WEDNESDAY 18 APRIL 2007

MALCOLM WICKS MP, AND DR DAVID WILLIAMS

  Q640  Graham Stringer: I understand that, but does it lead to any practical problems in implementing these programmes or approaching developments with a user-driven approach?

  Dr Williams: It is not so much a user-driven approach. There are two issues on security and the MoD. One is that within Europe services that in the UK are civilian, the marine coastguards, passport control and some of the Home Office functions, are actually military functions in other countries in Europe, so there is a boundary variable. In terms of employing money, the issue we have is always that we cannot employ civil money to meet a purely military goal and, similarly, military money should not be used to meet a civil goal, if it is only a civil goal. Where you have got the dual technology you can try and work together but there are some practical difficulties. I think we are trying to overcome them in the basic joint technology programme that we are trying to establish, which I think addresses some of your concerns about driving the technology policy; if we get that technology programme running it does allow us to have an underpinning technology capability that sits behind the user-driven approach.

  Chairman: I think that is probably the best way of also incentivising business as well—the point my colleague made about SMEs—because you bring all those into that particular agenda. Thank you very much indeed.

  Q641  Dr Turner: Malcolm, you have finished the consultation on space strategy now. Would you care to comment on the quality and number of responses you have received? What is your timetable for publishing the resulting strategy?

  Malcolm Wicks: I think we have had a good consultation. We have had a significant number of submissions (I am trying to think how many—100 or so, it tells me here)—130, I am suddenly reminded. We have had a number of replies, quite a lot from private individuals but, obviously, quite a number from institutions. We have been pleased with the consultations and we are just trying to assess them now. Our plan, come the autumn, is to publish our response in terms of our space strategy. So, if I may say so, this Committee's inquiry fits very well into our own timescale.

  Q642  Dr Turner: Do you think we will see any change in the balance between the three key issues involved in the strategy? Will you want to advance one more than another, or whatever?

  Malcolm Wicks: Our objectives to-date have been, I think, ones that you would be familiar with. One is delivering world-class science in this area; secondly, delivering public benefits, in partnership with other institutions, and I have already said I am just wondering whether there is a part of the public policy agenda which we have not yet tackled.

  Q643  Dr Turner: We will have transponders for grannies?

  Malcolm Wicks: I was about to say there will always be those who trivialise, but then I suddenly remembered I was in front of a rather august Select Committee and that would appear rude! I would not laugh at these things. Surely, if satellite technologies can help us monitor and traffic, there are even more laudable purposes that we can use them for.

  Q644  Dr Spink: Would you allow me, since I mentioned transponders for grannies? In fact, it might be very useful to a granny who falls over and breaks her hip in her home to signal to someone that she needs help.

  Malcolm Wicks: If you combine the technology that now exists in terms of the health monitoring of individuals, with satellite technology—

  Q645  Chairman: I think we have been here! Listen, at my age I am convinced this is an area you should be moving down, Minister!

  Malcolm Wicks: It was not me who reintroduced the subject! So public benefits, but also the economic and commercial aspects of this in terms of this becoming an important part of the British economy. They are the objectives to-date. I do not think they will radically change but there is no point us consulting and, not yet having read all the responses, coming to our conclusion now.

  Q646  Dr Turner: If you do come up with any significant changes in the strategy or emphasis in the strategy, will there be enough money to fund them?

  Malcolm Wicks: Well, the relationship between the money available and the strategy is an interesting one, is it not, and I am not going to talk about the Comprehensive Spending Review—that would not be appropriate for me to do so.

  Q647  Dr Turner: That is a shame; I was going to ask you!

  Malcolm Wicks: Clearly, we need to secure the resources that we require. Already, I think, Britain—and you have got the table and I have recited the figures—is spending quite significant amounts of money in the public sector on space and in the private sector there is a lot of investment. I think, and it relates to an earlier question, compared with some other countries, to be blunt, we are spending our money in a more rigorous and cost-effective way, partly because of the desire to apply it to practicable problems and to pick very carefully what European projects we back and which ones we leave others to back.

