Spring 2006 - Science in Parliament

Spring 2006

SCIENCE INPARLIAMENT

ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine

ThePrecautionaryPrinciple

The GreenRevolution

SET HelpingAfrica

75th Anniversary of British PharmacologicalSociety

The Journal of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee http://www.scienceinparliament.org.uk

SCIENCE IN

PARLIAMENT

Martin Rees notes the low participation inscience by 16 and 17 year-olds andreductions in A-level physics, chemistry andmaths. Deirdre Hutton presents a ScienceStrategy for the Food Standards Agency.Mark Walport welcomes a vibrant researchenvironment protected by risk management.Robert Souhami attacks the confused legaland regulatory guidance that is stifling theuse of electronic personal health care records

in NHS research.Ursula Roospromotes UK-German bilateralcollaborationespecially in climatechange and energy.John Waltonrecommends thatdoctors referpatients for CAMtherapy on the NHS

and Stephen Holgate encourages integratedhealth care using the science and art ofmedicine while David Tredinnick promotescomplementary medicine from both personaland public viewpoints. Norman Borlaug’splant breeding research provides "atemporary success in man’s war againsthunger and deprivation" and a breathingspace in which to deal with the "populationmonster". Sue Owens describes theevolution of the precautionary principle (PP)in the RCEP while Colin Berry describeserratic, arbitrary and non-scientificapplications of the PP, and Ragnar Lofstedttraces the PP from Swedish origins, butpredicts that the cost of regulation willoutweigh the benefits. Crispin Tickellconcludes that the most sustainable actionpossible is to help Africans to helpthemselves and Frank Rijsbermanrecommends investment in water, whileRichard Carter considers that Africa is inneed of support that exceeds even the mostimaginative that science and technology candeliver, and Gordon Conway makes waterand sanitation targets a priority for DFID.The British Pharmacological Societycelebrates its 75th birthday. NovartisPharmaceuticals promote living donation ofkidneys. Paul Hardaker says hurricanes haveincreased in intensity over the last 30 years.

Dr Brian Iddon MPChairman, Editorial BoardScience in Parliament

Science in Parliament has two main objectives:

a) to inform the scientific and industrial communities

of activities within Parliament of a scientific nature

and of the progress of relevant legislation;

b) to keep Members of Parliament abreast

of scientific affairs.

Spring 2006 Volume 63 Number 1

ContentsKeeping UK Science world class 1Opinion by Lord Rees of Ludlow PRS

Opinion by Dr Brian Iddon MP 2

Information for Health 2Opinion by Dr Mark Walport

Taking a Risk 4Opinion by Dame Deirdre Hutton CBE

Personal data for Public Good 5Professor Robert Souhami

Science and Innovation in Germany 7

Complementary and Alternative Medicine: should it be provided on the NHS? 8Addresses to the P&SC by Lord Walton of Detchant, Professor Stephen Holgate and David Tredinnick MP

From the Green to the Gene Revolution – a 21st Century Challenge 14Address to the P&SC by Dr Norman E Borlaug

Risk Management – should the Precautionary Principle be replaced by risk-related analysis for individual new technologies? 16Addresses to the P&SC by Professor Susan Owens, Sir Colin Berry and Professor Ragnar Löfstedt

The Importance of Science, Engineering and Technology to a sustainableeconomy on the African continent 22Addresses to the P&SC by Sir Crispin Tickell, Professor Frank Rijsberman, Professor Richard Carter and Professor Sir Gordon Conway

Pharmacology: what is it and how is it important to the Health and Wealth of the UK? 30C Page, R Hill, J Buckingham and G Henderson

Visualising the Emotions of Living Kidney Donation 32

Hurricanes, Typhoons and Tropical Cyclones 34Professor Paul Hardaker

House of Lords Science and Technology Select Committee 36

Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology 37

House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology 39

House of Commons Library 40

Book Review: Not in our Back Yard 41

Letter to the Editor 42

Debates and Selected Parliamentary Questions and Answers 42

Digest of Parliamentary Debates, Questions and Answers 46

Euro-News 55

European Union Digest 56

Science Directory 59

Science Diary 68

The Journal of the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee.

The Committee is an Associate Parliamentary Group of members of both Houses of Parliament and British members of the European Parliament, representatives of scientific and technical institutions, industrial organisations and universities.

Image on front cover: Cross-section of an artery labelled for potassium channels (red), with elastic wall (green) and cell nuclei (blue) shown. Dr Matthew Burnham andProfessor Arthur Weston, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester

ISSN 0263-6271

Science, engineering andtechnology make ever morepervasive contributions to our

lives. Science and its applicationscan improve the quality of life andthe prosperity in this and everynation; they also confront us with arange of new risks, and difficultpolicy issues. The UK is aninternational leader in science, asthe annual statistics published bythe Office of Science andTechnology illustrate. On mostmeasures of productivity andimpact, this country is second tothe world leader, the United States.But two worrying trends threaten toundermine our position in theworld league of science: decliningpopularity of chemistry, maths andphysics among A-level students, andrelatively low levels of public andprivate investment in research anddevelopment.Recent surveys show that theUnited Kingdom compares wellwith other countries in terms ofparticipation and performance inscience education at school level upto the age of 16. But after the age of16, our record appears todeteriorate. We have one of thelowest participation rates ineducation for 16 and 17 year-olds(ahead only of Italy among the G7nations). And entries in chemistry,physics, biology and mathematicsaccounted for only 22.9% of A-levelentries in all subjects by students inEngland, Wales and NorthernIreland in 2005.What is more, participation rates inthe sciences and mathematics havebeen deteriorating: they accountedfor 30.0% of all A-level entries in1991. Between 1991 and 2005, thetotal number of A-level entries in allsubjects increased by 12.1%. Butover that period, the number ofentries in physics, chemistry andmathematics declined by 35.2%,

12.6% and 21.5% respectively. Notall of the sciences have shown adownwards trend, with entries inbiology rising by 15.8%, andincreases in other newer subjectssuch as computing. It is not clearhow the performance of UKstudents currently compares withthose in other countries, buthopefully the Government will besuccessful in persuading enoughEnglish schools to be included in aninternational comparison exercisethis year to provide representativefigures.Clearly if our universities andbusinesses are to be internationallycompetitive in the physical sciences,we will need to ensure sufficientnumbers of talented young peopleemerge from our schools withcareer ambitions and qualificationsin those disciplines. I hope that thenew GCSE curriculum for science,which will be introduced nextSeptember, will encourage morepupils to study the sciences andmathematics at A-level. But furthermeasures will be needed, such astackling the shortages of suitablyqualified teachers in those subjects.The scientific community, theGovernment and our schools willneed to work together if thedownward trends are to bereversed.Ensuring the flow of well-qualifiedscientists and engineers into theworkforce is also a key part oftackling the other weakness in theUK’s performance in science,engineering and technology: theamount invested in research anddevelopment. UK gross expenditureon research and development in2003 was equivalent to 1.89% ofgross domestic product. This figurewas lower than in the early 1990sand puts the UK in 14th place inthe international league table ofOECD members.

Much public money has beeninvested in science in recent years,but the government-financedproportion of gross expenditure onresearch and development in theUK, as a proportion of GDP, in2003 was 0.59%. This was wellbelow the OECD and EU-25averages, and placed us 16th in theOECD league table. Industry-financed gross expenditure onresearch and development, as aproportion of GDP, in 2003 was0.83%, also below the OECD andEU-25 averages and producing aranking of 17th in the OECD.Recognising our poor performance,the Government’s 10-yearframework for science andinnovation has set an ambitioustarget of raising UK grossexpenditure on research anddevelopment to 2.5% of GDP by2014. This target can only beachieved if there is sustainedinvestment by both the public andprivate sector.Science, engineering and technologyprovide the base for the economicperformance of the UK and itscompetitors in the internationalcommunity. The UK has anoutstanding track record in worldscience. We must maintain ourmomentum: success should breedfurther success; we need to becomestill more successful in attractingand nurturing mobile talent. Butthere are now some fundamentalweaknesses which could undermineour position. It is up to policy-makers and the science communityto see that these problems aretackled so that the UK in the futurecan continue to reap the benefits ofbeing a world leader in science, inan era when we find growingcompetition from the Far East, aswell as from across the Atlantic.

OPINION

Keeping UK Scienceworld classLord Rees of Ludlow PRS

Lord Rees of Ludlow is President of the Royal Society, the UK national academy of science.

Science in Parliament Vol 63 No 1 Spring 2006 1

2 Science in Parliament Vol 63 No 1 Spring 2006

It is a great privilege to succeed DrDoug Naysmith, MP for BristolNorth West, and I would like to

thank Doug for developing Science inParliament over the past five years asa successful and authoritativemagazine and assure him of my verybest wishes in his new role asChairman of The Parliamentary &Scientific Committee.My enthusiasm for chemistry startedat age 11 when I acquired a set ofapparatus and chemicals along with“recipe books” from an older boy inmy village on the West LancashirePlain. I entertained audiences athome and abroad for 29 years with apopular 90-minute lecture called“The Magic of Chemistry”. Thisincluded an appearance on AlanTitchmarsh’s lunchtime show fromPebble Mill performing “live”experiments in the presence of otherguests, including Raymond Baxterand other presenters from successiveTomorrow’s World teams. Thisculminated on 5 November 1997when, dressed as Guy Fawkes, Ilegally exploded gunpowder in theHouses of Parliament, whenpresenting extracts from that lecturein the Jubilee Room!I previously served on Bolton

Metropolitan District Council as aCouncillor for 21 years and for ten ofthese as Chair of the HousingCommittee. This generatedambitions to push for a higher profilefor housing in Westminster, althoughscience and technology policy havenow reasserted themselves as mymajor interest. I became a founderMember of the Environmental AuditSelect Committee in November 1997and a Member of the Science &Technology Select Committee inMarch 2000. I am an HonoraryAdviser in the House to the RoyalSociety of Chemistry and anHonorary Member of the Society ofChemical Industry. I also Chair theBoard of Directors of BoltonTechnical Innovation Centre Ltd,which appears to be the first juniorincubator in the country (see Sciencein Parliament, Autumn 2005 for moredetails).This is an exciting time for scientists,especially as we have a Governmentthat is committed to science andtechnology, and the wealth and wellbeing that this can bring to ourfellow citizens and others indeveloping countries. 2005 was theyear when the focus was on climatechange and natural disasters and our

OPINION

Dr Brian Iddon BSc, PhD, DSc (Hull), FRSC, CChem, MP

Chairman of the Editorial/Management Board of Science in Parliament. Member ofParliament for Bolton, South East, since 1997, Treasurer to the Parliamentary & ScientificCommittee and formerly Reader in Organic Chemistry in the Department of Pure &Applied Chemistry at the University of Salford.

interest in these will be maintained.Important debates during the nexttwelve months will include energy,when the Energy Review iscompleted. The Human Fertility andEmbryology Act is currently underreview. Other exciting issues includethe Galileo Project that prompts thequestion whether Europe will nowbegin to predominate with advancesin space research?However the most important peopleof all are the readers of andcontributors to Science in Parliament.Our editorial team, theEditorial/Management board andProfessor Peter Simpson and MrsAnnabel Lloyd are always interestedto receive both criticism andcomment on further improvements tothis increasingly valuable publicationand all the above are thanked fortheir important contributions.Science in Parliament is published fourtimes a year and reports on meetingsof the Parliamentary and ScientificCommittee and other events inParliament including Members’contributions in both Houses, wherescience is covered in the broadestpossible sense with important inputsfrom engineering, technology andmedicine.

OPINION

Information for HealthMark Walport Director, The Wellcome Trust

The use of computers to store,analyse and disseminateinformation is changing our

lives, for better or worse (orrealistically for better and worse!).New and important service industriesare developing to take advantage ofthe commercial potential of thisadvance in technology. A hugechallenge for governments is how to

use, regulate and disseminate theavalanche of information about thelives of each and every one of theircitizens.Why is this topic relevant to theWellcome Trust? Our mission as amajor biomedical research charity,spending about £430 million eachyear, is to "foster and promoteresearch with the aim of improving

human and animal health". Oneimportant way of advancing thismission is to support research thatuses information gathered fromindividuals and populations aboutinteractions between health, theenvironment and genes. That is whywe are funding the UK Biobankproject in partnership with the MRC,the Department of Health and theScottish Executive. Professor RoryCollins of Oxford University isleading this project, which will studyover many years how the health of500,000 people aged between 40 and69 is associated with environmentaland genetic factors.No government or political party canafford to duck the issue of how to useinformation in a digital age, as goodpublic policy demands the use of


objective evidence that can only begathered by the systematic use ofinformation. For obvious reasons Iwill advance my arguments arounduse of information in the field ofhealth, but many of the principlesapply equally to other fields such astransport, housing and education.As a junior doctor, much of my timeused to be taken up looking for lostX rays and blood test results, andrepairing broken files of clinicalrecords or creating new ones whenthe old had been lost. Much harmhas been caused by the inefficienciesof record keeping using old methods,for example repeat X rays, drugprescription errors and misdiagnoses.We should therefore celebrate theinitiative in the NHS’s "Connectingfor Health" which aims to integrateIT infrastructure and systems. Oneaspect of this will be the provision ofan individual electronic care recordfor all England's 50+ million users,securely accessible to patients andtheir carers.But, if we are to treat people better inthe NHS, we need to be able to usethese data for research. Indeed, atypical family may have as many asseven points of contact with nationaland local government agencies suchas the NHS, Department of Work andPensions, Inland Revenue, localcouncils and local schools. Increasedlinkage, access and the effective useof these data resources includingtheir eventual linkage to personalcare records would be invaluable topublic policy development. Forexample, it is important that the NHScan understand and address healthinequalities, and develop diseaseregisters to improve delivery of care.Achieving this requires linking dataon health, housing, employment andother measures of socio-economicstatus. These benefits will onlymaterialise if these data can be sharedand used for research.The public and opinion formers canbe wary of such initiatives.Understandably, there are concernsabout the protection of personalinformation and privacy issues. Arecent study, commissioned by theCouncil for Science and Technologyhighlighted many of these concerns,but also indicated that, as long aspersonal confidentiality is protected,the public wants data used in relationto health research1. Governmentdoes not always help its own case –for example current publicity from

the DWP in relation to benefit fraudstates: "We can compare information acrossGovernment Departments.2 So if you’renot completely honest, we will findout." Use of such "Big Brother" stylemessages could seriously underminepublic confidence and lead toresources of unique value being putout of reach of policy makers andacademic researchers. Responsible data sharing, access anddata management are key to a vibrantresearch environment, allowing theexchange of ideas and researchfindings. There needs to be aregulatory and governanceframework that minimises andmanages the risks associated withsuch initiatives and one that inspirespublic confidence. Publicengagement will be key to this,helping to ensure that Governmentachieves real benefits from data-sharing. Technological change is not onlyaffecting what research resourcesacademics have access to for theirstudies but how the findings of theirresearch are published. I argue thatdata must wherever possible be freelydisseminated, subject to stringentsafeguarding of data that couldprovide confidential informationabout individuals. Here thepublication of the results of researchis key. Not everyone shares this view– a publisher, responding toquestions from the House ofCommons Science and TechnologySelect Committee inquiry into openaccess publishing, stated: "Speak to people in the medicalprofession, and they will say the lastthing they want are people who mayhave illnesses reading thisinformation, marching into surgeriesand asking things. We need to becareful with this very, very high-levelinformation."3

This statement implying that"knowledge is power" reinforcesgreatly my view that people whohave illnesses should have access toevery single element of this "very,very high-level information"! Indeed,the Wellcome Trust has had a longstanding interest in ensuring freeaccess to and rapid availability ofresearch information to maximise theutilisation of research outputs andthereby their benefits to society.These principles were enshrined in

an agreement concerning the dataemerging from the Human GenomeProject. All information produced bythe public-funded project was madeimmediately and freely available toeveryone, via the Internet, with norestrictions on how it could be used.This immediate information releasemaximised the utility of the data toresearch scientists in both academiaand industry.With recent advances in Internetpublishing, we are seeking toencourage initiatives that broaden therange of opportunities for the resultsof quality research to be widelydisseminated and freely accessed bythe reader anywhere in the world. Itis now a condition of our fundingthat a copy of any original researchpaper published in a peer-reviewedjournal must be deposited intosubject-specific public accessrepositories, so that it is available tobe read for free immediately or nolater than six months afterpublication. We will provide thefunds to enable this to happen. Current and future technologicaladvances are transforming the waywe hold, access and use information.We must collectively engage thepublic and opinion formers toexplore and communicate thebenefits and risks associated withthese advances and ensure a balancedregulatory and governanceframework is established. A morestreamlined, co-ordinated andcoherent approach towards thepersonal data sets held acrossgovernment departments couldprovide enormous benefits toindividuals, society and toGovernment itself.

1 Better use of personal information: opportunities and risks. Council for Science and Technology. November 2005.2 http://www.targetingbenefitfraud.gov.uk/on_to_you.html3 http:www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmsctech/399/4030102.htm


Aneighbour swears blind thathe caught food poisoningfrom a favourite local

restaurant: do you ever book a tablethere again? A close relative suffersa heart attack, despite being ahealth food fanatic: do you shelvethose intentions to go on a diet?Bird ‘flu hits the news: do youthrow out the chicken breasts youbought yesterday? When making choices like these,first-hand experience and scaryheadlines are as much a part of themix as any dispassionate assessmentof the risks. For an impartial,evidence-based organisation like theFood Standards Agency, that meanswe have to look constantly for morepersuasive ways to convey what weknow and learn about food risks.Our starting point is to distinguishclearly between the twin tracks ofweighing up the risk, and workingout what, if anything, should bedone about it – the “what” and“how” of effective public protection.The recent switch to a BSE testingregime is a good example. Anindependent risk analysis justifiedallowing older cattle back into thefood chain, subject to a negativetest. But it was only right to do sohaving earned public trust andacceptance through openengagement and honesty aboutwhat we knew – and what we didn’tknow – about the risks.This example is typical of the sort ofissue that faces the Agency andearlier this month, in open session,the FSA board discussed threemeasures to ensure our riskassessments continue to be madeusing the best available scientificevidence and impartial expertjudgement.First, a new Science Strategy for thenext five years was considered.Following consultation with leadingscientists from across the country,the Strategy re-emphasises the

importance of gathering and usingexisting authoritative evidence, andfocuses our own research resourceson filling in where there are gaps oruncertainties.Second, an enhanced role for ourChief Scientist was discussed,emphasising responsibility for“quality assurance” in the way theAgency gathers and uses scientificevidence.Finally, the role of our nineScientific Advisory Committees wasreviewed. In common with otherpublic protection bodies, we rely ona framework of expert committeesfor independent scientific advice.To make better use of this expertise,we discussed ways to improve thedialogue between the committeesand the Agency’s board – withoutcompromising the scientists’integrity in risk analysis or theboard’s responsibility to make riskmanagement decisions.A public meeting last Octoberprovided a taster for the wayforward when Professor AlanJackson joined Board Membersaround the table. Professor Jacksonchairs the Scientific AdvisoryCommittee on Nutrition (SACN)and Board Members grilled him onhis committee’s endorsement of a“nutrient profiling” modeldeveloped by the Agency – a systemfor scoring foods according to theircomposition intended to helpOfcom regulate televisionadvertising of food to children. Itwas an opportunity to give a publicairing to differences of opinion onaspects of nutrient profiling – a toolused widely within the foodindustry – and to arrive at a finalpolicy decision that is based,transparently, on the judgement ofthe leading experts.Work is also under way to developthe Agency’s understanding of theappetite for risk across a hugelydiverse population – to help us

draw the line in the right place, toparaphrase Lord Phillips. Betterregulation will follow from a betterunderstanding of the personal cost-benefit analyses that people makewhen deciding on their ownindividual trade-offs between safety,convenience, cost and enjoyment.Physical, chemical and life sciencesmay define what a risk is, butsocial, economic and behaviouralsciences help determine how youdeal with it. Back in October, the FSA and theRoyal Society brought senior socialscientists together with scientificexperts from our advisorycommittees to discuss how toaccommodate social, cultural andenvironmental factors into riskassessment.For some risks, like BSE or foodpoisoning, legislative powers willremain a necessary option. But forothers, such as poor diet, powers ofpersuasion are likely to be moreeffective. Whenever possible werely on giving people theinformation that allows them tomake up their own minds. Forexample, by raising awareness of therisks of eating too much salt, or byproviding clear, simple dietaryinformation on the front of packs ofprocessed foods to help withdecisions about what to eat more orless of.For the Agency, this means furtheradvances in openness, transparency,and clarity of language if we are tohelp people make safer, healthierchoices based on the risks ratherthan on random misfortune. Themore people understand food risks,the more chance they will enjoywhat they choose to eat and worryabout it less.

OPINION

Taking a RiskDame Deirdre Hutton CBEChair, Food Standards Agency


Research using informationfrom personal health recordsprovides much of the

evidence on which improvements inhealth care are based. Population-based research of this kind hasshown the long-term effects oftreatment, identified causes ofdisease, indicated how epidemicsmight be controlled and howdelivery of health care can beimproved. The UK has long been aleader in this field. With theproposed introduction of electronichealth care records, and theunifying health care systemprovided by the NHS, theopportunities for research toimprove health are now unique insize and scope.But just at the time when the UKcould forge ahead we have inhibitedthe development of this researchthrough a combination of confusedlegal and regulatory guidance, aninsistence on personal privacy andautonomy that is out of allproportion to any risk, and a stiflingbureaucracy of process. The Academy of Medical Sciencesidentified this problem in its 2003report Strengthening Clinical Researchand subsequently set up a WorkingGroup to examine the present andfuture position in the UK withrespect to the use of personal datain medical research. Our reportPersonal data for public good: usinghealth information in medical researchhas just been published. Such research requires access tolarge and representativepopulations. Two examples fromcancer registration show how lack

of access, or bias in the nature ofthe population studied, can lead tomisleading claims or cost lives:

It is often stated that outcomes ofcancer treatment are better in Francethan in the UK. This has no firm basisin fact because there is no systematicregistration of cancer in France so thenumber of new cases, and thepopulations affected, are uncertain.Comparisons of national cure rates aretherefore extremely unreliable.

A decision by the Hyogo prefecture inJapan to stop cancer registration,because of concerns about privacy,delayed the detection of increasingdeaths from mesothelioma (cancer ofthe lining of the lung caused byasbestos). Registration has beenbelatedly reintroduced.

The research in question uses datafrom the routine records of patients.(We did not consider interventionalresearch such as therapeutic trials orinvasive investigation.) The greatadvantages of routine health recordsare that the information is based oncurrent routine clinical practice,large numbers of patients can beincluded covering all social groups,and there can be rapidincorporation of the findings intoroutine clinical care.

The use of health data is legal if thepersons concerned have giveninformed consent or if all theidentifiable data have been removed(fully anonymised data). Butinformed consent or anonymisationare frequently not possible, orwould undermine the validity of theresults. The following examplesshow why this is so.

Double counting is a real risk:Congenital anomaly registers were setup in response to the thalidomidetragedy and are essential in identifyingteratogenic exposure in pregnancy.Many of the defects come to light laterin life so data must be collected fromdatabases held by paediatricians,midwives, genetic counselling servicesand many other sources. Theindividuals must be identifiablebecause otherwise they are very likelyto be counted two or more times.

Long term studies need to accrueadditional data: If a population is tobe studied over many years (essentialfor determining outcomes of exposuresor treatments) new data concerningevents in individuals cannot be addedif the data are irretrievablyanonymised.

It may be completely impractical toobtain informed consent: Thehypothesis that adverse conditions inpregnancy might increase the likelihoodof cardiovascular disease in later lifewas developed and tested by ProfessorBarker using over 15,000 birth recordscollected in Hertfordshire from 1911onwards. 3000 patients had died andthe population had dispersed. Theresults linked low birth weight with riskof hypertension, type II diabetes andother disorders in adult life.

Seeking consent may sometimesbias the data: Until 2001 there wascontroversy over whether terminationof pregnancy increased the risk ofbreast cancer. A potential bias was thatwomen who had developed breastcancer might be more likely to disclose

Personal data for Public GoodA new report from the Academy of Medical Sciences onthe use of personal health information in medical research

Professor Robert Souhami CBE FMedSciChairman of the Academy Working Group


information about termination thanwomen without cancer. When a datalinkage study was done without consentthe absence of risk was demonstratedconclusively.Research therefore often needs touse identifiable data withoutconsent. But this is where theproblem lies. The law in this area isnow notoriously complicated. Itincludes the Data Protection Act(DPA) 1998, the Human Rights Act1998, the Health and Social CareAct 2001 and the common law ofconfidentiality. Most of thelegislation is concerned with wide-ranging issues of confidentiality andprivacy in public life of whichmedical research is just one aspect.Nevertheless, exceptions andschedules have been includedwithin these laws specifically toallow the use of data withoutconsent in the public interest. Thekey point is that the use must beproportionate with regard to thebenefit and the possible risk. Todate there has been no common lawjudgement with respect to medialresearch. The Working Groupconsidered that, however desirable achange in legislation with respect tomedical research might be, this wasimpractical for the immediate futureand risked making matters worse. The view of the Academy thereforeis that present laws do not prohibitthis type of research and werecommend that this interpretationshould underpin the regulatoryguidance.The mass of legislation isinterpreted by each of the numerousregulatory authorities that lie in waitfor the researcher. These includethe Office of the InformationCommissioner (OIC), the PatientInformation Advisory Group(PIAG), regional and local ethicscommittees, the General MedicalCouncil, the Department of Healthresearch governance framework andthe R&D offices of NHS Trusts.Many researchers gave us instances

where it had been difficult orimpossible to penetrate theregulatory maze, to respond to theconflicting advice and interpretationof the law, and to surmount theslow, frustrating, bureaucracy thatenvelops a research proposal. In general these bodies adopt arather conservative, non-permissive,approach to research with littlerecognition that lack of informationmay cause suffering or cost lives. Inthe case of the OIC and GMC,medical research is not a major areaof expertise. PIAG was set upunder the Health and Social CareAct 2001 specifically to advise onresearch using identifiable data. Wereceived evidence that PIAG hashelped in some ways – for instancein giving class support to cancerregistration whose very existencewas undermined by an astonishingdirective by the GMC in 2000.However, PIAG’s processes arecumbersome. A simplified, efficientscheme of research assessment isnow urgently needed. Researchers must understand thatpublic concerns aboutconfidentiality and the use ofpersonal data are increasing formany reasons. They cannot resttheir case on the truth that, untilnow, there has been much benefitand no harm, and that all that isrequired is continued public trust inthe confidentiality of researchdedicated to the public good –essential though this is. Trust mustnowadays be engendered andmaintained by demonstrablyexcellent standards of data security,ethical review, staff training andrequirements for consent andanonymisation. The Academytherefore recommends thedevelopment of good practiceguidance in these areas and looks tothe UK Clinical ResearchCollaboration to take this forward. Early in its enquiry the WorkingParty realised that interpretation of,and concern for, public opinion and

expectations lay behind the legal,regulatory and administrativedifficulties. We were struck by thepoor quality of most research intopublic attitudes. There are only ahandful of studies where informedquestions are asked of a large,representative population. Wetherefore recommended thatmedical research funders shouldsupport research in this area – aninitiative already started by theWellcome Trust and CancerResearch UK. We not only need to know morebut there must be better dialoguebetween researchers, researchfunders, the DH and the public onthis topic. The research mission ofthe NHS is seldom mentioned inliterature given to patients – instriking contrast to its role inteaching nurses, medical studentsand other staff. Consent forresearch within the NHS cannot beassumed if it is not mentioned as alegitimate aim. In the developmentof the electronic care records theDH understandably does not wantthe primacy of confidentiality to beundermined in gaining publicacceptance. However, in ourdiscussions with patientrepresentatives there was strongsupport for research using healthdata. There was great concern thata vocal minority, loudly proclaimingthe right of privacy, might overridethe unexpressed desire of manypeople to contribute to the publicgood. The Academy thereforerecommends that a long-termprogramme of public engagementconcerning research uses beestablished. The benefit for healthwill strengthen the perceived valueof the electronic care record in theopinion of the public.These recommendations will, ifpursued energetically, start toreverse the damage that has beendone in recent years and give theUK the chance to be, once again,the front runner in the field ofresearch in population health.

