PROFESSOR MALCOLM GRANT CBE AND PROFESSOR MIKE SPYER

24 JANUARY 2007

  Q480  Dr Iddon: Do you think this embedding of research council institutes within university campuses is a current fashion that will continue or do you think there is a role for research council institutes to stand independent on somewhat isolated sites in some cases?

  Professor Grant: I think it depends on the mission of the research institute. One of the driving factors behind the proposed move of NIMR is that there is a change in mission. The purpose of the MRC in proposing this is to bring about a renewal with a more translational aspect which does, they would argue, require a colocation with clinical services particularly.

  Q481  Dr Iddon: My final question is this: by embedding research institutions which are research only on university campuses we will confirm the attitude in some academics' minds that their departments should become research-only departments and we all know that some academics would rather do full-time research than teach as well. Do you think we are heading towards research-only universities by bringing these institutes and attracting academics perhaps to force their departments to become research only?

  Professor Grant: No, absolutely not. To put it in proportion, these research institutes in terms of their total turnover are pretty small compared to our major universities. We are looking at UCL with an operating budget of £465 million and total expenditure of £600 million. NIMR is big but it is a relatively small proportion of that total spend.[2] Secondly, any university that became a research-only institution would have completely abdicated the right to call itself a university. The most effective form of knowledge transfer that we achieve is by educating our students and particularly in this context educating the next brand of PhD students who will become the biomedical research scientists of the future.

  Q482  Chairman: Thank you very much indeed, Professor Grant and Professor Spyer. Could I just ask finally, in terms of British medical science if this project does not get approval through the Treasury, will British science and medical science be the loser?

  Professor Grant: It certainly will be if it effects the destruction of NIMR. There is a very real risk if there is not a vision for the renewal of NIMR and there is not a vision for reinvestment in its existing model at Mill Hill, and there is a big question mark over one of the country's most distinguished medical research institutes, and that cannot be anything but damaging for British biomedicine.

  Chairman: That is a very sobering thought on which to end. Thank you very much, Professor Grant and Professor Spyer.