Examination of Witnesses (Question Numbers
360-378)
DEPARTMENT FOR
BUSINESS, INNOVATION
AND SKILLS
26 JANUARY 2010
Q360 Chairman: Let us look at the
courses. You can help us with that. I think the only real concern
we had in the aerospace sector is: are there too many foreign
students on the courses? In fact, we heard that often in aerospace
that is quite a good thing because those people quite often stayed
here and kept their skills here (there is an immigration question
lying behind that). I do not think we had many concerns about
aerospace courses. We did hear a lot of concerns about motorsport
courses; that there are too many generalised motorsport courses
available and, actually, most people going into motorsport as
engineers should go in with specialised engineering qualifications.
I love this quote we got from one of our witnesses: "I have
actually been recruiting in people from the university courses
for many years and I have found that some of the motorsport courses
were very, very light on the real technical subject ... when you
said, "Can you calculate how thick that piece needs to be?"
they say, "Oh, I didn't do that module", and they did
motorsports management instead. I do worry that, perhaps, universities
use motorsport to attract students in—perhaps on a slightly
bogus perspective—and actually are not offering the courses
motorsport really needs to keep its cutting edge.
Ian Lucas: I think what needs
to happen in that circumstance is what I said to Mr Clapham; essentially,
the industry needs to engage with the universities, in that case,
and say: "We do not think that what you are providing is
right and you need to provide something different and distinctive."
Q361 Chairman: Can you help that
process?
Ian Lucas: Absolutely, I would
be very keen to. Again, the UK Automotive Council should be involved
in that process, or could be involved in that process, so that
a more collective view is brought forward. I think that is a good
example of how the Council can work.
Q362 Chairman: Excellent. I think
that is very helpful. Thank you for that. I went to see Avatar
in 3D on Saturday and I really enjoyed it—a very predictable
story but brilliantly told. The audience of 12, 13 and 14-year
old boys, largely, were completely spellbound for two-and-three-quarter
hours. I was delighted to see at the beginning of the programme
an advert from the Government encouraging young people to go into
STEM subjects. Not a bad ad, actually—I thought it was quite
good. However, there is this continuing problem to get STEM subjects.
You cannot inquire into aerospace and motorsport and not acknowledge
the question about keeping science alive in schools, about encouraging
children to engage. Just give us a sense of your commitment to
making sure that there is a flow of young people wanting to do
the STEM subjects, so aerospace, motorsport and the other industries
that rely on these subjects are actually getting that supply coming
through.
Ian Lucas: I think science is
a hugely exciting area within which to study and within which
to work. One of the joys of my present job is seeing the excellence,
innovation and intellectual challenge that exists in manufacturing
facilities that I visit. At school I was always an arts student,
and I do not think I was taught science particularly well. Certainly
I think there has been a development in recent years in popular
science which has presented science much more accessibly. I think
what young people need to recognise is that we have got huge challenges
ahead—low carbon challenges and the future of the planet—and
it is ideas, intellect and scientific innovation that will deal
with those issues, and the position that we have created now needs
to be resolved by youngsters with those ideas.
Q363 Chairman: So the Higher Ambition
document published in November (I am helpfully reminded) did talk
about changes to funding arrangements to attract highly skilled
STEM undergraduates. What are the changes that are being proposed?
Again, this may be a question you may not be able to answer today
but what are the changes? It is a very tight Public Expenditure
Settlement we are facing at present; we have talked about cuts
to the university sector. If you can answer now, fine, but if
you cannot perhaps you can give us a note.
Ian Lucas: I cannot give you an
answer now, I am afraid, but I will certainly give you a note
about what sort of thinking we are moving towards in terms of
providing funding.
Chairman: Before I hand on to Lembit
for the last area of questioning, can I repeat something which
has been explicit throughout (and I think I have said it before):
aerospace, second in the world, motorsport, first in the world.
It depends absolutely on having high-level graduates to keep it
at the front end, absolutely. It is, I would argue, one of the
most important issues we face as a nation, so I am fascinated
to know what you are doing about it—and funds are being
cut. That is not a party political point; it is a factual observation.
Lembit Opik: It is an observation
from the Committee's investigations. Finally to green issues.
The motorsport industries have, clearly, heralded the way and
been ambassadors for dramatic steps forward in terms of green
technologies, and that is something the Government itself has
acknowledged. Yet we have learnt that some manufacturers seem
to be concerned about their association with motorsport because
of the perceived environmental unfriendliness of the sector. You
can imagine the same is true of aviation.
