Science Matters

Scientists for Science Matters

No. 35 Euro vote June 2009

TranslationalBridge Street research page 2 LondonUse your SW1A vote 2L page 3 Innovation in recession and recovery page 4 What has Labour done page 6 Vote Labour Contacts - page 8

th Scientists for Labour 4 June 2009 Secretary Paul Connell, 2 Redwood Close MEP, leader of the Ross-on-Wye Labour group of the European Herefordshire parliament invites SfL members HR9 5UD to support their Labour www.scientists-for- th candidates on June 4 . labour.org.uk

Honorary Patrons Sir Tom Blundell Mrs. Anne Campbell Dr Ian Gibson, MP Sir www.eurolabour.org.uk/ Lord Martin Rees Lord David Sainsbury More about the European elections inside:

What Labour has done for Science John Unsworth Chair of SfL

Make sure you vote from the Socialist societies

European cooperation in innovation Paul Drayson

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 1 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

Translational research

George Monbiot published an article in the Guardian that stirred up debate among scientists in general and SfL in particular. This was the Science Minister, Lord Drayson’s reply. Is scientific inquiry that seeks to understand the building blocks of our universe fundamentally different from, or somehow better than, science directed at building a wind turbine? In practice, the distinction between pure and applied science is seldom clear. All science involves asking questions and pursuing the insights yielded in various directions. My former company developed a device that injects medicines as fine particles, thereby dispensing with needles. The principles of fluid dynamics and supersonic flow that lie behind it can be traced back to Oxford scientists, who were seeking an urgent solution to Spitfires crashing during the war. That's what scientific serendipity means: questions about why planes go into tailspins increased understanding of basic physics, eventually spawning unanticipated medical applications. That's precisely the kind of research our country needs, however experts label it. We are a knowledge economy. Britain's greatest natural resource is brainpower. Our prospects for success, and ability to compete fully in global markets, depend on harvesting the insights of all kinds of science. More than that, we need brainpower to devise the renewable energy sources. I'm optimistic about the future, but if we fail to create wealth by building a lead in the next- generation industries like green tech, our tax base will suffer. That will mean less money for schools and hospitals, and less for scientific research. This we must avoid. By more than doubling investment in real terms over 10 years, the government has funded a renaissance in science. It is now world class, and our facilities state of the art. Today, despite immense pressure on public finances, we remain committed to sustained investment. The science budget continues to be ringfenced. And unlike many parts of government, the efficiency savings we've sought from the research councils (£106m from a total of around £4bn) will be reinvested by them in scientific research, pure and applied. But we must also prioritise investment – as other nations are – to thrive in growth markets, tackle problems like climate change, and reassure taxpayers concerned about jobs and prosperity. That means focusing on areas like the environmental and life sciences. But it's for scientists, not ministers, to identify the key disciplines and most promising research. Indeed, focusing effort within science is nothing new, whether during war or peacetime. Scientists have benefited from massive public investment. It is entirely reasonable to expect them to describe the possible impact of their research in grant applications. I also expect them to communicate the significance of their work to the wider public. That's important for our democracy, and for attracting future generations of researchers. So, there's no U-turn under way in British science; no retreat from excellence; no undermining a diverse base capable of interdisciplinary research; no challenging the independence of scientists, who remain governed by research councils and peer review. What has changed is our sense of urgency to use science as the primary means to achieve a healthy and prosperous Britain.

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 2 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

People will soon have the chance to vote on whether that urgency is appropriate. They face a clear choice: between maintaining an optimistic course of investment explicitly predicated on science and technology; or a pessimistic one defined by austerity, silence on the value of research, and a history of starving science of the investment it needs. To me, the long-term consequences of an impoverished research base don't bear thinking about. I'd like to believe that scientists feel the same. Scientists for Labour are in the process of arranging for a live debate on this issue in our AGM in October. Watch this space and please send us your views. David Caplin says use your Vote Prof. A D Caplin is Emeritus Professor of Physics at Imperial College London and the SfL delegate to the Socialist Society’s executive. This note was in the agenda of the meeting of the Socialist Societies executive committee recently. I wish to draw the attention of the Executive to the growing danger from the BNP gaining seats, because of the public’s reaction to the alleged irregularities by certain MPs over their claims for expenses. I must remind the Executive that next month’s European elections could potentially change the British political landscape for many years. If the BNP makes a significant breakthrough then it will emerge as Britain’s fourth political party. Other parties have done well in European elections, such as the UK Independence Party but none have been able to sustain their success. The BNP is likely to be different. Unlike UKIP, it has a domestic agenda, local branches and a more coherent political strategy than mere opposition to the EU. A significant political breakthrough will give the BNP huge resources, allowing it to open offices, employ full-time organisers and intervene in every political dispute. It will give the BNP the respectability that it craves, especially in the eyes of the media, who will treat it as just another political party. Perhaps even more worryingly is that the BNP will be able to spread its poisonous hate in a greater number of communities – the result of which we experienced only too vividly in Oldham in 2001. I therefore ask that it be agreed that delegates to the SSE should return to their Societies to urge their members to ensure that they, their families and contacts, use their vote on June 4 th . Societies should circulate their members to this effect. In the time remaining members should contact Searchlight’s HOPEnotHATE campaign, via www.hopenothate.org.uk . Give them your support to prevent a BNP breakthrough.

