Regulation of Research
28. One area where we heard that the UK has a
clear advantage over countries such as Germany and the USA is
the regulatory framework within which biotechnology research is
conducted. A major constraint on the development of biotechnology
in Germany in the past, for instance, was the restrictive regulatory
regime that made certain areas of research very difficult. Although
regulation has been liberalised recently, the ban on stem cell
research highlights the difficulties that still remain there.
The United States has also undergone a high profile debate about
stem cell research which, we were told, has reached a satisfactory
conclusion. However, powerful lobbies there would like to see
such research banned and certain states have imposed restrictions
that are making research in the field difficult.
29. In contrast, the UK can be seen to have a
comparatively liberal framework of regulation. Many of those we
met on our visits to Germany and the USA were envious of the relative
freedom enjoyed by British scientists. The prospect of tight restrictions
being imposed on biotechnology research is seen by scientists
as a real threat and it appears that they are prepared to move
to avoid these restrictions. We were told of a prominent biotechnology
research team that had abandoned Massachusetts for California
for this reason. If tighter restrictions were imposed more generally
in the USA, the UK would presumably prove a reasonably attractive
alternative and a migration of research expertise could take place.
However, the more liberal regime in the UK cannot be taken for
granted and countries such as Singapore now form a genuine alternative.
Regulation of aspects of biotechnology research has recently been
discussed at European Union level and public opinion in a number
of member states favours stricter regulation — or even outright
bans — on some types of research. Whilst the UK has so far
preserved its right to impose its own regulatory regime, pressure
for the setting of standards at European level is likely to continue.
Policies vary across the EU and it remains a contentious issue
for some member states.
30. While we agree that regulation should
set clear, ethical limits beyond which researchers should not
be allowed to go, public opinion in the UK seems broadly content
with the difficult ethical balance struck in the regime here.
We would therefore oppose any attempt to tighten regulation here.
We are aware that the Government takes the same view, but we wish
to underline the importance of continuing vigilance; the regulatory
environment for biotechnology research in the UK is a real source
of advantage and must not be undermined by developments at the
European level.
Conclusion
31. Excellence in research cannot in itself
ensure commercial success in biotechnology but it does seem to
us that its absence will preclude it. The UK has a fine tradition
of research in biotechnology and has made good progress in translating
some of this research into the commercial world. Levels of investment,
however, remain a problem, with the UK spending less than its
competitors on research and on the HE sector as a whole. Whilst
the UK is still performing creditably, there must be some concern
about the degree to which this can be sustained over the long
term.
14 App 4 Back
15
App 14 Back
16
Q 154 (Prof Dunnill) Back
17
OECD, Benchmarking Industry-Science Relationships (Paris,
2002), Fig. 5c, p.36 Back
18
Michael E Porter & Christian H M Ketels, UK Competitiveness:
Moving to the Next Stage, DTI Economics Paper No.3 (London,
April 2003) Back
19
Ibid. Fig. 12, p.23 Back
20
HC Deb, 26 June 2003, col 922W Back
21
Office of the Budget/NIH Back
