SIR JOHN CHISHOLM

20 JUNE 2007

  Q40  Linda Gilroy: Do you see it as part of your role as chairman to be the guardian of how MRC carries out one of its four missions in life, which is public engagement, to see that it should be proper engagement, or would you leave that to the chief executive and the director?

  Sir John Chisholm: You are quite right. I will certainly see it as part of my role to ensure that all the things the Council was responsible for actually discharged their duty. I would certainly look forward the chief executive reporting on how he had done it. It is not my job to do that, that is the role properly of the chief executive and the executive team.

  Q41  Linda Gilroy: You would accept the role of ensuring that he conducts that in a way that allows proper engagement rather than presentation.

  Sir John Chisholm: Exactly. I would certainly expect to be a longstop in the sense of the recipient of any impression from the public or any other bodies who felt that was not being done properly. The chairman acts as a longstop in that way.

  Q42  Linda Gilroy: In general you would agree that true consultation means genuine seeking of views before decisions are taken rather than transmitting the understanding of the shape of things to come by the great and the good.

  Sir John Chisholm: Yes. Obviously there are areas where public engagement can be a whole lot more effective than others. One of the areas to be reviewed we have been talking about related to the size and shape of the Council. Typically that is not an area where the public get that excited.

  Q43  Linda Gilroy: The staff might have some informed views on that?

  Sir John Chisholm: Possibly. For instance, the fact that the Council retains very strong scientific credibility is the sort of thing I would expect the staff to be interested in, as indeed the Council is interested in.

  Q44  Chairman: Can I ask to go back to the Ernst & Young appointment? Was the chief executive involved in the decision to bring in Ernst & Young?

  Sir John Chisholm: Yes, absolutely.

  Q45  Chairman: He was involved in the whole process of choosing Ernst & Young.

  Sir John Chisholm: Yes. Clearly the Council made the decision and the chief executive was involved in the processes leading up to advising the Council.

  Q46  Chairman: It would be very useful if we could have sight of what the process was because it was a highly influential and critical report from the steering group. It would be useful to know how that process of them being chosen came about. You were the chairman of the steering group. In response to Linda Gilroy's questions, you seem to be a little vague about what your role was as chairman of the steering group.

  Sir John Chisholm: I apologise for being vague.

  Q47  Chairman: My understanding is there were three members of the MRC and one member of Ernst & Young. That was the ratio on the steering committee and you were chairman. What was your role as chairman of that steering committee? What were you trying to achieve?

  Sir John Chisholm: I am sorry about being vague. As it happens, I was out of the country at that time.

  Q48  Chairman: You did not actually chair the steering committee?

  Sir John Chisholm: I did but at least one of the steering group meetings I attended by telephone.

  Q49  Chairman: The only meeting you attended was by telephone.

  Sir John Chisholm: No, not the only meeting. I said one of the meetings I attended was by telephone. I happened to be out of the country over the period during which the review was being conducted, therefore my input to it was the report-back sessions when I participated with others as the findings or the progress on the review was discussed.

  Q50  Dr Harris: On the joint review, in terms of the outcomes, what do you think the main recommendations are among the many in the joint review, the key ones, as far as you are concerned?

  Sir John Chisholm: The topics that the Council has taken forward are the changes to the Council itself, the taking up of recommendations that the Council should take a more strategic role and delegate more to the executive board the operational decisions; secondly, that there should be a clearer strategy process within the MRC; and, thirdly, that the MRC should clarify its process for translation.

  Q51  Dr Harris: The speed of implementation and the speed of the review, can you say a few words about that? Would you say it was a leisurely exercise, a moderate exercise, or was it all done in a rush or to a tight timetable and, if so, what was the timescale? What dictated the timescale of the review?

  Sir John Chisholm: What dictated the timescale of the review was the Council had a series of meetings and it is useful to provide the Council with relevant input for particular meetings. There was a two-day strategy discussion in March and it was useful to have feedback from the review by March.

  Q52  Dr Harris: Had it not been for the fact that was the back stop, as it were, it might have been possible to conduct the review at a slower pace?

  Sir John Chisholm: It might have been. Indeed, the Council who reviewed it in March might have decided that it was not satisfied with what it was achieving from the review and asked for more work to be done. Those are all possible outcomes.

  Q53  Dr Harris: The Joint Review recommends that the current Council of 17 members should be cut to 12. What was the rationale for that?

  Sir John Chisholm: Effectiveness probably.

  Q54  Dr Harris: What was the evidence that 17 tends to be less effective than 12, or is likely, in the case of the MRC, to be less effective than a smaller Council? Is it because the average size of a FTSE 100 company board is between 9 to 12 and therefore 17 is out with the current trends in business?

  Sir John Chisholm: I do not think it is a special revelation that smaller groups are more effective than larger groups. The Council you have to remember meets relatively few times per annum, maybe half a dozen times per annum.

  Q55  Dr Harris: I was a little confused. As a general rule, is this Committee too large in your view? I know it is in the Chairman's view. Where does that end? Should the Cabinet be 9 to 12? Have you passed that on? What about the Research Councils UK? Is there a magic number from some business guru that I have missed out on, which is possible as I am not a business person?

  Sir John Chisholm: I am not here to indulge upon management theory. I am asked by you to explain my understanding of the rationale for the recommendations. I went to observe an MRC Council meeting, the last Council meeting before I took over as chairman, and there were 18 people around the table. The meeting lasted two hours and there were 31 items on the agenda. The dynamics of that is that not many people around the table got an opportunity to engage fruitfully in the discussion. It is an observed fact that if I look at the attendance record historically of the MRC it is not as good as one would want.

  Q56  Dr Harris: 17 people do not always turn up so on average there might only be 12?

  Sir John Chisholm: I do not have the average figure. It is true that the attendance is not as good as we would want. That is usually an indicator that the meeting could be better organised.

  Q57  Dr Harris: Could it be an indicator that the scientists on the Committee are doing science. It is an international business. I would never criticise you for being abroad. I know you are not criticising these Council members for being abroad. Could it be the case that in order to retain a critical input of advice from active scientists that you have to have a given number on the Committee and you have to allow them to be active otherwise you get a bunch of retired scientists who might not be in touch.

  Sir John Chisholm: You make that speculation and we could discuss that.

  Q58  Dr Harris: We should discuss it.

  Sir John Chisholm: I do not have further and better evidence than that which was considered by the review board and they came up with their recommendation which the Council considered and was convinced by.

  Q59  Dr Harris: Will the Council include the funding board chairs, will it include representatives of the MRC research institutes and will it include a member from the universities? Since I mentioned one vested interest we should mention the others.

  Sir John Chisholm: Half the Council will be eminent scientists.