  Q648  Dr Turner: I was going to ask you anyway, Malcolm, although you are clearly a little reluctant to pass much comment on it, the implications of the early announcement of the CSR as far as science and technology is concerned; the 2.5% per year growth in real money terms. How do you see that impacting on space research?

  Malcolm Wicks: The actual increase for the science budget at the DTI is 2.7% per annum in real terms going forward, so it is a very considerable investment in science. Given the important role of one or two research councils in this area, this, all other things being equal, can only be good news for space science. The other thing worth remembering is the recent European settlement, Chairman, FP7—Framework Programme 7—which has just been agreed by the Commission and the Parliament, which shows a very considerable increase in money available for research. As part of that there is a stream for space science. I am trying to think of the figure we can give you.

  Dr Williams: 1.4 billion euro in total.

  Malcolm Wicks: I am very excited by FP7, generally, because it is based on excellence. It is based on the quality of applications and in the past, not surprisingly given the excellence of our scientists, we have had, as it were, more than our national share of that budget. There is no reason to think that should not be the case for space science as well.

  Q649  Dr Iddon: I want to come to manned space, and Britain's possible part in that. You referred earlier, Malcolm, to a meeting you had had with Michael Griffin, and the agreement that is going to be signed by Sir Keith tomorrow. Following that meeting, you said, and I quote you, that: "this millennium's great adventure" is probably going to be manned spaceflight. What do you see as the likely timescale for that and will Britain be a contributor, following your meeting with Michael Griffin, in manned space at some time in the future? David Williams told this Committee that he did not see a need to make a decision on that, certainly in the next 10 years. Are we bringing that decision forward?

  Malcolm Wicks: What the best evidence and what the science tells us, at the moment, is that man's/woman's exploration of space should not be a priority for the United Kingdom. Given the scientific objectives, there are other mechanisms to achieving the data and improving the science. That is the advice I am receiving, I think it is probably the advice the Committee will have received, and I have found no reason to second-guess that scientifically. Having said that, however, and I started off in this way, I think there is an instinct among people to further explore and to further explore space. We have all noted NASA's really very ambitious plans now to move towards a base on the moon, partly as a base to do scientific research but then to think about exploration of Mars, and my own judgment about that (and I am not contradicting myself, I do not think) is that that exploration should involve Britain to a very full extent in terms of our contribution to technologies. If, in the future, that enabled British men and women to explore space (and I think we are talking about quite a long-term future) that would be wholly appropriate. I think it would be a wonderful thing. It would be, particularly, a way of engaging young people in the importance of space and the importance of science. I think it has impacts that go beyond, although they include, the purely scientific.

  Q650  Dr Iddon: Was this a point of discussion when you met Michael Griffin? Did he put you under pressure about manned space?

  Malcolm Wicks: No, there was no pressure at all but, clearly, NASA are very keen to collaborate with other partners including the United Kingdom. They have a great deal of respect for our areas of expertise, and the agreement that will be signed shortly by Sir Keith O'Nions with NASA really symbolises, I think, our enthusiasm about working together on certain aspects of space.

  Q651  Dr Iddon: The whole of this discussion this morning and many of the discussions we have had in this area on this inquiry have suggested that Britain is only prepared to invest in space research providing it has some commercial return. Are we prepared to invest in blue-sky research, if you will pardon the pun—work that might not bring a commercial return? Is there any evidence that we are doing that at the moment?

  Malcolm Wicks: Yes. As I say, we discussed earlier the balance you need to strike in all areas between what you might call pure and what you might call applied, although I noted that sometimes there is a blurring, perfectly appropriately, of those two aspects. The answer has to be yes, it is very important, and I think this will largely be through our research councils, that we do invest in basic research in terms of astronomy, robotics, IT and the rest. It is very important that we do that. Although we are all concerned about innovation and commercial exploitation, that is not the whole purpose of science, knowledge and research. The quest for knowledge for its own sake has to be at the heart of any decent science policy.