Chairman: I think these are very clear
messages we have had. Whether they are fair perceptions or not,
wherever we have gone the industrialists we have spoken to have
said: "We do not think government is on our side because
we are not green". I just want to reiterate Lembit's point;
it is a powerful message that has come through to me; subliminally
they feel you are not on their side.
Q364 Lembit Opik: The Chairman
sums it up exactly. So although there are quotations from the
Government saying: "We understand there are lots of good
things happening in motorsport", they do not really think
that you are ambassadors for the work that they are doing. The
same goes for aviation; although aviation produces, in my judgment,
2-3% of the climate change pollution in the world they are concerned
that a lot of the mood music is not in favour of the benefits
of aviation. To what extent do you feel the industries have suffered
from their non-green image?
Ian Lucas: I think they do suffer
from it but I think that that is unfair. I remember my first visit
to Airbus shortly after I was elected, just down the road from
me, and I raised environmental issues with them on that visit.
I have been hugely impressed ever since at the seriousness that
the aerospace industry applies to the issue of emissions and environmental
drivers, and really one of the great intellectual disciplines
that exists both in the aerospace sector and the motorsport sector,
which came up again when I visited McLaren last week, is that
they look at energy efficiency and they look at low-carbon issues
the whole time, and that is one of the major drivers that they
have. We need to say this. I need to say it more on behalf of
government and we need to say it more widely so that the general
public see this; that the research that is going on and the innovation
that is going on is being driven by low-carbon imperatives. There
is a great response to that in the industries, and I think we
need to shout out much louder about it than we do at the present
time. I think Lord Drayson, who you mentioned earlier, gave a
speech about the importance of motorsport and embracing technologies
that are low-carbon and, also, broadcasting that fact more than
perhaps they have done in the past, and I think there will be
some exciting innovations which achieve that coming along very
shortly.
Q365 Lembit Opik: They will
be pleased to hear that in the record. It has to be said that
the Government has been accused of failing to engage with motorsport,
for example, in developing low-carbon technologies. Is that a
fair attack or criticism? I see your colleague shaking his head.
Ian Lucas: He does not think so.
You have not said anything yet.
Q366 Chairman: Join the party, please!
Mr Carter: No, I do not think
it is very fair. I think there has been a lot of engagement with
various motorsport companies. Do not forget a lot of motorsport
companies in developing a lot of this innovation also crossover
in the supply chain into the automotive industry, so there has
been a lot of engagement. I cannot give you details of the companies
because I do not know but if you look at some of the contracts
that have been let, for example, under the TSB Low Carbon Programmes
there will be motorsport companies that have benefited from those
as part of a package of companies that are looking at developing
technologies. I think the big problem, as the Minister rightly
said, is that there is a broad public perception that motorsport,
particularly, is not a very green industry, but I think when you
look at what motorsport has done, when you particularly look at
some of the programmes that were run under the Energy Efficiency
programme by MDUK, in the take-up of bio-diesel, ethanol and other
fuel efficient programmes, a considerable amount has been done;
it is just not shouted about and it is not always recognised.
Again, to reiterate what the Minister said, through the technology
working group of the Automotive Council this will be a key area
for motorsport SMEs to become engaged even further and to become
more deeply entrenched into what is going on and to take advantage
of the opportunities that will come from there.
Q367 Lembit Opik: Can you give
us some specific examples of the engagement? You have inferred
it but are there specific projects you could point at where the
Government has worked with, in this case, the motor industry on
green technology? You can drop us a note.
Mr Carter: I think it will be
easier to send you a note on that.*
Q368 Lembit Opik: We are not
trying to corner you, it is just it would be great to have those
solid examples, not least because the motorsport industry would
appreciate being able to use them in the public domain. Does the
Government recognise the importance of the motorsport and aerospace
industries in terms of innovating to cut carbon emissions? If
so, what are you actually doing to support that? It might, to
some extent, tie in with the previous conversations.
Ian Lucas: Many of the innovations
that are taking place in both sectors are, as I have just said,
driven by environmental targets and the compelling targets that
we have through the Climate Change Act and our international obligations.
Certainly in the aerospace field, which is such an international
industry and operates in a national context, the driver is that
we have emissions targets that have to be met and this is, of
course, relevant in terms of not just making more efficient engines
but, also, development of composites makes aeroplanes lighter,
and all of that is geared towards having a more environmentally
compelling case for green travel by aircraft and, also, within
the motorsport sector, again making progress to more efficient
engines and lighter materials. Those are imperatives that really
are quite consistent with environmental challenge.
Q369 Lembit Opik: Do you think
this is something you could tie in with the benefits of the apprenticeship
schemes? I put that forward as a suggestion for your consideration.
