world has moved on. It was the case that we had national laboratories
around specific facilities but we are now evolving a different
model. What is key to the UK's competitiveness in the world is
to have critical mass in key areas. First and foremost, the Daresbury
and Harwell science and innovation campuses are a means of gathering
critical mass and making sure that the UK acts in unison, drawing
in the expertise that is needed from all over the UK so we can
compete in the world. The Cockcroft Centre is a perfect example
of an investment that we, PPARC and others made in order to get
that critical mass in place in Daresbury. It is a very powerful
model which is demonstrating its credibility. We have also made
an investment in the University of Durham recently. You might
have seen the announcement of £16 million over 10 years to
continue the particle physics theory centre there. We are making
these investments all the time to get critical mass. We started
the Particle Physics Institute in order to get critical mass in
particle physics theory in the UK and it is incredibly successful.
It competes in the world and is recognised as a beacon because
we made that investment.
Q79 Chairman: If you had a free hand
would you still move everything to RAL and close Daresbury?
Professor Mason: No, for the simple
reason that we are a national organisation. My job is to make
use of the national resources to pursue the programmes and the
mission that we are given. We happen to have Daresbury there for
historical reasons, but the North West is a hugely energetic area
with a lot of capability and skills that we need to tap into,
so I do not want to move it. I want it to be there for the purely
selfish reason that I want to tap into the expertise in that area.
| 