The Academy of Medical Sciences, established in 1998, promotes advances in medical science and campaigns to ensure theseare converted as quickly as possible into healthcare benefits for society. The Academy Fellowship is made up of over 800

leading medical scientists from hospitals, academia, industry and the public service and gives the Academy the expertise andauthority to deal with public policy issues in healthcare in their wide scientific and societal context. The President is

Sir Keith Peters, FRS PMedSci. Further information about the Academy can be found on the website: www.acmedsci.ac.uk


Germany’s Gross DomesticExpenditure on R&D was€54.3bn (£37.4bn) in 2003

(latest figure available) or 2.55% ofGDP. Industry accounted for 68.9% or€37.4bn (£25.8bn) of this. Public-sector research is done both atuniversities and at Germany's non-university research institutes (MaxPlanck, Fraunhofer, Helmholtz andLeibniz). Germany’s engineering baseremains strong, but its efforts to catchup in biomedical research are oftenhampered by debate about the risksand ethical boundaries of suchresearch.

The Research Policy Agendaof Germany's new FederalGovernmentLast September’s federal electionsresulted in the formation of a coalitionGovernment between the SocialDemocrats and the ChristianDemocrats. The new Government setout key elements of its science andinnovation policy agenda in the 12November coalition agreement:● Increasing Gross Domestic

Expenditure on R&D: The federalGovernment is committed toincreasing Germany’s expenditure onR&D to 3% of GDP by 2010.Public-sector R&D spending willincrease by €6bn (£4.1bn) by 2009.This will have to be matched byindustry.

● Supporting the Lisbon Strategy:Germany's EU Presidency in the firsthalf of 2007 will support the LisbonStrategy. Presidency objectivesinclude the launch of newprogrammes in education andresearch, further development ofERA, and co-operation withinternational partners outside theEU.

● Development of a newInternationalisation Strategy forR&D: This seeks to increase both

the level of networking and thedegree of co-operation fromindividual scientific exchange tojoint research laboratories.

● Concentrating R&D funding onsectoral priorities: The Governmentwill promote priority areas,including nanotechnology, energy,and health. There will be a boostfor clinical research, including aregister for public-sector clinicalresearch projects. Germany willpromote research on human adultstem cells. Greater emphasis will beplaced on security research.

● Support for innovative companies:Germany's Government willcontinue schemes to promoteinnovative companies. This includesthe €260m (£180m) High-TechStartup Fund and the joint FederalGovernment/European InvestmentFund facility to promote access toventure capital in high-tech sectors.

● Knowledge transfer and clusters:Germany is developing a programmeto accelerate knowledge transferbetween academia and industrywithin the framework ofcollaborative clusters. TheGovernment will promote innovativeclusters in Germany's 16 Federalstates (Länder) in order to increaseproductivity and growth. It will alsodevelop a High Tech Strategy topromote leading edge technologies.This will cover IPR and standards,and better use of Governmentprocurement to promote innovation.

● Promoting scientific excellence andintroducing full economic costfunding of research: The new federalGovernment is committed toproviding its 90% share of a€1.9billion (£1.3bn) Federal andLänder initiative to promoteexcellence in university teaching andresearch. Grants provided underthis Excellence Initiative will includean additional 20% to cover full

economic costs. The GermanResearch Foundation (DFG),equivalent to the UK's fundingResearch Councils, is planning toput its funding schemes on a fulleconomic cost basis.

Scope for Bilateral UK-German Co-operationThe scope for bilateral collaboration iswide. It includes the exchange of bestpractice. Germany, for instance, iskeen to learn from the UK's experiencein areas such as research assessment,R&D tax credits and full economic costfunding. The UK's system of scientificadvice to policy, which Sir David Kingpresented in Berlin on 12 January2006, has met with considerableinterest. Germany has no equivalent toa Chief Scientific Adviser, nor does ithave a single national academy ofscience.Britain and Germany are close on andthus key drivers of a number ofEuropean research policy issues. Andthere are collaborative opportunities inspecific scientific disciplines. There areclose links in climate change, followingthe Berlin State Visit Climate ChangeConference in November 2004. Largeinternational research projects (eg theX-FEL laser facility in Hamburg) orEuropean projects (eg in microsystemsengineering) also offer opportunities forcollaboration.

Looking aheadLooking ahead, the Science &Innovation Team in Germany isworking with partners on a number ofprojects to promote UK-Germanscience collaboration during 2006.Forthcoming events include aconference on Trust in Science co-organised with the ScheringFoundation. UK Trade & Investment(UKTI) in Germany plan to promoteexcellence in British science to Germancompanies and to encourage R&Dcollaborations. Two major bilateralconferences in Berlin, on climatechange research and energyrespectively, will offer excellentopportunities to showcase the UK.

Science & Innovation inGermany: The NewFederal Government'sResearch Policy AgendaUrsula Roos, Science & Innovation Officer, British Embassy Berlin

For information about activities by the FCO's Science & Innovation Team in Germany see:http://www.britishembassy.de/S&I


For ten years I served as aMember of the House of LordsSelect Committee on Science

and Technology, and chaired threeSub-Committee Enquiries,producing Reports which wereaccepted by the parent Committeeand eventually debated in theHouse. The last enquiry which Ichaired was into Complementaryand Alternative Medicine (CAM).To assist the enquiry, two specialistadvisors were nominated, namelyProfessor Stephen Holgate, who willspeak later, and Professor SimonMills, Director of the Centre forComplementary Health Studies atthe University of Exeter.Our first task was to try to achieve adefinition of terms. We concludedthat alternative medicine normallyrefers to a number of professions ordisciplines which claim to offersystems of diagnosis, prognosis ormanagement using approachesdifferent from those employed inconventional Western medicine.Complementary medicine weaccepted as embracing a number ofother professions or disciplineswhich do not usually offerdiagnostic information, but whichare more often used to complementthe treatment offered by

conventional medical practitioners.We broadly accepted the definitionprovided by the CochraneCollaboration as “A broad domainof healing resources thatencompasses all health systems,modalities and practices and theiraccompanying theories and beliefs,other than those intrinsic to thepolitically dominant health systemsof a particular society or culture in agiven historical period.”Having issued a public call forevidence, we received 185 writtensubmissions, and held 21 oralhearings, interviewing 44representatives of manyorganisations in the conventionalmedical field, in science and inCAM. Several individuals also gaveoral evidence. One witness was DrStephen Straus, Director of theOffice of Complementary andAlternative Medicine in the USA, anorganisation funded by the NationalInstitutes of Health in order toundertake research in CAM. In ourenquiry we were not primarilyconcerned with efficacy, but wererequired to consider evidence,regulation, training and education,research and development,information availability and thedelivery of CAM, including the

question as to whether it should beprovided by the NHS.It soon became clear that the uptakeof CAM in the UK had increasedsteadily. More than 15% of peoplein the UK had consulted CAMpractitioners and more than 30%had bought over-the-counterremedies used in CAM, with a totalannual expenditure approximatingto £1.6 billion. In the USAexpenditure was estimated at someUS$27 billion.Eventually, we classified the CAMprofessions and disciplines intothree groups. In the first groupwere those known as “the big five”,namely osteopathy, chiropractic,herbal medicine, acupuncture andhomeopathy. The professions ofosteopathy and chiropractic areindividually regulated by Acts ofParlament. Herbal practitioners inthe UK are also to some extent acohesive group, who havedeveloped a powerful method ofvoluntary self-regulation and whosubscribe to scientific principles.Very many powerful drugs incommon used in Western medicineare of herbal origin. We alsolearned that, through the BritishAcupuncture Registration Board,practitioners using acupuncture,

COMPLEMENTARY & ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE: SHOULD IT BE PROVIDED ON THE NHS?

MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON MONDAY 17THOCTOBER 2005

Some 40 per cent of GPs recommend CAM therapies to their patients – indeed, 20 per cent offerthem on their premises. Although many doctors accept that CAM has much to offer their patients,others are not so sympathetic. Nevertheless CAM is increasing in popularity with many patients whoclaim to have benefited. Is the evidence base for the efficacy of any of the twenty-five recognisedCAM therapies good enough to justify the taxpayer paying for this treatment as part of the NHS?

Complementary andAlternative Medicine –should it be provided onthe NHS?Lord Walton of Detchant


some of whom are doctors andnurses but many of whom hold noother professional qualification, hadbegun to develop a mechanism ofself-regulation. There is goodphysiological evidence to show thatacupuncture can induce anincreased output of endorphins (thebody’s own analgesics) from thecentral nervous system. We alsoincluded homeopathy, a long-established method of diagnosis andtreatment used in the UK by manymedical practitioners, but also bynon-medical homeopaths, inCategory 1.In our Category 2 we includeddisciplines such as aromatherapy,massage, counselling, reflexology,shiatsu, hypnotherapy, meditationand different varieties of healing.We found that these disciplineswere complementary in being used,generally, but not invariably, tocomplement conventional medicaltreatment.Category 3 gave us the greatestdifficulty. In Category 3a weincluded ancient Chinese medicineand Ayurvedic medicine; we wereconcerned by some principlesemployed in Chinese acupunctureand Chinese herbal medicine, notleast because the large combinationsof herbs, widely used in bothancient Chinese medicine and, to alesser extent, in Ayurvedicmedicine, have sometimes includedharmful components such asaristolochia, which can causeserious renal damage, while somepreparations also containcombinations of heavy metals whichmay be deleterious. We also feelthat many of the concepts uponwhich these disciplines rely (theelements, ying and yang and thefive doshas, for example) whichdate from antiquity, are totallyoutdated. We therefore classifiedthem in Category 3a, implying that,when practised according totraditional concepts, they seemed tous to lack validity. Nevertheless, wediscovered later that somepractitioners of ancient Chinesemedicine and many of AyurvedicMedicine take part in scientificallyvalid research, exploring the valueof individual herbal preparations asdistinct from massive combinations.In Category 3b we classified severaldisciplines for which we could findno credible supportive evidence,

including crystal therapy, radionics,dousing and kinesiology.While much evidence we receivedstressed, very properly, the role ofthe therapist and of the placeboresponse, which has been shown, inconventional medicine, to haveprofound effects upon many bodilyorgans and especially upon thebody’s immune system, we didreceive evidence to indicate thatseveral of the CAM disciplines,especially those in our group 1, dohave specific effects which couldnot be wholly accounted for by theplacebo response. We also notedthat many alternative andcomplementary practitioners wereable to offer much more time forconsultations than can busydoctors. The CochraneCollaboration reviewed 154 trials,40% of which revealed somebenefit. The recent SmallwoodReport felt that CAM in the NHSwould be cost-effective, a pointdisputed by Ernst and hiscolleagues in a recent paper in theBritish Medical Journal.Accepting that the practice ofosteopathy and chiropractic iscontrolled by Acts of Parlament, werecommended that herbal medicineand acupuncture should seek forstatutory regulation under theHealth Act 1999, alongside otherhealthcare professions; we took theview that this might becomepossible for homeopathy, oncedifferences of opinions and practice,as between medically qualifiedhomeopaths and those withoutmedical qualifications, are resolved.We also recommended that themany organisations representing thedisciplines in Category 2 shouldseek to develop a system of rigorousvoluntary self-regulation for each ,with a view perhaps ultimately tobecoming registered by Statute.In relation to education andtraining, we recommended thateach profession should define a corecurriculum including elements ofanatomy, physiology and clinicalmedicine, as well as statistics andthe accumulation and analysis ofevidence. We felt it imporrtant thatconventional medical practitioners,nurses and others working in thehealthcare field should developsome understanding of the CAMdisciplnies so as to be aware of theprinciples underlying the systems

which many of their patients mayconsult. We also recommendedsimple familiarisation courses forundergraduate medical students.We also discussed the crucialimportance of randomisedcontrolled trials, sequential trialsand many other research techniquesdesigned to collect evidence on thevalidity and efficacy of the variousCAM disciplines, with particularreference to being able todemonstrate which had effectssuperior to placebo. We alsorecommended the establishment ofCentres of Excellence in UKuniversities, where CAMpractitioners could undertakeresearch programmes incollaboration with scientists,doctors and others already wellversed in research techniques. Wewere pleased to note that the NHSR&D organisation has nowsupported several such researchprojects in the CAM field. We alsoconsidered mechanisms by whichhigh quality information aboutCAM could be made available, notonly to the public, but also tohealthcare professionals, andrecommended that NHS Directmight be a useful source ofinformation. We also recommendedthat health authorities should workwith representatives of the well-regulated CAM professions toproduce information about well-qualified CAM practitioners in theirrespective areas and regions.Finally, in relation to the provision ofCAM in the NHS, we recommendedthat primary care groups and trustsshould be willing, in appropriatecircumstances, to fund consultationsand treatment using well-established,well-regulated and well-foundedCAM methods, but that all suchconsultations paid for by publicfunds (ie through the NHS) shouldbe by referral from doctors or otherhealthcare professionals, working inprimary, secondary or tertiary care.Our Report was accepted withoutsignificant modification by theparent Committee, and was debatedin the House of Lords early in 2001.Our recommendations wereaccepted, virtually entirely, by theGovernment. I and all those whoserved on the enquiry look forwardto seeing whether, how and whenour recommendations will beimplemented.

The House of Lords report oncomplementary and alternativemedicine (CAM) published in

2002 has led to the wider recognitionof complementary approaches for thedelivery of health care withimprovements both in regulation andin research. However, the recentSmallwood Report “The Role ofComplementary and AlternativeMedicine in the NHS” and recentarticles in the premier medicaljournals have once again brought thisfield of medicine to the forefront. Itis, therefore, worth exploring some ofthe issues that fuel this debate.

Features of ConventionalMedicine and CAMPractitioners of CAM often say thatthey do things differently and have aspecial connection with the patient(or client). The Parliamentary SelectCommittee on Science andTechnology that reported oncomplementary and alternativemedicine in 2002 stated “any therapythat makes specific claims for being ableto treat specific conditions should haveevidence of being able to do this aboveand beyond the placebo effect”.However, in a recent editorial in theLancet1, Vandenbroucke commentingon continued controversy over theuse of homeopathy and the growth oftruth quoted William Osler in hisHarvean Oration of 1906 “Truth maysuffer all the hazards incident togeneration and gestation….. allscientific truth is conditioned by the stateof knowledge at the time of itsannouncement”. There are clearlysome fundamental differences in theway that orthodox and

complementary medicine delivertheir practice. Orthodox medicine isfocused on specific disease causation,is divided into specialties anddelivers treatment specific to thediseased organ(s) (one disease, onetarget, one cure). In contrast, CAMaddresses distributed cause, is notdivided into specialties and treats thewhole person with multiple therapiesthat are not necessarily disease-dependant.It is increasingly recognised that thereare some problems which currentlyafflict conventional medical practice.These include the management ofchronic disease and pain andunexplained symptoms eg chronicfatigue syndrome; being able to takefull account of changing behaviour eghousing, diet, stress and life style;patients sense of fragmentation,disempowerment anddehumanisation; concerns aboutdrug side effects and the cost ofadverse events and a lack of time forcommunication between patients andhealth care professionals. Thus alegitimate question to be asked iswhether CAM represents a signpostfor modern medicine’s missingelements. The Prince of Wales’ Foundation forIntegrated Health defines integratedhealthcare as incorporating integratedmedicine as its core component, butis a broader concept that goes beyondthe treatment of illness to emphasisethe importance of improving healthand wellbeing, views the livingperson as more than a collection ofmolecules, cells and organs whichmay or may not be working properly

and sees the human as an integratedself-correcting whole. Thus it viewsgood health not simply as theabsence of illness, but as a selfregulating state that involvesinteracting complex systems.Professor Michael Hyland, apsychologist from the University ofPlymouth, views health as a complexsystem in which parts form wholes,with everything being interconnectedand the whole behaviour not beingpredictable from the behaviour of theindividual parts2. As a consequencenew properties of the componentparts and the whole system emerge.He states that changing a part willlead to a change in the whole andthat changing the whole will lead tothe part changing. Based on thishealth concept represents thebehaviour of the whole system whichhas the capacity to self- organise andadapt to constant change. Integratedhealth care is directed towardssupporting this adaptation. Hylandemphasises the important ofnetworks with the brain at the centreof a self-regulating, self-organisingpattern recognition system that isintimately connected to immune andendocrine systems functions. Twotypes of error in this complex systemmay lead to human disease. The firstis an organic error leading toabnormalities in sequentialprocessing involving molecules, cellsand organs and against whichconventional treatments operate. Thesecond is to an information errorwhich is more closely linked withalterations in lifestyle and involvesnetwork processing and an imbalanceagainst which CAM is directed.



Integrated Health Care;What can be learned fromComplementary andAlternative MedicineProfessor Stephen Holgate, Medical Research Council ClinicalProfessor of Immunopharmacology, University of Southampton

The Role of Specific andNon-Specific TreatmentEffectsIt is stated by some that the placeboor dummy treatment effect underliesmuch of the therapeutic benefit thatpatients experience with medicalintervention and that this non-specific (incidental or placebo) effectdifferentiates CAM from orthodoxmedicine. In conventionalrandomised placebo controlled trials(RCT) designed to investigate aspecific therapeutic intervention, theplacebo effect is also often large andnot infrequently exceeds 50% of thetotal treatment response eg analgesiaand depression. In RCTs the placebois subtracted to isolate the specifictherapeutic response of the actualintervention (efficacy). Thus, thecomponents of therapeutic responsecomprise the sum of the specificeffect (efficacy) and the non-specificeffect (placebo). In the “real world”the therapeutic response (oreffectiveness) of a treatment equalsthe sum of efficacy and placebo.With different forms of therapy therelative contributions of the specificand non-specific responses will differ.In seeking to characterise theincidental or placebo effects incomplex interventions used in CAMsuch as acupuncture Patterson andDieppe3 made the following fourpoints:1. The RCT developed to test new

drugs is based on bio-medicalassumptions alone.

2. In a drug trial talking and listeningto patients are often defined asincidental (placebo) factorsseparate from the drug effect.

3. In CAM interventions thecharacteristic and incidentalfactors are intertwined.

4. Use of placebo or sham controlledtrial designs for complexinterventions may lead to falsenegative results.

This publication led to an extensivedebate in the British Medical Journalcorrespondence column with a widerange of views being expressed aboutthe relative importance of non-specific responses with different typesof treatment. Possible factors thatmake up the placebo effect includeimproved adherence to concomitanttreatments, Pavlovian conditioning,expectation and a physical (or“organic”) response. Use of functionalbrain imaging such as PET, MRI andSRI has now demonstrated thatplacebos can indeed mimic drugs inactivating the same brain areas as


some specific treatments eg inParkinson’s disease, pain relief,depression and the use of stimulants4.These findings greatly enrich thedebate regarding the relative benefitsof specific and non-specific treatmentresponses.It is now known that sustained painresults in the release of endogenousopioides that stimulate opioide mureceptors in cortical and subcorticalregions of the brain, and thatactivation of these receptors reducessensory and affective ratings of thepain experience5. By applyingfunctional magnetic resonanceimaging (fMRI) of the brain, placeboanalgesia decreases activation in thepain sensitive regions – the thalamus,insula and anterior cingulate cortex.The placebo also increases fMRIactivity in the prefrontal cortexduring anticipation of pain. Of greatinterest was the finding that bothplacebo induced analgesia and alteredperception of pain were effectivelyblocked by naloxone an opioidreceptor antagonist.

Implications for CAMThe recent study investigating theeffect of acupuncture on pain inosteoarthritis has revealed 12%specific effect versus a more than30% placebo effect. Based onfindings described above expectancyand belief could modulate thetherapeutic response of pain relief byacupuncture. In a trial of patientswith osteoarthritis, Pariente et al6

undertook PET scans of the brain(that reflect local blood flow) beforeand after “real” acupuncture,Steitberger needle placebo and shamplacebo (skin prick distant from theacupuncture point). Theydemonstrated that the varioustreatments each gave increased brainPET signals in the right prefrontalcortex, anterior singular cortex andthalamus the treatment order effectbeing real acupuncture > Steitbergerplacebo >> sham placebo. Thesefindings reinforce the view that realacupuncture has both a specific effecton the pain centres in the brain butalso a non-specific effect also via thebrain’s reward system. Thus, at leastin the case of pain relief, activetreatment and different types ofplacebo may have effects on the brainthat may truly complement eachother. This might indicate that everyeffort should be made to enhance thenon-specific effects of a treatment egby practitioner interaction and thehealth care setting and, by doing so,this can add to or enhance the effectof a specific treatment. The fact that

CAM is conducted in a way thatmaximises the non-specific responsemay help account for a substantialportion of the treatment effectbeyond any specific action, and thatin conventional medicine insufficientattention is given to this aspect ofhealth care in focusing only onunitary solutions in the form of drugsor surgery.

The challenge of integratedhealth careRecognising that the human organismis a complex system, it is apparentthat each level of the system speaks a“different language” and yetcommunicates continually, the levelsbeing entangled and self organising2.Integrated health care that interactswith this complex system entailsmore than simply combiningconventional with complementaryapproaches. It emphasises healthpromotion, self-care and patientpractitioner partnership. It aims totrigger, support or remove constraintson the ability of the mind and bodyto heal itself and it sees thehumanisation of health care as acentral issue. There is already ampleevidence that when doctors usecommunication skills effectively, theirpatients and they benefit. Integratedhealth care means not usingreductionist approaches alone, butbeing aware and understanding theimportance of body intelligence andthe impact of the lived experience,triggering adaptation and self healingprocesses, tailoring treatment toindividual needs and circumstances,optimising the human factor,encouraging participation andempowerment. Thus, such wholeperson care requires practitionerswho utilise both the science and theart of medicine.References:1 Vandenbroucke JP. Homoeopathy and “the growth

of truth”. Lancet. 2005 Aug 27-Sep 2;366(9487):691-2

2 Hyland ME. A tale of two therapies: psychotherapyand complementary and alternative medicine(CAM) and the human effect. Clin Med 2005 Jul-Aug; 5(4):361-7

3 Patterson C, Dieppe P. Characteristics andincidental (placebo) effects in complexinterventions such as acupuncture. BMJ 2005 May21; 300(7501):1202-5.

4 Petrovic P, Dietrich T, Fransson P, Anderson J,Carlsson K, Ingvar M. Placebo in emotionalprocessing—induced expectations of anxiety reliefactivate a generalized modulatory network.Neuron. 2005 June 16; 46(6):957-69

5 Petrovic P, Kalso E, Peterson KM, Ingvar M.Placebo and opioid analgesia – imaging a sharedneuronal network. Science. 2002 Mar 1;295(5560):1737-40. Epub 2002.

6 Pariente J, White P, Frackowiak RS, Lewith G.Expectancy and belief modulate the neuronalsubstrates of pain treated by acupuncture.Neuroimage. 2005 May 1; 25(4):1161-7.

Acknowledgments:The author wishes to acknowledge the contributions

of David Peters, Michael McIntyre, Michael Pittiol,George Lewith and Michael Hyland to this paper.


Iam honoured to address thisaudience and follow on aftertwo such illustrious speakers

and with all the Doctors in theHouse of Commons present. Ihave been involved withComplementary Medicine for 30years. I fell off a horse in 1976and then had to turn toChiropractors and Osteopaths tohelp straighten out my spine.Subsequently my wife hadallergies and headaches, resultingin visits to Jean Munro in HemelHempstead for treatment and shehas never had a headache since.Homeopathy has helped myfamily with treatment for asthma,colds, and I have had cripplingpain that has been successfullytreated using acupuncture, that isthe one component of ChineseMedicine listed in the firstcategory in the House of Lordsreport. Our group, the All-PartyParliamentary Group forIntegrated and ComplementaryHealthcare has two objectives:

1) to bring Complementarypractitioners together and

2) briefing Members of Parliamenton the benefits of ComplementaryMedicine.

When the Government changedfrom Conservative to Labour Ichanged strategy and have taken

every opportunity to question theHealth Minister onComplementary Medicine at everysingle Health Questions in orderto get the matter up in lights.According to Tony Benn, “firstthey say you are mad, then theyagree with you, then they want toown the idea.” This resulted inme being dubbed “the Memberfor Holland and Barrett”.Ironically their headquarters arein my constituency.

This talk focuses on the past,present and future forComplementary Medicine. Therehas been an exponential growth indemand for ComplementaryMedicine to the extent that half ofthe population have now hadsome experience of it. People arenot fools and tend to buy thingsthat work. The first majorattempt to improve CAMacceptance and regulation was inthe 1987 Parliament. In the 1992Parliament the two PrivateMembers Bills on Osteopaths andChiropractors both became law,bringing them into mainstreammedicine with the establishmentof regulatory bodies. The nextstage was the House of Lordsreport in 2002 with definablecategories. I would disagree withsome of the categories, but overallit was a brilliant piece of work

that gave us a benchmark to workaround. There are some out therethat say that some of thecategories are wrong. I don’t seepersonally that you can claim thatChinese Medicine that has beenaround for 2,000 years should bedivided into two differentcategories. With 60,000 hospitalsin China delivering ChineseMedicine perhaps these methodsdelivered over 2,000 years havesome credibility? On some of thezanier treatments, ignoring CrystalTherapy which we are not goingto discuss further this evening, Iwould say that 20 years ago, whatis now seen as mainstreamComplementary Medicine wasthen seen as wacky and off-the-wall. I put it to this distinguishedCommittee that they should bearin mind that things do changeand that it is possible that some ofthese treatments that have notbeen given much credibility mayin the end turn out to be quitehelpful.

Where are we now in the politicalworld? There have been somevery important developments; firstof all the Government has broughtin practice-based permission forhealthcare which means thatdoctors now have almost got theirGP Fundholders status back thatthe Conservatives brought in. It


Integrated Healthcarefor better Health andHappinessDavid Tredinnick MP


is giving them more purchasingpower and the ability to choosewhere and what services they buy.I understand that 50 per cent ofGP practices are now usingComplementary Therapy to someextent and that there will be ahuge increase in demand throughthese practices.

The second interestingdevelopment will be the thirdmajor change, namely StephenSmallwood’s report which is veryhelpful as it identifies the so-called effectiveness gap in thehealth service where there is notenough treatment available. Inthe past the ComplementaryTherapies were given the reallyhopeless patients that doctors callprivately the “heart-sink patients”.They are the ones that werefarmed out to the ComplementaryTherapists. Amazingly, about75% of heart-sink patients getrelief in the ComplementaryMedical sector.

Now we have these clearlyidentified effectiveness gaps whichis jargon for saying that there isnot enough treatment around forback pain, knees or stress andnausea. What is now needed isfor these to be linked up withComplementary Therapies andthe recommendation that theNational Institute for ClinicalExcellence (NICE) performsfurther studies on this iswelcomed. But what has not beenpicked up from the Smallwoodreport is that it also stated thatComplementary Medicine is moreeffective than MainstreamMedicine.

So what about the future? AreComplementary Medicine andIntegrated Healthcare here to stay?The whole thrust is towards betterregulation, awareness andknowledge.

Regulation of acupuncture andherbal medicine is now almostcomplete. There are many clinics

nationwide with useful researchstudies, such as the GlastonburyClinic the Get Well UK Clinic inCamden that offers advice todoctors by helping them to findsuitable ComplementaryPractitioners.

I would like to finish byemphasising that the risks ofComplementary Medicine areoveremphasised, especially sincethere are many cases inMainstream Medicine where theuse of drugs such as aspirin cancause death, and even travellingaround by London transport isnot risk-free.

There are 50,000 ComplementaryTherapists and huge gaps in ourNational Health Service. Let ushave better regulation andinterfaces with our doctors. Thisis a hugely exciting time and if wego down the route of IntegratedHealthcare we will have ahealthier and happier population.