SfL is pleased to share web links with : www.compassonline.org.uk/

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 3 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

Lord Drayson, Minister for Science and Innovation

Speaking on Innovation in recession and recovery to the Scientific-Economic Research Union conference, Berlin 06 May 2009 "The global recession has served as a harsh but necessary reminder about the importance of innovation in driving economic growth. In that context, the next stage should be for us to consider how international collaboration in this area can serve our national interests" Innovation is vital in driving the UK and the rest of Europe out of recession and about how innovation is essential as we prepare for the recovery of global markets and then strive for sustainable growth. Notwithstanding the intense global competition that will accompany the emergence of the inevitable economic upswing – researchers, businesses and governments have much to learn from their international counterparts about boosting their capacity to innovate. There are compelling reasons for us to collaborate across Europe. British innovation policy UK strategy shifted significantly in the summer of 2007 when created a new government department combining responsibility for science and innovation with further and higher education. By re-aligning the work of government in this way, our objective was clear – and it preceded both the credit crunch and the subsequent recession. The purpose of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills – DIUS for short – is to unite three strands of activity which are crucial to Britain's economic success. We've got to develop the skills of British people, by which I mean everything from basic literacy to particle physics. We must build on a decade's worth of record investment in our research base. And we need to make sure that, with those skills and that research as the foundations; we create the conditions whereby the UK becomes the location of choice to run an innovative business. There's a further dimension here, because innovation in science and technology is equally important in finding solutions to those challenges which are common to us all – developing viable clean energy sources, tackling the problem of climate change, addressing our ageing populations and pre-empting new threats to international security. Our ambition can be summarised in the desire to make Britain an "innovation nation". And I think it's fair to say that we're not striving to achieve that ambition from scratch. Our science is the most productive and efficient in the G8 – and the budget for science is protected despite the fiscal pressures that every country is facing. The quality and number of science innovations from our universities have never been higher, and the investment opportunities for spinouts never better. We're seeing more young people studying maths, engineering and the pure sciences at undergraduate level – and, importantly, British consumers are enthusiastic about using innovative products and services. Innovation and the downturn But, like every country, this recession has accentuated weaknesses in terms of the way we support innovation. We already knew, for example, that we needed more talent and investment going into high-tech manufacturing. Now, a lack of capital and credit is threatening growth in that sector. Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 4 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

At the same time, the downturn has thrown up some entirely new challenges – like compensating for the declining demand for financial services by actively rebalancing the economy in favour of other industries. We're urgently addressing that first problem of investment. In the latest Budget, presented a couple of weeks ago, the UK Government created a £750m Strategic Investment Fund to support projects that can generate jobs and improve national competitiveness in next-generation industries. In particular, a full third of the Fund has been earmarked for low-carbon technologies. This money represents one aspect of a broader mission to promote a new industrial activism. Indeed, over recent months, I have spearheaded a debate that has its corollary in a number of other countries. These countries – Germany among them – are all contemplating tough choices about which sectors to focus on in order to maximise the chances for long-term growth. In these difficult circumstances, Britain too must play to its strengths. Ministers are currently taking a back seat in this debate, because it is for the academic and business communities to agree together those sectors, which have the greatest potential. My input has been limited to requesting that they consider: • where Britain has a clear competitive advantage; • where the growth opportunities over the next 20 years are significant; • and where Britain has a realistic prospect of being number one or number two in the world. Office for Life Sciences In one area, we are already forging ahead. By creating a new Office for Life Sciences, we are seeking to quickly improve the operating environment for international companies in this field, so the UK remains an attractive location for R&D and manufacturing facilities. We are examining how best to use Government levers like taxation, market regulation and public procurement – in addition to the extra funding I mentioned earlier. The Budget, for example, contained a commitment to review the balance of taxation on innovative activity, including patents and other intellectual property. The Office for Life Sciences is working with industry representatives and the Treasury to assess the impact and implications of potential changes. Its well-documented databases going back to 1948 will be extremely useful for researchers investigating the genetic basis for disease. With all patients in the country registered with the NHS, there is enormous potential to organise large-scale and stratified clinical trials. With a mature legislative framework for stem cell research, we stand at the forefront of a burgeoning field which could eventually transform medicine. Later this year, we will publish a broader strategy for the life sciences, covering incentives to support greater participation in clinical research, steps to promote innovation in the NHS, and action to tackle skills gaps. I could identify UK strengths in a range of sectors – in plastic electronics, computer games, satellites, photovoltaics. Our Technology Strategy Board – whose job is to stimulate innovation and accelerate its commercialisation – is funding collaborative ventures involving business and the research base in developing electric and hybrid vehicles, environmentally sustainable buildings and solutions to digital network security.

