1. (Recommendation 1) The Committee recognises that the UK will benefit from a coherent strategy to maximise the health benefits from the UK's research and broadly endorses the approach taken by Sir David Cooksey in his wide-ranging review of UK's health research framework. (Paragraph 6)

The Government agrees that the UK will benefit from a coherent health strategy and also endorses that the approach taken by Sir David Cooksey was the right one.

2. (Recommendation 2) We believe that Sir David was right to exceed his remit and we welcome the board-ranging nature of the review. However we feel that it would have been appropriate to advertise the changes in the terms of reference to attract a broader range of opinions. (Paragraph 8)

The Government agrees with the Committee that it was appropriate for Sir David Cooksey to go beyond the scope of the original terms of reference in the light of the evidence he received. The Government does not feel that this required a formal change to the Terms of Reference for his review, given its already wide scope; Sir David consulted widely, receiving over 280 responses to the written consultation and met a large number of interested parties to discuss issues throughout the review.

3. (Recommendation 3) Whilst the pharmaceutical sector is clearly of great importance to the UK's health research output, the Committee is concerned that the allied health research sectors such as medical engineering and technology, preventative and public health research should not be overlooked. The DTI and DH must ensure that these sectors are represented within both OSCHR and the TMFB. (Paragraph 9)

The Government agrees that these areas are important and should form part of the joint health strategy. John Bell and the OSCHR Interim Oversight Group are currently developing plans for the Translational Medicine Board, which will have a wide remit rather than focusing on pharmaceuticals alone. In addition they are also in the process of establishing a Public Health Research Board with a similarly broad remit to develop the strategy around public health.

4. (Recommendation 4) We look forward to the announcement in the Comprehensive Spending Review regarding the Single Fund Budget, and expect the current combine budget for the MRC and the NHS R&D function to be at least maintained. (Paragraph 10)

The details of the Department for Health and MRC settlements will be known in the autumn.

5. (Recommendation 5) We acknowledge and support the importance of translational and clinical research. However, it is essential that the new proposals do not result in decreased funding for basic research. (Paragraph 11)

The Cooksey Report clearly recognises the importance of basic research and the importance of maintaining the UK's excellence in this area, and Government supports this view. It is vital to get the balance right between basic, applied and translational research, and OSCHR will support transparent and evidence-based decision-making on that balance over time.

6. (Recommendation 6) We share the concerns submitted in evidence regarding the impact of the proposed institutional arrangements and the possible effect upon the MRC. We are firmly of the view that OSCHR should operate as a light touch organisation does not complicate the existing successful administrative mechanisms of the MRC. (Paragraph 13)

OSCHR will be a light-touch organisation. The aim is to build on the strengths of the current administration systems, whilst creating a simpler mechanism for those applying for funding.

7. (Recommendation 7) We support the setting of priorities, but we expect OSCHR to ensure that the best in all fields is funded and research outside the priorities is adequately supported. We expect performance monitoring to be done without the use of rigid targets. (Paragraph 14)

The Government agrees that research across the whole spectrum of health research should be funded, but there needs to be better alignment between health need and research. The joint strategy is an opportunity to do this by setting the strategic direction for research.

Monitoring of performance is an important way to ensure accountability for delivering strategies, and requires the setting of targets and objectives. The MRC, like the other Research Councils, is subject to a performance management system, based on a delivery plan, which sets out targets and milestones, though not in an excessively rigid way, and its progress against these is monitored. The performance management system for the joint health research strategy has not yet been developed but Government anticipates that this will include clear objectives, targets and milestones, but accepts the need to avoid the use of excessively rigid targets.

8. (Recommendation 8) In setting out its joint research plan for the MRC and the NIHR, OSCHR must ensure that research that would benefit the developing world is part of the overall strategy. We recommend that there be clear mechanisms, structures or representations to ensure that there is adequate advocacy of developing world health research priority needs within OSCHR. (Paragraph 15)

Government agrees that research which would benefit the developing world should be an important part of the UK health research strategy. The MRC currently has an extensive portfolio of research which will benefit the developing world For example research supported by the MRC in partnership with DfID has established the safety of a new vaginal microbicide product, which is now being investigated in a major clinical trial (co-funded by MRC and DfID) to test acceptability and effectiveness to protect women from acquisition of HIV. As this work has already established that African populations find the use of this product highly acceptable, it is hoped that it will be able to make a major contribution to HIV control once shown to be effective.

We envisage that OSCHR will ensure that research of this kind, much of which involves strategic partnership with other funders nationally and internationally, will continue to form an important part of the UK health research strategy.

9. (Recommendation 9) We welcome the recognition that peer review should remain the primary tool for assessing the scientific rigour of research proposals have funded to the MRC and NIHR. (Paragraph 16)

The Government agrees with the Committee that peer review should remain at the heart of funding decisions.

10. (Recommendation 10) We support the principles behind the fast-tracking crucial research. However, remain somewhat sceptical about the ability of the current structures to respond to the demands this would make on them. This is one area in which we will monitor developments. (Paragraph 19)

The Department of Health is taking this recommendation forward over the longer term. The Government agrees that health research systems must be able to respond to the demands placed on them as the recommendations of the Cooksey Review are taken forward. We are streamlining the procedures underpinning research in order to support an efficient research environment that commands public confidence and protects research participants. For example, a revised model Clinical Trial Agreement has been launched to speed up the initiation of industry-sponsored trials and plans are being developed for central sign-off for multi centre trials.

11. (Recommendation 11) We welcome the initial stages in implementing the review's recommendations. The committee will take a close interest in reviewing progress and how the new institutional arrangements will work in practice. (Paragraph 20)

The Government welcomes the Committee's continued interest in this important area.

July 2007