In discussion the following points were made:

Variations in genotype affect the sensitivity and responses to both the placebo and to conventional and integratedmedical therapies and the whole genome should be considered when treating chronic fatigue syndrome. Medicalapproaches to disorders of the prostate in the UK differs from those in the EU where herbal medicines are thetreatment of choice and which have also been successfully used to extend longevity. The increase in conventionalmedical treatments has also grown enormously starting from a very restricted base in the early days.Intercomparisons between integrated and conventional medicine therefore should be continually updated.Integrated medicine emphasises the importance of the individual, in preference to the general application of amore conventional medical system. Delivery of the latter may be unduly constrained by a single, undifferentiatedapproach to population studies, based on systematic drug treatment hierarchies, with pressure on doctors toconform and subject to legal issues, with hospitals where pharmacists apply drug regimes based on externalcriteria, and doctors who don’t know their patients. For example, pooling the results of research on asthmastudies on 3 year olds with those of young adults is anti-science and provides unusable data. An open mind isneeded, based on direct observation, resulting in various differing explanations.

The culture base for Chinese medicine is 2,000 years old which accounts for some of the differences from a morereductionist conventional medicine that tends to consider human health issues in isolation from one another.Nevertheless evidence is still needed for proper regulation of integrated medicine, to help inform sceptical doctorsand to assess the science base for diagnostic procedures, using the pulse and tongue and therapies such asacupuncture for example. The human body needs to be put back together and considered holistically. Manymodern treatments are based on ancient herbal remedies. For example, Indian scientists have recently providedscientific interpretations that support traditional Ayurvedic medicine that can also benefit from both placebo andand cultural effects. GPs can currently only afford 10 minutes per patient. How can this be extended to 45minutes to match that of integrated therapists? The main benefits of medical research in the last 50 years havearisen from randomised, controlled trials and the production of high quality efficaceous medicines. In summary,don’t subtract the placebo effect as it may be one of the benefits of integrated medicine, for example, thoughtalone may provoke change. Whole person medicine giving help and comfort to the patient should be provided bythe NHS.

My career in internationalagriculture began in 1944,when I joined the recently

established Rockefeller Foundationagricultural program in Mexico, thefirst systematic attempt to reduce afood deficit and increase foodproduction. The Rockefeller-Mexicanagricultural program was theforerunner – and in many respects themodel – for the network of 15international agricultural researchcenters that emerged two decades later,and which today are funded throughthe Consultative Group forInternational Agricultural Research(CGIAR), of which the UnitedKingdom is an active member.

The first two centers – theInternational Rice Research Institute(IRRI) in the Philippines established in1960 and the International Maize andWheat Improvement Center(CIMMYT) in Mexico, first establishedin 1963 and lately reorganized in 1966– became the international agriculturalresearch and development leaders inAsia, whose varieties and cropmanagement information launched theso-called “Green Revolution.” Between 1965 and 2000, the area indeveloping Asian countries plantedwith new high-yielding wheat and ricevarieties increased from zero to 170million ha. The new seeds were thecatalyst for a doubling in irrigated area,

a 35-fold increase in fertilizer use, anda 20-fold increase in the use ofagricultural machinery, and more thana three-fold increase in cerealproduction – from 309 to 962 milliontonnes. Without these gains, whatwould have happened to the Asianpopulation, which grew from 1.6 to3.5 billion people over this period?Science and technology has had itsgreatest impact on the lands bestsuited to agriculture. Over the past 50years, the world’s farmers have beenable to triple world cereal production –from 650 million metric tons to 1,900million with only a 10 per centincrease in total cultivated cereal area.If we had tried to produce the worldcereal harvest of 2000 using theagricultural technology of 1950, wewould have needed an additional 1.1billion hectares of land, of the samequality, over and above the 660 millionhectares that were actually used. Toooften, the environmental critics ofmodern agriculture fail to see thesevery beneficial aspects to producingmore food, feed and fiber on the landsbest suited for these uses, so that otherlands can be spared for other uses.Despite the successes of the GreenRevolution, the battle to ensure foodsecurity for hundreds of millions ofmiserably poor people is far from won.Mushrooming populations, changingdemographics, failed rural

development programs, includingthose designed to take farmers off theland into other jobs, andenvironmental abuses have all takentheir toll. Enormous challenges lieahead to ensure that the projectedworld population in 2025 of around 8billion people is adequately andequitably fed, and in environmentallysustainable ways. Over the next 20 years, world cerealdemand will likely increase by 50 percent, driven strongly by rapidlygrowing animal feed use and meatconsumption. With the exception ofacid-soil areas in South America andAfrica, the potential for expanding theglobal land area is limited. Futureexpansions in food production mustcome largely from land already in use.The productivity of these agriculturallands must be sustained and improved.Central to achieving these productivitygains will be a “Blue Revolution,” onein which water-use productivity ismuch more closely wedded to land-useproductivity. Significant improvementsin water-use efficiency can be achievedthrough conservation tillage, plantingon beds, and drip irrigation.Roughly 50 per cent of the world’s 800million hungry people live in marginal


FROM THE GREEN TO THE GENE REVOLUTION – A 21ST CENTURY CHALLENGE

MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON WEDNESDAY 26THOCTOBER 2005

Dr Borlaug – who is credited with saving more lives than any other person who ever lived – joined the Rockefeller Foundation’s pioneeringtechnical assistance programme in Mexico in 1944 where, as a geneticist and plant pathologist, he directed the Cooperative Wheat Researchand Production Program. Within twenty years he was spectacularly successful in finding a high yielding short-strawed, disease resistantwheat. He arranged as a practical humanitarian to put the new cereal strains into extensive production to feed the hungry of the world thusproviding in his words “a temporary success in man’s war against hunger and deprivation”, a breathing space in which to deal with the“Population Monster” and the subsequent environmental and social ills that too often lead to conflict between men and nations. Vast acreagesof the new wheat were planted with revolutionary yields harvested in Mexico, India and Pakistan – the Green Revolution, which led to theaward of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970.

Since 1986, he has been the President of the Sasakawa Africa Association, and leader of the Sasakawa-Global 2000 agricultural programmein sub-Saharan Africa, along with former US President Jimmy Carter, which has worked with several million farmers in 15 countries of sub-Saharan Africa to increase food production.

From the Green to theGene Revolution – A21st Century ChallengeNorman E Borlaug

lands and depend upon agriculture fortheir livelihoods. These food-insecurehouseholds face frequent droughts,degraded lands, remoteness frommarkets, and poor market institutions.Investments in science, infrastructureand resource conservation are neededto increase productivity and lowertheir production risks. Some of theproblems farmers in marginal landsface will be too formidable for scienceto overcome. However, significantimprovements should be possible.Moreover, biotechnology can play amajor role, through developing newcrop varieties with greater tolerance topests and diseases, drought, and withhigher nutritional content. Africa is the biggest food securitychallenge we face, although there isstill too much hunger in Asia andamong indigenous people in LatinAmerica. A twin-track anti-hungerstrategy is needed – first, aproductivity-led agricultural growthcomponent and second, safety netprograms to assist the chronicallyhungry. Why hasn’t a Green Revolution takenoff in Africa? I don’t think the reasonis one of technology, although Asiacertainly had more of its farmlandsunder irrigation. I think the principaldifference between Asia and sub-Saharan Africa is the infrastructure.One World Bank estimate predicts thatit might take another 20 years forAfrica to reach the road density thatIndia had in 1960. This isunacceptable. Adequate transport iscentral to commercial agriculture andrural development. Roads also bringindirect benefits – schools, clinics,transport, and improvedcommunications between differentethnic groups. They are a tremendouscatalyst for positive change.Since 1986 I have been engaged in asmall agricultural development projectin Africa, financed by the NipponFoundation of Japan. Former USPresident Jimmy Carter is part of thiseffort. Several million demonstration

plots – mostly maize – have beengrown by smallholder farmers,employing a relatively simple packageof recommended technology. Averageyields have been two-to-three timeshigher than national averages. Butwithout roads, the cost of bringing infertilizer is 3-4 times higher than whatfarmers in other regions pay. Thus,African farmers are unable to applyeven modest amounts of fertilizer totheir crops, less than 10 per cent of theworld average. I am especially proud of ourpromotion of quality protein maize(QPM), with much higher levels of theamino acids lysine and tryptophan,which measurably improve nutritionfor humans and monogastric animalsin maize-dependent diets. CIMMYTscientists were instrumental indeveloping QPM as a viable crop.African researchers in 10 countrieshave selected QPM varieties which aregrown by farmers on upward of400,000 ha. Over the last 20 years, biotechnologybased upon recombinant DNA hasdeveloped invaluable new scientificmethodologies and products for foodand agriculture. Recombinant DNAmethods have enabled breeders toselect and transfer single genes, notonly reducing the time needed inconventional breeding to eliminateundesirable genes but also allowingbreeders access to useful genes fromother distant species. So far,agricultural biotechnology has mainlyconferred producer-oriented benefits,such as resistance to pests, diseases,and herbicides. But many consumer-oriented benefits, such as improvednutritional and other health-relatedcharacteristics, are likely to be realizedover the next 10 to 20 years. Despite formidable opposition incertain circles to transgenic crops,commercial adoption by farmers of thenew varieties has been one of the mostrapid cases of technology diffusion inthe history of agriculture. Between1996 and 2004, the area planted

commercially to transgenic crops hasincreased from 1.7 to 81 million ha,and will likely surpass 100 million hain 2005. Herbicide resistance isrevolutionizing soybean production.The use of genes from a soil bacterium,bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt, confersexcellent resistance to several classes ofdamaging insects in maize, soybeansand cotton. The Bt cotton story is especiallyimpressive. Some nine million hectaresand six million small-scale farmers inChina, South Africa, and India aregrowing Bt cotton, greatly improvingtheir yields and profitability, andsignificantly reducing their use ofinsecticides.Today, the world’s wheat farmers face adangerous situation. For the last 53years we’ve had no major change instem rust organism any place in theworld. But in 1999, first reported inUganda, then in Kenya and now inEthiopia, a new race of stem rust hasevolved that is capable of severelydamaging perhaps half of the world’sbread wheat. The publicly funded internationaldisease screening and testing systemwe had 25 years ago has broken down,partly a victim of the malaise that hasled to steady declines in real publicsector research funding. We had betterwake up before it’s too late.Despite the formidable challenges tomeeting the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, look at where the world’sgovernments spend too much of theirmoney – US$ 900 billion annually onarmament and military. We still have close to 900 millionadults who are illiterate – and nearlytwice as many women illiterate as men– and 150 million primary school-agechildren still not in school. This isappalling in this day and age. Lest we forget, as the late Lord JohnBoyd Orr, the first director general ofFAO so aptly said, “You can’t buildpeace on empty stomachs,” to which Iadd, “or human misery.”



The grossly exaggerated fear of genetically modified food has seriously delayed its introduction to the UK and Europe. Bird fluhas had no impact on people in the UK yet, and may never do so. The public tend to respond negatively to science-drivenchange while still acknowledging that science and technology are important. The British press have described GMOs as“Frankenstein Food” and this may reflect the fact that our more senior scientists are not speaking in public in defence ofscience and technology. In spite of these apparent problems human longevity is still increasing. What message should beprepared to indicate to the public, for the future benefit of mankind, that all GMO food is safe to eat provided ethical issuesare addressed? For example, what possibility is there for the technology transfer of sugar cane to sub-Saharan Africa insupport of a new bioethanol industry? The gene for common sense appears to be missing among the decision makers.Pakistan became self sufficient in 7 years in wheat and rice and India in 10 years, arising directly from the importation ofmodified crops. In spite of this success Swaminathan was attacked without any justification. There is an urgent need forpeople who know how to integrate all relevant techniques and how to work together across disciplines with support frompolitical leaders, leading to commercial production.

Principle 15 of the RioDeclaration neatlyencapsulates the key elements

of the precautionary principle:

“Where there are threats of seriousor irreversible damage, lack of fullscientific certainty shall not be usedas a reason for postponing costeffective measures to preventenvironmental degradation”.Application of this principle –increasingly influential inenvironmental policy since the1970s – is typically associated withtaking pre-emptive action ratherthan waiting for proof of harm, withless reliance on the capacity of thenatural environment to assimilateand neutralise pollution, and withgreater emphasis on reducingpotential problems at source usingthe “best technology not entailingexcessive costs”.Since 1970, when it was created byHarold Wilson in response tomounting environmental concern,the Royal Commission onEnvironmental Pollution (RCEP) hasbeen influenced by and has itselfinfluenced a broader trend towards

precaution in environmental affairs.In its early days, the precautionaryprinciple was regarded withsuspicion in the UK as a“contintental” philosophy, alien tothe British (“dilute and disperse”)approach to pollution. Demandsfor tighter control typically met witha robust response: “you haven’tproved that there’s a problem, thescience is uncertain, it’s tooexpensive and would damagebusiness”.In this climate, the RoyalCommission’s position – bestcharacterised as one of “cautiousprecaution” – was quite radical.One of its best known earlierrecommendations – that thereshould be no significantcommitment to civil nuclear poweruntil the possibility of dealing safelywith nuclear waste had beendemonstrated – was essentiallyprecautionary (RCEP 1976). Theargument in its ninth report (RCEP1983) that lead additives should bephased out of petrol was classicallyso, grounded in the possibility ofserious harm to children’s health inthe absence of scientific “proof”.

(The recommendation was acceptedwith alacrity by the government inthe run up to the 1983 GeneralElection). But one can also trace amore general shift towardsprecaution, exemplified by theCommission’s treatment of waterpollution and of chemicals in theenvironment.In the case of water, theCommission became convincedover time that “[t]he question ofhow much waste can be disposed ofto the environment without adverseimpact should be preceded byasking how far the pollution from aprocess can be reduced” (RCEP1992: para 9.44). From its earliestdays it was concerned about limitsto the assimilative capacity of theenvironment – even that of the seaswhich might seem vast – and wasworried about irreversible impacts:“there could be points of no returnin the deterioration of water” (RCEP1972b: para 10). By the mid-1980s, when Britain was staunchlyresisting European pressures forstringent control of dangerous waterpollutants at source, the RoyalCommission urged reconsideration:


RISK MANAGEMENT – SHOULD THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE BE REPLACED BYRISK-RELATED ANALYSIS FOR INDIVIDUAL NEW TECHNOLOGIES?

MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON MONDAY 14THNOVEMBER 2005

Disputes and uncertainties are an essential part of the concept of science and are not an indication of disagreements betweenindividuals. Should we therefore improve our ideas and models by testing them to destruction, or are some so potentiallydangerous and possibly irreversible in their consequences that we dare not take any action for fear of the unknown? Would it bepossible to replace the Precautionary Principle with an analysis of the risks associated with individual new technologies?

Risk and Precaution:changing perspectivesfrom the RoyalCommission onEnvironmental PollutionSusan OwensProfessor of Environment and Policy, University of CambridgeRoyal Commission on Environmental Pollution

“the United Kingdom shouldreappraise its stance on irretrievabledischarges to the sea of toxicsubstances which are unarguablypersistent and bioaccumulative”(RCEP 1984: para 3.26). The UKdid indeed shift to technology-based controls, at least for arestricted “Red List” of substances,in 1987. Later the RoyalCommission argued for a moregeneral extension of theprecautionary approach in thecontext of water pollution (RCEP1992).Another example of a general shifttowards precaution can be found inthe Royal Commission’s treatment ofchemicals in the environment. Inits second report, it argued for adegree of circumspection inlaunching new products thatcontained substances withpotentially hazardous properties:“While it would not be reasonableto regard substances with theseproperties as ‘guilty until provedinnocent’ it is reasonable to regardthem as ‘under suspicion’’’ (RCEP1972a: para 13). This should bereflected in toxicological testing inadvance of marketing andmonitoring for environmentalimpacts afterwards. During the1970s and 1980s, the Commissionwas influential (behind the scenesas well as through its reports) ininstitutionalising arrangements forthe control of agriculturalpesticides. By 2003, it wasexpressing concern about the tensof thousands of chemicals aboutwhose impacts very little is known,and arguing for a paradigm shift inthe slow process of assessment.Since uncertainty has to beregarded, at least for now, asinherent, the Commissionrecommended “a precautionaryapproach based on substitution ofhazardous chemicals with ones oflower hazard or a non-chemicalalternative” (RCEP 2003: summaryp. 5).The work of the Royal Commissionillustrates a number of importantpoints about the precautionaryprinciple. One is that it is temperedin application by other principles.Perhaps the most significant is theprinciple of proportionality,requiring that measures takenshould be proportional to thepotential threat, and should take

account, as far as possible, of thecosts and benefits to society of theaction or inaction involved: acting“ahead of the evidence” does notmean acting “whatever the cost”.Proportionality was part of thecontext for the original (WestGerman) Vorsorgeprinzip, whichinfluenced the Royal Commission’sthinking in the 1980s (RCEP 1988).One might argue that theCommission’s radicalrecommendation on lead in petrolwas facilitated by its finding that thephasing out of lead additives couldbe achieved at modest cost: ineffect, it sidestepped the intensescientific controversy about causallinks with human health by askingtwo simple questions: “do we needlead in petrol? and how muchwould it cost to take it out?” Later,the Commission was to argue that“the strength of the economic ortechnical case for [a] substance’scontinued use” should be amongthe criteria for any shift in theburden of proof about possibleharmful effects (RCEP 1984: para2.31).A second important point is that theprecautionary principle is notsomething to be set apart from“sound science”. Its properapplication must involve someassessment of the plausibility andmagnitude of the threat, and shouldbe based on the best informationthat a rigorous scientific analysiscan provide. But the principle isgrounded in a recognition that,certainly in the case of manyenvironmental controversies, we aredealing not only with uncertainties(which might be reduced over time)but with indeterminacies andignorance, placing some of theseissues into the realm that Weinberg(1972) described as “trans-scientific”. In such circumstances,the principle of precaution can beseen not as an alternative to sciencebut as “a rational response touncertainties in the scientificevidence relevant to environmentalissues and uncertainties about theconsequences of action or inaction”(RCEP 1998: para 4.44).Nor is the precautionary principlean alternative to risk assessment: itsapplication entails an assessment ofrisk. But in making thisconnection, we must acknowledgethat thinking about risk itself has

changed. Most notably, the olddichotomy between “objective” and“perceived” environmental risk(which featured in some of theRoyal Commission’s earlier reports)has been substantially undermined,and the “information deficit” modelof public risk perception discredited(Owens 2000). Particularly in thecase of complex systems, we nowappreciate that “risk estimates, oftenpresented as the objective outcomeof a scientific assessment, mayinvolve important (but oftenobscure) assumptions and valuejudgements” (RCEP 2003: para1.21). We have also come tounderstand that public responses torisk are not necessarily “irrational”but are crucially dependent both oncontext and on trust in institutions.The final point follows from theothers. Those who look to sciencealone to make difficult decisions inenvironmental policy mustinevitably be disappointed.Application of the precautionaryprinciple should of course beinformed by science, but “must ofnecessity make heavy demands onjudgement” (RCEP 1998: para2.31). Like all important principlesguiding human affairs, precaution isessentially an exercise in practicalreason. This has two importantimplications. First, action taken inits name “should be transparent andsubject to review in the light ofdevelopment of understanding”(ibid. para 4.48). Second,acceptable risk and appropriateprecaution are not matters to bedetermined by experts alone, butshould properly be subjects forpublic and political debate in amature democratic society.


ReferencesOwens, S. (2000) “”Engaging the public”: information

and deliberation in environmental policy”,Environment and Planning A 32: 1141-1148.

RCEP (1971) 1st report, Cmnd 4585, London: HMSO-- (1972a) Three Issues in Industrial Pollution, 2nd

Report, Cmnd 4894, London: HMSO-- (1972b) Pollution in Some British Estuaries and

Coastal Waters, 3rd Report, Cmnd 5054, London:HMSO

-- (1976) Nuclear Power and the Environment, 6thReport, Cmnd 6618, London: HMSO

-- (1983) Lead in the Environment, 9th Report, Cmnd8852, London: HMSO

-- (1986) Tackling Pollution – Experience andProspects, 10th Report, Cmnd 9149, London: HMSO.

-- (1988) Best Practicable Environmental Option, 12thReport, Cm 310, February 1988

-- (1992) Freshwater Quality, 16th Report, LondonHMSO

-- (1998) Setting Environmental Standards, 21stReport, London, London: TSO.

-- (2003) Chemicals in Products: Safeguarding theEnvironment and Human Health, 23rd Report,London: TSO.

Weinberg, A. (1972) ‘science and trans-science”,Minerva 10, 209-222.

In managing the risks that besetus, of infectious anddegenerative disease, accidents

in the home, the problems relatedto various means of transport or theactions of other living beings, it isproper that we use Caution, thetaking of heed and Precaution, theuse of prudent foresight. Nosystem of regulation or pattern ofavoidance of risk can give anIndemnity enabling the preventionof contingent harm. The desire forcertainty about hazards and newtechnologies has led to thedevelopment of scientifically flawedideas, including the PrecautionaryPrinciple. Despite the obviousimpracticability of an indemnity,changes in society that lead to arisk-averse view of life have becomeprevalent; as Frank Furendi has it,“the defining feature is the beliefthat humanity is confronted bypowerful and destructive forces thatthreaten our everyday existence”.Part of this thinking comes from aprofound underestimation of thereal risks that confront us and itfollows from this that thepresentation of a hazard that mightproduce a low level and remote riskassumes an unreasonablesignificance.

This is abetted by a lack ofunderstanding of the scientificmethod in the untrained, oftenillustrated by a tendency to over-

value single steps in a chain ofcausation. The dependence of anhypothesis on a complete chain ofconfirmed steps is counter-intuitiveto many and has been commentedon by non-science writers such asPJ O’Rorke. It is not easy toprovide instant certainty withscience and Bertrand Russell’sdictum that “what man desires isnot knowledge but certainty” isrelevant. In 2001, the apparentdiscovery of trans-gene migration inMexican maize by Quist andChapela (2001) reported in Naturecaused considerable alarm to some.I do not mean to discuss whetherthe technique they used was faulty(or better, inappropriate) nor toconsider whether trans-geneswould be expected to persist butthe later study of Ortiz Garcia et al(2005), who found no transgenes in150,000 samples over a four years’study period illustrates the dangerof acting on unverified information.In the same way, initial reports onthe dangers of a GM crop to theMonarch butterfly were discredited

Similar concerns apply to thecontroversy about the MMR(measles, mumps and rubella)vaccine where a set of indifferentdata was made much of by theuninformed. Even had thehypothesis been true, the suggestedhazard (there were no data todescribe a risk) should have been

balanced against the facts – toconsider measles alone; it is highlycontagious and will occur inoutbreaks in communities withimmunisation rates much below75-80%. The illness will beaccompanied by ear infection in 1in 20 cases; by pneumonia orbronchitis in 1 in 25 cases (withsome permanent sequelae in termsof lung disease); by convulsions in1 in 200 cases; meningitis orencephalitis in 1 in 1000 cases;death in 1 in 2500-4000 cases; andthe terrible problem of sub-acutesclerosing panencephalitis inperhaps 1 in 8000 children.

But there is a better documentedexample of the precautionary advicebeing damaging. In the yearsbetween 1986 and 1988 there werearound 1500 deaths described asbelonging to the Sudden InfantDeath Syndrome (SIDS) in Englandand Wales per year. In 2004 therewere 313. What had happened?

Perhaps as a result of the view thatthe immature brain stem functionof infants made them vulnerable tocertain stimuli affecting the airwaysit was assumed that it would besensible to sleep infants on theirfront or side, in the way it wasaccepted that it was better to nurseunconscious or vulnerable adultpatients. At that time there wasalso an increasing use of intensivecare methodology in premature

RISK MANAGEMENT – SHOULD THE PRECAUTIONARYPRINCIPLE BE REPLACED BY RISK-RELATED ANALYSISFOR INDIVIDUAL NEW TECHNOLOGIES?

The PrecautionaryPrinciple – more sorry than safe Sir Colin BerryEmeritus Professor of PathologyQueen Mary, University of London


infants. This practice wasprecautionary – there were no data.After a great deal of investigation,some absurd hypotheses andirritation with funding bodies (suchas the Medical Research Council)that they were not doing enough toinvestigate the problem, a series ofobservations, mainly Australasian,demonstrated that this position wasdangerous. The “Back to Sleep”campaign resulted in a drop inSIDS that has continued (0.65deaths/1000 live births in 1996,0.55/1000 in 2000 and 0.43/1000in 2004). Blair (2003) estimatedthat the change in policy had saved10,000 infant lives in the lastdecade; my own estimate is higher.It is important to notice that themain epidemiological characteristicsof these cases has not changed(marital status, maternal age etc –see Leach et al, 1999) although achange in practice by someCoroners in the description of SIDSvs an “unascertained” course ofdeath in death certification mayhave altered the figures in a verysmall fraction of the cases.

Although this tragic loss of preciouslives is the price of precautionwithout information, there is amore important issue for Science asa methodology. The “backgroundnoise” of these deaths had obscureda significant number of deathscaused by overlying in thosesleeping with their infants. Furtheradvice last year (2004) from theDepartment of Health has furtherreduced unexplained deaths ininfancy from a cause that any pigfarmer would have anticipated fromhis data.

There are plenty of other explodedcertainties relating to both therapiesand diet, some documented in RuthGilbert and her colleagues’ reviewof the SIDS issue (Gilbert et al,2004), readily illustrated by the β-carotene and anti-oxidant story andby increasing difficulties with the “5a day” mantra. Here againinadequate science may obscure thereal value of a concept; there aregood data on the benefits of sometypes of diet for populations but

they often fail to confirm theirpromise in trials (as for carcinomasof the breast and colon). I haverecently examined a PhD thesisfrom New Zealand by Dr BarbaraThompson, a food scientist fromNew Zealand, which may explainwhy; it is possible that the advicegiven with relationship to fruit andvegetable intake may needmodification.

It is possible to provide endlessexamples; perhaps the most recenta conjunction of interest about theeffects of PCB’s and the concernabout flame retardants – the 309survivors of an Air France A340Airbus crash in Toronto might havea view on this.

Apart from problems with the PPand its essentially non-scientificnature, its erratic application is amajor difficulty. Why is the PPapplied to GM crops but notorganic food? I know of no regularmonitoring scheme for mycotoxinsin these foods yet food-relatedmycotoxin toxicity is a wellestablished phenomenon andfungicide treatment has beendemonstrated to prevent it. Anumber of papers havedemonstrated the consequences offailure to treat (notably welldocumented in root crops). Whyare some “natural” products notsubjected to precautionaryregulation when we have theREACH initiative? I suspect thatwe have a “mind-set” problem; it isobvious to some that particularthings are dangerous. ProfessorErnst in his survey of 95 BritishComplementary and AlternativeMedicine (CAM) organisationsfound that few understood theconcept of adverse reactions andsome said that “adverse events wereonly connected with mainstreammedicine, but were inconceivable intheir own practice”. This despite L-tryptophan and the eosinophilia/myalgia story (with many deaths),germanium and selenium and renaltoxicity, the loss of a transplantedheart to St Johns Wort and deathsfrom Asinasin (a new vegetablejuice) and from a Chinese herbal

dieting regime.

I have concentrated on theproblems of bad science, is there analternative? The definition of thePP that I have used dwells onpossible causative links that haveoccurred as a possibility tosomeone but have not beenestablished. This is irresponsible;when so many examples of gettingit wrong exist. It is possible toestimate risks for mostinterventions as well as for newtechnologies and thus to designmonitoring studies that wouldenable a response to be modified ifadverse outcomes are the result ofan initiative. In the first report onRisk from the Royal Society (thesecond is not nearly so good) therewas a category of “Risks notForeseen”. There is no system toprotect us from these – attempts todo so will be stultifying.

In discussing those who should rulethe Republic, Plato was emphaticthat they must be an elite. Therewere three classes of citizens, theGuardians who ruled the polis, theAuxiliaries who were guardianswho remained warriors, and theCraftsmen (the rest). In order toensure that the leadership of theGuardians was accepted by thecitizens a “noble lie” was told abouttheir origins – that they were allborn of the same mother but thatsome had gold in their souls, somesilver and some bronze,determining the role they wouldplay in society. This myth was told“for the sake of those being ruled”.That is how we are beginning toregulate. The study of Trewby andhis colleagues (2002) shows that weare in danger of destroying a trustby assuming we can decide what isgood for people. We may be ableto give good advice; but only if wehave data.


