The UK does not participate in the International Space Station (ISS) project and compared with most other ESA Member States the UK has been least convinced that the study of life and physical sciences in space is worthy of significant support. I believe that this situation has arisen as a consequence of the low priority assigned to manned spaceflight programmes by UK Space Policy, and the dominance of astronomy projects in securing funding from the UK Space Science budget, with no clear line of potential funding for areas such as microgravity R&D (as is the case with most other industrialised nations). Indeed, as a consequence of this policy, UK scientists and industrialists have been excluded from exploring opportunities aboard the ISS. I believe that this policy should now be re-assessed by the Select Committee.

  In his statement of 13 December the Science Minister announced that research into microgravity and astrobiology was to get a £1.4 million boost by the UK joining ESA's EMIR-2 programme. The first point that I would make to the Select Committee is that astrobiology and microgravity are two entirely separate subjects, and must be treated as such when lines of public funding are established. Astrobiology is the study of the origin, evolution, adaptation and distribution of past and extant life in the universe; microgravity R&D is the study and application of scientific and industrial processes in a weightless, or convection-free environment (enabling processes that are impossible in terrestrial laboratories). It is most important that the Committee recognises this distinction. I would also make the case that this funding is a case of "too little, too late", as UK scientists now lag far behind their international competitors, as a consequence of lack of funding and flight opportunities.

  In 1996 my company conducted a study related to this subject, entitled "The Potential Impact of Space-Based R&D on the Competitiveness of the UK Pharmaceutical Industry". I enclose a copy of the final report. I would particularly draw the attention of the Committee to the submissions from UK industry (in the annex) [63]that considered it essential that access to space facilities was ensured in order to enable further systematic studies of microgravity R&D.

  Following the study my company assisted Glaxo Wellcome in the assignment of facilities on a Space Shuttle flight (STS 95), with the objective of pursuing a drug design project, related to the treatment of asthma. Unfortunately, the experiment did not take place, as the complex protein concerned could not be prepared in time. Lately, however, there has been little activity in the UK (as a consequence of lack of flight opportunities), although R&D in other countries has advanced dramatically, and reports from the USA indicate that drugs developed from data acquired in space have now entered clinical trials.

  I believe that the UK should capitalise on membership of EMIR 2 by undertaking a proactive exercise to identify and facilitate further commercially relevant flight experiments, in all sectors of UK industry (and not just the pharmaceutical industry). This would be based on a process of identifying commercially exploitable operations in space, identifying the potential beneficiaries of space-based R&D in UK industry, discussing the potential benefits with selected industries and facilitating identified space activities with the appropriate institutions. (I understand that BNSC is undertaking similar activities to establish a market for Earth Observation products, in order to capitalise on public investment by HMG). It is only when the results of such a study can be analysed by academics and industrialists that a UK Space Policy concerning microgravity R&D can be properly determined.

  I would therefore suggest that the Select Committee recognises the potential benefits of microgravity R&D to the UK economy, establishes a dedicated line of public funding to properly assess these benefits and, if appropriate, initiate a policy that ensures access to orbital laboratory facilities for UK researchers.

February 2000