22/10/08 Research Fortnight - Interview
Adam Afriyie, shadow science minister, dismisses his counterpart as `reckless', regards DIUS with scorn and lets Brian Owens glimpse his vision of a future Conservative government.
On Paul Drayson's first day as science minister, his Conservative shadow was surprised to hear of the new chief's misjudged support for sending British astronauts into space. `Having to backtrack within a matter or 24 or 48 hours, doesn't inspire a great deal of confidence,' says Adam Afriyie. `I would regard that as a pretty reckless way to begin.'
Although Afriyie concedes that Drayson, with his background in science and business, is `well-placed' for the science portfolio, he remains sceptical of the government's recent reshuffle. `One thing's quite clear about the current government, we've got a lot of re-treads. And whether it's [Peter] Mandelson or Drayson, we're seeing the same people popping up again, often with some slightly troubled backgrounds within politics.'
The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, where Drayson works, is not faring much better, according to Afriyie. The Sainsbury review `was pretty much a stinging indictment of what the government had done so far on innovation,' he says. `It took a long time to get a response in the form of the Innovation Nation white paper - great title, nice and catchy, it rhymes - but actually that paper was again an admission that, after 11 years, they haven't done very much.'
Afriyie questions the decision to separate innovation from business when, in July 2007, the Department for Trade and Industry was split into DIUS and the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. But he stops short of promising to reverse the changes. `Innovation is a lot bigger than merely science. And there's a lot more to science than innovation... But we are where we are, and we'll take a look at it for sure later on.'
Nowhere are the failings of DIUS more apparent than in its handling of the funding settlement for the Science and Technology Facilities Council in the Comprehensive Spending Review last year, says Afriyie. The STFC was left with an £80 million hole in its budget, and decided to cut the number of grants. `It was complete incompetence by the department,' says Afriyie. `It was absolutely clear in July 2007 that they had seen the papers that said a flat cash settlement would cause cuts. So, for the minister and the department not to accept any form of responsibility for the outcome is shirking their responsibility. Had the minister been bold enough to come to the House and say `yes, we were aware that a flat cash settlement would eat into research grants', I think there would be a far greater level of respect. But that's not what they did, and I think that bitterness will stay with the science community for quite some time.'
But Afriyie is not saying what the Conservatives would have done instead: `I think that merger [to create the STFC] was botched. We now are where we are... hopefully, the situation will stabilise. At the moment, we don't feel any great urgency to unpick the STFC.'
The Tories have already promised to maintain Labour's spending plans through 2010-11, and Afriyie says he is comfortable with the balance of science spending and that there are no `ideological divides' when it comes to science. So how would a Conservative government be any different from Labour?
`Our approach would tend to be for us to step back to a degree. Whereas I think our current government approach is more towards, `Let's create a Whitehall innovation unit to drive down innovation through the whole economy. We control the research and development budgets ever more tightly to pump-prime or force through research and development.' So, in terms of overall attitude adopted, I think you'd find an incoming Conservative government to be a lot more relaxed about how businesses, voluntary organisations and charities use their research spending.'
The last Conservative government had, at best, a troubled relationship with the universities and researchers. Afriyie wants to reassure academics that the Conservatives are `incredibly positive about science', but he sees one troubling parallel with 1979.
`Clearly, the last time the Conservatives came into power was following an economic debacle in the 1970s and clearly there were pressures at that time. And I would simply hope that…an incoming Conservative government would not inherit a similar sort of economic meltdown.'