ReferencesFurendi, F. (2005) “The politics of Fear: beyond Left and

Right” Continum Press.Health Education Authority (1997) MMR Immunisation

Fact sheet, 1997(February), p.1Blair PS. et al. (2003). Arch. Dis. Child. 88; 434-51Leach EA. et al. (1999). Pediatrics. 104 ; 43-51Gilbert R. et al. (2005). nt J Epidemiol. 10; 1-14Quist and Chapela (2001). Nature, 2001 - 414; 541-543 Ortiz Garcia et al (2005). Proc.Nat.Acad.Sci.

USAdoi10.1073/pnas0503356


IntroductionThe precautionary principle is one ofthe main regulatory tools ofEuropean Union environmental andhealth policy with importantramifications for member states.Over the past twenty years theprecautionary principle has alsoincreased in popularity beyondEurope, underpinning internationalagreements such as the Conventionof Biodiversity. The precautionaryprinciple has not been welcomed byall regulators in all governments asthe use of the principle for regulatorypurposes is highly controversial.This paper analyses the use of theprecautionary principle and providesinsights regarding its future use inEurope.

Sweden The first use of the concept in lawwas the 1969 Swedish EnvironmentalProtection Act. This introduced thereversed burden of proof with regardto environmentally hazardousactivities. Industry was required todemonstrate the safety of its productsto regulators, rather than requiringregulators to prove harm, as was thecase in existing regulatory regimes.In effect the whole act is based on theburden of proof concept. AsWesterlund 1981 writes:“The idea is that the authorities donot have to demonstrate that acertain impact will occur. Instead, themere risk (if not too remote) is to bedeemed enough to warrant protectivemeasures or a ban on the activity.Coupled with this is a rule in the Actstating that anyone applying for alicence must demonstrate the effectsof the activity.”

The purpose of the Act was to protectpublic interests, both environmentaland public health. The concept wasnot called “precautionary principle”at this stage, but the core element,namely reversal of proof, was put tolegal use.

West GermanyAt about the same time, the Germangovernment began to develop a lessradical version, Vorsorgungsprinzip, or“cautionary principle”. This variantemerged from the Social Democrat-Liberal Democrat election victory in1969, won partially on anenvironmental platform, as well as apromise to promote a fairer society.The use of the term precautionaryprinciple was a way to address bothissues, as its implementation led to amove away from economic criteriaand all the legal implicationsassociated with this approach. Withregard to environmental legislation,the first draft of the new clean air actin 1970 contained the statement thattranslates into English as “to preventthe development of harmful effects”.Interest in the environment wasdriven not by public pressure but bythe Liberal Democrat Hans DietrichGenscher to establish the party’senvironmental credentials.Environmental affairs were treated asa federal responsibility and movedfrom the Department of Health to themore powerful Ministry of Interior(BMI), headed by Mr Genscher. German industry, as well as theChristian Socialist Union (CSU) andChristian Democratic Union (CDU),became more receptive to theprecautionary principle, possibly asthey had power bases in Bavaria andBaden-Wurttemberg which have most

of the country’s forest cover, carmanufacturing and nuclear powerplants. The link betweenWaldsterben (Forest death) and autoemissions created conflict betweenthe environment and economicgrowth. Promoting nuclear power, asan alternative to fossil fuel powerplants, provided a way to reducepressure on the auto industry. Ironically, this invocation of theprecautionary principle endorsed atechnology surrounded by greateruncertainty than the one it wasintended to replace. Nonetheless, itreflected a conceptual change,advancing a more holistic perspectiveto investment and R&D strategies.The new incentives were intended toencourage “ecological modernisation”in which environmental protectionand economic development becamemutually reinforcing. They were alsodesigned to stimulate appliedindustrial research and open exportmarkets for German environmentaltechnology

Europe The precautionary principle wasdiscussed internationally as early as1982, at the World Charter forNature. However, the first significantuse of the concept was in relation tothe North Sea. As a result, mostdiscussion regarding theprecautionary principle has focusedon the marine environment. At thesame time Germany was alsolobbying the European Union to havethe principle adopted as its standardfor environmental policy as well.This was part of a drive to“Germanise” European environmentalpolicy by means of political initiativesat the EU level aimed at minimising

RISK MANAGEMENT – SHOULD THE PRECAUTIONARYPRINCIPLE BE REPLACED BY RISK-RELATED ANALYSISFOR INDIVIDUAL NEW TECHNOLOGIES?

The present and futureEuropean use of theprecautionary principle Professor Ragnar LöfstedtDirector King’s Centre for Risk Management, King’s College


administrative adjustment costswhich were expected to follow fromthe Single European Act. TheGerman version of the precautionaryprinciple was increasingly used inEuropean environmental legislation,culminating in its inclusion in the1992 Fifth Environmental ActionProgram and the 1992 MaastrichtTreaty.

Present use of theprecautionary principleThe precautionary principle has beenused at member state and EU levelswith mixed results. Sweden has beenone of its most active proponentswhere industry has been operatingunder a strict reversed burden ofproof, “substitution principle” andneeds-based regulatory environmentsince 1969, ensuring that thecountry's regulations are morestringent than those of otherEuropean nations. Examples of suchlegislation include the banning ofantifouling paints for pleasure boatowners, the banning of the domesticuse of glysphophosphates (a commonweed killer sold under the tradename “Round Up”) and the proposedbanning of all brominated flameretardants. The country is proposingto put into place a toxic freeenvironment by the year 2020, bywhich time all concentrations of“artificial” chemicals should be atnatural background levels. The precautionary principle wasincreasingly used at the EU level as a“philosophy” for regulation. Forexample, in the period from 1994 to1999 the term precautionaryprinciple was referred to in 27European Parliament resolutions.The most public European use of theprecautionary principle has beenassociated with high level EU-UStrade disputes ranging from Europeanbans on hormones in beef to

genetically modified organisms.These disputes led US businessinterests to take the view thatelements within the EU were usingthe precautionary principle forprotectionist purposes. Indeed, thecontentiousness of this issue led theDG Environment Commissioner,Margot Wallström, to state in a recentWashington speech that: “We do notspend our days in Brussels, as somemight think, in Machiavellianplotting to apply precaution to thedetriment of US businesses.” TheEuropean Commission therefore sawthe need for an official clarificationon the role of the precautionaryprinciple in present regulatory policy.This is highly regarded withinEuropean Commission and places theprecautionary principle within theexisting framework of risk analysis tothe displeasure of manyenvironmental non-governmentalorganisations (NGOs) includingGreenpeace.

Speculations on the futureof European regulationEuropean regulatory politics changedafter the formation of the BarrosoCommission in late 2004, which isseen to be very much centre-right,with more attention devoted toreduction of regulatory burdens onindustry to ensure Europeancompetitiveness. There is littleconsensus on further use of theprecautionary principle in its strictestform, that is reversed burden of proofand regulation based on harm ratherthan on risk. Tools to promote betterregulation such as Regulatory ImpactAssessments (RIAs) are also verymuch in favour at present with theprecautionary principle almost nevermentioned at the European level.The French Food Authority’s decisionto continue with the British beef banfollowing the EU decision to lift it

indicated that the agency had thepublic’s best interest at heartespecially after the tainted bloodscandal. The EU’s precautionaryactions also have a great deal to dowith credibility and range frombanning hormones in beef, to notintroducing genetically modifiedcrops on a commercial scale inEurope, to imposing hazard ratherthan risk criteria with regard to theforthcoming chemical legislation.The regulators want to be seen asacting in the best interest of thegeneral public and not industry. Inso doing they may be perceived asfair, one of the three components oftrust, and thereby ultimately theseagencies will, if all goes to plan,regain the public’s trust that theyhave lost over the past 10 years.Arguably the US underwent the samecrisis of legitimacy with the sameform of strategies in the early 1970swhich the European Union isundergoing, albeit 30 years later.European regulators have thereforeput forward the precautionaryprinciple (specifically reversedburden of proof) as one of the mainregulatory philosophies. Once trustis restored, and once regulators seethat the costs of precautionarylegislation outweigh the benefits of it(as occurred in the United States)then the popularity of theprecautionary principle in Europeancircles will decline and a more USbased model will appear. Thequestion is, of course, when will thisoccur? How much precautionaryprinciple legislation needs to beenacted before regulators, as in theUnited States, see that the costs ofregulation outweigh the benefits of it?There are already signs that the EU isconsidering going in this directionwith the development of the betterregulation agenda within the BarrosoCommission.


The application of the precautionary principle has peaked in Germany where it arose prior to the environmental movementand was adopted and monopolised by them. It is based on ideology rather than on sound science and should now besidelined. The application of the precautionary principle to ban the importation of cattle treated with hormones could bejustified by economic reasons such as the existence of beef mountains in the EU. The banning of groundnuts from Africa onthe basis of aflatoxin contamination with a one in a hundred million chance of contracting cancer from this exposure may berelated to trade protection. A discussion on the relative benefits and impacts of the banning of flame retardants on infantdeaths followed. The precautionary principle is difficult to characterise and risk is difficult to quantify. All one can do is to obtain the bestpossible data in every case since perfect knowledge can lead to perfect quantification. Most developed countries tend to bemore precautionary. Although absurd examples of inappropriate application exist and there are no perfect answers. The current handling by the media on bird flu was quoted as an example of the hysterical mishandling of scientific data thatundermines the scientific assessment of risk and its management.The precautionary principle is concerned with harmful outcomes, but positive outcomes are the primary objective oftechnological development such as the laser for example, on which so much technology now depends, but which could havebeen banned as a potential weapon of destruction.

The human species may havearisen in Africa, but Africawas – and is – no garden of

Eden. It has a wide variety ofenvironments, but probablyremains more vulnerable toenvironmental change than anyother continent. The specialposition of Africa has now beenwidely recognised, notably in itsplace on the agenda of the G8countries at their meeting atGleneagles in July. While livingstandards have recently increased inmany countries, both GDP percapita and wealth per capita inAfrica have actually declinedbetween 1970 and 2000.

We live at a time when the worldwe are used to is anyway changingquicker than ever. It has changedmore in the last 200 years than inthe preceding 2000, and it haschanged more in the last 20 years

than in the previous 200. Theproblems are of course global.They date mostly from theindustrial revolution which beganaround 250 years ago. The mainglobal problems are:

Human multiplication at anextraordinary rate: when I wasborn in 1930 there were around2 billion people, but now thereare more like 6.3 billion, and thenumber could rise to between 8and 9 billion by the middle ofthe century. At present there are80 million more people everyyear.

There has been extensive landdegradation throughdeforestation and over-cultivation. We have depletedmineral and other resources, andaccumulated a rising volume ofwastes.

Climate is changing as a result ofhuman activities, with consequentvariations in hot and cold, rainand drought, more extremeevents, and rising sea levels.Melting ice in the Arctic andAntarctic, and the hurricanesKatrina and Wilma are goodillustrations of what is happening.Coping with the problem(principally by drastically reducingcarbon dioxide emissions) carriesbig implications for energy policy.Kyoto and plans for post-Kyotoare only modest steps forward.

Water, both fresh and salt, hasbeen polluted world-wide, andthere are growing freshwatershortages, described by the UNEnvironment Programme as thebiggest problem of the twentiethcentury, and a possible source ofconflict.


THE IMPORTANCE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO A SUSTAINABLEECONOMY ON THE AFRICAN CONTINENT

MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENTARY AND SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON MONDAY 12THDECEMBER 2005

Africa has the shortest average human lifespan for any continent, partly attributable to the incidence of HIV/AIDSand Malaria in Sub Saharan Africa. These conditions are aggravated by a generally weak economy and fragileenvironment that will be further challenged by future climatic and demographic changes. According to the UnitedNations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) these will combine to reduce the average water resources to lessthan 1700m3 per person, per year, throughout most of the continent by 2025. Current aspirations for the eliminationof poverty in Africa are therefore unlikely to be achieved unless underlying factors such as current and predicted waterscarcity are addressed now. The combined deployment of Science, Engineering and Technology with Development Aidwould therefore appear to be a very high priority if the structural causes of poverty in Africa are to be identified andrectified. Is this on the donors’ agenda?

The Importance ofScience, Engineeringand Technology to aSustainable Economy onthe African ContinentSir Crispin Tickell GCMG KCVO

There has been a reduction inthe diversity of living organisms,and thus of the global ecosystemof which humans are a part. Inthis area we are ignorant of ourown ignorance.

New risks have arisen from thedevelopment of technology,whether in the nuclear orchemical fields, in nano-technology, in genetics, orelsewhere.

All these problems are closelyconnected. I commend theSeptember edition of the ScientificAmerican which, under the headlineCrossroads for Planet Earthexamines each of the main issues,including agriculture and foodsecurity, deterioration of landquality, and public health.

Nowhere do these global problemshave more effect than in Africa.

The African population is likelyto triple between now and 2050.Estimates suggest that it willincrease by 63% in North Africa,122% in West Africa, 175% inmiddle Africa, 136% in EastAfrica and 4% in South Africa.This will lead to increasingnumbers of refugees, both withinand between countries, andmajor social and economicinstability.

Climate change is a particularhazard and has long been such.Throughout the Holocene therehave been big variations withsuch factors as the El Nino/LaNina phenomenon in the Pacific(with global implications) to betaken into account. Theconventional wisdom is that thedroughts of the last 40 years,particularly in the Sahel and EastAfrica, arise at least in part fromover-population, poor landmanagement and deforestation.But recent evidence suggest thatat least some of the problemsarise from changes in themonsoon, due to risingtemperatures in the IndianOcean, in turn due to globalwarming caused by the risingvolume of greenhouse gases.This is scarcely an African


responsibility. Sealevel risecontains many hazards forcoastal cities where increasingnumbers of Africans now live.

Damage to soils and a steadyincrease in desertification are alsoforecast for Africa.

Shortages of fresh water arelikely to increase dramaticallythroughout Africa by 2025. In2000 about 300 million Africanswere living in a water-scarceenvironment, but by 2025 thisfigure could triple. Sanitation isanother major problem.

With water shortages is likely tocome substantial changes in bothterrestrial and aquaticecosystems, with effects nowhard to estimate. Distributionand productivity of plant andanimal species will change withbig effects on food security andhuman health. We are asvulnerable to change as any otherspecies. Humans take 20 yearsto reproduce while bacteria cando the job in 20 minutes. Thespread of such old diseases asmalaria and dysentery and ofsuch new ones as HIV/Aids andthe Ebola virus can bedevastating in a weakenedpopulation.

Misapplication of technology,particularly in agriculture, isanother major problem. Well-meaning efforts to changetraditional crops, or increase cropyields, have often led to disaster,for example in Ethiopia.

So far efforts to cope with thisalarming range of interconnectedproblems have had little success.They tend to be associated withproblems of government,governance generally, poorinfrastructure, local conflicts andcorruption. Capacity building isalways a long and difficult process,and has hardly started in Africa.Others will talk about the progressnow being made, and the role ofDFID.

It is good that the African Unionand NEPAD (the New Partnershipfor Africa’s Development) have beenworking together. Progress was

made at the second Africanministerial conference on scienceand technology in Senegal inSeptember when a consolidatedplan of action with twelve flagshipprogrammes was agreed. Theseprogrammes include projects inbiotechnology, water, informationtechnology, and use of rawmaterials. In South Africa newscientific networks across thecontinent are being promotedthrough the National Astrophysicsand Space Science Programme anda new African Institute forMathematical Sciences.

How quickly science andtechnology can contribute toproducing a more sustainableeconomy in Africa is anyone’sguess. The first step to wisdom isrecognition of the problems, butwhat to do about them runs upagainst cultural and other barriers,for example in coping withpopulation increase and land use.The devil lies in the detailedapplication. As an example Ilooked at the particular problems ofone of the poorest African states,Burkino Faso. Here a charity, TreeAid, has found that one of the mostserious problems is the gapbetween understanding of theissues at the top of the socialhierarchy, and willingness to tacklethe problems lower down. Whilesome farmers have been willing toinnovate, and in particular torestore tree cover where possible,they have had little support fromeither colleagues or localgovernment officials.

The most useful contribution whichanyone from outside can make is tohelp Africans to help themselves intheir unique geographical andecological circumstances, and toassist them in their efforts to createbalance between population,resources and environment. Thisinvolves a wide range of issues,including trade. What industrialcountries do globally greatly affectsAfrica, and what the Africancountries do locally greatly affectsthe rest of the world. We have anenormous common responsibility.


The Role Water Plays inAfrica’s ChallengesAt any given time, close to half thepopulation in the developing worldis suffering from one or morediseases associated with inadequateprovision of water and sanitationservices1. Diarrhoeal diseases formthe bulk of the health risk. Thereare an estimated 1.2 billion cases ofdiarrhoea in Sub-Saharan Africaevery year that lead to the deaths of769,000 children under 5. Thisplaces an average health burden onevery African of 21.7 years of illhealth. Diarrhoea kills moreAfricans every year than HIV/Aids.Water is also closely linked withhunger and poverty. Some seventyper cent of the 600 million “$-poor”and the 200 million malnourishedpeople in Africa live in rural areas,with agriculture as their sole orprimary source of food and income.Agriculture is their only way out ofpoverty. Soil nutrient loss and lackof access to safe and reliable waterare the chief biophysical factorslimiting small farm production andtherefore critical to any povertyreduction strategy for the ruralpoor.

State of Water and LandManagement in AfricaIf water plays such a key role inAfrica’s challenges, then why has itnot been addressed already? Waterresources development projects inAfrica, particularly irrigation

projects, have a reputation for beingseveral times more expensive thanAsian projects and for not deliveringresults. Have we learned from thepast and do we know where toinvest in the future, or is there atask for research, for science andtechnology, to develop suchsolutions? Jeffrey Sachs’s proposal isclear: we have the answers and thekey is increased investments.Others, such as Lomborg, questionwhether there are good investmentopportunities where the benefits tosociety clearly outweigh theinvestment costs.For water, however, both campscame to the same conclusion: (1)for water supply and sanitation wehave excellent investmentopportunities; and (2) for increasingwater productivity in agriculture,developing innovative solutionsthrough research is a goodinvestment opportunity. There are clear, simple solutionsthat are credible and widelysupported for effective provision ofsafe and affordable water andsanitation services. These focus oncommunity-managed, low-costwater supply (often standpipes) andsanitation (latrines in rural areasand low-cost, small-bore seweragein some urban areas), combinedwith hygiene education (handwashing). For Africa to meet the2015 MDG water and sanitationtarget, however, it will be necessaryto increase the speed at which

people are provided with safe andaffordable water threefold and withsanitation fourfold. The keyquestion is how to mobiliseadditional investment resources. For irrigated agriculture there is awidespread belief that enough –possibly too much – has beeninvested. In the twentieth centurythere has indeed been massiveinvestment. The governments ofthe United States and Australia, forexample, constructed some fivethousand cubic meters of waterstorage per capita. In Africa,however, very little waterinfrastructure has been built. SouthAfrica has most (700), whileEthiopia has only 40 cubic meters.For all of Africa, only 3% of itshydropower potential has beenexploited and less than 4% of itsarable land is irrigated. Rainfall in Africa is characterised byextreme variability. There is a veryhigh correlation between rainfalland national economic growth,suggesting that economic growthcould be stabilised if waterinfrastructure could even out watershortages. Africa is the only regionin the world where per capita foodproduction has fallen over the lastforty years. In other regionsagriculture has “intensified”;increased production has come fromhigher production per unit area. InAfrica, however, it has come almostcompletely from expandingagricultural area, at the cost of the

THE IMPORTANCE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING ANDTECHNOLOGY TO A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY ON THEAFRICAN CONTINENT

What Can Water Scienceand Technology do forAfrica? Frank RijsbermanDirector General, International Water Management Institute,Colombo, Sri Lanka


environment. A key question forscience and technology is howagriculture in Africa can beintensified, or how water and landproductivity can be increased.A comprehensive recent study byIWMI and partners shows that,surprisingly, irrigation projects inAfrica are not very much moreexpensive than in Asia. Smallprojects are more expensive thanlarge projects, however, and therehave been many more small projectsin Africa than in Asia. Projects witha 10% increase in irrigated areahave a 7% lower unit cost and a 3%increase in economic returns. Keyconclusions are:1. Farmers are the private sector.2. Large has a place: Large dams

can be good and small dams canbe bad.

3. Farmer participation inirrigation O&M makes for betterprojects.

4. Success depends highly on othersectors: fertilizer, roads, markets,output prices.

5. High-value crops (vegetables,primarily) outperform staplefoods by a considerable factor.

6. Have multiple-use projects:domestic and productive use(crops, fish, livestock, trees andenvironmental services).

The Role Science andTechnology Can PlayIn my opinion, two keyopportunities for water science andtechnology in Africa are:1. making an asset out of

wastewater; and2. increasing water and land

productivity at the basin orlandscape scale.

Making an asset out ofwastewaterThere are an estimated 20 millionurban and peri-urban farmers inAfrica that produce some 70-90% ofthe perishable vegetables consumedin African cities. Virtually all thesefarmers use un-treated, or verypartially treated, urban wastewater.And virtually all these farmers areignored by government becausetheir use of wastewater is againstofficial regulations and because their

farming is informal and the farmersare illegal (squatters).Nevertheless, wastewater irrigationis a reality in the urban fringes ofvirtually all cities in Africa and Asia.Re-use of wastewater has manyadvantages for farmers: ● it conserves nutrients and

reduces the need for chemicalfertilizers;

● it increases crop yields; and● it is a very reliable water supply.It also has considerableenvironmental benefits:● it provides low-cost sanitary

disposal of municipal wastewater;● it conserves water; and● it reduces pollution of rivers,

canals and other surface water.Re-use of polluted, unsafe wateralso does carry serious health risks,for producers and consumers, aswell as environmental risks,however. The challenge for scienceand technology is to develop “safe”approaches for re-use of wastewater.This could make sanitationaffordable for African slum dwellers,with major health benefits, whilegenerating sustainable livelihoodsfor (peri-)urban farmers. Theopportunity is to carry out actionresearch in several African cities anddemonstrate how sustainable (eco-)sanitation can be linked withsustainable agriculture.

Increasing basin scale waterproductivityThe official data on irrigationseverely under-report informalirrigation undertaken by smallfarmers. For Ghana, for example,the official numbers report 9thousand hectares while some 5thousand hectares are actuallyirrigated. An IWMI survey incentral Ghana shows there is at leastsome 45 thousand hectares ofinformal, small scale irrigation,however.

Another IWMI study of so-called“bright spots”2 demonstrated thatthere are a range of technologiesavailable that are used successfullyby smallholder farmers to increasewater and land productivity. Theserange from rainwater harvesting, tosmall-scale irrigation, to the

integration of livelihoodsopportunities (crops, livestock, fish,agro-forestry, ecosystem services).There is evidence that water candeliver a considerably higher valuethan what is currently produced.The challenge for science andtechnology is to integrate and scaleup these successful technologies tothe riverbasin and landscape scale.This approach focuses on smallfarmers, as private sector investors.

ConclusionsPoor access to safe and affordablewater, both for domestic use andsanitation as well as to grow foodand provide livelihoods, places anenormous burden on the health ofpoor Africans and is a majorconstraint to their escape fromhunger and poverty.

To address this, there are excellentinvestment opportunities that focuson known and proven technologies.The key question is how to mobiliseadditional investment resources. Aninnovative solution, and a challengefor water science and technology, isto make an asset out of wastewaterand turn the sanitation challengeinto a food and livelihoodsopportunity.

Increased investments in waterresources development, ie waterinfrastructure, are a priority forAfrica. Successful irrigation projectsare not significantly more expensivein Africa than in Asia.Opportunities for increasing waterproductivity at the basin orlandscape scale exist. The challengefor water science and technology isscaling up these technologies with afocus on multiple use systems thatoptimise water productivity acrossdomestic use as well as cropgrowth, animal husbandry, fisheriesand aquaculture, agro-forestry andecosystem services.

Footnotes:1 Diarrhoea, ascaris, dracunculiasis (guinea worm),

hookworm, schistosomiasis (bilharzias, or snailfever) and trachoma.

2 Bright Spots are areas in which communities aresiginificantly more successfulin managing theirnatural resources than in neighbouringcommunities where resources are often severelydegraded. IWMI analysed 286 Bright Spots in 57countries, involving 12 million farmers

References are available from the author [email protected], www.imwi.org


ContextMisheg is a highland farming villageof a few hundred households inCentral Tigray, Northern Ethiopia.Kisibo is a similar-sized ruralcommunity on the Uganda/Rwandaborder. In both places crops aregrown primarily for localsubsistence – markets are distantand small – and the raising oflivestock forms an important part ofthe farming system. Bothcommunities experience seasonalwater shortages and droughts,extremely high infant mortality(estimated at 300 per 1000 livebirths in Misheg), high levels ofinfectious disease, poor nutrition,and many other well-known aspectsof chronic rural poverty which areendemic in sub-Saharan Africa.Such poverty is not a staticcondition. Pressures from within –rapid population growth, leading toland fragmentation and degradation– combine with external pressuressuch as global climate instabilityand weaknesses in democraticprocesses and governance, toreinforce and exacerbate chronicpoverty. If the pressure becomestoo intense, disaster follows, in theform of silent suffering or better-publicised famine, with or withoutthe controversial benefits of food aid.

Questioning the role ofscience and technologySo what can science and technology

offer to Misheg and Kisibo, and theone million other villages in sub-Saharan Africa? Are thesecommunities destined to remainpoor, until their respective nationalgovernments become moredemocratic, educational provisionbecomes truly universal, and theirnational economies growsubstantially? Or can science andtechnology transform rural Africanpoverty from within? And if so,whose science and what sort oftechnology? Can science andtechnology provide strategic andlong-term solutions in place ofshort-term developmentinterventions or even shorter-termemergency relief efforts?

Technology, people andpoliciesIn Misheg and Kisibo, and the manyother similar African villages,technologies introduced fromoutside can have an impact which isdisproportionate to their apparentlevel of sophistication. Cementrainwater tanks constructed bywomen’s groups in Uganda are notonly freeing up time and energyformerly devoted to water-hauling,but vastly enhancing self-esteemand the respect with which womenare held in the community. Drysanitation technologies whichproduce valuable compost fromhuman excreta can start to reverseprocesses of soil nutrientdegradation, while at the same time

reducing groundwater and surfacewater pollution from human waste.In almost every case though, patientand careful efforts need to be madeby external agents of change tobring about uptake of technology ornew ways of doing things. Theseprocesses are time-consuming, andrely heavily on the commitment andmotivation of external agencies, andthe level of trust which can beestablished with communities.Science and technology in thenarrow sense need social scienceand promotion of behaviour changeto become effective.

What has often been ignoredhowever, is that a community whichmoves from subsistence and almosttotal self-dependence into thetechnological age (using artefacts ofcement, metals, and plastics, andrequiring fossil fuels in theirmanufacture or maintenance)actually becomes more dependenton markets, suppliers and externalagencies than hitherto. Externalsupport is needed for the forseeablefuture, to maintain technical orsocial infrastructure, and thissupport may have to come fromGovernment, private sector, non-Government organisations, or somecombination of the three.Technology may bring benefits tousers, but it also places heavydemands on organisations whichprovide technical and managementbackstopping to communities.

What the Dickens canScience and Technologyoffer Africa? A Tale ofTwo Villages in EastAfrica… Richard C Carter, Professor of International Water Development,Institute of Water and Environment, Cranfield University

THE IMPORTANCE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO ASUSTAINABLE ECONOMY ON THE AFRICAN CONTINENT


“Appropriate” technology for theserural African contexts does notnecessarily need to be of the“bamboo-and-bailer-twine” variety.The mobile telephone is proving tobe a major contributor todemocratisation, empowerment andcorresponding development in sub-Saharan Africa. In Uganda, privatesector competition andcorrespondingly low charges makethe technology highly accessible. Incontrast Ethiopia still retains aGovernment monopoly, and as aconsequence there are only aroundone tenth as many mobile phonesper head of population as inUganda. Uganda is one of severalAfrican countries which are nowoffering market intelligence to ruralfarmers via SMS messaging – withpotentially very significant impacton producer prices and ruralincomes.

