Scientific Advisory Committees: Membership (Hansard, 19 May 1999)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville)
My Lords, all appointments made by Ministers are governed by the overriding principle of selection based on merit. More specifically, the Chief Scientific Adviser's Guidelines on the Use of Scientific Advice in Policy Making require scientific advisory committees to include a wide range of scientific opinion of the highest calibre; the Nolan guidance makes clear the conduct of integrity and openness expected of committee members; and where scientific advisory committees are defined as advisory non-departmental public bodies, the Commissioner for Public Appointments' guidance applies.

Earl Baldwin of Bewdley
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. Is he aware that from previous questions I have established that there is a preponderance of links with industry among these key committees, in some cases amounting to more than 80 per cent of their membership? Will he ensure that his ministerial colleagues—notably in MAFF, health and the environment—are alive to the need to recruit from a wider culture of scientists and lay people?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I hope I have made clear that the main consideration is to select people solely on the basis of merit and to include on these committees all the scientific disciplines needed to take decisions. We certainly try to achieve a balance of both people with commercial interests and those who have no interests to declare. The main principle is selection on merit. I was glad to see that the recent report of the House of Commons Select Committee on the scientific advisory system took the view that the integrity of scientists is not automatically compromised by an association with industry and that the barring of such scientists would deprive the Government of some of the best scientific advice available.

§ Lord Clement-Jones
My Lords, the Minister referred to the House of Commons Select Committee report. Does he agree with another of its conclusions, namely, that serious thought needs to be given by the Government to establishing clear guidelines on disclosure of interests for members of advisory committees, backed by active policies of annual disclosure, clear and transparent policies for review of disclosures and clear criteria for decisions on whether interests are material? Will the Minister commit to that?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, yes, all of those points are considered. If there are details which need to be clarified, then we should clarify them. Most 295 of the bodies have very clear registers of interests which cover most of the points. To the extent that they do not, I shall look into the matter.

§ The Countess of Mar
My Lords, is the noble aware that the veterinary products committee recently set up a working party to look into recombinant bovine somatotrophin? Two members of the committee have interests in Monsanto which manufactures that product. Bearing in mind the recent fiasco with the first Pinochet judgment in your Lordships' House, does the Minister regard those two particular members of the panel as independent?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, the general principles are very clear. In circumstances where a matter is being considered which has a direct financial implication for a company, then, in accordance with the Nolan principles, such persons are required to stand aside on that particular issue. I am sure that that will happen in this case.

§ Baroness O'Cathain
My Lords, will the Minister confirm that some of the best scientific brains are employed by industry and that enormous investment is made by industry in scientific research? Does he therefore agree that the fact that people are involved with industry should not automatically debar them? I have first-hand experience of taking market research right through what are termed near markets and applied research. That can only be of benefit as regards membership of these panels.

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I reiterate the point that the main consideration is to select people for these committees on the basis that they have the best scientific expertise to consider the questions that arise. We certainly do not exclude people on the basis that they have contacts in industry. The noble Baroness is right to point out that some of the best brains in these areas inevitably have contact with industry, whether through consulting, making speeches or other concerns. In the extremely wise words of my noble friend Lord Peston in a previous debate, if every time any leading scientist or engineer is appointed to an advisory committee scurrilous remarks about his or her integrity are made, in the end only second-rate people will be willing to work, and that would not serve this country well.

§ Lord McNair
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the difficulty of getting research done, particularly in alternative health fields, has an effect on the standing of the people who might subsequently be appropriate for appointment to such panels? There is, as it were, a bottleneck. Does the Minister further agree that, as soon as research is done into some of the alternative health issues, people who have the necessary status will emerge?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, there is always a difficulty with areas that are not considered to fall within the basis of current scientific criteria. In those 296 circumstances difficulties arise. The most important consideration is simply that there is transparency, and that scientific advice of this nature is brought into the public arena so that there is effectively peer review and people can say whether or not proper scientific criteria have been applied.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, will the noble Lord confirm the Government's adherence to the age-old democratic parliamentary position that experts should be on tap, never on top?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, these are advisory committees; they are asked to advise on specific technical questions. In many cases, Ministers will accept the findings because they relate to a technical question. However, the ultimate decision is always the ministerial one.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, does the Minister accept the need for wide public support and understanding of the work of these committees? With that in mind, are scientists with impeccable credentials who are trustees and advisers to charities considered for appointment to them?

§ Lord Sainsbury of Turville
My Lords, I repeat that appointment is on the basis of merit. Some of our most distinguished scientists work for charitable organisations and would be considered alongside other people.