PROFESSOR COLIN BLAKEMORE, SIR JOHN CHISHOLM AND MR NICK WINTERTON

13 DECEMBER 2006

  Q400  Dr Harris: It may be that we will write to you to ask for a rebuttal of particular complaints about sharing, but I have one more question. I do worry personally, as well as politically from the Committee, that because of the unpleasantness previously there is now a stand-off position and it is going to be very difficult for the MRC, or, indeed, for that matter, if it came to it, senior staff at NIMR, to back down and say they were wrong. Let us deal with the MRC position because you are the people spend the money on our behalf. Are you aware of that sensitivity; that you have a chief executive who has been through a lot, Professor Blakemore, Sir John, around this and who may find it difficult to say, "Let's start again" or "Let's give this up"?—because of what we thought in our report was very unfair criticism of him on a personal level. I know it is difficult to have this conversation but I want to ask you whether you are confident that there is complete objectivity now available. For understandable reasons, there may not be, perhaps.

  Sir John Chisholm: I am obviously aware, because I have read the files, of the controversy and I am very aware of the currents of opinion, sometimes very polarised opinions, around this issue. I am very confident that the MRC was constituted as a council to make a balanced judgment at the end of the day. It will necessarily have to take proper accounts of all the views that have been expressed. All the issues which we have discussed today are certainly in the mix of things which we have to take account of.

  Professor Blakemore: I think it is very unfortunate that a legitimate and passionate discussion about the best way to pursue a scientific objective should have been transformed into criticism of individuals.

  Q401  Dr Harris: We shared that view. Do you feel you can make objective decisions, even if it meant going all the way back to the beginning?

  Professor Blakemore: Fortunately, I am not in the position of having to make decisions alone; I am supported by the Council, by the range of advice that is available, and that, I have to say, remains absolutely consistent.

  Chairman: I would like to hope this issue of communication is taken up by the council because clearly it is in nobody's interest, as Dr Harris has said.

  Q402  Dr Iddon: I would like to go back to category 4 versus category 3. You have category 4 facilities now at Mill Hill. In your planning application, will you be applying for category 3 or category 4 facilities?

  Professor Blakemore: We will be applying for HSE CL3 facilities—which I believe is uncontroversial with both Camden and with MI5. Such facilities exist all over London.

  Q403  Dr Iddon: Is it safe to handle the H5N1 avian influenza virus over those containment facilities or is that in conflict with the Defra containment requirements for animal pathogen advice?

  Professor Blakemore: To handle pathogenic avian flu virus, you require a licence from Defra because it is classified as a Defra 4 pathogen. To obtain that licence, the facility has to meet certain criteria. There has to be a shower available at the exit, there has to be a certain performance of negative pressure, air filtering and so on. It is perfectly possible to provide such performance within a facility which is classified by HSE as category 3.

  Q404  Dr Iddon: I am aware that a Member of Parliament but a PQ down which has caused some controversy.

  Professor Blakemore: Yes.

  Q405  Dr Iddon: There seems to be a controversy between whether you require category 3 or category 4. You are saying definitively to the Committee this morning that category 3 is okay for handling that virus.

  Professor Blakemore: And, as I have said, I will provide the correspondence that establishes that with a letter provided by the person who makes the decisions on issuing Defra SAPO licences.

  Dr Iddon: That would be helpful.

  Q406  Bob Spink: Is there ever likely to be a situation in the future where a category 4 facility might be used?

  Professor Blakemore: Anything is possible. If it should be that this institute in the future requires access to a full category 4 facility, we will do everything possible to provide it.

  Chairman: I think you have made that point before.

  Q407  Dr Turner: Sir John, the council is meeting this afternoon and will be discussing, as you say, all the options. Can you give me a yes or no answer as to whether the future development of Mill Hill will be one of the options discussed?

  Sir John Chisholm: Unfortunately this afternoon we will not be discussing the recommendation from the working group because there is not one this time.

  Q408  Dr Turner: Is Mill Hill an option or not?

  Sir John Chisholm: As we have explained, the do-nothing option always has to exist to continue as—

  Q409  Chairman: Sir John, with the greatest of respect, I am not going back over ground we have covered. The transcript will say exactly what you have said. Could I first of all thank you enormously, Colin Blakemore, John Chisholm and Nick Winterton, for a very important session this morning. Could I thank you for your patience with the Committee and thank my Committee for their patience with you.