SUMMARY OF COUNCIL MEETING ON 3 MARCH 2003
Purpose
1. The Council met to:
· Discuss how CST might provide advice on the Innovation Review.
· Consider the OST ‘LINK' and ‘Foresight' programmes, and how a post-review CST might interface with them.
· Give further consideration to the CST review and emerging ideas on how the new CST might work.
· Receive an update on the Science Base / Services study.
2. The Council also discussed the forthcoming meeting of EU Scientific Advisory Councils.
Attendees
3. The meeting was chaired in part by Professor Sir David King. The independent members present were:
Mr. Jarvaid Aziz, Professor Sir Alec Broers, Professor Dame Julia Higgins, Dr. Rob Margetts, Sir Paul Nurse, Dr. David Potter, Professor Peter Schuddeboom, Professor David VandeLinde and Mr. John Weston.
4. Also in attendance were Mr. David Hughes, Mr. Jeremy Clayton, Mrs. Judy Britton, Dr. Claire Craig, Ms. Michelle Duncan, Ms. Lynne Edwards, Mr. Maurice Potts
Discussions and Outcomes
(i) Meeting of EU Scientific Advisory Councils
5. AT the previous CST meeting the originally proposed topic of ‘A European research Council' had been discussed. Members had expressed some disquiet about the topic, and this disquiet had been echoed by others elsewhere. A new topic was now proposed for this meeting, ‘Achieving excellence in the European research Area'.
6. Members were agreed that the Council should evaluate its position, but only after having studied what came out of the meeting, and other related studies that are presently in progress.
(ii) Innovation Review
7. A meeting had taken place between some CST members and Alistair Keddie / David Hughes. CST agreed to look at the subjects of both IPR and Services in relation to University links with business.
8. Strong research requires strong Universities with large companies. Consistency in the rules and approach to IPR ownership involving universities could help. The perceptions of Universities regarding the undertaking of research needed to be updated to dispense with the ‘fear factor'. This was only likely to happen by operating the right ‘levers' to promote change.
10. ‘IPR Free Zones' were another idea that might help to get the right companies to do the research that is needed, where it is wanted.
(iii) CST and ‘Link'.
11. As part of the Strategic Review of Link, consideration was being given to the potential need for a high-level knowledge-transfer advisory group, and whether CST could perform this function.
12. It was felt that CST could possibly provide a watching brief on the programme, but that ‘LINK' also need sufficient flexibility to be able to meet its objectives. The programme fits well with CST's own remit, which is genuinely trans-departmental.
(iv) Foresight
13. There are two exciting new FORESIGHT projects, Cyber Trust and Crime Prevention. The existing two projects are due to report by the end of the year.
14. There is a big investment involved in picking new topics. Consultation on topics and within topics is important, as is ensuring that consultation is wide enough, and is inclusive of business as well as academic communities.
(v) Review of CST
15. The final report on the review of CST had provided a number of options for consideration rather than ‘one right way', depending on what was wanted. Members want to know what it is the Government want from them, and to be engaged more fully in ‘real-time'.
16. The Council needs to ensure it can deal with any new duties it take son, and indeed to ensure that the work it is presently doing is properly resourced.
17. CST has been most effective where it has a stake in the agenda. Ministerial contact and a proper view of the ‘issues horizon' were important to gain optimum value from the body.
(vi) Services Study
18. The first stage of the services study is now well in progress, with 100 qualitative contacts at Director level being made with companies in the specified sectors of Technical, I.T., Financial and Professional Services.
19. Conclusions drawn form the Services Study would take into account the emerging picture coming out of the Innovation Review.
CST Secretariat
April 2003
This snapshot taken on 13/05/2010, shows web content selected for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search boxes may not work in archived websites.