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 5 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

European collaboration But let me return to the issue of collaboration – with particular reference to innovation. Academics and businesses from Germany and the UK already work together closely. Indeed, in European Frameworks 5, 6 and 7, Germany has been the UK's leading partner. In FP7 alone, we're involved in almost 850 joint projects – especially in the areas of health and information technologies. And yet I think there are opportunities for us to help each other in further ways. There are many similarities between us, such as high state investment in research, and support for a tax and regulatory environment that is conducive to new German patents are disproportionately high in sectors characterised by incremental innovation. At the same time, your greatest success comes through commercialising value-intensive technologies. The UK, by contrast, is more adept at innovation which might be described as "disruptive" or "breakthrough". This is a necessarily simplistic analysis, but I do think it provides the basis for beginning to address respective areas for improvement – not so much in terms of further research cooperation, but at government level. We should have detailed discussions about our relative strengths and weaknesses to see where strategic fits might arise. To conclude, the global recession has served as a harsh but necessary reminder about the importance of innovation in driving economic growth. In that context, the next stage should be for us to consider how international collaboration in this area can serve our national interests. British invention and German application sounds to me like a formidable combination. What has Labour done for science?

After the Tories let British science go to rack and ruin, Labour is building up the British research base • Labour has more than doubled the science budget over the past ten years, from £1.3 billion (1997) to £3.4 billion (2007). The science budget will continue to rise above inflation reaching almost £4 billion by 2010/11. • Labour is increasing spending on medical research by 30% over the next 3 years. It will receive over £1.9 billion over the next three years from the science budget to fund both basic and translational research. • Labour is funding a number of multi-disciplinary research programmes, including a major contribution to the £1 billion “Living with Environmental Change” programme; a new research programme on ageing; and increased investment in energy research and stem cells. • Labour’s funding for R&D (including Higher Education Funding Councils and Research Councils) stood at £ 7.4bn in 2006. • Labour has provided £2.3 billion of support for business through R&D tax credits during the first six years of the scheme that began in 2000. • Labour is supporting knowledge transfer , including through the Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF), which will receive £150M a year by 2010/11 to strengthen links between academia and business and help take research to the market. • Labour has increased capital expenditure through the Science Research Investment Fund (£500M per annum) and Full Economic Costing (£200M per annum), has significantly improved the research infrastructure in universities. • In 2006/07, the total resources made available under the Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) was £2.3 billion. The value of contracts made with SMEs was £136.9M, representing nearly 6% of the baseline budget. Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 6 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

Our investment is working – Britain is recognised as a world class science base • A fifth of the world’s current top selling medicines were discovered and developed in the UK. • Britain is the sixth largest manufacturing economy in the world. • With just 1% of the world’s population, UK produces 9% of all scientific papers and receives 12% of all citations. UK is second only to US on the majority of leading scientific indicators. • Between 1992 and 2003, the percentage of UK research papers with international co-authorship doubled, from 20% to 40%. • In 2005-06, over 40% of students studying for PhDs came from overseas. Labour has established joint ventures with business to solve challenges facing the world • The TSB has an important leadership role. It will develop and lead a strategic programme worth £1 billion over the next three years. o The TSB will be investing £100M in eight collaborative R&D technology areas – Materials for Energy; Technologies for Health; Advanced Lighting, Lasers and Displays; High Value Manufacturing; and Gathering Data in Complex Environments, Low Carbon Energy, Cell Therapy and the Creative Industry. o Five Innovation Platforms. An Innovation Platform creates the opportunity to bring together key partners (Government and business) to address a major societal challenge and to open up market opportunities to increase business investment in R&D and innovation:  Intelligent Transport Systems and Services  Low Impact Buildings  Network Security  Assisted Living  Low Carbon Vehicles • The Energies Technologies Institute was established as a 50:50 partnership between business and Government to raise up to £1 billion over ten years for low carbon energy R&D. • Public sector commitment announced publicly by DIUS (up to £50M per annum for 10 years) and DfT (up to £5M per annum for the CSR period to 2011). • Six companies already signed up (BP, Shell, E.ON UK, EDF Energy, Rolls-Royce and Caterpillar) creating the current capacity of up to £30M pa for matching by the public sector. Labour is encouraging STEM skills • Labour has invested over £20m to create 10 Science Learning Centres - 1 national centre and 9 regional centres in conjunction with the Wellcome Trust. A further r£10m over 5 years has been allocated for Project Enthuse, a scheme that covers the cost of teachers to attend courses at the national Science Learning Centre. • The DIUS-funded Science and Engineering Ambassadors (SEAs) programme now has over 18,000 individuals registered as SEAs and acting as role models within schools across the UK. • Latest UCAS figures for acceptances onto degree courses in 2007 show rises in some key STEM subjects in excess of the overall average increase for all subjects of 6.4% (Mathematics up by 9.1%; Chemistry 8.9%; Physics 12.4%). Some areas of engineering also showing above average increases. • PhD stipends paid by Research Councils have risen by almost 45% (from £9,000 to nearly £13,000 and just over £13,000 to study subjects of recruitment difficulty – including some scientific subjects) since 2002 and have more than doubled since 1999 (when they stood at £6,500). This list was prepared by Josie Cluer while Special Advsor to the DUIS

