Asked by
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of
the Medical Research Council's plans to close certain specialised
research units; and of the implications of those plans for
affected scientists.
The Minister of State, Department for Science, Innovation and
Technology ( of Balham) (Lab)
The Medical Research Council is changing how it supports research
across its units and centres following a review of its funding
models. The new MRC centres of research excellence model will
improve how we bring together the best science, skills and
leadership to focus on key challenges in medical research. All
existing units can apply for funding through this new model, or
transition to other models of MRC grant funding.
(Lab)
I am very grateful to the Minister for answering my Question and
I am pleased to hear that he supports the notion of these
specialised units. Does he agree, too, that these units are
particularly important in the study of relatively uncommon
diseases, often with a very high profile, and are extremely
unique? They all have an international reputation and have
produced a number of Nobel Prize winners. Is it not possible that
the current review, having received successful grant money from
the MRC, might destabilise these units, and we would end up
losing scientists who may be forced to go to other places? Does
he feel there is something we can do about that?
of Balham (Lab)
The noble Lord makes a very important point. In the transition to
this new model, all the existing units will be able to apply to
the new model and there will be transition arrangements for those
staff who do not become part of the new model and return to
funding from the host institution or through grant funding. He is
right that there will be specific centres with some role in
global resilience, or another bespoke reason to keep them going,
that will be looked at as special cases as part of this
process.
(CB)
My Lords, I declare an interest as professor emeritus of the
University of Dundee and its previous chancellor. The MRC unit in
Dundee on protein phosphorylation and ubiquitylation has spawned
many other sub-sections in cell signalling. I know the Minister
is aware of the number of drug molecules developed using
reversible phosphorylation. One of the aspects of the new system
will be that it will limit the number of postgraduate trainees. I
was always amazed how many postgraduates were graduating with a
doctorate—20 to 30 at any one time. The new system will limit the
ability to recruit that number of PhD students. That will be
damaging to the reputation of the unit and our global
recognition. Does he agree?
of Balham (Lab)
The noble Lord knows that I know that unit extremely well. It is
a very important unit globally and it was given an award of £30
million recently. The new model will allow for a longer period of
funding—seven years plus seven years' funding, so a total of 14
years—with a different process of evaluation, which is a
lighter-touch, less bureaucratic process. There is no reason why
there cannot be a similar number of trainees going through the
new system.
(LD)
My Lords, I declare an interest as chair of a university
governing council. To some extent the Minister's responses are
reassuring, but is this part of a wider trend towards
centralising decisions on research funding through UKRI? Are we
moving towards a situation where the Government will fund
research only within particular sectors set out in their
industrial strategy? If that is the case, will that not stifle
new research talent and innovation?
of Balham (Lab)
As the noble Lord may be aware, I have been very clear about the
need for supporting basic curiosity-driven, investigator-led
research, and I will remain resolute in that determination. Some
of these new centres have specified areas, such as mental health
and multi-morbidity, but there is a whole round which is
unspecified, allowing for people to put forward ideas of their
own for units of the future, which I believe will be important
for the very reason the noble Lord says.
(CB)
My Lords, I draw noble Lords' attention to my registered
interests. The funding base to support science in some of our
leading universities, including those that may host these centres
in the future, has become dependent on cross-subsidy from
overseas student income. Is the Minister content that, with the
obligation for universities to play a greater role in supporting
those centres that receive MRC status, the funding base for
scientific research in our universities is sufficiently secure to
make that possible?
of Balham (Lab)
Universities have been under pressure, as the noble Lord knows,
for a number of reasons, including student fees, overseas student
numbers and questions about the full economic costs of research
in addition to inflation. These are all important areas that will
need to be looked at. It is worth remembering that, over the
years, roughly one MRC unit per year has closed and a new one has
started. This process is part of that continuing change, which I
believe is important to make sure that we stay at the cutting
edge. As part of that, the staff on the new wards will be fully
paid. The principal investigator salary is the one that will have
to be picked up in part by a host institution or by other grants
coming in to provide support.
(Con)
Given the well-known fact that every £1 of government investment
generates a return of £3 to £4 to the UK economy, does the
Minister agree that any move to reduce government R&D spend
or to close specialist research centres would be an act of
economic self-harm, in direct contradiction to the Government's
claim to prioritise economic growth?
of Balham (Lab)
The noble Lord will be unsurprised that I am a strong supporter
of R&D funding and know the importance of its links to
economic growth. It is crucial that we look at the spread of
R&D funding. It is the case that it will be necessary, from
time to time, to shut some things and open new things—that has
always been the case—otherwise things become ossified and you
never end up with new programmes. I fully expect there to be a
continued pattern of renewed support for some areas and a closing
down of others. What is important in the context of this
particular scheme is that the same proportion of MRC funding will
be spent on these new centres as was spent on the old units and
centres.
Lord (LD)
My Lords, the Minister will be aware that there has been both
veiled and explicit criticism of the way in which UKRI conducts
its work, particularly work of a bureaucratic nature. Will the
Minister tell your Lordships' House what conversations are being
had between UKRI and his department, and indeed himself, to clear
up those issues?
of Balham (Lab)
I will speak about these particular schemes first. These are
seven years plus seven, with one review at the beginning and one
review at six years. The whole idea is to reduce bureaucracy and
make this simpler. UKRI is undergoing a full review of all its
activities, with the aim to reduce bureaucracy, following the
Grant review. I have discussed this with the CEO of UKRI and will
keep a very close eye on it. I believe it is important that
scientists get as much time as they can to do science.
of Drefelin (Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, in the new set-up, the
role of the charity sector, particularly the medical research
charities and the support that they give for what are often
MRC-funded or underpinned research projects, will be key going
forward? Is he sure that we have the right kind of environment
and that the ecosystem is working well enough to support this
charity contribution?
of Balham (Lab)
As my noble friend says, the charity sector has been incredibly
important for medical research in the UK, ranging from large
charities such as the Wellcome Trust through to smaller ones.
This new scheme will allow centres to have funded technical and
other support, which are the things that need great constancy,
and will allow the principal investigators to seek research
funding from others, including the charitable sector. The
charitable sector will remain an incredibly important part of our
system for funding scientific research in the UK.
(Con)
My Lords, I declare my interest as a serving Army reservist. With
all departments facing intense budgetary pressure, can the
Minister give any assurances about safeguarding budgets for
military research and development and, in particular, the Minerva
project?
of Balham (Lab)
I am obviously unable to comment on the upcoming Budget, but I
recognise the importance of military spending and of the DSTL
within that. I will continue to be a strong advocate for the need
for that as part of a successful resilience and defence strategy.
