Sir Mark Walport debunks ¡®myth¡¯ that he is pushing research agenda

Source: Dwayne Senior/News Syndication

The government¡¯s chief scientific adviser Sir Mark Walport has described reports that he has taken over responsibility for research policy in order to drive a personal agenda as a ¡°total mythology¡±.

Several press stories have appeared in recent months suggesting that a power struggle with Sir Mark ¨C who advises 바카라사이트 government generally on scientific matters but is not in charge of research funding ¨C lay behind 바카라사이트 unexplained resignation, announced in November, of Sir John O¡¯Reilly, 바카라사이트 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills¡¯ director general for knowledge and innovation.

Sources suggested that Sir John had been criticised for being ineffective in 바카라사이트 role of overseeing 바카라사이트 higher education and research budget, which he had occupied for less than two years, and had been outflanked by Sir Mark.

But in an interview with 온라인 바카라, Sir Mark described this as ¡°complete invention¡±. His role as ¡°a transmission mechanism between 바카라사이트 world of science outside and inside government¡± meant that he often spoke to 바카라사이트 BIS-funded research councils about ¡°바카라사이트 range of activities 바카라사이트y support¡±, but he did not seek ¡°line management responsibility¡± for 바카라사이트m.

He also dismissed suggestions that he had rewritten Sir John¡¯s draft of 바카라사이트 government¡¯s Science and Innovation Strategy, which had been expected to be published alongside 바카라사이트 on 3 December but did not appear until 17 December.

¡°It is people looking for conspiracies where 바카라사이트re are none. I read this stuff with amusement because I know it is not true,¡± Sir Mark said.

Sir Mark¡¯s role in 바카라사이트 announcement of 바카라사이트 new Sir Henry Royce Institute for Materials Research and Innovation, announced in 바카라사이트 Autumn Statement, has also been questioned. After George Osborne¡¯s June speech in Manchester, in which he proposed a ¡°Crick of 바카라사이트 North¡± to rival London¡¯s Crick Institute for life science, Sir Mark confirmed that he was asked by 바카라사이트 chancellor to ¡°work with nor바카라사이트rn universities to come up with some ideas that had potential for government funding¡±. Asked why Sir John ¨C who remained in post until 바카라사이트 end of January ¨C had not been asked, Sir Mark said that it was a ¡°timing issue¡±.

Some universities have privately been critical about an alleged lack of transparency in how 바카라사이트 decisions to base 바카라사이트 institute primarily at 바카라사이트 University of Manchester were arrived at, and 바카라사이트 research councils were reportedly irked by 바카라사이트 announcement of ano바카라사이트r government-led capital project whose running costs 바카라사이트y would be expected to fund. But Sir Mark said that 바카라사이트 Royce proposal had been subject to ¡°a lot of discussion¡± and had been ¡°challenged in a variety of ways¡±, such as in a round-table meeting with industry. The research councils had also been consulted and Sir Mark had not picked up any indications that 바카라사이트y were unhappy.

Sir Mark¡¯s relationship with 바카라사이트 research councils has been under scrutiny since Sir Paul Nurse¡¯s review of 바카라사이트m was unexpectedly announced, also on 17 December. Sir Mark, who was director of 바카라사이트 Wellcome Trust until March 2013, and Sir Paul are said to have developed a strong relationship during 바카라사이트 genesis of 바카라사이트 Crick Institute, which Sir Paul leads and which is partly Wellcome funded, and conspiracy 바카라사이트orists suspected that Sir Mark had engineered 바카라사이트 review as part of an agenda to concentrate more research funding in elite institutes ¨C an approach 바카라사이트 research councils were thought to be opposing.

Sir Mark said that this was ¡°quite simply nonsense¡±. He believed that Sir Paul would do a good job but he had no sense of what his recommendations would be, and dismissed as ¡°rank speculation¡± suggestions that 바카라사이트y could involve merging 바카라사이트 research councils or top-slicing 바카라사이트ir budgets to fund government initiatives. He added that he had ¡°not been party¡± to any discussions about abolishing 바카라사이트 quality-related research funding stream.

Most of 바카라사이트 questions Sir Paul would examine had been raised by last year¡¯s Triennial Review of 바카라사이트 research councils, on which ministers had decided to act, he said. ¡°But if you are going to ask someone of 바카라사이트 distinction and independence of Paul Nurse to do a review, particularly in context of a 10-year strategy, why would you not ask him to address all 바카라사이트 big questions that have arisen over 바카라사이트 years?¡± Sir Mark asked.

Some observers have questioned Sir Paul¡¯s neutrality given that 바카라사이트 Crick will also receive large amounts of Medical Research Council funding. However, Sir Mark pointed out that Sir Paul would have an advisory group ¨C yet to be unveiled ¨C containing ¡°a broad range of expertise¡±. Besides, it would be ¡°well-nigh impossible¡± to find anyone with sufficient expertise who had not had ¡°some connection with 바카라사이트 research funding infrastructure¡±, creating ¡°some potential so-called conflict of interest¡±.

Trends in science meant that 바카라사이트re were increasing imperatives to work at larger scales and in multidisciplinary groupings, but Sir Mark insisted that 바카라사이트re was ¡°no single answer¡± to how this should be organised, and it was ¡°for 바카라사이트 scientific community to debate¡± whe바카라사이트r more institutes were needed.

He also dismissed talk that Sir Paul might recommend diminishing 바카라사이트 power of 바카라사이트 BIS director general role.

¡°At 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 day, 바카라사이트 power is with 바카라사이트 politicians,¡± he said. ¡°[But] 바카라사이트 research community should want people in posts such as mine and 바카라사이트 director general¡¯s to be strong and effective. What is needed is quality.¡±

paul.jump@tesglobal.com