33. The Government's Quinquennial Review of the Grant-Awarding Research Councils (QQR) in 2001 recommended that a new high level strategy group be established to enhance the collective leadership and influence of the Research Councils and secure greater strategic coordination in the funding of science. The review also concluded that:

• The Councils need to develop a clearer identity and purpose, whereby they will be able to establish stronger links with the other major science funding organisations, including the funding councils, Government Departments and the major charities; and
• A closer relationship is needed between the Councils and other key stakeholders, including the universities and the business and public service organisations which use their research and expertise.

34. In response to the Quinquennial Review of the Research Councils, Research Councils UK was launched on 1 May 2002. The venture is led by the Research Councils UK Strategy Group. The membership of this group comprises the Chief Executives of the seven Research Councils and the Director General of the Research Councils.

35. An internal review was held after the first year of RCUK's operation to determine whether the RCUK partnership was on course to deliver its objectives and to identify areas for improvement. It was undertaken in April and May 2003 by external consultants Peter Saraga (formerly of Philips Research Laboratories) and Tony Quigley (formerly of OST). The Review concluded that RCUK had made a promising start.[40] There was a great deal of support for the RCUK concept and goodwill towards making it a success, but it was felt that after only 12 months, it was too soon to determine the long term success of the venture. The Review's 13 recommendations are primarily about clarifying the role of the RCUK partnership and the RCUK Strategy Group and providing clear and consistent messages about the long-term goals of RCUK. The RCUK Strategy Group has agreed these recommendations and implemented a programme of work to deliver the improvements needed.[41]

36. It has been a feature of our scrutiny programme of the Research Councils that they go about their work in different ways, often for reasons that are not apparent. The argument for differences tends to be that their research communities have different demands. We have argued on several occasions that the Research Councils should be more responsive to their communities, so we would not wish to support harmonisation for the sake of it. Nevertheless, some differences in policies and grant schemes are completely unnecessary. These make comparisons between Councils difficult and, more seriously, could create obstacles to interdisciplinary research. A physicist wishing to work at the life science interface should not have to learn the particular processes and terminology of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC). It is also important that best practice is adopted by all Councils, where appropriate. For example, a recent trend has been the introduction of peer review colleges by several Research Councils to replace standing boards and committees. The EPSRC made clear to us the benefits of the new system.[42] The BBSRC, conversely, stressed that its community preferred the existing scheme.[43] It was not clear to us why a system would provide advantages for one Council and not another.

37. The OST has commissioned an independent review to look at the first two years of RCUK, as recommended by the Quinquennial Review of the Grant-Awarding Research Councils.[44] We understand that this will report to Ministers in July 2004. Research Councils UK has been a useful initiative. We look forward to further progress in collaboration between Research Councils and greater convergence in administrative procedures and structures.

41   Ev 17 Back

42   Ninth Report of the Science and Technology Committee, Session 2002-03, The Work of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, HC 936, para 51 Back

43   Third Report of the Science and Technology Committee, Session 2003-04, The Work of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, HC 6, para 26 Back

44   Office of Science and Technology, Quinquennial Review of the Grant-Awarding Research Councils, Stage Two, Report by the Review Team, November 2001,Target 7.4 Back