  Q652  Dr Iddon: It appears to me we are a key player in the Aurora programme. Are we able, having signed up to that initially, to pull out of that programme if it moves from robotic exploration of space to manned exploration of space, as it inevitably will with the aim to land on Mars around 2033?

  Malcolm Wicks: Let David give you a better answer on that.

  Dr Williams: We are, because there has already been an attempt to do that by ESA by changing the declaration. We very specifically blocked a change that would involve the UK being automatically committed beyond the robotic phase. So they have now had to separate the way they have structured the financial, legal framework to the programme to make it clear that one part is robotic and one part can be something else. We are very alert to that sort of issue and it is not because we may not, in the future, want to go there, it is because at the moment we have to go where we have got authority to go to as an organisation and agency. That has been picked up very specifically at the present time.

  Q653  Dr Iddon: Thank you. The Space Exploration Working Group. Are you able to indicate early findings of that or is that something that is a bit hush-hush at the moment?

  Dr Williams: The global exploration—?

  Q654  Dr Iddon: BNSC has set up a Space Exploration Working Group, composed of 22 scientists. That is the one I am referring to.

  Dr Williams: That is in response to the big global exploration working group. I think that is still too early. They have only met between them one or two times and I have not seen any output from them at this stage, I have to say.

  Q655  Dr Iddon: Any timescale on that?

  Dr Williams: We are hoping for it in the timescale of the strategy, so that we get something before the summer.

  Q656  Dr Spink: Minister, you said, wisely, to Dr Turner about 15 minutes ago that we, as a nation, spend our small space budget probably more wisely and more carefully than some other nations do, and we are delighted to hear that. However, you cannot really do space without launchers, so do we not spend much money on launchers in this country?

  Malcolm Wicks: Because you can do space without British launchers, I think, is the very simple answer to that question. Once upon a time it would have been very difficult to launch something into space without your own launcher but I think the advice and the empirical evidence now is that that is no longer the case, and I think the test for that so far, through you, Chairman, has been that we have found no problems in Britain in actually launching satellites into space; either through the Americans or the Europeans or using Russian launchers there seems to be quite a healthy market, as I understand it, in launchers. Would it be sensible for us, for the sake of it, to have our own launcher system? Our judgment is no.

  Q657  Dr Spink: That is certainly the evidence that would be given by David Williams. David, you probably are aware by now that we have received contrary evidence to that from Jean Jacques Dordain, the Director General of ESA, who told us, and I quote: "I am not too sure that [you] can find a launcher anywhere any time on the market". He was really giving a contrary case to the one that you gave. Can you explain, please?

  Dr Williams: I think that is availability of product rather than availability in terms of conceptual buying. The current problem, and there is a short-term problem, is that a certain sea launcher has failed, as a result future orders have switched to other launchers and, as a result, the launcher market is sold out. It is not that you cannot buy one, it is that the market is currently saturated. Whether the UK is in the Ariane programme or out, that would not change. The market is there to buy launchers. At the particular moment in time, whether there are enough launchers being built is another issue, whether you have to wait for a launch. I think Jean Jacques was giving a different answer; it was not that you cannot go out and get a launcher, it was that you might have a problem finding a launcher at a specific moment in time because of the number of launchers physically available in the world.

  Dr Spink: I am sure we will examine the semantics of that very carefully.

  Q658  Chairman: I do not understand that at all.

  Dr Williams: If you want to buy a car and you want a certain model, and it is not available for six months, you have to wait six months, but you can still buy the car.

  Malcolm Wicks: You are saying there is a queue.

  Dr Williams: There is a queue for the launchers, certainly.

  Q659  Chairman: We create a market opportunity?

  Dr Williams: Yes, and then the companies that build launchers are trying to respond to that, but there is a time-lag. You cannot suddenly build three to four extra launchers in the next couple of weeks.