The need for integrationFor a villager in Misheg or Kisibo,the day-to-day problems of povertycome as a package. A woman’s dayis dominated by fetching andcarrying of water and firewood,farm work – weeding and hoeing,childcare, and caring for the family.A man may be more pre-occupiedwith providing staple crops andmeat, earning income, andparticipating in village decision-making. Both need technologieswhich can free up time, save energy,provide opportunity for income-generation, and help to enhance thehealth, education and well-being ofthe family. External organisationsneed to be well-connected to theserealities, and aware of their scopeand detail, even if their specificinterventions only address specificelements of the poverty andvulnerability of households andcommunities.

Local science, foreignscienceThe poorest subsistencecommunities in sub-Saharan Africaknow far more than any foreignorganisation (be it Government,research institution, developmentorganisation, or donor) about theirown environment and its vagaries.But that is not to say that foreignscience is irrelevant. On thecontrary, as internal and externalpressures on poor communitiescontinue to grow, the need for a

stronger three-way partnershipbetween communities and theirindigenous knowledge, localresearch and developmentorganisations, and foreign scienceand technology organisationsbecomes increasingly imperative. In some cases, foreign technologywhich attempts to control naturemay be entirely ill-suited, whilelocal knowledge which is betteradapted to nature’s uncertaintiesmay be the only solution. In othercases, foreign technologies such assatellite remote sensing and othermeans of environmental monitoringmay find a constructive synergywith local knowledge. Theimportant point is to always assumethat local science exists and hasmuch to offer. Too often it has beenignored in the rush to “modernise”.

Broadening the view ofscienceThe specialised western educationalcurriculum, adopted in mostAfrican countries, puts artificialwalls between natural science andsocial science, technology and itsutilisation. If science andtechnology are to offer anything ofvalue to villages such as Misheg andKisibo, they must expand toembrace all relevant aspects ofknowledge and its application. Thescience of “how things happen now”and the technology of “how thingsmight be” requires scientists andagents of change who are willing totackle the full breadth of theproblems posed by poverty, andfind solutions which will involveconventional and unconventionaltechnologies and human behaviourchange.

So what is to be done?International science andtechnology support to Africandevelopment needs to be re-oriented to focus increasingly (a) onhome-grown solutions to individualcountries’ local poverty issues, and(b) on global issues such as climatechange, renewable energy andcommunications technologies, andhealth issues such as malaria andHIV/AIDS which may benefit fromsolutions developed internationally.If Misheg and Kisibo are going toemerge from quarter-dollar a daypoverty, this will be through theefforts of Ethiopian and Ugandan

institutions which facilitateproblem-solving within thosecommunities. Such nationalorganisations in turn need long-term, predictable and reliablepartnerships with internationaldonors and expertise. They needstrong encouragement to question,to observe, to experiment, to makemistakes, to learn, and to documentexperience – in other words to doapplied science, to developsolutions to real poverty-relatedproblems, and to share thosesolutions with others who areengaged in the same endeavour. But at the same time they need thesupport provided by internationalproblem-solving applied to globalpoverty issues. Global climateinstability has probably beenaffecting impoverished ruralcommunities in Africa for severaldecades already, and the prospect isfor this to get worse. The energyneeds of households andcommunities can only increase,against a background of increasingpressure on natural resources andland. Communicationstechnologies have already started toshow their potential to redistributewealth to primary producers.Preventable diseases, or those whoseworst effects can be ameliorated,contribute to Africa’s high rates ofinfant and child mortality, and highmortality and morbidity in older agegroups. Evidence-based policies,and corresponding spendingdecisions, can translate science andtechnology which is focused onglobal environmental and povertyissues into local outcomes.Misheg, Kisibo, and a million otherAfrican villages can benefit fromscience and technology which isowned by national institutions,grounded in local issues, nothidebound by traditionaldisciplinary boundaries, freed fromthe constraints of what is deemed tobe academically respectable,internationally networked, andaware of what global science canoffer. But whether the “best oftimes” currently enjoyed in thematerially wealthy one fifth of theworld can ever be experienced bythe “worst of times” villages typifiedby Misheg and Kisibo, may requiresomething much bigger than eventhe most imaginative science andtechnology.


IntroductionDFID is committed to helpingdeveloping countries achieve theMillennium Development Goalsincluding water, which is alsoimportant for most of the othertargets, and is as important aseducation and health. We are allessentially composed of water. Inthis at least we are all equal. Betterwater supplies reduce the burden ofcollecting and managing water inthe home and help more girls to goto school. In Bangladesh, a schoolsanitation and hygiene educationprogramme increased girls’attendance rates by 11%. Women’shealth also benefits from reducedwater carrying and enables them toearn money and to look after theirfamilies. Close proximity to homeof water and latrines reduces theopportunities for rape or attack.The return on $1 investment insanitation and hygiene in lowincome countries is in the range $3to $34.Appropriate technologies, which areaffordable, sustainable, practical,low risk and participatory, play akey role throughout ourprogrammes. A good example isthe treadle pump that lifts water forirrigation and is operated by a manor a woman stepping up and downon the treadles. They are nowproduced very cheaply by theprivate sector in several Asiancountries, and increasingly inAfrica. They are made affordablethrough micro-finance schemes and,

because they are easy to maintain,they are a highly sustainable pieceof technology.The Secretary of State, Hilary Benn,spoke on World Water Day at theRoyal Geographical Society inMarch where he made acommitment to the provision ofclean water and sanitation havingfrequently witnessed in manycountries, poor women and girlsstruggling to carry water over longdistances to their homes. He wasalso aware that at current rates ofprogress the water target will not beachieved in sub-Saharan Africa andthe sanitation target will be missedin both Africa and Asia, by almost abillion people. The reasons for this include: ● Water and sanitation budgets for

poor people are low ● Overall responsibility for

delivering water and sanitationservices is fragmented

● Donors and developmentagencies do not co-operate well

● Targeting misses priority areas ● Sanitation must be combined

with hygiene promotion for besteffects

The Secretary of State committedthe DFID to doubling its fundingfor water and sanitation in sub-Saharan Africa from £47.5 millionto £95 million per year by 2007-08and urging progress from the EUand World Bank. DFID’s overallexpenditure on the water sector in2004-05 was an estimated £200

million. Of this, DFID contributedan estimated £25 million to theWorld Bank and £17.5 million tothe European Commission for waterprogrammes. DFID’s contribution tothe African Development Bank’swater sector budget is expected toincrease rapidly from £3.5 millionin 2004-05 to £18.5 million by2007-08. DFID also funds NGOssuch as WaterAid. We are workingin Bangladesh villages withWaterAid to develop community ledtotal sanitation. This has reduceddiarrhoea, increased incomes andraised self-respect by completelyeliminating open defecation and is ademand-led approach which isbeing replicated in India, Indonesia,Uganda and Zambia, withoutwaiting for government subsidies.Other partnerships includeinternational research organisationsand international partnerships suchas the Global Water Partnership, theWater Supply and SanitationCollaborative Council, the Waterand Sanitation Programme managedby the World Bank and the JointMonitoring Programme which isimplemented by WHO andUNICEF.The Secretary of State pledged on22 March that, where the waterMDG target is off-track in partnercountries in Africa, we would makesure that there was a core donorgroup working on water andsanitation (and take the lead if weneed to); map what donors and thegovernment were doing, and assess

DFID’s Commitment toClean Water andAdequate Sanitation for All Sir Gordon Conway, Chief Scientific Adviser, Department for International Development

THE IMPORTANCE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY TO ASUSTAINABLE ECONOMY ON THE AFRICAN CONTINENT


what more needed to be done; andmake water and sanitation a centralfocus of our discussions with thegovernment.In the four African countries whichare most off-track, he pledged tosecond people to boost capacity andfind quick ways of increasingspending on water and sanitation.We have already identified the nextsteps to improve delivery. Let megive two examples:In Ethiopia the government haspublished a water and sanitationstrategy with increased emphasis onthis sector. DFID provides fundingto the government through budgetsupport and is a member of the coredonor group on water. We haveoffered a consultant to support Italyas lead co-ordinator for the EUWater Initiative, and are planning tosecond an expert to the Ministry ofWater in early 2006. If additionaldirect funding is required, we willprovide selective support toWaterAid, the World Bank or theAfrican Development Bank.In Nigeria donor co-ordination hasbeen weak but is improving, led byUNICEF and the World Bank.Nigeria allocates 10 per cent of itsnational budget to water but there isstill a huge funding gap; debt reliefand better co-ordination provideimportant opportunities to close thegap. More focus is also needed onsanitation. DFID provides fundingand has seconded a specialist tosupport UNICEF as the lead donoron rural water and sanitation.

DFID also provides funding toWaterAid, a small towns project andto UNICEF’s girls’ education projectwhich has a strong sanitationcomponent. These emphasise plansdrawn up by communitiesthemselves. Since 2004, over250,000 people in localcommunities have benefited fromnew handpump-operated boreholesand 70 boreholes in schools and1,200 latrines have been built. Theaim is that this community-ledplanning process will be replicatedelsewhere. The EU has recentlyagreed to provide €40 million towiden the programme to six morestates. We have similar programmesin the Democratic Republic ofCongo and the Sudan, and in eightother off-track countries.At the regional level we are puttingour money through the AfricanDevelopment Bank’s Rural WaterSupply and Sanitation Initiative,which aims to increase coverage inrural areas to 66 per cent by 2010and 80 per cent by 2015; and alsothrough the EU Water Facility thatrecently approved a second stage offunding worth €250 million. Under the UK’s Presidency, G8leaders committed to implement theG8 Africa water action plan agreedat Evian in 2003, by increasing aidin the sector. They also agreed tobetter co-ordinate aid to improve itsimpact. DFID leads the EU WaterInitiative Finance Working Groupproviding advice to regions onfinancing water and sanitation projects.

The Africa Water Supply andSanitation Working Group is settingup discussions on policy andimplementation in ten pilotcountries each led by an EUmember state. We have seconded aspecialist to the EuropeanCommission to support the EUWater Initiative and will second afinancial specialist to the AfricanWater Facility later this year. Weare increasing our support for theNile Basin Initiative – an African-ledexample of regional co-operationand good governance of a sharedwater source. We are providingmore specialist help, encouragingcountries to share experiences andlearn from each other, and makingsure local community groups areinvolved in decisions about the useof water. Finally, we have producedan Asia Water Plan, which we willtake forward with the AsianDevelopment Bank and otherpartners. 60 million people acrossthe region are at risk from watersupplies polluted with arsenic.Fluoride also contaminates water inparts of India and China, andindeed in Africa.

DFID will prepare a further updateon progress against the World WaterDay commitments early in 2006.The update will set out how DFIDwill continue to make water andsanitation a priority in order to meetthe challenge of achieving the waterand sanitation targets in thedeveloping world.


Successful mining projects in Africa rely upon partnerships with important links to funding sources in the privatesector that are, for example, supporting MSc students with a mining company in Kenya. Africa generally lacksinfrastructure to manage irrigation compared with India, where hydropower generation is mainly used forpumping water to where it is needed. Dependence on expensive, imported fossil fuel should not be encouraged.The importance of solar energy is commonplace in Asia but rarely exploited in Africa. GNP is not a useful measureof success where human welfare underpinned by clean green growth is a better measure of what people actuallyrequire to help them to care for themselves. DFID provides core funds directly to governments with a donor groupfor each sector with support for NGOs and others in what is described as a twin-pronged approach. There aremajor capacity weaknesses in Africa, however, resulting in failure to deliver services where they are needed thatrequire a partnership-based approach if they are to succeed. Development of direct contacts at the village scale isone example. The importance of the role of women was emphasised, as educators of children, especially younggirls, managers of the main means of production – agriculture, as supporters of the elderly and as primarilyresponsible for contraception. Africa needs both high technology – vaccines, solar power, mobile phones, and lowtechnology based on the productive use of water, which thereby releases children for education rather than ascarriers of water. The overall environmental fragility of the African environment is due to the underlying graniticrocks which weather to barren silica sand grains forming a dustbowl, compared with India which is mainlyunderlain by basaltic lavas which weather to release essential nutrients to the soil.


Pharmacology is defined as thestudy of the manner in whichthe function of living systems

is affected by chemical agents1. TheUK has a long established traditionof excellence in this field of medicalscience which is at the very heart ofwhy the UK is still considered aworld leader in the development ofnew medicines.

The British Pharmacological Society(BPS) celebrates its 75th year in2006. From humble beginnings atour first meeting in the Universityof Oxford, we now boast aninternational membership whichincludes basic scientists andclinicians from both academia andthe industrial sector. The BPS alsopublishes two of the leadingscientific journals in this field. Ourmembership includes several NobelLaureates, the current Chairman ofNICE and many scientists who havebeen closely involved in thedevelopment of ground breakingmedicines, some of which arehousehold names. For example SirDavid Jack FRS and his team atGlaxo was responsible for thedevelopment of a wide range ofdrugs including salbutamol(Ventolin) for the treatment ofasthma, sumitriptan (Imigran) forthe treatment of migraine andvarious glucocorticosteroids for thetreatment of inflammatory diseases.Professor Sir James Black FRS, aNobel Laureate pharmacologist,pioneered the development of betablockers for the treatment of heartdisease and he also developed theH2 blockers that have

their response to the recentlypublished Leitch Review of Skills,identified that its members were“finding it increasingly difficult tosource certain types of graduateskills within the UK – especiallythose individuals with goodchemistry degrees, toxicologists andin vivo pharmacologists. There iscertainly a shortage of peoplewanting to work with animalsgenerally; however, for in vivopharmacologists there are additionalissues concerning the cost oftraining, administrative workloadinvolved with Licence applications(to the Home Office to obtainpermission to work with animals)and under-funding of UKuniversities leading to fewerscientists being trained in this area”.

The US FDA has also recently calledfor “strengthening and rebuilding ofrelevant disciplines (egpharmacology and clinicalpharmacology)” as part of itschallenge to the scientificcommunity to improve the currentstagnation in bringing new medicalproducts to patients5.

revolutionised the treatment ofstomach ulcers. UKpharmacologists have alsocontributed to the development ofnumerous other drugs includingantibiotics, anti-viral drugs,treatments for cancer and heartdisease, as well as medicines formany other medical conditions.

However, there are a number ofthreats to this position. At the basicscience end, new drug discoveryrequires a thriving academic base inpharmacology and chemistry, yetover the past decade PharmacologyDepartments have disappeared froma number of UK universities, andmany medical schools no longerexamine specifically in the areas ofpharmacology and clinicalpharmacology2. The loss of clinicalpharmacology is a particularproblem given that over 60% of theelderly take at least one prescriptionmedicine per week, 650 millionprescriptions are issued per year inthe NHS and many patients beingadmitted to medical wards take 10or more medicines2,3.The consequence of this reductionin the academic base ofpharmacology and clinicalpharmacology is beginning to beseen in the wider community. It isestimated that 5-10% of all hospitaladmissions are due to adverse drugreactions, many caused byinappropriate prescribing andattributable to a lack of goodtraining in pharmacology2-4. Indeed the Association of the BritishPharmaceutical Industry (ABPI), in

Pharmacology: What is it and how is itimportant to the Healthand Wealth of the UK?C.Page, R.Hill J.Buckingham and G Henderson on behalf of theBritish Pharmacological Society

C.Page

G.Henderson


Clearly pharmacological approachesto treatment are not on the waneand with an increasing lifeexpectancy (in part due topharmacological advances in thetreatment of cardiovascular disease)giving rise to an ever largerpopulation of the elderly increasesthe need for experts in all aspects ofdrug actions2. The real possibilityof “Personalised Pills” in the nearfuture has already started to capturethe imagination and major scientificbreakthroughs continue to appearfrom UK pharmacologists.Nonetheless, to maintain ourcompetitive edge in this field thereis no time for complacency and wemust address the challenges facingUK pharmacology discussed aboveso that we will have even more tocelebrate over the coming 75 years.

J.Buckingham

R.Hill

Celebrating 75 years -Scientific Events in 2006For more details go to www.bps.ac.uk or call 020 7417 011110 MarchClinical pharmacology and clinical pharmacologists in Europe - past,present and future ASCPT meeting in Baltimore USALecture by Professor Sir Michael Rawlins

9-11 AprilHigh throughput GPCR pharmacology?HorshamThis meeting will provide an opportunity to review the advantages anddisadvantages of assay techniques commonly in use in most automatedhigh throughout screening laboratories, and will include both industrialand academic perspectives.

27-28 AprilControlling acute inflammationLondonThis meeting will focus on the resolution of inflammation and provide anopportunity to hear the views of key workers in the USA, Canada and theUK on resolution of innate and adaptive immunity.

8 JunePharmacological control of appetiteBJP symposium in Washington DC, USA

4 JulyProstaglandins, Glucocorticoids, Annexin A1 and InflammationIUPHAR Congress Beijing, ChinaLecture by Professor Rod Flower FRS

4 SeptemberPersonalised pillsNorwichMeeting at the British Association’s Festival of Science

11-13 SeptemberThe challenges of drug discovery and developmentUniversity of Hertfordshire4th James Black Conference

19-21 December75th Anniversary MeetingOxfordThis meeting will include symposia on novel approaches to treatingbacterial infections, safety pharmacology, surrogate markers of braindisorders, the historical development of pharmacology teaching, the impactof biotechnology from a pharmacological and drug discovery perspective,cannabinoids, cardiovascular pharmacology and gender and mediatorpharmacology, amongst others.

References1 Rang, H, Dale M and Ritter J 1999 Pharmacology 4th Edition,

Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh2 Vallance, P & Smart, TG The future of Pharmacology Br J

Pharmacol (2006) In press3 ABPI Facts and Statistics from the Pharmaceutical Industry

http://www.abpi.org.uk/statistics (2005)4 Pirmohamed, M, James, S, Meakins, S, Green, C, Scott, AK,

Walley, TJ, Farrar, K, Park, BK, & Breckenridge, AM Adversedrug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospectiveanalysis of 18,820 patients. Br Med J 329: 15-19 (2004)

5 Innovation/ Stagnation: Challenge and Opportunity on thecritical path to new medical products FDA White paper, March2004http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/criticalpath/whitepaper.html

It’s one thing knowing that yourfather’s chances of survival reston having a new kidney but it’s

quite another deciding to give oneof your own. Mark had no doubtsabout giving his father, Gordon, thekidney he needed and even jokedthat he could have a kidney, at astage when he was unsure thateveryone has two!Mark and Gordon have beeninterviewed and photographed for anew thought-provoking exhibitionand portfolio, produced with aneducational grant from NovartisPharmaceuticals. The aim of thematerials, which are freely availableto renal and dialysis centresthroughout the UK, is to raiseawareness of the option of livingdonation and encourage discussionabout living donation amongstfamily and friends.Whilst more than 5,000 patients arewaiting for a kidney transplant,there is an increasingly severeshortage of donor organs. And,although living donor kidneytransplantation results in betterclinical outcomes than deceasedkidney transplantation, the rate ofliving kidney donation in the UK isonly 28 per cent, compared to 50per cent in the US and 90 per centin Japan.After spending time interviewingand photographing donors andrecipients before, during and afterthe transplant, Dr Jennie Jewitt-Harris and Victoria Lush haveproduced this revealing portfolio ofimages which link with powerfulpersonal quotations to offer a visualjourney through the process ofliving donation. The thoughts,compassion and challenges of lifeare captured as those going throughthis life-changing processexperience a roller-coaster ride ofemotions.The exhibition and patient portfoliohave been put together with inputand support from renal experts.

Visualising the Emotions of LivingKidney Donation

When I heard dad needed a kidney I just said ‘OK mate have one of mine’ and at thatstage I didn’t even know that I had two.

Humour helps us get through this.


Kidneys from live donors have the greatest chance of working well.

After 3 months, I’m back running my pub. Regulars say I’m less short-tempered and morejovial now – they’re right. That’s how I feel.

If you would like a copy of the portfolio, or you would like information sending to hospitalswithin your constituency, please contact Nikki Bryant on telephone number 01276 692255 or

via email [email protected].

Involvement and encouragementhave come from Mr Chris Rudge,Managing Director of UKTransplant, Lisa Burnapp,Consultant Nurse, Living DonorRenal Transplantation at Guy’s andSt Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trustand Mr Andrew Ready, TransplantSurgeon at Queen ElizabethHospital, Birmingham. Mr Chris Rudge of UK Transplantsays, “These new materials are animportant step in raising awareness ofliving donor transplantation as anoption for patients with kidney failure.They cut through the medical jargonthat sometimes faces patients, relativesand friends and tells them what it’sreally like to go through it. It’s aninspiring insight for everyone involved.”

Many of the quotes used in theportfolio also address theunderlying concerns andmisconceptions that people mayhave about living donation. Theaim of using the quotes is toreassure possible donors andrecipients that these are normalfeelings and to put the emotionsduring the various stages of donationinto context and perspective.

As one donor said, “You can’t worryabout whether you might need a sparekidney in the future. You’ve got to dealwith the problem you’ve got now, notthe one you might never have.”Another donor stressed that, “Somepeople think I’m brave – I just want ahealthy husband back again.”

And as a recipient said, “After theoperation, all the lights were switchedon.” Many patients find the mentaland physical effects of life ondialysis difficult to cope with

personally and find “dialysis makeslife difficult for the whole family, notjust me.”

Others continually stressed thebeneficial effects aftertransplantation of being able to leada life without the ties of dialysis andas one recipient said, “The joy ofgoing on a normal family holiday issomething I can’t put into words.”

“Transplantation is very special andquite extraordinary. 18 months downthe line and I still wake up feeling asurge of life.”

Whilst not an option for everyone,to many, living kidney donation is“the light at the end of the tunnel.”

Research shows that patients wouldlike more information and thisexhibition and portfolio are animportant step in that direction.The “emotions of living donation”materials have been produced togive an honest and open visualaccount of the process oftransplantation, that will encouragepatients, their relatives and friendsto talk about it.


Hurricane the North Atlantic Ocean, the Northeast Pacific Ocean east of the dateline, or the South Pacific Ocean east of 160E

Typhoon the Northwest Pacific Ocean west of the dateline

Severe tropical cyclone the Southwest Pacific Ocean west of 160E or Southeast Indian Ocean east of 90E

Severe cyclonic storm the North Indian Ocean

Tropical cyclone the Southwest Indian Ocean


The name Hurricane originatesfrom the word “Hurakan”, aMayan god, one of their creator

gods, who it’s said blew his breathacross the Chaotic water and broughtforth dry land, later destroying themen of wood with a great storm andflood. It’s also said that a 17th-century Hurricane likely inspiredShakespeare's The Tempest and led tothe British colonisation of Bermuda.The recent Category 5 HurricanesKatrina and Rita that hit the Gulfcoast of the US in August andSeptember last year reminded theworld how powerful and destructivethey can be. Fatalities as a result ofKatrina have been estimated to bearound 1,300. This is less thanHurricane Okeechobee in 1928 thatreportedly killed over 2,500 peoplein the US, although Katrina isundoubtedly the most costly (interms of loss of life and an estimated$200 billion financial damage)natural disaster in US history.The naming convention began in the1940s originally with women’s namesonly. Since 1978, the United Nation’sWorld Meteorological Organization(WMO) has used a pre-determinedlist of names for each ocean basin ofthe world, that for obvious reasonsdoes not use the letters Q, U, X, Y orZ. When a storm like HurricaneKatrina strikes, that causes loss of lifeand/or widespread damage, thecountry most affected by the stormmay ask the WMO to “retire” thename from the list as an act ofrespect – some fifty names have been

The destructive power of Hurricanesis typically measured in Categories 1to 5, from the Saffir - SimpsonHurricane Scale.

Hurricane forecasting acrossthe globeThe advent of satellite observationsfrom the 1960s has meant that theglobal meteorological community isable to monitor and track Hurricanesas they move and develop across theoceans. However it is still a difficultprocess to predict their tracks withsufficient notice in order to provideuseful warnings.The WMO has a number of RegionalSpecialist Meteorological Centres(RSMC) that have the responsibilityfor issuing Hurricane warnings intheir specific areas of responsibility.As the Met Office is one of the fewNational Meteorological Services inthe world that runs a global weatherforecast model it is able to provideHurricane forecasts that support thework of the RSMCs.Met Office forecasts are issued twice aday as “forecast guidance” to therelevant RSMC in the form of a 6-dayforecast of the Hurricane track.Explicit forecasts of maximum windspeed are not given as the MetOffice’s model at present cannotresolve the wind field with sufficientdetail. However, a qualitativeindication of forecast wind strength isgiven based on relative vorticity (atthe 850 mb pressure level in theatmosphere).The Met Office’s forecasts for Katrinawere some of the most accurateforecasts available, and were the firstto predict the correct location oflandfall over the Gulf coast, some 3days before it struck New Orleans.The forecasts for Katrina were sent tothe National Hurricane Centre inMiami (as the responsible RSMC forthe Atlantic) who used these, alongwith those from other modellingcentres in order to issue warnings.Like other RSMCs, the NationalHurricane Centre looks at allavailable information and makes ajudgement as to the most likelyevolution of the Hurricane system.This type of “ensemble” approachuses the spread of forecasts to createprobabilistic warnings, which overrecent years have become morecommon place. The EuropeanCentre for Medium Range WeatherForecasting (ECMWF) creates itselfan ensemble forecast of Hurricanetracks by using the same model run

retired since 1978 in the Atlanticbasin alone.

So what makes a Hurricane?To be precise it’s actually a TropicalCyclone. These are deep lowpressure systems that occur intropical or sub-tropical waters. Theyare tropical depressions at a sustainedsurface wind speed below 39 mphand become tropical storms whenwinds exceed this. When thesewinds exceed 74 mph, then theybecome severe tropical cycloneswhich, in the North Atlantic, we callHurricanes (a name I will usegenerically hereafter).For Hurricanes to form there need tobe several favourable conditions,which include:● the presence of warm ocean

waters, that is temperatures at leastas high as 26.5ºC and through asufficient depth of at least 50 m;

● an atmosphere which is humid atmid levels (around 5km) and thatpromotes thunderstorm activity;

● a minimum distance of at least500 km from the equator tomaintain the rotation and theexistence of an organised pressuresystem near the surface;

● low values (less than about 23mph) of vertical wind shearbetween the surface and the upperatmosphere, so as not to disruptthe organisation of cyclone.

Of course, these conditions inthemselves do not mean that aHurricane will form, but they arenecessary for development to occur.

Table 1: Regional terminology for Tropical Cyclones (after Newman, 1993)

Hurricanes, Typhoonsand Tropical Cyclones

Professor Paul Hardaker, Chief Government Advisor, Met Office


many times with small changes to theinitial representation of thedeveloping system.The Met Office’s forecasts ofHurricanes are some of the best inthe world. It regularly verifies thequality of these forecasts, inparticular in terms of the positionalerror of the predicted Hurricane overtime. Figure 1 shows the decrease inpositional error in the forecasts from1988 to present day, at 1 (T+24) to 5(T+120) days ahead. Notice inparticular the significant improve-ment in 1994, which resulted fromintroducing a new initialisationscheme, developed as part of acollaboration with the City Universityof Hong Kong.

What are the climatemodels telling us about howHurricanes are changing?Hurricane Katrina is the sixth mostintense Hurricane in our observationshistory in the North Atlantic and wasovertaken by Wilma and Rita – alloccurring in 2005. Many peoplesuggested that in the active Atlanticseason in 2005 we were seeing theeffects of climate change first hand.

