Thank you, Sir Keith. I would like to begin by congratulating all those
who have contributed to establishing the Forum, and extending my own
warm welcome to all the participants at the Forum's launch here this
evening.
The Government has strongly endorsed closer consultation and
collaboration between our research base and industry, and we have put in
place policies and substantial additional resources to encourage and
strengthen these links, such as University Challenge, Science Enterprise
Centres and HEIF. In the next two years we are putting £187million
through HEIF into universities for knowledge transfer.
This is because we believe that both our research base and industry
stand to benefit from the exchange, and by working together can enrich
the UK as a home for outstanding science and successful innovation. I
see the new Forum very much as a new ally in this cause.
In its relatively short life to date, the Academy of Medical Sciences
has already notched up significant achievements, for example in the
field of research careers. This largely reflects the quality of its
membership and leadership. But it also reflects the Academy's
determination to bridge the divide between basic and clinical research,
and to keep a firm eye on the ultimate beneficiaries of medical
research, namely the patients.
I welcome the Forum as an extension of this same, connective
thinking. There must, surely, be much to be gained from close and
recurrent interaction between the Academy's membership and the wider
research and research user communities. One danger might lie in
identifying too many issues to address, and I am impressed by the way
that the Forum is focusing on a few well-defined topics where it can
make a real difference, and where it can bring added value to both its
members and a wider audience.
I particularly pleased by the early inclusion of animal research in
your discussions, the difficult and sensitive issue of using primates in
research on the one hand, but also the scope to develop alternatives
through new techniques in predictive toxicology.
I must, however, confess to one slight surprise. The Forum's
prospectus states that academic and industry share concerns that the
UK's historic strength in medical scientific research is waning. I have
to say that the overall impression I gain is one of continued
international excellence and great vitality. As always the main question
is what is the evidence.
In the time that I have been in my current job I have noticed a
tendency in science policy-making, as I suspect in other areas, for
people, to oscillate between unjustified optimism and exaggerated
pessimism. This is not a good basis for policy-making, which I believe
should be based on a clear view of what problems and opportunities
exist, in this way, the problems can be fixed and new resources can be
focused on the opportunities.
It would be very helpful if the Forum would consider contributing to
the periodic assessment of the health of the UK science base, in all its
dimensions. What do your members see as the key indicators? What are the
trends over time? What are the problems and what are the opportunities?
And most importantly are we delivering major improvements in health
care. This might perhaps form a long-term watching brief for the Forum.
I very much hope the Forum is a success and that it adds real value to
the work of its members. I hope also that it will work closely with
Government so that together we can provide the best possible conditions
in this country for medical research and improvements in patient care.
Thank you.
|
