Bulletin

Issue: November/December 2005

News

Visit by Britain’s top scientist highlights the importance of Science at the Heart of Government

Flood control, global warming, tsunami alerts, genetic modification of crops, defence, crime prevention, foot and mouth disease, drug addiction, third-world poverty – not to mention the day-to-day business of economic development and national wealth generation...

The centrality of science to our existence – and the urgent need to make it a core business of government in the 21st century – was brought home dramatically by Sir David King, Chief Scientific Adviser to the British Government, when he delivered this year’s La Trobe University Science Lecture.

La Trobe Dean of Science, Engineering and Technology, Professor David Finlay, said the lecture was a salutary lesson to Australia of the critical need to boost scientific agendas within government.

While visiting La Trobe’s main Melbourne campus at Bundoora, Sir David also accepted an Honorary Doctorate from the University for his contribution to science and science policy.

The title of his lecture was Science at the Heart of Government. Sir David heads the UK Office of Science and Technology and advises Prime Minister, Tony Blair, directly on scientific issues.

He has oversight of a £2.4 billion science budget, set to rise to £3.3 billion by 2007/8 and a team of eight chief scientific advisers – ‘appointed like myself, largely from the university sector, parachuted into government, with the ability to operate science professionally at the very top’.

Sir David cited a broad range of national benefits that flowed from this: from Britain’s rapid mobilisation against foot and mouth disease (he chaired Britain’s Foot and Mouth Disease Science Panel in 2001 and its Genetic Modification Science Review Panel in 2003) to rekindling national centres of industry where Britain today ‘can boast the largest number of high-tech industry clusters outside the USA.’

Science, if heeded, can also help governments deal with natural hazards. For example, he said studies into the seismic potential of major plate boundaries more than 25 years ago predicted one of the highest risk zones off Indonesia – site of the earthquake that caused last December’s catastrophic Indian Ocean tsunami.

As Chief Scientific Adviser and head of Science and Technology, Sir David has a staff of around 150, chairs Britain’s key science committees and is also a member of a number of cabinet committees.

‘I’m responsible to the Prime Minister for science across government – science advice and the science research base as well – and the coordination of science policy issues across government. This is a large task, especially with a government that is fully understanding of the ramifications of science.’

While science may be at the ‘heart’ of British government, Britain’s research councils are funded for research at ‘arm’s length from government’.

‘The chief executives and their boards are independent of government. All we do is cut up the cake, divide it amongst them and let them get on with the work.’

Turning to science within government, Sir David said: ‘We have science and innovation strategies from each department, and each of these strategies has to go through my department to be clarified, to be improved, before it goes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for approval on the budgeting. So we have a double step operation.’

He said Britain recently established the Global Science and Innovation Forum, which he chairs. ‘This is the only body in government that pulls together all players on the international scene in science, engineering and technology. The Foreign Office, the Department of International Development, the British Council, the Royal Society and the research councils all sit on that Forum.

‘Because the Prime Minister is particularly concerned about society being brought along with some of the advances that science can deliver for it, he has been keen that we establish a science and society group.’ One reason for this was the public’s difficulty in accepting genetically modified foods, which represent a ‘massive economic opportunity for the UK’.

Sir David said he also reviewed the quality of science and the ‘fitness to purpose’ of science in every government department every three years. ‘This is a new operation and the idea is to raise the quality of science advice right across government departments.’

He said his analysis of the state of science in countries around the world – which he carried out when he took up his government post in 2000 and also published in the science journal, Nature – demonstrated a relationship between scientific wealth and economic wealth.

‘I do believe that science in all of its ramifications, whether it is in terms of the actual research or in terms of the skills base that is produced, is an essential part of the economic growth of all of our countries. So it is no surprise to see that there is this correlation. I was very careful to check before I came out, to see that Australia did not look too bad on this graph. Your wealth intensity is a bit above the UK, and our science intensity is a bit above yours, but certainly Australia is a very big player in terms of international science.’

However, neither country matched the US when it came to wealth that could be generated from the science. ‘The US is supreme at generating wealth from its science base. Japan also has been particularly good at the exploitation of their science base into wealth.

‘There is no better investment a country can make today in terms of maintaining its competitiveness as we move forward in a globalised economy than through investing in science and skills.’

Sir David was heavily involved in producing the UK’s ten-year Science and Innovation Framework, 2004-2014, and has published more than 420 papers in scientific journals. He retains his professorial post in chemistry at Cambridge University and while at La Trobe was also able to meet members of the University’s surface chemistry group. Thanking Sir David for his contribution, La Trobe Science and Technology Dean, Professor Finlay, noted the value of Sir David’s proximity to top-level government in developing science policy in the UK.

‘The effectiveness of your organisation within government is an important message for us all in Australia. The example about responding to incidents like foot and mouth disease was salutary and, of course, climate change is also being very fiercely debated in this country.’

Professor Finlay said Sir David’s input in advising government on science funding ‘is also dear to my own heart and something that occupies a lot time for deans of science in this country.

‘I was also deeply impressed by the amount of funding that industry in the UK is able to provide – which is certainly not the case in this country at this time.’

Sir David King’s speech is available on www.latrobe.edu.au/news/2005/mediarelease_2005-95.php.