Following Hurricane Katrina, KerryEmanuel at MIT, one of the world’sleading authorities on Hurricanes, hitthe headlines with his paper inNature on “Increasing destructivenessof tropical cyclones over the past 30years” (2005). The press made bignews of these new findingssuggesting that Kerry had shownClimate Change was indeed causingHurricanes to increase. Of course,that is not what he had shown.We know that under a changingclimate sea surface temperatures willincrease, which is favourable for theformation of more intenseHurricanes. But we also know thatthis is not the only condition neededto encourage Hurricane development.Simulations with the climate modelsshow that other criteria, like lowvertical wind shear, are notnecessarily favourable in a warmedclimate.In fact, attributing the increase ofevents like Hurricanes to human-induced climate change is almostimpossible with current climatemodels. The current global modelsare too coarse a resolution to resolvefeatures like Hurricanes. Some

Figure 1. A plot showing the improvements over recent years in the tropical cyclone trackforecast errors from the Met Office’s Global Weather Prediction Model. The error is measuredin km and each line in the plot represents a forecast lead time in hours, where T is an analysisfield at the time of the forecast and T+24 is, for example, a forecast for 24 hours ahead.”

studies have looked at embeddinghigher resolution regional climatemodels within the global predictions,but can only give broad indicationsof trends that have a large degree ofuncertainty. What the climatemodels can do is to look at largerscale tropical storm systems as asurrogate for Hurricane development,but as yet these studies areinconclusive and an active area ofresearch.What Kerry Emanuel has done is usehistorical observations of Hurricanesto look for trends in the data. Hisstudies suggest that globally theannual frequency of Hurricanes hasremained relatively constant ataround 90. Although frequencyvaries from year to year across thedifferent ocean basins there are noobserved long-term increase trends.However what he has also suggestedfrom his studies is that:“Records of Hurricane activityworldwide show an upswing of both themaximum wind speed in and theduration of Hurricanes. The energyreleased by the average Hurricane(again considering all Hurricanesworldwide) seems to have increased byaround 70% in the past 30 years or so,corresponding to about a 15% increasein the maximum wind speed and a 60%increase in storm lifetime.”Drawing conclusions from time seriesof Hurricane data is fraught withdifficulties. Methods of observingHurricanes have changed over time.Before the 1950s observations ofwind speed are only available overland or from ships. After thatreconnaissance aircraft brought backadditional measurements. Then fromaround 1980 we began to havereliable estimates of wind speedsfrom satellites.What has remained relativelyconstant though through time is theway in which pressure observationshave been made, which can berelated to Hurricane intensity. Atpresent Kerry Emanuel’s observationsremain some of the closestindications we have that not thefrequency but the intensity ofHurricanes has increased over the last30 years – watch this space!

Rank Hurricane Year Pressure (in millibars)1 Wilma 2005 882 mb2 Gilbert 1988 888 mb3 Labor Day 1935 892 mb4 Rita 2005 897 mb5 Allen 1980 899 mb6 Katrina 2005 902 mb

Table 2. The most intense recorded Hurricanes in the North Atlantic as measured bycentral pressure levels.

Further information about the Met Office and its Hurricane forecasts can be found at ‘www.metoffice.gov.uk’ and‘www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/tropicalcyclone/index.html’.http://www.britishembassy.de/S&I

ReferencesEmanuel , K. A., 2005: Increasing destructiveness of

tropical cyclones over the past 30 years. Nature, 436,686-688.

Neumann, C.J., 1993: Global Overview - Chapter 1.Global Guide to Tropical Cyclone Forecasting,WMO/TC-No. 560, Report No. TCP-31, WorldMeteorological Organization; Geneva, Switzerland.


The members of the Committee (appointed 6 June 2005) are Lord Broers (Chairman), Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, Lord Howie ofTroon, Lord Mitchell, Lord Patel, Lord Paul, Baroness Perry of Southwark, Baroness Platt of Writtle, the Earl of Selborne, Baroness

Sharp of Guildford, Lord Sutherland of Houndwood, Lord Taverne, Lord Winston and Lord Young of Graffham.

House of Lords Science and Technology Select Committee

The Reports and Calls for Evidence for the inquiriesmentioned below can be found at the Committee’sweb site www.parliament.uk/hlscience.

‘Pandemic Influenza’ – report published In December the Select Committee published itsreport following a short inquiry investigating the UK’spreparations for a potential outbreak of pandemicinfluenza. Overall, the Committee found that the UKis relatively well prepared for responding to apandemic, but that that there remained much to bedone.

Preventing the emergence of a dangerous new viruswas found to be a crucial first line of defence.Improvements in healthcare facilities and diseasesurveillance in south east Asia are needed, withincreased support to international agencies. In thiscountry, the report recommends that the Governmentclarify their policy on the prophylactic and early useof antiviral drugs in the event of a pandemic.Members also heard how treatment and research intothe disease may be hampered by regulations, andrecommended that such barriers be dealt with, andsuitable research projects prepared, before a pandemicstrikes. Of serious concern to Members was the lackof detailed plans covering food distribution andretailing. The Committee heard how a shortage ofHGV drivers made the supply chain especiallyvulnerable to widespread illness.

The Committee saw a need for stronger cross-departmental leadership, recommending theappointment of a Cabinet-level Minister forContingency Planning, within whose portfoliopandemic preparedness would fall. Whilst Departmentof Health leads on this issue, the effects would be feltacross Government.

The debate on the report took place on 20 January asScience in Parliament was going to press. It will bereported in the Whit issue.

Water Management Sub-Committee I of the Select Committee is currentlyconducting an inquiry into Water Management.Chaired by the Earl of Selborne, the inquiry comes ata time of growing pressure upon water resources inthe south and east of England, driven primarily bypopulation growth, lifestyle changes and climate

change. At the same time, an increasing number ofchallenging EU Directives on water-related issues areemanating from Brussels, led by the Water FrameworkDirective.

With the exception of flooding and fluoridation, theinquiry is looking at all significant aspects of watermanagement, including the regulatory system, waterresources, demand management, environmentalimpacts, research and development, consumer issuesand the role of the relevant EU Directives. TheCommittee has received a wide range of writtenevidence and has already taken oral evidence from theregulators, the industry, government departments andagencies, consumer groups, environmentalorganisations, farming representatives and academics.In addition, the Committee has visited YorkshireWater, the 2005 Utility of the Year, and is planningfurther visits to BedZED and Essex and Suffolk Water.A delegation will also be sent to Australia to examinebest practice and new technologies in Melbourne andSydney.

The Committee will be hearing from the EuropeanCommission in February and the relevant Ministersfrom Defra and ODPM at the end of March. TheChairman intends to publish the report in earlysummer. For further information please contact theClerk of the Sub-Committee, Tom Wilson ([email protected], telephone 020 7219 6612).

Science and Heritage – new inquiry An inquiry examining the role of science, engineeringand technology in the conservation of the UnitedKingdom’s cultural heritage was launched just beforeChristmas. Sub-Committee II, chaired by BaronessSharp of Guildford, will look at both how science andengineering techniques help in the conservationprocess, and at how technology is used to enhancepublic understanding of, and access to, culturalobjects.

Written evidence has been invited addressingquestions set out in the Call for Evidence, which isavailable from the Select Committee’s website. Oralevidence will be heard from March, with the reportexpected to be published in the summer. For furtherinformation please contact the Clerk of the SelectCommittee, Christopher Johnson ([email protected], telephone 020 7219 6072).


Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology

POST Board – 2005 Parliament

The first meeting of the new POST Board, created afterthe 2005 general election, occurred on 6th December2005. At this meeting, Dr Ashok Kumar MP waselected Chair and Professor the Lord Winston, Vice-chair. Other MPs on the POST Board are MichaelConnarty, Paul Flynn, Neil Gerrard, Mark Harper, Dr Evan Harris, Anne Snelgrove, Ian Taylor and Dr Desmond Turner. One vacancy remains to be filledby the Conservative whips. The other Lords membersof the Board are Lord Broers, Baroness Greenfield andLord Oxburgh. Non-parliamentary members of theBoard remain Professor Fran Balkwill, Professor Sir TomBlundell, Sir David Davies and Professor Jim Norton.

Recent POST publications

Science in CourtOctober 2005 POSTnote 248Science is increasingly used in courts in a variety ofways. Equipment used to gather evidence for the courtsmay be well-established (for example, breathalysers) orits scientific validity may still be in question (forexample, lie detectors). Scientists themselves may act asexpert witnesses, presenting evidence. This briefingconsiders how courts determine what science to accept,the options for accrediting science and expert witnessesand how disagreements between scientists are managed.

Household Energy EfficiencyOctober 2005 POSTnote 249Household energy use accounts for more than a quarterof all energy used in the UK but the typical householdis only about 66% efficient in the use of that energy.The Government’s 2003 Energy White Paper placedenergy efficiency centre stage for achieving its energytargets. It identified potential carbon savings amountingto ~20 million tonnes a year (Mt/yr) across theeconomy over the next 15 years, with 5 Mt/yr comingfrom the household sector by 2010. Critics questionwhether current policies will deliver these predictedsavings. This POSTnote examines these concerns andexplores the barriers to increasing household energyefficiency.

The 24-Hour SocietyNovember 2005 POSTnote 250In recent years more businesses have begun to operateoutside standard working times, contributing to aculture of long or unusual working hours. The “24-hour society” can increase efficiency and help to meetconsumer demand but can also have serious health andsocial impacts. This briefing outlines the driving factorsbehind the 24-hour society and reviews options tomanage its negative impacts, ranging from theEuropean Union (EU) Working Time Directive to newtechnological solutions.

Sustaining FisheriesNovember 2005 POSTnote 251The fishing industry is an important economic andsocial activity in parts of the UK; some remotecommunities are highly dependent upon it. Worldwide,demand for fish is rising but many fish stocks aredwindling with several important stocks threatened inthe European Union (EU). A moratorium on fishing ofa British favourite, the cod, has been recommended bygovernment scientists since 2001. Several recentinquiries into the sustainability of the fishing industryhave concluded that a change in management isrequired. This briefing outlines the main issues andrecent policy developments, with a focus on whitefishstocks.

Recycling Household WasteDecember 2005 POSTnote 252About 29 million tonnes of municipal waste, 87% ofwhich was household waste, was produced in Englandin 2003/04. Most waste ends up in landfill sites; only19% of household waste is currently recycled orcomposted. Recycling is widely assumed to beenvironmentally beneficial, although the collection,sorting and processing of materials gives rise to someenvironmental impacts and energy use. This POSTnotesummarises the environmental impacts of recyclinghousehold waste, and examines some of the reasonswhy recycling rates are still relatively low.

Cleaner CoalDecember 2005 POSTnote 253Climate change is high on the political agenda, gas andoil prices are increasingly volatile and concerns aboutnuclear power generation continue. Could “cleanercoal” offer the perfect energy solution? Cleaner coaltechnologies (particularly those that reduce carbondioxide (CO2) emissions) are at various stages ofdevelopment. Advocates believe they hold the key to asecure and low carbon electricity mix. Critics areconcerned that core technologies have not been fullydemonstrated and that the barriers to implementationhave been underestimated. This POSTnote examinesthe most prominent technologies and the issuessurrounding their use.

Farmland WildlifeDecember 2005 POSTnote 254Farmland covers approximately three quarters of theUnited Kingdom and has historically provided a widerange of habitats for wildlife. Many British species areadapted to living in a farmed landscape, so efforts toconserve wildlife are often concentrated withinmanaged ecosystems. Much of the wildlife that inhabitsfarmland has declined over recent decades. The reformof the EU Common Agricultural Policy has presented


Additional information can be obtained from POST, House of Commons, 7 Millbank,

London SW1P 3JA (020 7219 2840).

Also available on the internet at http://www.parliament.uk/post/home/htm

Members of either House can obtain free copies of all published material. Others may purchase copies from the Parliamentary

Bookshop (020 7219 3890). There is also a subscription service: details from POST.

an opportunity for farmers to be rewarded forprotecting wildlife. This POSTnote examines thecurrent status of wildlife on farms. It reviews theoptions available to farmers for wildlife conservationand explores the implications of future changes to thecountryside.

Current workPOSTnotes are in preparation on:

Biological Sciences and Health - Avian flu, TheNational DNA database, Healthy life expectancy andPaediatric medicinesEnvironment and Energy - Ecosystem services,Balancing water supply and the environment, The“embedded” carbon of alternative electricity generationtechnologies, Siting of nuclear power plants,Decommissioning of nuclear power plants and CarbonoffsettingPhysical Sciences, IT and Communications - Militaryuses of space, Access to Information andCommunication Technologies in developing countries,Wireless communications, The analogue-digitalswitchover, The future of the UK space programme andPervasive computingScience Policy, etc - Public engagement in science.

SeminarsIn October POST and the British Psychological Societyhosted a parliamentary seminar on “Binge Drinking”.The seminar was chaired by Prof Pam Maras, of theBritish Psychological Society. Speakers were Dr PhyllisStarkey MP, chair of POST in the 2001-5 Parliament, DrFrank Ryan, Consultant Clinical Psychologist, SubstanceMisuse Service, Hammersmith and Mr Adrian Brown,Alcohol Health Worker, A&E Department, St Mary’sNHS Trust.

In November POST and the Engineering and PhysicalSciences Research Council hosted a parliamentaryseminar on the health and social impacts of the 24-HourSociety. The seminar was chaired by one of POST’s newBoard members, Anne Snelgrove MP. Speakers includedRussell Foster, professor of molecular neuroscience atImperial College, Melanie Howard, co-founder of theFuture Foundation, Simon Quin, Chief Executive of theAssociation of Town Centre Management, and LeonKreitzman, author of “the 24 Hour Society”.

Fellows and interns at POSTCurrent and recent fellows are: British Ecological SocietyFellow: Nick Worsfold (Sheffield University/Farmlandconservation); Economic and Social Research CouncilFellow: Cindy Warwick (Oxford University/Waterresource management), and Royal Society of ChemistryFellows: Ruth Croxton (Lincoln University/DNAdatabase) and Greg Offer (Imperial College,London/Future transport technologies).

Since June 2005 POST has also welcomed as internsNicholas Cockroft (UCL/Conservation science); MarinaRoehrs (St Andrews University/Compiling database onoverseas parliaments and science and technology); LydiaCross (Manchester University/The international financefacility for vaccines and other medicines), and SusanneKadner (University of East Anglia/The AarhusConvention).

International activitiesIn September the Director participated in the secondinternational Science and Technology in Societysymposium in Kyoto. With colleagues from Shell UKand the Department of Earth Sciences, University ofCambridge, he co-ordinated a session on future energypolicies.Also in September the Director participated in aworkshop on parliamentary technology assessment,organised by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Councilof Europe, held in Budapest, for the benefit of new andpotential member countries of the EU.In October the Director and Dr Peter Border representedPOST at the annual European Parliamentary TechnologyAssessment network council and conference, held at theFlemish Parliament building in Brussels. At the sametime, the Director also spoke on “technologicalsolutions” at an international conference on “BeyondKyoto” organised at the Solvay Library, Brussels by“Friends of Europe”.Also in October POST hosted a meeting of the group ofEPTA members working on a joint study on ICT andPrivacy. The interim report was finalised and the nextstage of the work programme decided upon.In November Dr Bella Starling represented POST at aworkshop on European bioethics policy, held inBudapest in association with the UNESCO WorldScience Forum.The same month Dr Chandrika Nath gave a presentationon “Terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities: assessing andcommunicating the risk” at a European Commissionsponsored conference on Security of EnergyInfrastructures, in Brussels. Also in November the Director spent two days in Tokyo,at the invitation of the Japanese Ministry of Education,Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, as a member ofthe international assessment panel for projects under its“Super Centres of Excellence” scheme.Later the same month the Director visited Lisbon tospeak at a conference on Politics and Science, held by anew organisation – the Associação Viver a Ciência – setup to promote contacts between the worlds of scientificresearch and politics in Portugal. He also attended aspecial meeting of the Comissão de Educação, Ciência eCultura, of the Assembleia da República – thePortuguese Parliament, to discussion parliamentary scienceinformation provision.


Oral EvidenceThe corrected transcripts of these evidence sessions areavailable on the Committee’s website.

Science Question TimeThe Committee hosted a “Science Question Time” withLord Sainsbury of Turville on Wednesday 19 October. TheCommittee will continue to host such sessions at regularintervals.

Chief Executive of the Natural Environment ResearchCouncil: Introductory HearingThe Committee took evidence from Professor AlanThorpe, Chief Executive of the Natural EnvironmentResearch Council on Wednesday 19 October.

Strategic Science Provision in English Universities:Follow-up sessionOn Wednesday 2 November, the Committee took evidencefrom Bill Rammell MP, Minister of State for LifelongLearning, Further and Higher Education, Department forEducation and Skills, and Sir Howard Newby, ChiefExecutive, Higher Education Funding Council forEngland. This session was a follow-up to the Committee’sEighth Report of Session 2004-05, Strategic ScienceProvision in English Universities (HC 220) and the SecondSpecial Report of Session 2005-06, Strategic ScienceProvision in English Universities: The Government Response tothe Committee’s Eighth Report of Session 2004-05 (HC 428).

Forensic Science on Trial: Follow-up sessionOn Wednesday 23 November, the Committee tookevidence from the Rt Hon Lord Goldsmith QC, AttorneyGeneral and Rt Hon Harriet Harman QC, Minister ofState, Department for Constitutional Affairs, and AndyBurnham, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, HomeOffice. This session was a follow-up to the Committee’sSeventh Report of Session 2004-05, Forensic Science onTrial (HC 96) and the First Special Report of Session2005-06, Forensic Science on Trial: The Government Responseto the Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2005-06 (HC427).

Avian InfluenzaOn Wednesday 30 November, the Committee tookevidence from Professor Colin Blakemore, Chief ExecutiveOfficer, Medical Research Council, Dr Alan Hay, Directorof the WHO Influenza Reference Centre at the MRCNational Institute for Medical Research, Professor AndrewMcMichael, Professor of Molecular Medicine, MRC HumanImmunology Unit at the University of Oxford andProfessor Anne Johnson, Deputy Chairman of the MRC

Infections and Immunity Board (IIB), Department ofPrimary Care and Population Sciences, University CollegeLondon. This evidence session was intended to ask aboutthe key findings of the MRC’s recent visit to south-eastAsia and to examine the MRC’s contribution to researchand development in this area.

Current InquiriesCarbon Capture and StorageThe Committee announced its terms of reference in July2005. The inquiry is looking into the viability of CCS as acarbon abatement technology for the UK. Terms ofreference include the current state of R&D in CCStechnologies, projected timescales for producing market-ready, scalable technologies, cost, geophysical feasibilityand the Government’s role in funding CCS R&D. InNovember and December, the Committee held three oralevidence sessions on this inquiry. A Report is expected inFebruary 2006.

Scientific Advice, Risk and Evidence: How GovernmentHandles ThemOn 9 November 2005, the Committee announced aninquiry into scientific advice, risk and evidence. Theinquiry will focus upon the mechanisms in place for theuse of scientific advice (including the social sciences) andthe ways in which the guidelines governing the use ofsuch advice are being applied in practice acrossGovernment. It will test the extent to which policies are“evidence-based”. During the course of the inquiry, theCommittee will consider a number of case studiesincluding the technologies supporting the Government’sproposals for identity cards, the classification of illegaldrugs, and the use of MRI equipment and the EU PhysicalAgents (Electromagnetic Fields) Directive. The deadlinefor written evidence was Friday 20 January 2006. TheCommittee began holding evidence sessions in February2006.

Research Council Support for Knowledge TransferThe Committee announced its terms of reference on 1December 2005. The inquiry will concentrate upon theeffectiveness of the Research Councils’ knowledge transferactivities. Terms of reference include the promotion ofcollaborative working between researchers and partners inindustry, stakeholder engagement, results and performancemanagement, and co-ordination between the Councils andthe role of RCUK. The deadline for written evidence isThursday 16 February 2006. Oral evidence sessions arelikely to begin shortly afterwards.

House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology

Under the Standing Orders, the Committee’s terms of reference are to examine “the expenditure, policy and administration of the Office ofScience and Technology and its associated public bodies”.

The new Committee was nominated on 19 July 2005. Members of the Committee are Adam Afriyie (Con, Windsor), Mr Robert Flello (Lab,Stoke-on-Trent South), Dr Ian Gibson (Lab, Norwich North), Dr Evan Harris (Lib Dem, Oxford West and Abingdon), Dr Brian Iddon (Lab,

Bolton South East), Margaret Moran (Lab, Luton South), Mr Brooks Newmark (Con, Braintree), Anne Snelgrove (Lab/Co-op, SouthSwindon), Bob Spink (Con, Castle Point), Dr Desmond Turner (Lab, Brighton Kemptown), and Mr Phil Willis (Lib Dem, Harrogate and

Knaresborough). Mr Phil Willis was elected Chairman of the Committee at its first meeting on 20 July 2005.


Further InformationFurther information about the work of the Committee orits current inquires can be obtained from the Clerk of theCommittee, Chris Shaw, the Second Clerk, Celia Blacklock,or from the Committee Assistant, Ana Ferreira on 0207219 2792/0859/2794; or by writing to: The Clerk of theCommittee, Science and Technology Committee, House ofCommons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. Inquiries canalso be emailed to [email protected]. Anyonewishing to be included on the Committee’s mailing listshould contact the staff of the Committee.

Anyone wishing to submit evidence to the Committee isstrongly recommended to obtain a copy of the guidancenote first. Guidance on the submission of evidence can befound athttp://www.parliament.uk/commons/selcom/witguide.htm.

The Committee has a new website address:www.parliament.uk/s&tcom All recent publications (from May 1997 onwards), termsof reference for all inquiries and press notices areavailable at this address.

The following are summaries of papers produced for Members of Parliament. Information and copies of papers can be obtained from Michael Crawford at the House of Commons Library on 0207 219 6788 or through www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_publications_and_archives/research_papers.cfm

House of Commons LibraryScience and Environment SectionResearch Papers

The Health Bill: Part 1 Smokefreepremises, places and vehiclesResearch Paper 05/79 The Health Bill was presented on 27 October 2005. Ithad its second reading on 29 November 2005.This paper informs debate on Part One of the Bill,which seeks to make provision for the prohibition ofsmoking in certain premises, places and vehicles. Themeasures will take effect from the summer of 2007 andwill apply to England and Wales.

The other provisions of the Health Bill are dealt with inLibrary Research Paper 05/80.

The Animal Welfare BillResearch Paper 05/87 The Animal Welfare Bill 2005 was published on 13October 2005. It had its second reading on 10 January2006. The Bill seeks to consolidate and moderniseanimal welfare legislation in England and Wales.It is an enabling Bill under which a variety of activitiesand practices involving animals may be regulated.

Progress of Legislation before ParliamentGovernment BillsAnimal Welfare Bill Bill – 2nd Reading 13.10.05;Committee 17, 19, 24 & 26.1.06Charities Bill (HL) – 2nd Reading 7.6.05; Committee28.6.05 & 12.7.05; Report 12 & 18.10.05; 3rd Reading8.11.05; introduced into the House of Commons9.11.05Commons Bill (HL) – 2nd Reading 20.7.05; Committee25.10. & 1, 9 & 14.11.05; Report 28 & 30.11.05; 3rdReading 18.1.06; introduced into the House ofCommons 19.1.06Health Bill – 2nd Reading 29.11.05; Committee 6, 8,13, 15 & 20.12.05 & 10.1.06Identity Cards Bill – 2nd Reading 28.6.05; Committee5, 6, 7, 12, 14, 19 & 21.7.05; Report 18.10.05; Houseof Lords 2nd Reading 31.10.05; Committee 15, 16 &23.11 & 12, 14 & 19.12.05; Report 16 & 23.1.06Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Bill (HL) – 2ndReading 14.6.05; Committee 11.7.05; Report 17.10.05;3rd Reading 26.10.05; House of Commons 2nd Reading25.1.06Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill –2nd Reading 6.6.05; Committee 21, 23, 28 & 30.6 &5.7.05; Report 11.10.05; House of Lords 2nd Reading7.11.05; Committee 24.1.06

Private Members’ BillsBreast Cancer Bill – introduced under the ballot by MrShailesh Vara MP – 2nd Reading debate 20.1.06; to beresumed 3.3.06Children’s Food Bill – introduced under the ballot byMary Creagh MP – 2nd Reading debate 28.10.05; to beresumed 16.6.06Climate Change Bill – introduced by Michael MeacherMP – provisional date for 2nd Reading 10.3.06Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill –introduced under the ballot by Mr Mark Lazarowicz MP– 2nd Reading 11.11.05; Committee 25.1.06Fishery Limits (United Kingdom) Bill (HL) –introduced by Lady Saltoun of Abernethy – 2nd Reading16.6.05; Committee 5.7.05; 3rd Reading 12.7.05Food Supplements (European Communities Act1972 Disapplication) Bill – introduced by Mr WilliamCash MP – provisional date for 2nd Reading 17.3.06Management of Energy in Buildings Bill – introducedunder the ballot by Dr Alan Whitehead MP – 2ndReading debate 11.11.05; to be resumed 10.3.06Pharmaceutical Labelling (Warning of CognitiveFunction Impairment) Bill – introduced by Mr AndrewDismore MP – provisional date for 2nd Reading 12.5.06Regulation of Laser Eye Surgery Bill – introducedunder the ballot by Mr Frank Cook MP – provisionaldate for 2nd Reading 12.5.06


BOOK REVIEW

Not in our Back YardBy Anthony Jay

White Ladder Press 2005 ISBN 0-9548219-4-7

The rise of the Rt Hon Jim Hacker fromOpposition MP to Prime Minister as recordedby Jonathan Lynn and Anthony Jay in their two

books Yes Minster and Yes Prime Minister gave many ofus a new insight into the day-to-day running of ourgovernment and of the civil service, and into the waypolitical and administrative decisions are made.

Now Anthony Jay has turned his attention to theplanning system and in this book he has undertakenthe task of explaining how residents in a localcommunity who are concerned about some newdevelopment, such as a proposal to build a wind farmon a local beauty spot, can challenge the authoritiesand try to stop it happening.

For a small community to take on and fight the localgovernment and big bureaucracies may at first seem adaunting task with little prospect of success but Jayexplains that the odds are often better than youwould think.

In his preface he says, "Bureaucrats at every level inall organisations are immensely vulnerable in all sortsof ways and to pierce the armour all you need is someinsight into their established procedures and mentalprocesses, and a working knowledge of the tacticsand techniques that will give you the best chance ofvictory. It is not actually all that difficult.” Aparticular strength of the book is that Jay has hadpersonal experience of supporting a campaign in hisown village in Somerset which was eventuallysuccessful. The battle is winnable; it can be done.

This book contains a set of instructions for activistsand a working programme for campaign organisers.It explains first how to make the best use of the localskills in the community. This will channel localresentment into an organised movement and mobilisethe campaign resources in the most effective way.“You are fighting an enemy with massive resourcesand vast statutory powers … you must use guerillatactics.”

Jay recommends that a typical campaign should startwith an Action Committee supported by a number ofspecialist groups or cells. These cells have differentfunctions and recognise that different people cancontribute different skills.

For instance, a grass roots cell would drum up localsupport and a funding cell would raise the money. Alocal lawyer would head up the law cell and a local

dignitary would be responsible for finding influentialallies. The technical specialists in the experts cellattack the concept, the facts and the figures. Theychallenge the basic necessity for the project and putforward an alternative. The publicity cell shouldthink up a slogan, a logo and if possible a song. Theheadquarters cell should ideally include that specialskill, the Fixer, with a marvellous gift for “persuadingpeople, for getting unlikely permissions”, and forwhom “locked doors open, transport appears ondemand”.

Reading this book does raise the question whetherthis type of intellectual civil war is really necessary inbuilding and developing our national infrastructure.Is there something wrong with our present planningsystem which invariably generates local resentment atany new development?

Jay reminds us that most planning decisions are inthe hands of local authorities and in making theirinitial proposals their decision may be often dictatedby “what will cause the officials least trouble”.

We live on a small overcrowded island but thepublic's increasing expectations for more and betteramenities and for greater personal mobility mean thatwe need continually to expand our nationalinfrastructure, including building more houses,schools and hospitals, better roads, railways andairports, a better electricity and water supply, andbetter protection from floods. And at the same timewe need to protect our farmland and to provide moreunspoilt recreational space. These problems posepolitical and social challenges.