You could actually achieve government targets at the same time
as quite responsibly and, in terms of competition law, quite legally,
investing in the aerospace and motorsports industries at the same
time, in very attractive study areas.
Ian Lucas: This really returns
to what I was saying about the challenges ahead, and attracting
young people as being the people who are going to bring the solutions.
The apprentices and the students who will be studying for degrees
to deal with these problems and get involved in the industries,
that is a great goal and, really, something that individual students
can look at as something that they need to work towards to achieve
and would be a great goal to actually get to.
Q370 Lembit Opik: I am pleased
to hear that. Finally, why are there multiple initiatives in aerospace
looking at reducing the environmental impact of aerospace which
have not been brought together to a cohesive whole? I do not blame
the industry for that and I do not really blame the Government,
but in effect I am asking whether you could take a more holistic
approach towards the entire aerospace screening strategy which
aerospace itself agrees with and, obviously, airlines agree with
because it saves them money, and the Government wants.
Ian Lucas: I am not entirely clear
about the different mechanisms that you are describing. It is
obviously a very complex area, aerospace, because of the international
obligations that exist, and it does mean that we have to combine
both domestic pressures with the international obligations that
we have, so it is often very difficult to create a simplified
system. If there is anything that we can do to try to make that
easier for the industry as a whole then we will certainly try.
Q371 Lembit Opik: There may
be some specifics we can consider there. One statistic for you:
an A380 Airbus travelling from London to Singapore uses the same
amount of fuel as we use on Britain's roads roughly every nine
seconds. Do you think there is an opportunity to provide a real
sense of perspective about the relative economic and social importance
of aviation versus the environmental cost? Given that aviation
is working proactively to try and reduce its footprint, is there
a chance, perhaps, of rehabilitating aviation's image which some
would say is disproportionately negative in the eyes of its environmental
impact?
Ian Lucas: I think the A380 that
you mention is a remarkable aircraft, not least because of how
quiet it is, in addition to what you said about emissions. I think
there does need to be some sense of scale in terms of our appreciation
of aviation. I do not think that people in the world are going
to travel less; I think the challenge is that we have to devise
an aerospace industry that will meet the challenges of the environmental
targets that we have whilst allowing people to travel in the way
that they want to. That is a difficult challenge but it is achievable,
provided that the intellect and resources are put into meeting
that challenge, and I think that is what we have to face going
forward. We need to have a more intelligent and calmer debate
about aerospace than sometimes we do have.
Lembit Opik: Is it not really more
feasible for any government to seek to make the environmental
impact of flying lower rather than seriously pretending that they
are going to embark on a major strategy of reducing people's ability
to go on holiday if they want to? Can any government really, politically,
achieve the latter? I do not think so, myself, but maybe you have
a different view.
Q372 Chairman: We are going into
rather broader territory now.
Ian Lucas: I do not like to stop
people from going on holiday; I am a politician.
Chairman: I think it is a question for
DECC or Transport.
Q373 Mr Hoyle: Minister, you have
quite rightly said the benefits of A380. Who has got it right?
Boeing with Dreamliner or Airbus with the A380?
Ian Lucas: Is that not, ultimately,
a question for the customer?
Q374 Mr Hoyle: One is saying you
carry more passengers in the bigger aircraft—
Ian Lucas: I know what the argument
is. I think that people will travel long distances more, and there
is the appeal of travelling a very long distance, to the Far East,
to Australia; I think more people in the Far East are going to
travel more, so I am very hopeful that the A380 is the right approach.
Q375 Mr Hoyle: The right choice.
I will go with you; we are backing Airbus.
Ian Lucas: Particularly as the
wings for that aircraft are made about five miles from my constituency.
Lembit Opik: Declare an interest!
Q376 Chairman: Most of the clever
stuff is made in the UK.
Ian Lucas: I declare an interest.
Q377 Chairman: Mr Carter, did you
have a hand in Paul Drayson's speech to the European Cleaner Racing
Conference?
Mr Carter: A small input.
Q378 Chairman: I just want to end
with what I thought was a marvellous quote. You are one of the
petrol heads, are you not, Lindsey? I thought Paul Drayson's speech
was excellent. I think the message of some of Lembit's questioning
and much of what we have heard today is in this last substantial
paragraph of the speech: "Motorsport can lend the necessary
street cred to going green. You represent the best possible response
to Top Gear ridicule—to move the low-carbon story
away from lentils, sandals and self-sacrifice." I think we
can all agree on that! Look at Lembit—he does not look good
in sandals and he certainly does not do self-sacrifice! Gentlemen,
thank you very much for a very useful session. We have been promised
quite of lot of material to exchange but we have found it very
helpful. Thank you very much indeed.
| 
