October 5, 2007

leading scientists comment on Lord Sainsbury’s review of government science and innovation policies

The review includes recommendations to strengthen the teaching of science in schools and increase investment in science and technology in the UK.

Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society, said:

“This comprehensive review of innovation is a timely reminder of the central role that science can play in our economy. It maps out ways in which the UK can make better use of the incredible natural resources we have in terms of scientific knowledge and skills.

“Too often in the past we have not fully capitalised on our advantages because of a fragmented approach to supporting innovation and complacency about the ongoing quality of our science. The report’s recognition of the importance of coordination, support for the relevant players, strengthening education and international cooperation must now be backed up with the commitment and sustained financial support necessary to fulfil our potential.

“The importance of innovation in the service sector has long been overlooked, yet it is one of the UK economy’s most vibrant sectors. The Royal Society has already started looking at how to best to capitalise on this and will be undertaking a review over the coming year. We will be keen to work with the Government to make sure that the full potential of this area is achieved.”

Dr Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, said:

“This is an excellent package of recommendations. Proposals in three areas are particularly welcome. The first is the recognition that basic research is the bedrock of innovation and that Government should continue to expand the budget for basic research. Second is the support for translation of discovery into application by strengthening the role of the Technology Strategy Board. Third, the future of UK society and the UK economy depends on the education of our children. I welcome the identification by Lord Sainsbury of the key role of the National Science Learning Centre in providing much needed continuous professional development for science teachers.”

Philip Greenish CBE, Chief Executive of The Royal Academy of Engineering, said:

“Lord Sainsbury is absolutely right to highlight the ‘knowledge economy’ as the UK’s best strategy for effective competition in the future. Recent research by our Academy shows that this vision could be under threat within ten years due to a shortage of high quality graduate engineers. We need a step change in investment and modernization of the way we teach tomorrow’s engineers if they are to capitalise on the opportunities of globalisation.

“Young people are incredibly confused about the career paths open to them after an education in science and maths. This has to be addressed if we are to bring the best of our young talent into science and engineering based wealth-creating careers.”

Sir Richard Sykes, Rector of Imperial College London, said:

“We agree with Lord Sainsbury’s thesis and his work is worthy of first-class honours. But this is no academic exercise; this is an important contribution to Britain’s competitiveness in the 21st century.

“We compete on brain-power today and if we are going to be a prosperous and successful nation for much longer we have to recognise that it means investing in our future brains at an early stage.

“We will simply not be able to compete in the knowledge economy if we do not build an education system to deliver it. So we must attack the problem at a young age as the Sainsbury report prescribes; we must follow up all its recommendations for increasing the number of inspiring teachers in science.

“We have to reach out to 13 and 14 year olds and explain that all the big problems facing the world – climate change, falling natural resources, public health and quality of life – are going to be solved by scientists and engineers. If they follow science and engineering as a career path these young pioneers will one day make an absolutely critical difference.

“Lord Sainsbury has also clearly recognised the different missions and distinctive contributions that universities each make, and helpfully he has acknowledged that some should be business-focussed.

“Now the challenge is to push each group of universities forward in what they are best at, not to artificially hold any back. That means abandoning a one-size-fits-all approach, and more appropriately recognising and rewarding excellence according to each university’s mission and contribution.”