"As we think about re-inventing Britain, science must be the foundation for a new industrial activism – not focused this time on mining, railways and mechanising production, but on renewable energy, on digital networks, and genetic engineering"
Cheltenham Science Festival
03 June 2009
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Good afternoon, everyone.
My official billing is as minister for science and innovation – but everything I have to say is informed by experiences that are no doubt similar to Vicky and Billy's.
Like them, I used to be a hi-tech entrepreneur, and that's the perspective I bring to government. It's the experience of doing a PhD; of realising how scientific research could underpin a business venture and convincing investors to back it; of bringing a product to market and then exploring the potential for further applications; the creative thrill of building a world-class business – built from science.
It's on that basis that I say – in all seriousness – that Britain has no future without science and engineering.
Allow me to justify such a statement.
First, Britain's success as a modern nation was built on science and technology. We can trace that success back to the industrial revolution – an amazingly fertile period of invention and innovation in power generation, transport and manufacturing.
We still stand on the shoulders of science: on the insights of those individuals and teams who devised the World Wide Web, MRI scanners and satellite technologies. Indeed, our reputation for curiosity-driven research and disruptive technologies – ideas which transform how we live our lives – continues to attract talent and investment to this country. It’s a fact that the UK is the most scientifically productive nation in the world.
So as we look ahead, and think about re-inventing Britain, science must be the foundation for a new industrial activism – not focused this time on mining, railways and mechanising production, but on renewable energy, on digital networks, and genetic engineering.
Science must also be our tool in predicting and preparing for the future. The Government's Foresight programme, for example, scans the horizon for potential opportunities and problems in which science and technology have a key part to play – whether achieving sustainable farming or tackling coastal flooding.
My second point is that we find ourselves at a crossroads in history. The global recession is – whether we like it or not – reshaping markets and national economies across the world at high speed, and it's not finished yet.
In our case, financial services – which have disproportionately boosted our GDP and contributed enormously to our tax base over the past few years – have taken a big hit. We need other sectors to take up the slack – to create wealth, jobs, and a virtuous circle of investment.
By that I mean sustainable growth: a healthy and ongoing situation where scientific insight translates into profitable business, by which we generate the public money to reinvest in research.
Third, we face the problem of international competition. Many countries are currently figuring out which industries and academic disciplines merit special backing – not just the Obama administration, but governments in Asia, Europe, South America and the Middle East. They're devising all kinds of incentives to attract researchers – both scientists and the R&D arms of global firms.
Any government worth its salt is not only trying to manage the immediate effects of the downturn; it's thinking very hard about where the greatest opportunities will lie once the upswing kicks in.
This session, therefore, is timely. There's a real urgency for Britain to establish its own strategy for the future and to get on with implementing it.
And, for all I've said so far, I'm very optimistic that Britain can more than hold its own over the next 25 years, providing we act wisely over the coming months.
That's because it's been true for years that this country's most valuable natural resource is brain power. Our researchers have consistently been responsible for pioneering work in molecular biology, in earth observation, in space and materials science that has created jobs and wealth.
Over the next 25 years, it's pretty clear that growth will be concentrated in areas like green tech and biotech, in whatever directions the IT revolution takes. And it's no coincidence that these areas are not only critical for our economy, but for the viability of our society – and others – as we face the challenges of climate change, ageing populations and threats to our national security.
So how do we go about achieving the maximum return on science investment, which must continue to rise? For, without question, it would represent economic suicide to cut research budgets at this point.
The projects we fund today could easily take a decade or more to bear fruit. Short-sighted actions in the short-term are guaranteed to damage the innovation pipeline years from now.
A few months ago, I set the ball rolling by asking the seven Research Councils – which, as bodies of scientists, are responsible for allocating taxpayers' money to the most promising scientific projects – to identify areas worthy of greater focus.
I asked them to bear in mind three essential criteria:
- where Britain has a clear competitive advantage
- where growth opportunities are significant over the next 20 years
- and where we have a realistic prospect of being number one or two globally
Let me be clear. Focus is not the same as narrowness. We have to maintain a diverse research base, because we don’t know where all the challenges will come from and what kinds of multi-disciplinary responses will be required. We have to stay flexible.
The Government is currently considering the recommendations made by the Research Councils, but let me give you a sense of what this will involve, because we're already forging ahead in the life sciences.
When it comes to medicine – for which demand is both global and unlimited – you can make a decent argument for Britain already being a world leader.
We have a long history of scientific breakthroughs – most recently helping to generate a replacement windpipe using stem cells from a patient's own bone marrow.
Our industrial base in the life sciences is second only to the US.
Medical science also receives enormous support from the British public, who give generously to the research charities and have a real appetite for new treatments.
And in the NHS, we possess a resource that no other country has for fostering innovation in patient care, drug discovery, and medical devices. With cradle-to-grave records stretching back to the late 1940s, we have the potential to organise large-scale clinical trials more effectively than in most other parts of the world.
My job, then, is not only to bring about rapid change in the operating environment for life sciences companies – many of whom are struggling through the recession – but to help boost innovation in the NHS for the long-term.
The challenge is to build closer links between universities, hospital trusts and life science companies so we can practise what's known as stratified medicine – identifying, say, specific breast cancer patients through biological markers so that variants of the disease can be treated in ever more sophisticated ways and effective ways.
So, that's the kind of innovation we're trying to achieve by focusing on what we do best.
Now, some commentators have argued that this approach is flawed – that there's something almost grubby – or dare I say "un-British" – about emphasising the economic and societal impact of science over the apparently more wholesome pursuit of knowledge; that, by doing so, we reduce the likelihood of unexpected discoveries. I think they’re wrong.
But this is an argument where I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you and the other panellists think.
Surely, the public who subsidise research have a right to know that what they're funding holds out the prospect of broader applications – not necessarily in terms of high-street sales, but in ultimately making the world a better place.
Which brings me back to my initial position. Science holds the key to a healthy, sustainable and prosperous future. Let’s make it happen.
Thanks for listening.
