Science and Engineering Research Council: Funding (Hansard, 12 February 1992)

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, government grant-in-aid to the Science and Engineering Research Council for 1992–93 is £520.8 million. This represents a real terms increase since 1979–80 of 16 per cent. This will enable the council to continue to fund a programme of high-quality research, much of it world class, in accordance with its Royal Charter.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, will my noble friend try to persuade the Treasury that arbitrary interruptions, particularly reductions in funding, can be particularly damaging—indeed crippling—to scientific research? In particular, can my noble friend shed any light on why the council has failed to make any progress at all as regards the very helpful agreement made with the Russians in 1990 for collaboration in molecular electronics?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I suspect that the Treasury is more likely to tremble at the prospect of a visit from my noble friend Lord Peyton than from me. However, in this instance I cannot be described as the guilty party. The interruption in spend to which my noble friend referred was not caused by the Treasury but by SERC's own shortcomings in financial planning areas. That was confirmed by last year's report by the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, which 716 acknowledged that SERC's difficulties were the result of shortcomings in the council's financial planning. The report states specifically that SERC had, "over-committed its available resources".
As regards the agreement with Russia to which my noble friend referred, there is no question of reneging on an agreement. The agreement on nanotechnology was an enabling agreement signed with the former Soviet Academy and the Soviet Science Society. SERC is not aware of any approaches made by the former Soviet Union for work to be carried out under this agreement. At present all such agreements with the previous Soviet Union agencies are now needing to be renegotiated with the relevant Russian or other agencies. I understand that SERC officials will be visiting Russia shortly to commence the necessary discussions.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, is the Minister aware that nearly 50 per cent. of the applications for research grants which are alpha-rated through peer review are actually turned down through lack of funding? Does she agree that that suggests that SERC does not have enough funds to carry out the purposes for which it was set up?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I believe that the noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone, will agree that the decision as to what SERC funds and what it rejects is very much its decision.

§ Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone
My Lords, purely for information, can my noble friend answer this question? I understand that the Medical Research Council is able to solicit funds from sources other than government. Can my noble friend say whether that is also true of the Science and Engineering Research Council or is it unable to do so?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I do not know the answer to that question. I shall find out and write to my noble and learned friend.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, the noble Baroness did not really answer my question. The point is that SERC would like to fund many more of the alpha-rated proposals but is unable to do so. Is the Minister also aware that there is a Nobel laureate whom the SERC has had to turn down recently for research funding who is also a Member of your Lordships' House?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, I well appreciate that there are difficult decisions to be made. But we have not discovered—I am sure that it applies to SERC too—the bottomless pit which allows every application to be accepted.

The Earl of Halsbury
My Lords, perhaps I may declare an interest as a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry—not a Nobel laureate, I might add. Is the noble Baroness aware of the scoring of only a 20 per cent. success rate? What steps are being taken to watch the liquidity of research councils? I have had 25 years' experience of sitting on them. They must not be allowed to get into a situation in which too few grants are terminating in any given year so as to enable them 717 to redeploy their financial resources. They are not chosen for skill in maintaining liquidity. They need help. What steps are the Government taking to give it to them?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, the noble Earl makes a very good point. There was a full review at SERC of the programmes and the operations of its financial planning. I am sure that the lessons from that have been well learnt and account taken.

§ Lord Peyton of Yeovil
My Lords, I doubt very much if the Treasury is entitled to the white sheet in which my noble friend clothes it. Will she press for some explanation as to why until now the council has taken no initiative of its own under the very useful agreement made with the Russians, welcome as is the news that it is to do so now?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, the political changes within the Soviet Union made the outlook uncertain. The situation has now become clear enough for the matter to be taken up again, and that will be done.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, we are all aware of the bottomless pit problem. Is the Minister aware that one of the few things we do in this country which is absolutely world class is research in chemistry? There is not the slightest doubt of our pre-eminence in that area. Can she not at least persuade the Treasury, given the many other crackpot things in which it invests money, that this may be an area for which a good deal more money might be found?

§ Baroness Denton of Wakefield
My Lords, the Science and Engineering Research Council covers a very wide remit with four broad subject areas: astronomy and planetary science, engineering, nuclear physics, and science. It has very difficult decisions to make in dividing spending between them.