6 Conclusion |
64. It has been an interesting and challenging
year as a select committee scrutinising government. We spent most
of the year scrutinising a department, DIUS, albeit with a remit
also to scrutinise science across government. We attempted to
do justice to all the different parts of the DIUS portfolio. The
pressures caused by two large inquirieson science and engineering
and higher educationinevitably displaced some work though
we carried out scrutiny across all our main subject areas. We
ended the year reverting to a cross-government scrutiny committee.
We are anxious to pick up this work as smoothly and quickly and
to get down to scrutinising science in government, particularly
on evidence-based policy making.
65. As we point out in our Report, Putting
Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy,
the arrangements adopted in October 2009 for the Science and Technology
Committee were the best that could be achieved following the machinery
of Government changes.
Having now operated as a Committee for two months we are of the
view that following the general election the committee's main
fields of work cover science, engineering and technology policy
and that as a result it should be called the Science, Engineering
and Technology Committee. The Committee should revert to 11 members
with a quorum of three.
75 HC (2008-09) 168-I, para 210 Back