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 7 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

NESTA Another government initiative was to launch NESTA, the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts based on Lottery funding. This is an independent body with a mission to make the UK more innovative. NESTA does not work alone. Its approach is to forge partnerships between innovators, policymakers, community organisations, educators and other investors. With £50 million of its £400 million endowment being invested in start-up businesses, and £10 million available to invest every year, NESTA is now the UK’s single biggest seed capital investor.

NESTA Ventures invests directly in early-stage companies in the Life Sciences Dr John Unsworth and Healthcare sector and the ICT, Engineering and CleanTech sector, e.g. Chair of SfL via the Kinetique Biomedical Seed Fund, established in 1999, which invests in technologies relating to the biomedical sciences by providing start-up funding for spin-out companies from King’s College London and Queen Mary, University of London. This includes the development of therapeutics, drug-delivery systems, diagnostics, devices, biomaterials and IT related to healthcare, and some examples are:- • Immune Regulation, which is commercialising research based on the human stress protein BiP, an autoantigen in rheumatoid arthritis. Bip has been shown to have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties in mice. The company is carrying out work funded by a major pharmaceutical company, and is planning clinical trials in 2009. • Neurotex, which is developing a new generation of nerve repair from a new material based on high- strength modified silk called Spidrex®. • Odontis, which is developing a biological replacement tooth product - the BioToothTM, based on research demonstrating that tooth development can be initiated in stem cells, and that fully-formed teeth can be created in developmental models. The technology opens the potential for the implantation of cultured cells in patients to grow and replace missing or damaged teeth. NESTA has launched a number of initiatives to stimulate innovation by bringing together companies from very different sectors to work on common problems, e.g. the F1 motor racing team, McLaren, and air traffic control services, NATS. As a result race control computing developed by F1 team McLaren is now being adapted to aid the management of aircraft on the ground. In 2009 NESTA have focused on the role of innovation in the downturn and published several policy briefings, including The Connected University, Attacking the Recession, Demanding growth in Scotland and Demanding growth. These recommend that Government policy should focus on innovation and growth, supporting innovative sectors that have the potential for strong growth once the recovery begins. The Connected University addresses the importance of the innovative businesses created and supported by our universities which will be essential to allowing the UK to emerge strongly from the recession. For more information see http://www.nesta.org.uk/

SfL contributed to the idea of using Lottery funding for scientific initiatives before the 1997 election.

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 8 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk

SfL is pleased to share web links with : www.progressonline.org.uk/

Wanted webmaster Dr Fred A. Mellon retired as Head of Mass Spectrometry at the Institute of Food Research last year. More recently he moved to France. Fred has been our webmaster as long as I have been involved with Sfl but has now retired from the position. SfL thanks Fred for putting his skills to use for the society. So we are in need of a new webmaster. Volunteers are welcome from the whole membership. It might be that a new webmaster would prefer to use software that they are used to or would need a copy of deamweaver.

There are plans to integrate the website with a facebook site which Dr Fred Mellon would be administered by someone else. If you are interested in taking on this vital role please get in touch.

‘Science Matters’ is the newsletter of Scientists for Labour, a Socialist Society affiliated to the Labour Party.

Chair: John Unsworth, Ty Llanbedr, Allt-y-pentref, Gwynfryn, Wrexham, LL11 5YY. [email protected]

Secretary: Secretary Paul Connell, 2 Redwood Close, Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire,HR9 5UD [email protected]

Membership: Ann Kingsbury [email protected]

Science Matters No. 35 AGM 2008 page 9 of 9

http://www.scientists-for-labour.org.uk