Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80
- 85)
TUESDAY 31 MARCH 2009
Dr Andrew Wadge, Dr Stephen Axford and Mr John Roberts
Q80 Baroness Neuberger:
I have just been left with a sense of unease on the public engagement
side. It is partly in your response to the Earl of Selborne when
talking about the lessons learned from GM. One of the things you
have been saying is that it is a bit too early. At the same time
your response on GM is that we should have got in there earlier.
I do not feel very comfortable that thinking has been developed
very carefully. I have always taken the view personally that it
is better to get in earlier. All the evidence about public engagement
in other areas, say in the health services, shows that to be the
case. I know you say this is starting in the autumn. Is there
not some argument, given that we are doing this inquiry now, for
ratcheting up at least the advance warnings of what you are going
to be doing in the autumn?
Mr Roberts: Of course, we did do some work on
social engagement in the period 2004 to 2006-07, which was the
first wave, which included citizens' juries and a number of engagement
exercises. A number of other people have also done them, such
as Which who ran a jury last year and we have access to
those results. The second phase of work which has been described
will build on the first phase of work which was done three years
ago.
Q81 Baroness Neuberger:
I understand that. I still think there is a time issue.
Dr Wadge: It is useful to clarify what I meant
around that in the sense that I do not think it is too early to
start the engagement; far from it. We need to learn the lessons
and start the engagement. I meant in relation to specific products
and the types of information that people might require in relation
to that.
Baroness Neuberger: I accept that.
Q82 Lord Haskel:
On this question of research and all the work you are doing, does
that fall in at all with the money which the Government are putting
into resuscitating the economy? Is that part of that?
Dr Axford: The money we have talked about so
far is money which was allocated in the last spending review,
to the research councils for example. Not any new money, no new
stimulus potentially.
Q83 Lord Haskel:
It is not going to be part of stimulating the economy.
Dr Axford: We do not have any idea about that.
Q84 Chairman:
We shall learn after the Budget. Do you have any other comments
you wish to add? I should like to thank you very much for giving
us nearly two hours of very interesting conversation but there
may be things that you would like to add at this point.
Dr Wadge: No, nothing. Thank you for the opportunity.
Dr Axford: No thank you.
Q85 Chairman:
There will be a transcript of these proceedings which will be
sent to you for corrections so you will have a chance to make
sure the written record accurately represents what you have said.
We have asked you for some written material and the Committee
Clerk, Antony Willott, will follow that up. Equally, if you have
any points you think of that you would like to submit to us in
writing, we should very much welcome that. Finally, I should like
to ask, if you were advising us on recommendations we should produce
at the end of our deliberations, whether you have any particular
thoughts.
Dr Wadge: Other than a large increase in the
budget of the Food Standards Agency ... I think you have touched
on an area of concern in relation to risk assessment and the capacity
we have in relation to toxicological expertise and that is a concern
that I have more broadly than simply around nanotechnology and
I am involved in discussions with other chief scientists around
that particular point. It is something that this very specific
issue of nanotechnology does raise from my perspective.
Chairman: Thank you. Would others like
to add anything? Thank you very much indeed.
| 
