Memorandum submitted by the University
of Leicester (UKSA 19)
1. The University of Leicester, which celebrated
50 years of involvement in space science in July 2010, is one
of the largest academic centres in space research in the UK, encompassing
activities in high energy astrophysics, Earth observation science
(EOS), theoretical astrophysics and the studies of planetary surfaces
and magnetospheres. The University is strongly engaged with space
industry at regional, national and international levels and with
the European Space Agency (ESA) through its technology research
programmes, provision of instruments for its scientific missions
and active exploitation of the subsequent scientific data sets.
The University of Leicester is a founding partner in the National
Space Centre (NSC).
2. The University strongly advocated the formation
of a national agency with executive powers at the time of the
S&T Committee's previous inquiry into UK space matters (2007:
A space policy ; seventh report of session 2006-07, HC 66-1) and
remains convinced of the long-term benefits of the UKSA if it
can evolve into an organisation of similar weight to the national
space agencies of France, Germany and Italy.
3. University senior staff participated
fully in the Innovation Growth Team (IGT) process which accompanied
the formation of UKSA, are fully engaged in the ongoing space
technology road-mapping exercise and sit on a number of UKSA councils
and committees, including the Space Leadership Council (Prof.
Monks).
4. Given that less than six months have
passed since the foundation of UKSA, we feel that it may be premature
to judge the effectiveness of the new Agency, especially since
that half-year has included the preparation of inputs to the next
comprehensive spending review, the definition of a working relationship
with the new ESA Centre at Harwell (itself less than one year
old), the emergence of the International Space Innovation Centre
(ISIC) and, above all, the overarching review of all Government
expenditures.
5. Nevertheless, in response to the specific
questions posed by the Inquiry:
(i) The progress in setting up the UKSA appears
commensurate with the published timetable for the transition from
BNSC.
(ii) Viewed from outside UKSA, the important
interface with the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
still appears confused, particularly in relation to the Harwell-based
ESA Centre and ISIC. The future of instrumentation-based "Rolling
Grants", key for the basic development of novel space science
within large UK academic centres such as ours, needs to be clarified
and responsibilities fully defined between UKSA and STFC to avoid
this type of funding "falling down the gap" between
the organisations. Similar comments apply with regard to the UKSA/NERC
interface and the Centre for Earth Observation Instrumentation
(CEOI). The potential investment in ISIC needs to be carefully
balanced against the needs of the wider community and existing
structures.
(iii) The articulation of UK space policy is
indeed clearer than in the past, but this is certainly due to
the adoption of the industry-led IGT findings, rather than as
the result of the UKSA's actions per se. A clear strategy for
the future should be based around the UKSA's technology road-mapping
exercise, with direction from the Space Leadership Council and,
the recently formed National Space Technology Steering Group.
The strategy should be shaped by regular consultation with UK
space industry and academia.
(iv) UKSA's priorities should include: significant
investment in both bilateral and national missions, in addition
to the core programmes of the European Space Agency (ESA); the
fostering of strong collaborations between UKSA and both academia
and industry to deliver the UK space programme; publicising the
increasing importance of space assets in all aspects of public
life.
(v) The forthcoming CSR needs not only to maintain
UK space activities but to actually significantly increase the
civil space budget, otherwise the under-funding of UKSA is likely
to be on the scale experienced by BNSC and its constituent organisations.
Such underfunding will result in loss of technological capability
and market (mission and spin-off) opportunities. This is particularly
alarming since there are reports of other countries now investing
in established areas of UK competence (eg Germany in Space Robotics).
Professor Martin Barstow
Professor George Fraser
Professor Mark Lester
Professor Paul Monks
Professor John Remedios
Professor Mark Sims
University of Leicester
August 2010
|