In proposing new developments should there bebetter provision for local residents to share thebenefits? For instance, would power stations be moreacceptable in a local community if local residentswere offered cheaper electricity or the provision ofdistrict heating? Should residents be offered a choiceof alternatives and should financial compensation bemore generous and be offered more readily?

This book is essential reading for campaignorganisers, but many readers may be left wonderingwhether it is time to review the operation of thewhole planning system. Should we be seeking tocreate something better?

Robert Freer

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Sir,How should we approach the Risks inherent inNew Technologies?The Parliamentary and Scientific Committee asked avery important question at its November Meeting.“Should the Precautionary Principle be replaced byRisk-Related Analysis for Individual NewTechnologies?” It was surprising to learn from thepresentations just how deeply embedded the“precautionary principle” has become not just in EUregulation and legislation, but also even in the US.We live today in a risk-averse society. The media feedon this and seek to boost their circulation with storiesabout various disasters around the corner. But why arewe so risk averse? The major cause has to be that somany risks faced by our ancestors have beeneliminated! We know where the next meal is comingfrom. We know that we do not face a high probabilityof our newborn child dying before the age of five. Weknow that we will be warm through the winter. Life atthe basic level has become much more certain andcomfortable. We are not accustomed to a significantlevel of risk taking simply to survive. I take someprofessional pride in the contribution that technologyand its application by engineers have made to thisdevelopment.Against this background it is perhaps understandablethat society is much more circumspect about changeand proposals for even further development. So acautionary approach is seen as sensible. And the morecomfortable and prosperous the society, the moresensible it seems. It is hardly surprising that the mostfervent advocates of caution should be the Swedes andthe Germans and that they are the inspiration for thePrecautionary Principle.But the major difficulty with the PrecautionaryPrinciple is to know quite what it is. There are severaldifferent formulations. Reduced to its basics it seems tobe a sophisticated version of “better safe than sorry”.But of course this only applies if you believe that youare safe. A football team that is four nil ahead on thefirst leg will play a very cautious defensive game on

the second leg. Its opponents on the other hand willneed to adopt a quite different strategy. They are not“safe”.And indeed the vast majority of people on the planetare not safe. The poor of Calcutta cannot affordcaution if they are to survive. Rich northern countriesmay be able to afford to ban DDT as a precautioninstead of managing its dangers. But for malaria-infested sub-Saharan Africa this is a disaster. And evenin our own society we can see lots of threats,deprivation and a need for improvement. We all knowthat there can be no progress without risk. Everydayexpressions reflect this: “No gain without pain”; “Youcan’t make an omelette without breaking eggs”. But wedo rightly demand that the risk taking, especially thattaken by others on our behalf, be managedprofessionally.It is this demand that leads us to adopt a formal,structured approach to Risk Assessment andManagement. Such an approach seeks to find wherethe balance of beneficial and harmful risks lie in anyproposal. And then, and only then, if the balanceseems beneficial it seeks to maximise the potentialbenefits and to minimise the potential harm. The RoyalAcademy of Engineering has reported on a frameworkfor this process in respect of engineering andtechnology developments. In this it is made clear thatresources must be allocated to identify potential futurehazards inherent in any proposed development. Thensteps have to be taken to research and understand thehazard, and/or to mitigate or even side step the hazard.In major projects, independent experts who do nothave any vested interest in the outcome of the projectshould audit this process. This is not a philosophy of throwing caution to thewinds as the Precautionary School might claim. It isrecognition that the future is uncertain. There may beunforeseen side effects that cause damage, or evenfailures to realise the expected benefits. But we haveanticipated these possibilities and have outlinestrategies already in place to handle these eventualities.

John TurnbullThe Royal Academy of Engineering

Debates and Selected Parliamentary Questions & Answers

Following is a selection of Debates and Questions and Answers from the House of Commons and House of Lords.

A full digest of all Debates, Questions and Answers on topics of scientific interest from 10th October to 20th December 2005from both Houses of Parliament appears on pages 46 to 54

Forensic SciencesDebate in Westminster Hall on Tuesday 18 October

Dr Ian Gibson (Norwich N) referred to the Scienceand Technology Committee report on “ForensicScience on Trial” of the previous Parliament. The UKhas been at the forefront of developments and theForensic Science Service (FSS), which is an executive

agency of the Home Office, is a major player. Otheralliances involve the former Laboratory of theGovernment Chemist, large scientific businesses withan interest in forensic science, and police forces whoare contracting out their scientific needs. Universitiesare also offering forensic science training to policeofficers, which has led to some criticism. A hugenumber of techniques are involved in the service, and


we must recognise that it provides information thatguarantees that police forces are based on intelligence-led information. Sir Alec Jeffreys, who made theserendipitous discovery that each individual has adifferent pattern of DNA when it is broken up and runon particular gels, has argued that the wholepopulation should be sampled. Is there any intentionto privatise the service, to develop a public-privatepartnership and to set up a Gov-co?

Dr Brian Iddon (Bolton SE) discussed the McFarlandreview of the Forensic Science Service published inJuly 2003, which needs investment to proceed initiallyas a Gov-co and thereafter as a full public-privatepartnership. This could jeopardise funding of blue skyresearch since the Government’s objectives appear tobe to increase competition and reduce costs. Adistinction should be made between specialistscientists trained as chemists, physicists, biologists orzoologists and those trained in forensic science coursesthat are currently proliferating. Many forensic sciencegraduates enter the police force and it is good forpolice officers to have an intimate knowledge offorensic science.The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for theHome Department (Fiona Mactaggart) identifiedDecember 2005 as the target date for vesting as a Gov-co, at arm’s length from the Home Office. Thenational DNA database, which is a national criminaljustice asset, a world leader and one of the UK’s keyintelligence databases, will not be transferred to theGov-co and the public-private partnership. It will beretained under strong central control initially in theHome Office, overseen by a tripartite board composedof the Home Office, Association of Chief PoliceOfficers, the Association of Police Authorities withrepresentatives from the Human Genetics Commission.The operational delivery of database services willcontinue to be provided by the FSS in the firstinstance to ensure continuity of service to the police.Wider consultation will take place about the mosteffective long-term oversight of the national DNAdatabase and other national forensic databases. TheHome Office has close links with the Engineering andPhysical Sciences Research Council and meets otherresearch councils to improve links to the researchcommunity, thus enabling some blue sky horizonscanning, although it is admitted that research is verylimited at present with only 2 per cent of FSS turnovergoing to R&D. However, commerical imperatives willcreate pressure to increase blue sky research in future .

Science and TechnologyDebate in House of Lords on Thursday 3 November

Lord Bhattacharyya rose to call attention to thecontribution of science, engineering and technology tothe United Kingdom economy. It was LordWaldegrave in the Conservative Government who gaveus our current strategy in the White Paper, Realisingour Potential, launched in 1993. Its purpose was “Toharness the strength of science and engineering to thecreation of wealth in the UK by bringing it into closer,more systematic contact with those responsible for

industrial and commercial decisions”. However, thereis a key difference between then and now – and that isthat this government have been prepared to put somecash behind the policy so that it can be implemented.The fruits of some of this new spend are demonstratedby the Diamond x-ray research facility, jointly fundedby the Government and the Wellcome Trust, nearOxford. At a capital cost of £380 million, it is thelargest research facility to be built in the UK for morethan 30 years. It will make a major impact in thefields of molecular biology and genetics, just as theSanger Institute played a remarkable role in the humangenome project, which is now leading to newtechnologies, supported by the UK’s enlightenedposition on regulatory controls. The UK is thus wellplaced to build on the genetic revolution leading toprofitable products for sale.

New centres of world-class research in Asia aregrowing fast. China alone graduates in excess of600,000 scientists and engineers every year. But let usnot forget that the modern mobile phone, which weuse every day, comes entirely out of Britain and thelargest mobile phone company – Vodafone – is in thiscountry, even though the phones themselves may bemanufactured in the Far East.

Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior asked the questionwhether Britain’s science and technology is wellenough placed to advance the economy of this country.Three questions must be answered. First, does thenational income spend on research and developmentcompare with that of competitor countries? Secondly,do we adequately recognise our R&D personnel, andthirdly how does UK research and development impacton the global village?

Lord May of Oxford pointed out that Joe Stiglitz’sreport from his Council of Economic Advisers toPresident Clinton in 1995 showed that investments inresearch and development (R&D) have large payoffs interms of growth. Indeed investments in R&D areestimated to account for half or more of the increase inoutput per person. Hence you now have to add newknowledge to both labour and capital as it accounts foras much as half of the productivity growth.

Lord Turnberg estimated that of the total of £5.5billion of investment from a variety of sources inmedical research in the UK, the UK probably gains £5for every pound invested in such medical research.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State,Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsburyof Turville) emphasised the importance of thiscountry as a place where talented entrepreneurs andworld-class companies can congregate from around theworld, perform their research aided by stronguniversity links and develop and finance their businessin an environment with a high quality of life.

UK Space PolicyDebate in Westminster Hall on Wednesday 23 November

Mr Bill Olner (Nuneaton) declared an interest as thejoint chair of the all-party group on space, which hasthe support of nearly 100 Members, from both Houses



and both sides of this House. The relevance of spaceis growing in an information age using television,mobile phones, weather forecasting and satellitenavigation based on space technology. Spaceapplications monitor disasters and climate change, andhelp with the distribution of aid. The UK’s lead role inthe space revolution, which arises from sustaineddevelopment and investment in technology, isacknowledged here. The Inmarsat-4 satellite serieswas made in Britain by EADS Astrium and operated inBritain by Inmarsat, the world’s most profitable mobilesatellite communications company. This is a triumphfor British technology and business and a strategicasset that is highly regarded by many countries.However Britain only spends £195 million a year oncivil space activities, a penny per person per day, witha spending level which is only 16th in the world. Ifwe are to remain a world leader and a sharp cutter atthe edge of this technology, we need more investment.

The Minister for Energy (Malcolm Wicks): This isan opportunity to consider the UK’s role in space andapplaud the work of the All-Party Parliamentary SpaceCommittee. Our national priorities are firstly tomaintain high-quality science; secondly to stimulatecommercial use of space leading to downstreameconomic benefits; and thirdly to identify and supportprojects such as Galileo that benefit the lives of citizensin the UK. This is a key part of the infrastructure thatis necessary for a digital world. The UK hascontributed more than 17 per cent of the cost of theearly phase of Galileo and also contributes through theEU budgets. Decisions on funding for the next phasehave not been taken yet and discussion could proceedwell into 2006. Global Monitoring for Environmentand Security (GMES) is well known to the DTI andacross government where it has demonstrated practicalservices especially in the aftermath of the Boxing Daytsunami. Spending on space is sound investment in anexciting sector. Government seeks to supporttechnology development for the space industry andhas provided almost £200 million in 2004-05, and thereturn on our investment exceeds that of many of ourcounterparts.

Telecommunications MastsQuestion and Written Answer on Thursday 8 December

Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green): Toask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answerof 28 November 2005 on mobile telephone masts, ifhe will make a statement on the application of theprecautionary principle as recommended by theStewart Group and adopted by the Government.

Yvette Cooper: Since the publication of the StewartReport the Government has introduced standards toensure that all base stations meet the internationalguidelines on public exposure set by the InternationalCommission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection(ICNIRP). These guidelines are five times tougher inrespect of public exposure than the guidelinespreviously used. More generally the Government'sacceptance of the precautionary approach

recommended by the Stewart Group is demonstratedin the way it has adopted its recommendations.

Low-carbon VehiclesQuestion and Written Answer on Tuesday 13 December

Mr Hollobone (Kettering): To ask the Secretary ofState for Transport what steps have been taken underthe UK's EU Presidency to encourage vehiclemanufacturers to speed up the development of lowcarbon vehicles.

Dr Ladyman: The UK Government has made climatechange one of the main priorities of its EU and G8presidencies this year, and has sought whereverpossible to highlight the importance of improving thefuel efficiency of vehicles as a way of reducingemissions of carbon dioxide from the transport sector.The communique that was agreed at the G8 Gleneaglessummit on 8 July, for example, included a climatechange, clean energy and sustainable developmentaction plan. This contained a commitment to apackage of measures to encourage the developmentand uptake of clean, low carbon vehicles. A copy ofthe full communique text is available athttp://www.g8.gov.uk.

The UK also hosted an international EnvironmentallyFriendly Vehicles (EFV) conference on 10–11November 2005, providing a forum for global dialogueon the promotion and uptake of cleaner, more fuelefficient vehicles. Over 250 delegates from more than30 countries attended, and the chairman's conclusions,together with copies of the presentations and othersupporting material, are available athttp://www.livegroup.co.uk/efvc.

The UK has also been actively involved in theEuropean CARS 21 initiative this year. This hasconsidered ways to encourage further development oflow carbon vehicles as part of an integrated approachtowards reducing CO2 emissions in the transportsector.

Within the UK, we have continued to incentivise thedevelopment and uptake of clean, fuel efficientvehicles as set out in our 2002 Powering FutureVehicles Strategy, which is available via the Departmentfor Transport's website. We also launched during 2005a new system of colour-coded fuel efficiency labels forcars to raise consumer awareness and help boostdemand for fuel efficient vehicles. The labels are nowin the majority of new car showrooms in the UK.

Fuel Cell TechnologyQuestion and Written Answer on Wednesday 14 December

Mr Yeo (S Suffolk): To ask the Secretary of State forTrade and Industry what support his Department givesto the (a) development of fuel cell technology and (b)application of such technology to the transport sector.

Malcolm Wicks: DTI provides support for industrialcollaborative research and development for fuel cellsthrough the DTI Technology programme. Theprogramme seeks to advance fuel cell technology forboth stationary power generation and transport


Parliamentary & Scientific Committee NewsNew Members

We are pleased to welcome the following newmembers:

Parliamentary Members

Ms Margaret Moran MP

Mr Brooks Newmark MP

Mr Phil Willis MP

Scientific and Technical Organisations

John Innes Centre, represented by Dr Dee Rawsthorne

The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution,represented by Mr Tom Eddy

Industrial Member

Oxford Computer Consultants Ltd, represented by DrReynold Greenlaw

applications, with a view to achieving the costreductions and performance levels necessary forcommercial deployment.

Basic research in universities on both fuel cells andhydrogen is supported by the Engineering andPhysical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), includingthrough the SUPERGEN initiative. The Governmentalso provided funding of over £450,000 for the trial ofthree hydrogen-powered fuel cell buses in London aspart of the CUTE project. £7.5 million of funding hasbeen provided for the fuel cell and low carbon vehicletechnology Centre of Excellence (CENEX) based inLoughborough.

On 14 June 2005, the Government announced afunding package worth £15 million for hydrogen andfuel cell demonstration projects. This scheme iscurrently in preparation, and will require EC state aidsapproval.

Stem Cell ResearchQuestion and Written Answer on Wednesday 14 December

Mr Amess (Southend W): To ask the Secretary of Statefor Health how many diseases were cured as a result of(a) adult and (b) embryonic stem cell research in eachyear since 2002; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: Research with embryonic stem cellshas been licensed to allow scientists to understand anddevelop treatments for conditions such as motorneurone disease, diabetes and cystic fibrosis. It is stilltoo early to speak of cures, but scientific and medicalopinion is that stem cell research will revolutionisemedicine in the 21st century.

There has been a number of encouraging early stageclinical trials with adult embryonic stem cells. As aresult of the United Kingdom stem cell initiative, theGovernment are investing £100 million in stem cellresearch and clinical trials over the next two years.

Scientific Publications: Free for all?Debate in Westminster Hall on Thursday 15 December

Mr Phil Willis (Harrogate and Knaresborough)welcomed the opportunity to debate the Science andTechnology Committee’s 10th report of session 2003-04, “Scientific Publications: Free for all?” The marketfor scientific journals did not feature in his postbag or

radar before he became Chairman of the Committee,but in the last six months this is the one that hasgenerated the most interest and intense feeling as itdivides both the academic and publishingcommunities with Ministers running for cover. Thetask is to put the issue of scientific publications intocontext.

Dr Ian Gibson (Norwich N) pointed out that theCommittee had considered all the problems and weresaying “Come on, get together, and start to addressthose problems, and do something about them.”There has been a move in the right direction but notenough of one. The attitude that there is no problemwas not reflected in the report: there is a problem. Hisfinal word to the Government is “Come on, get offyour knees. If you believe in science, support some ofthe ideas in this report.”

Mr Edward Vaizey (Wantage) made the case forconstituencies in Oxfordshire where scientificpublishing is a huge industry, including Reed Elsevier,Blackwell, Macmillan, Oxford University Press,Informa and CABI together providing employment forsome 5,000 people directly and indirectly andgenerating some £100 million in revenues fromoverseas, representing a world-beating industry. Hedisagreed with the conclusions of the report which hadbeen pushed forward too fast without proper analysisand discussion of the additional problems they maybring with them and did not accept that the problemlay with the publishers.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State forTrade and Industry (Barry Gardiner) indicated thatthe Government’s position on open access is thatresearch funding authorities should have the discretionto provide the funds if the author prefers an openaccess route. The aim is to allow the market todevelop, without institutional barriers being put in theway of any particular publishing model, and they arehappy to see publishers developing several businessmodels, including subscriber pays, open access, andhybrid approaches. That option will encouragecompetition and innovation in the publishing industryand in publishing models, as well as retaining freedomof choice for authors. This approach is in the long-term interest of a sustainable scientific publicationsmarket.


AgricultureAnimal and Plant Diseases – 31.10.05 HoC 675WDamson Trees – 20.12.05 HoC 2665WFireblight Disease – 7.11.05 HoC 23WFlower Imports – 22.11.05 HoC 1842WFood Security – 14.11.05 HoL WA118 & 22.11.05 HoC1843WOrchards – 17.11.05 HoC 1377W

Animal ExperimentsAnimal Experimentation – 24.10.05 HoC 36W, 28.11.05HoC 24W & 8.12.05 HoC 1523WAnimal Procedures Committee – 10.11.05 HoC 25WS &HoL WS61, 14.12.05 HoC 153WS & HoL WS121

Annual Report 2004 – 20.10.05 HoC 62WS & HoL WS59

Animal Rights Extremists – 2.11.05 HoC 1098WAnimal (Scientific Procedures) Inspectorate – 21.11.05HoC 95WS & HoL WS109Animal Testing (Attacks) – 23.11.05 HoC 2144W

Cosmetics – 18.10.05 HoC 909WAnimal Welfare – 18.10.05 HoC 863WAnimals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986: Annual Report –8.12.05 HoLWS89Botulinum Toxin – 14.12.05 HoC 2007WEurope Goes Alternative Conference – 7.11.05 HoC 66WPrimates – 9.11.05 HoC 542WScientific Procedures Statistics (Living Animals) 2004 –8.12.05 HoC 117WS

Animal Health and WelfareAnimal Diseases (Africa) – 5.10.05 HoC 2802W

Health – 8.11.05 HoC 292WHusbandry – 17.10.05 HoC 663WQuarantine – 14.11.05 HoL WA115TB – 19.12.05 HoC 2372WWelfare Bill – 5.12.05 HoC 920W

Avian Flu – 13.10.05 HoL 408, 26.10.05 HoL 1203,1.11.05 HoL WS9, 7.11.05 HoL WA54, 9.11.05 HoLWA76, 14.11.05 HoL WA115, 7.12.05 HoL WA100,13.12.05 HoL WA146, 15.12.05 HoL WA177

Debate – 17.11.05 HoL 1280Wild Bird Imports – 10.11.05 HoL WA89

Avian Influenza – 14.10.05 HoC 37WS, 17.10.05 HoC665W, 19.10.05 HoC 1017W, 20.10.05 HoC 967 & 1128W,21.10.05 HoC 1269W, 24.10.05 HoC 85W, 26.10.05 HoC307, 31.10.05 HoC 23WS & 677W, 1.11.05 HoC 874W& 1006W, 2.11.05 HoC 1043W & 1219W, 3.11.05 HoC1269W, 7.11.05 HoC 6W, 8.11.05 HoC 315W, 9.11.05HoC 476W, 10.11.05 HoC 669W, 11.11.05 HoC 831W,14.11.05 HoC 873W, 15.11.05 HoC 1048W, 17.11.05HoC 1090, 21.11.05 HoC 1523W, 28.11.05 HoC 4W,

1.12.05 HoC 35WS & 649W, 5.12.05 HoC 920W, 6.12.05HoC 1085W, 12.12.05 HoC 1585W & 14.12.05 HoC2005W

Epidemiology Report – 15.11.05 HoC 48WSAvian Quarantine – 15.12.05 HoC 166WSAviculture – adjournment debate – 8.11.05 HoC 49WHBeef – 5.12.05 HoC 924WBeef Imports – 31.10.05 HoC 678WBee Keeping/Research – 17.11.05 HoC 1365WBees – 20.10.05 HoC 970, 21.11.05 HoC 1525W,29.11.05 HoC 303W, 30.11.05 HoC 503W & 6.12.05HoC 1085WBiosecurity – 31.10.05 HoC 678W & 7.11.05 HoC 12WBird Imports (Border Procedures) – 28.11.05 HoC 9W

Markets – 11.11.05 HoC 833WTrade – 3.11.05 HoC 1275W, 8.11.05 HoC 317W & 9.11.05 HoC 478W

Birds – 1.11.05 HoC 1007W, 2.11.05 HoC 1044W,7.11.05 HoC 13W, 21.11.05 HoC 1526W & 1.12.05 HoC649WBrazilian Meat – 8.11.05 HoC 318W, 10.11.05 HoC 670W& 28.11.05 HoC 10WCaseous Lymphadentis – 10.11.05 HoC 671WCattle Imports (Brazil) – 2.11.05 HoC 1046WClade – 7.11.05 HoC 16WDuck Producers – 7.11.05 HoC 23WEndangered Species – illegal imports – 17.11.05 HoC1374WEU: Live Bird Imports – 10.11.05 HoL WA91 & 30.11.05HoL WA35Exotic Birds – 14.11.05 HoL WA118, 17.11.05 HoC 1085& 29.11.05 HoL WA19

Wild Birds – 1.11.05 HoC 882WFoot and Mouth – 19.10.05 HoC 1021W, 31.10.05 HoC685W & 12.12.05 HoC 1598W

Brazil – 19.10.05 HoC 1022W & 5.12.05 HoC 930WGame Birds – 31.10.05 HoC 687WGovernment Veterinary Service – 31.10.05 HoC 820WLegal Meat Imports – 31.10.05 HoC 689WLiver Fluke – 10.11.05 HoC 678WMarsh Report – 17.10.05 HoC 669WMeat Imports – 15.11.05 HoC 1065WNational Register of Poultry Businesses – 5.12.05 HoC932WNewcastle Disease – 19.10.05 HoC 1024WPigeons – 15.11.05 HoC 1067W & 28.11.05 HoC 18WPoultry – 15.12.05 HoC 2210W & 19.12.05 HoC 2386W

And Captive Bird Import Restrictions – 20.12.05 HoL WA277Cull (Avian Influenza) – 9.11.05 HoC 536WFarms – 14.11.05 HoL WA125Numbers – 8.11.05 HoC 324W

UK Parliament - Digest of Parliamentary Debates, Questions and Answers10th October – 20th December 2005

The references are to Hansard, giving first the date of publication, either HoC (House of Commons) or HoL (House of Lords), and finally

the column number in Hansard.

*Denotes selected Debates and Questions and Answers of particular interest which are reproduced on pages 42 to 45.


Quarantine – 28.11.05 HoC 20W & 12.12.05 HoC1602WRoof-nesting Gulls – 17.11.05 HoC 1379WScrapie – 10.10.05 HoC 150W, 19.10.05 HoC 1026W &19.12.05 HoC 2392WSnares – 7.11.05 HoC 36WState Veterinary Service – 15.11.05 HoC 1071WSupply of Relevant Veterinary Medicinal Products Order2005 – 18.11.05 HoL 1362Urban Gulls – 29.11.05 HoC 317W & 30.11.05 HoC513WVeterinary Laboratories Agency – 1.12.05 HoC 656W

Medicines – 19.10.05 HoC 1028WServices – 15.11.05 HoC 1110WSurgeons – 21.10.05 HoC 1273W & 21.11.05 HoC 1532W

Wild Birds – 3.11.05 HoL WA49 & 9.11.05 HoL WA87Imports – 23.11.05 HoC 2037W

Zoonotic Disease – 20.12.05 HoC 2675W

AviationAircraft Emissions/Noise – 8.12.05 HoC 1456W

Environmental Effects – 28.11.05 HoC 134WPollution – 8.11.05 HoC 282W & 314WSafety – 19.10.05 HoL WA124

Airports – 20.12.05 HoL WA241Aviation and Aircraft Fuel – 10.10.05 HoC 162WAviation Emissions – 16.11.05 HoC 1219WAviation Health: Contaminated Air – 19.10.05 HoLWA125, 25.10.05 HoL WA167, 1.11.05 HoL WA9,7.11.05 HoL WA51, 23.11.05 HoL WA209, 24.11.05 HoLWA226, 1.12.05 HoL WA58 & 20.12.05 HoL WA246Aviation Health: Fresh Air – 20.12.05 HoL WA246Aviation Pollution – 19.12.05 HoC 2294WBiofuels (Carbon Emissions) – 22.11.05 HoC 1851WCarbon Emissions (Aircraft) – 22.11.05 HoC 1852WEU Aviation and Emissions Trading Conference – 25.10.05HoC 229W

Biological and Chemical WeaponsAnthrax Sales (Iraq) – 16.11.05 HoC 1264WBiocontamination – 10.10.05 HoC 118WBiological and Toxin Weapons Convention – 20.12.05 HoC191WS & HoL WS171Chemical/Biological Agents – 20.12.05 HoC 2878W

Biodiversity and ConservationAlbatrosses – 19.12.05 HoC 2468WAnimal Trading – 17.10.05 HoC 664WAreas of Special Scientific Interest – 10.10.05 HoC 242WBiodiversity Ministerial Group – 8.12.05 HoC 1440W,12.12.05 HoC 1589W & 14.12.05 HoC 2005WBirds – 17.10.05 HoC 666WBushmeat Trade – 8.12.05 HoC 1440WConservation of Albatrosses and Petrels – 19.12.05 HoC2374WCOTES Regulations – 10.10.05 HoL WA16Endangered Flora and Fauna – 29.11.05 HoC 309WEndangered Species – 17.10.05 HoC 668WEndemic Species – 5.12.05 HoC 929WFarmland Birds – 17.11.05 HoC 1375WGrey Squirrels – 13.12.05 HoL WA149Habitats Directive – 15.12.05 HoC 2209WIllegal Bushmeat Trade – 18.10.05 HoC 899WInternational Whaling Commission – 17.10.05 HoC 668WNative Amphibians – 17.10.05 HoC 669W

Non-native Species – 28.10.05 HoC 560WOceans – 19.10.05 HoC 1024WPlant Varieties – 18.10.05 HoC 860WRare Birds (Breeding) – 14.12.05 HoC 2068WRed Squirrels – 29.11.05 HoC 315WRuddy Ducks – 20.10.05 HoC 1133WSites of Special Scientific Interest – 22.11.05 HoC 1847WSpiders – 20.12.05 HoC 2672WWater Voles – 17.11.05 HoC 1382WWhaling – 12.10.05 HoC 474WWild Birds – 30.11.05 HoC 514W & HoL WA55Wildfowl – 17.11.05 HoC 1383W

BiotechnologyAgriculture and Fisheries Council – 14.12.05 HoC 2124WGenetic Engineering – 18.10.05 HoC 858WGenetically Modified Maize – 28.10.05 HoC 19WS &1.11.05 HoL WS11GM Crops – 2.11.05 HoC 1048W, 8.11.05 HoC 320W,21.11.05 HoC 1710W, 7.12.05 HoC 1293W, 15.12.05HoC 2208W, 19.12.05 HoC 2513W & 20.12.05 HoC2668W & 2677WGM Food – 20.12.05 HoC 2702WGM Products – 14.12.05 HoC 2013WHerbicides – 18.10.05 HoC 858W & 19.10.05 HoC1023W

BSE and CJDBSE – 17.10.05 HoC 667WNational Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Surveillance Unit –7.11.05 HoL WS44Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob – 15.12.05 HoC 2219W

Bovine TuberculosisBadgers – 28.11.05 HoC 8WBCG Vaccine – 12.12.05 HoC 1589WBovine TB – 17.10.05 HoC 666W, 1.11.05 HoC 876W &1008W, 2.11.05 HoC 1045W, 5.12.05 HoC 923W,12.12.05 HoC 1590W & 19.12.05 HoC 2373W

Adjournment debate – 6.12.05 HoC 201WHBovine Tuberculosis – 10.10.05 HoC 244W, 20.10.05 HoC978, 17.11.05 HoC 1088, 28.11.05 HoC 9W, 29.11.05HoL WA17, 14.12.05 HoC 2091W, 15.12.05 HoC 165WS& 2206W

Statement – 15.12.05 HoC 1441TB – 31.10.05 HoC 691WVeterinary Surgery (Testing for TB in Bovines) Order 2005– 18.11.05 HoL 1354

Chemicals and PesticidesAdvisory Committee on Pesticides – 8.11.05 HoC 313WGlutaraldehyde – 10.12.05 HoC 216WGlyphosate Poisoning – 5.12.05 HoL WA75Hazardous Substances – 19.10.05 HoC 1055WHealth Protection Agency – 1.12.05 HoC 723WHousehold Products (Health Effects) – 22.11.05 HoC1807W & 24.11.05 HoC 2281WMedicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency andSyngenta – 1.12.05 HoL WA67Organophosphates – 19.10.05 HoC 1025WPackaging – 21.11.05 HoC 1553WPesticide – 7.11.05 HoC 34WPesticide Residues – 12.12.05 HoC 1601WPesticides – 9.11.05 HoC 487W, 15.11.05 HoC 1067W,22.11.05 HoC 1812W, 29.11.05 HoC 314W, 30.11.05HoL WA52, 1.12.05 HoC 728W, 2.12.05 HoC 854W,


5.12.05 HoL WA84, 7.12.05 HoC 1423W, 14.12.05 HoC2015W & 20.12.05 HoC 2670WREACH Directive – 28.11.05 HoC 108W & 20.12.05 HoC2787WREACH Proposals – 16.11.05 HoC 1355WSheep Dip – 19.10.05 HoC 1027WSlug Pellets – 2.11.05 HoC 1051WToxic Chemicals in Newborn Babies – 10.10.05 HoC236WToxic Chemicals: REACH Agreement – 23.11.05 HoL 1620Toxicity Tests – 5.12.05 HoL WA86Toxicogenomics – 1.12.05 HoL WA70

Climate ChangeAfrica: Climate Change – 19.12.05 HoL WA199Antarctic Glacier Melt – 30.11.05 HoL WA31Carbon Emissions – 10.10.05 HoC 129W, 19.10.05 HoC1019W & 23.11.05 HoC 1978WClimate Change – 5.10.05 HoC 2803W, 10.10.05 HoC163W & HoL WA13, 11.10.05 HoC 419W, 14.10.05 HoC615W, 17.10.05 HoC 662W, 18.10.05 HoL 677, 20.10.05HoC 1129W, 24.10.05 HoL WA150, 31.10.05 HoL WA1,10.11.05 HoC 639W, 15.11.05 HoC 1053W, 16.11.05HoC 1219W, 21.11.05 HoC 1595W, 23.11.05 HoC1983W, 30.11.05 HoL 207, 6.12.05 HoC 1139W, 12.12.05HoC 1596W, 15.12.05 HoC 1423, 1431 & 1435 &20.12.05 HoC 2664W

Debates – 10.11.05 HoL 726 & 22.11.05 HoC 1437Emissions – 5.10.05 HoC 2804W & 10.10.05 HoC 135WEnvironment Council – 1.11.05 HoC 881WGreenhouse Gas Emissions – 23.11.05 HoC 1993W,30.11.05 HoC 509W, 1.12.05 HoC 652W, 12.12.05 HoC1599W & 15.12.05 HoC 2209WGreenhouse Gases – 11.10.05 HoC 420W, 8.11.05 HoC321W, 15.11.05 HoC 1059W, 29.11.05 HoC 312W &14.12.05 HoC 2014WKyoto Protocol – 11.10.05 HoC 421W, 27.10.05 HoC473W & 2.11.05 HoC 1050WRainforests and Logging – debate – 13.10.05 HoL 469Sustainable Energy (China/India) – 17.10.05 HoC 798WTackling Climate Change – debate – 12.10.05 HoC 360

ConstructionBuilding Regulations – 7.11.05 HoC 176WCarbon Emissions – 7.11.05 HoC 177WEnergy Efficiency – 11.10.05 HoC 439W, 24.10.05 HoLWA157 & 20.12.05 HoC 2817WEnergy Performance of Buildings Directive – 19.10.05 HoC834Low-carbon Buildings – 2.11.05 HoC 47WS & HoL WS18

CrimeDNA Database – 7.11.05 HoC 11Expert Witnesses – 21.10.05 HoC 1282WForensic Science Service – 9.11.05 HoC 539W, 16.11.05HoC 1260W & 24.11.05 HoC 2315W

* Adjournment debate – 18.10.05 HoC 181WHForensic Services – 22.11.05 HoC 1925WNational DNA Database – 5.12.05 HoC 79WS & HoLWS50New Technology (Crime Prevention) – 1.12.05 HoC 751WTaser Weapons – 21.11.05 HoC 1780WTasers – 13.12.05 HoC 1941W

DefenceAircraft Carriers – 18.10.05 HoC 914W

Bowman – 12.12.05 HoC 1100Defence Industrial Strategy – 14.11.05 HoC 901W

Statement – 15.12.05 HoC 1462 & HoL 1405Defence Science and Technology Laboratory – 14.12.05HoC 2038WDefence Weaponry (Space) – 20.10.05 HoC 1211WFixed Wing Aircraft – 17.10.05 HoC 660WFuture Aircraft Carrier (CVF) – 14.12.05 HoC 148WS &HoL WS125Future Joint Combat Aircraft – 19.12.05 HoC 2341WHearing Loss – 2.11.05 HoC 1070WLynx Helicopter – 6.12.05 HoC 1103WMicrowave Weaponry – 20.12.05 HoC 2762WMinistry of Defence Procurement – adjournment debate –18.10.05 HoC 816Naval Shipbuilding Projects – 15.12.05 HoL WA184Nimrod – 20.10.05 HoC 1215WQinetiQ – 18.10.05 HoC 919W & 20.10.05 HoC 1216WResearch and Development – 10.11.05 HoC 709WSubmarine IT Systems – 20.10.05 HoC 1217W &21.10.05 HoC 1251WSubmarines – 14.12.05 HoC 2043WType 45 Destroyer – 21.10.05 HoC 1252WWarships – 2.11.05 HoC 1073W & 3.11.05 HoC 1264W

Defence (Gulf War)Gulf Veterans’ Illnesses – 2.12.05 HoC 44WS

Mortality Data – 10.10.05 HoL WA30Gulf War 1990-91: Welsh Veterans – 7.11.05 HoL WA59

Illnesses – 19.10.05 HoL WA128 & 5.12.05 HoL WS48Immunisations – 14.11.05 HoC 911WVeterans – 1.11.05 HoC 914W & 5.12.05 HoC 1033W

Inoculations – 1.11.05 HoC 914WOperation Telic – 1.11.05 HoC 916W

EducationAcademic Medicine – 3.11.05 HoC 1327WA-level Grades – 14.10.05 HoC 617W, 19.10.05 HoC11066W & 1.12.05 HoC 766WDeveloping Countries: Scientists – 18.11.05 HoL WA176Dyslexia – debate – 7.12.05 HoL 681Engineering Students – 17.11.05 HoC 1394WGCSE Mathematics Results – 27.10.05 HoC 478WHigher Education – 21.11.05 HoC 1620W, 23.11.05 HoC2088W, 24.11.05 HoC 1655 & 2.12.05 HoC 863WIntelligent Design – 31.10.05 HoC 822WInternational Baccalaureate – 10.10.05 HoC 352WMathematics Centre of Excellence – 24.10.05 HoC 144WMedical Training (Anatomy) – 21.10.05 HoC 1286WOverseas University Students – 26.10.05 HoC 392WPart-time Higher Education – 19.10.05 HoC 303WHPersonalised Learning – 17.10.05 HoC 42WS & HoL WS37PhD Students – 17.10.05 HoC 688WSchool Science – 14.12.05 HoC 2081W & 19.12.05 HoC2426WSchools: 14-19 Education and Skills – 14.12.05 HoC150WS & HoL WS133Science – 7.11.05 HoC 129W, 9.11.05 HoC 616W,14.11.05 HoC 951W & 6.12.05 HoC 1175W

A-levels – 1.12.05 HoC 782WCurriculum – 2.11.05 HoC 1213WEducation – 12.10.05 HoC 529W & 18.10.05 HoC 967W


Graduates – 5.12.05 HoC 948WTeachers – 22.11.05 HoC 1960WTeaching – 10.11.05 HoC 739W, 14.11.05 HoC 951W& 19.12.05 HoC 2430W

Sciences – 13.10.05 HoC 577WSecondary Education Reform – adjournment debate –15.11.05 HoC 193WHSpecialist Teachers – 24.11.05 HoC 2171WStrategic Subjects – 16.11.05 HoC 1288WTeachers – 25.10.05 HoC 223W & 29.11.05 HoC 489WTwenty-First Century Science Examination – 19.10.05 HoC1072WUniversities and the Workplace – 19.10.05 HoL 748University Access Courses – 10.10.05 HoL WA87

Allocation – 12.10.05 HoC 534WEndowments – 26.10.05 HoC 397WGraduates – 31.10.05 HoC 829WLeague Tables – 28.11.05 HoC 194W

Veterinary School Lecturers – 9.11.05 HoC 629WWomen Engineering Graduates – 3.11.05 HoC 1243W

EnergyCarbon Capture – 14.12.05 HoC 2109W & 19.12.05 HoC2326WCarbon Dioxide – 29.11.05 HoC 290WCarbon Dioxide Capture/Emissions – 28.11.05 HoC 93WCarbon Emissions – 17.10.05 HoC 785W & 12.12.05HoC 1659WCarbon Sequestration – 10.10.05 HoC 23W & 15.12.05HoC 2250W

Technology – 16.11.05 HoC 1341WCoal/gas-fired Power Stations – 12.10.05 HoC 505WCompetitiveness Council – 19.12.05 HoC 2327WElectricity Generation – 24.10.05 HoL 1015Electricity/Gas Supplies – 17.10.05 HoC 786WEmissions Trading – 31.10.05 HoC 703WEnergy – 15.12.05 HoC 2252W

Efficiency – 14.10.05 HoC 616WIndustry Funding – 12.10.05 HoC 508WPolicy – 3.11.05 HoC 954, 14.11.05 HoL 821 & 12.12.05 HoC 1664WReview – 29.11.05 HoC 12WS & HoL WS7, 2.12.05 HoC 887W, 5.12.05 HoC 1008W & 12.12.05 HoC 1665WSupply – 28.11.05 HoC 99WSupply – debate – 27.10.05 HoL 1307

European Energy Policy – adjournment debate – 25.10.05HoC 25WH

* Fuel Cell Technology – 14.12.05 HoC 2111WFuture Energy Needs (Scotland) – adjournment debate –1.12.05 HoC 151WHGas-powered Energy – 17.10.05 HoC 788WGeothermal Power – 25.10.05 HoL WA177Greenhouse Gases – 14.12.05 HoC 2112WHydro-power – 12.12.05 HoC 1667WLow Carbon Building Programme – 12.12.05 HoC 1668WMicro-generation – 12.12.05 HoC 1670WMicrogeneration Energy – 5.12.05 HoC 1011WNatural Gas – 19.10.05 HoC 1059WNorth Sea Energy Industry – 17.10.05 HoC 790W &24.10.05 HoC 60WOil and Gas Supplies – adjournment debate – 12.10.05HoC 104WHPower Stations – 13.12.05 1905WPower Stations (Carbon Emissions) – 24.11.05 HoC2213W

Research and Development – 15.12.05 HoC 2211WUK Carbon Emissions – 7.11.05 HoC 36W

Energy (Coal)Clean Coal – 12.12.05 HoC 1659W

Technology – 17.10.05 HoC 785W & 14.12.05 HoC 2109WTechnology – adjournment debate – 12.10.05 HoC 408

Coal Mining – 15.12.05 HoC 2251WFuture of the Coal Industry – adjournment debate –12.10.05 HoC 73WH

Energy (Nuclear)Carbon Dioxide Emissions – 8.11.05 HoC 292W &5.12.05 HoC 927WCarbon Emissions – 10.10.05 HoC 22WCivil Nuclear Facilities – 5.12.05 HoC 927WNuclear Energy – 17.10.05 HoC 790W, 22.11.05 HoL1498, 28.11.05 HoC 104W, 2.12.05 HoC 893W &12.12.05 HoC 1788W

Fission – 2.12.05 HoC 893WFusion – 24.11.05 HoC 2212W

Nuclear Power – 12.10.05 HoC 507W, 17.10.05 HoC791W, 2.12.05 HoC 894W, 12.12.05 HoC 1671W,15.12.05 HoC 2254W & 20.12.05 HoC 2785W

Generation – 3.11.05 HoC 1238WStations – 14.12.05 HoC 2113W

Nuclear Reactors – 8.11.05 HoC 297WNuclear-generated Electricity – 3.11.05 HoC 959Renewable Energy – 14.11.05 HoL WA127Uranium – 8.11.05 HoC 300WUranium Reserves – 17.10.05 HoC 799W

Energy (Renewable)Alternative Energy Provision – 9.11.05 HoC 525WAlternative Fuels – 28.10.05 HoC 637WBiodiesel – 17.11.05 HoC 1363WBiodiesel Industry – 12.12.05 HoC 1589WBiofuels – 8.11.05 HoC 317W, 15.11.05 HoC 1052W &1104W, 1.12.05 HoC 657W & 6.12.05 HoC 1086W

Capital Allowances – 10.11.05 HoC 640WIndustry – 28.11.05 HoC 93W

Biomass Fuel – 25.10.05 HoL WA168 & 29.11.05 HoC304W

Industry – 7.11.05 HoC 12W, 9.11.05 HoC 478W, 14.11.05 HoC 873W & 14.12.05 HoC 2006WTask Force – 9.11.05 HoL WA77

Clear Skies and Solar Photovoltaics – 7.11.05 HoC 39WElectrical Systems Technical Issues Steering Group –8.11.05 HoL 502Electricity Generation: Offshore Wind Farms – 20.10.05HoL 879Energy Efficiency – 8.11.05 HoC 319WEU Directive 2001/77/EC – 5.12.05 HoC 1009WFerco Silvag Biogas Plant – 7.11.05 HoL WA56Microgeneration – 10.11.05 HoC 679W, 17.11.05 HoC1508W & 1.12.05 HoC 365Non-food Crops – 8.11.05 HoC 322WOcean-generated Energy – 17.10.05 HoC 792WOffshore Wind Power – 17.11.05 HoC 1508WOffshore Wind Turbines – 17.11.05 HoC 1363WRenewable Energy – 17.10.05 HoC 795W, 25.10.05 HoC296W, 31.10.05 HoC 713W, 1.11.05 HoC 889W, 7.11.05HoC 35W & 47W, 8.11.05 HoC 297W, 14.11.05 HoC887W, 16.11.05 HoC 1356W, 17.11.05 HoC 1508W,

23.11.05 HoC 2012W, 2.12.05 HoC 897W, 14.12.05 HoC2117W & 15.12.05 HoC 2257W

Heat Obligation – 15.11.05 HoC 1069WTechnologies – 1.11.05 HoC 1026W

Renewables Obligation – 17.10.05 HoC 796WSolar Energy – 10.10.05 HoC 315W & 8.11.05 HoC299WSolar Photovoltaics – 17.11.05 HoC 1509W & 30.11.05HoC 580W

Programme – 16.11.05 HoC 1359W, 17.11.05 HoC 1521W & 5.12.05 HoC 914W

Sunflowers – 1.11.05 HoC 890WTidal Power – 28.11.05 HoC 111WOffshore/Onshore Wind Generation – 12.10.05 HoC514WWave Energy – 28.11.05 HoC 112W & 6.12.05 HoC1152WWind Energy – 10.10.05 HoC 45W, 20.10.05 HoLWA144, 7.11.05 HoC 56W & 14.11.05 HoC 887W

Farms – 24.10.05 HoC 62W, 25.10.05 HoC 3005W, 31.10.05 HoC 719W, 21.11.05 HoC 1533W & 23.11.05 HoC 2025WTurbines – 7.11.05 HoC 56W

Wind-generated Electricity – 2.12.05 HoC 900W

Environment (Pollution)Air Pollutants – 24.10.05 HoC 162WChlorofluorocarbons – 1.12.05 HoC 650WContaminated Brownfield Sites – 22.11.05 HoC 349WHEnvironmental Pollution – 7.12.05 HoL WA101Gothenburg Protocol – 7.12.05 HoC 97WSIntegrated Pollution Legislation – 19.12.05 HoC 2381WMarine Pollution – 14.11.05 HoC 893WNational Brownfield Strategy – 28.11.05 HoC 210WParticulate Matter (Deaths) – NI – 14.10.05 HoC 649WSlaughterhouses – 31.10.05 HoC 691W

Environment (Protection)Ancient Woodlands – 20.12.05 HoC 2747WAntarctic Research – 20.12.05 HoC 2842WBiosafety Protocol – 19.12.05 HoC 2501WBracken – 5.12.05 HoL 414British Antarctic Territory – 14.12.05 HoC 2059W &19.12.05 HoC 2472WBrownfield/Greenfield Land – 8.12.05 HoC 1500WCarbon – 18.10.05 HoC 853WDeforestation – 29.11.05 HoC 308WEssential Chlorofluorocarbons – 15.11.05 HoC 1054WFlood Maps – 14.12.05 HoC 2011WFlood Plains (Building) – 20.12.05 HoC 2818WFlooding – 26.10.05 HoC 371W & 14.12.05 HoC 2012WIllegal Fishing – 19.12.05 HoC 2483WIllegal Whaling – 19.12.05 HoC 2484WJapanese Knotweed – 30.11.05 HoC 509WLakes – 15.11.05 HoC 1064WLongline Fisheries – 19.12.05 HoC 2486WMarine Environment – 19.12.05 HoC 2384W

Monitoring – 15.11.05 HoC 1064WMarine Management Organisation – 5.12.05 HoC 932WNuclear Power Stations – 20.12.05 HoC 2670WOld Whaling Stations (Pollution) – 19.12.05 HoC 2488WPetrel Populations – 19.12.05 HoC 2490WPetrol Vapour – 10.10.05 HoC 146WRefrigerators – 9.11.05 HoC 489WSea Walls – 15.12.05 HoC 1433

Sites of Nature Conservation Importance – 12.12.05 HoC1604WSSSI Sites (Stroud) – 7.12.05 HoC 1294WTrees – 28.11.05 HoC 214WWind Farms – 17.10.05 HoC 800W

EU MeetingsAgriculture and Fisheries Council – 21.10.05 HoC 67WS,1.11.05 HoC 39WS, 21.11.05 HoC 93WS, 5.12.05 HoC63WS & 20.12.05 HoC 190WSCompetitiveness Council – 12.10.05 HoC 34WS & HoLWS27, 17.10.05 HoC 44WS & HoL WS38, 23.11.05 HoC124WS & HoL WS137, 5.12.05 HoC 80WS & HoLWS46, 20.12.05 HoC 202WS

REACH – 20.12.05 HoL WS173Education and Youth Council – 14.11.05 HoL WS78,22.11.05 HoC 101WS & HoL WS115Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer AffairsCouncil – 7.12.05 HoC 98WS, HoL WS68 & 20.12.05HoC 193WS, HoL WS174Energy Council – 29.11.05 HoC 14WS, HoL WS9; 6.12.05HoC 87WS, HoL WS61Environment Council – 31.10.05 HoC 22WS, 2.12.05HoC 49WS & 13.12.05 HoC 135WSEU Health Ministers: Informal Meeting – 1.11.05 HoC40WS & HoL WS10 & 3.11.05 HoL WA43EU Telecoms Council – 29.11.05 HoC 13WS, HoL WS10;6.12.05 HoC 88WS, HoL WS63Transport Council – 14.10.05 HoC 38WS, HoL WS33;1.12.05 HoC 38WS, HoL WS35; 14.12.05 HoC 157WS,HoL WS123

FisheriesCetacean By-catch – 15.11.05 HoC 1053W, 5.12.05 HoC927W & 12.12.05 HoC 1594WCommon Fisheries Policy – 1.11.05 HoC 1013WCormorants – 17.11.05 HoC 1490W & 29.11.05 HoC306WCuttlefish – 31.10.05 HoC 679WEnvironment Agency: Freshwater Fisheries – 1.12.05 HoLWA60Fish Stocks – 10.11.05 HoC 672W & 17.11.05 HoC1363WFisheries – 12.10.05 HoC 472W & 21.11.05 HoC 1528W

Adjournment debate – 7.12.05 HoC 876Fishing – 15.11.05 HoC 1057W

Fleet – 10.10.05 HoC 140WLicences – 30.11.05 HoL WA35No-take Zones – 2.11.05 HoC 1047W

Lundy No-Take Zone – 29.11.05 HoL WA25Marine Fisheries Agency – 11.10.05 HoC 20WSSalmon – 24.11.05 HoL WA239

Fishing – 18.11.05 HoL WA179

Food and NutritionArtificial Sweeteners – adjournment debate – 14.12.05HoC 491WHAspartane – 12.10.05 HoC 535WAvian Influenza – 22.11.05 HoC 1801WBrucella Viruses – 28.10.05 HoC 568WChildren’s Diets – 9.11.05 HoC 590W, 23.11.05 HoC2074W & 2104W & 2.12.05 HoC 844WCreatine – 7.12.05 HoC 1402WDiet – 25.10.05 HoC 261W & 1.11.05 HoC 966WFood Allergies – 14.12.05 HoC 2012W

EU Border Security – 5.10.05 HoC 5805W


Poisoning – 15.11.05 HoC 1194WStandards Agency – 24.10.05 HoL WA155 & 25.10.05HoC 262WSupplements – 10.12.05 HoC 214WSupplements (Tryptophan) – 7.11.05 HoC 255W

National Diet and Nutrition Survey – 2.12.05 HoC 853WNutrition – 18.10.05 HoC 962WNutrition and Health Claims Directive – 10.10.05 HoLWA23, 12.10.05 HoC 545W, 17.11.05 HoL WA157 &1.12.05 HoC 725WOestrogen – 18.10.05 HoC 930WOmega 3 Oils – 18.11.05 HoL WA178Organic Food Labelling – 25.10.05 HoC 200WPoultry Meat – 7.11.05 HoC 34WSalt: Dietary Advice – 26.10.05 HoL WA193Schools: Healthy Eating – 18.10.05 HoL WA121Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition – 24.10.05HoL WA162Soft Drinks in Schools – adjournment debate – 15.12.05HoC 1535Sudan One – 22.11.05 HoC 1815WSunflower Oil – 3.11.05 HoC 1350WTryptophan – 7.11.05 HoC 277WVitamin D – 19.12.05 HoC 2650W

Health (Cancer)Anti-cancer Drugs – 12.12.05 HoC 1798WBowel Cancer – 28.10.05 HoC 567WBreast Cancer – 28.10.05 HoC 567W, 31.10.05 HoC786W, 1.11.05 HoC 1009W, 8.11.05 HoC 412W, 9.11.05HoC 581W, 23.11.05 HoC 2102W, 24.11.05 HoC 2268W,28.11.05 HoC 2245W, 29.11.05 HoC 340W & 398W,1.12.05 HoC 712W, 5.12.05 HoL WA73, 7.12.05 HoC1322W & 20.12.05 HoC 2691WBreast Screening – 28.10.05 HoC 568WCancer – 18.10.05 HoC 984W, 24.10.05 HoC 165W,25.10.05 HoC 256W, 31.10.05 HoC 832W, 8.11.05 HoC389W, 9.11.05 HoC 631W, 10.11.05 HoC 664W, 11.11.05HoC 812W, 17.11.05 HoC 1448W & 2.12.05 HoC 843W

Screening – 28.11.05 HoC 247WSurvival Rates – 21.10.05 HoC 1306WTreatment – 1.11.05 HoC 960WTreatment-induced Anaemia – 3.11.05 HoL WA41

Cervical Cancer – 3.11.05 HoC 1332WChild Cancer Drugs – 24.10.05 HoC 167WFluoride – bone cancer – 16.11.05 HoC 1300WHER2 Testing – 28.10.05 HoC 579WHerceptin – 16.11.05 HoC 1302W, 22.11.05 HoC 1358,29.11.05 HoC 403W & 20.12.05 HoC 2705WLiquid-based Cytology – 28.11.05 HoC 270WLung Cancer – 18.10.05 HoC 940W & 2.11.05 HoC1147WMouth Cancer – 29.11.05 HoL 108NICE (Drug Approvals) – 26.10.05 HoC 444WOesophageal Cancer – 7.12.05 HoC 1423WProstate Cancer – 22.11.05 HoC 1813W, 23.11.05 HoC2120W, 28.11.05 HoC 235W, 1.12.05 HoC 729W, 6.12.05HoC 1131W & 1268WSkin Cancer – 21.10.05 HoC 1316W, 16.11.05 HoC1310W, 1.12.05 HoC 730W & 14.12.05 HoC 2104W

Health (General)12th Wave Work Programme (NIHCE) – 24.11.05 HoC134WS & HoL WS150Advisory Committee on Topic Selection – 2.12.05 HoC839W

Allergies – 1.11.05 HoC 957WBrucella Viruses – 3.11.05 HoC 1330WChildhood Leukaemia – 19.10.05 HoC 1110WClinical Academic Staff – debate – 1.12.05 HoL 380Coeliac Disease – 14.12.05 HoC 2131WComplementary and Alternative Medicine – 22.11.05 HoC1803WContagious Diseases – 12.10.05 HoC 539W & 24.10.05HoC 171WCystic Fibrosis – 20.10.05 HoC 1173WEndometriosis – 31.10.05 HoC 837WHuman Embryo Research – 29.11.05 HoC 403WIVF Treatment – 12.10.05 HoC 541WLupus – 26.10.05 HoC 441W, 27.10.05 HoC 489W,3.11.05 HoC 1343W, 8.11.05 HoC 398W & 8.12.05 HoC1572WMedical Research (Regulation) – adjournment debate –9.11.05 HoC 73WHMedicine Reviews (Older People) – adjournment debate –6.12.05 HoC 841Motor Neurone Disease – 8.11.05 HoC 400W

Non-invasive Ventilation – 13.10.05 HoL WA102Myalgic Encephalomyelitis – 26.10.05 HoC 421W, 7.11.05HoC 262W, 22.11.05 HoC 1797W, 23.11.05 HoC 2115W& 5.12.05 HoC 1074WMyasthenia – 7.11.05 HoC 263WMyelopathy – 28.11.05 HoC 277WObesity – 28.11.05 HoC 280W, 30.11.05 HoL WA51 &1.12.05 HoC 726WPneumococcal Meningitis – 29.11.05 HoC 346WPulmonary Hypertension – 21.10.05 HoC 1289WSleep Apnoea – 17.11.05 HoC 1455WSpina Bifida and Folic Acid – adjournment debate –19.10.05 HoC 247WH

* Stem Cell Research – 14.12.05 HoC 2173WTuberculosis – 30.11.05 HoC 501W

Health (Influenza)Avian Flu – 10.10.05 HoC 199W, 14.10.05 HoL WA105,17.10.05 HoL 565, 17.10.05 HoC 629, 18.10.05 HoL 674& 18.10.05 HoC 982W, 24.10.05 HoC 164W, 25.10.05HoC 254W, 28.10.05 HoC 566W, 1.11.05 HoC 958W,3.11.05 HoL WA39, 7.11.05 HoC 242W, 8.11.05 HoC387W, 9.11.05 HoL WA75, 11.11.05 HoC 812W, 22.11.05HoC 1366, 23.11.05 HoC 2101W, 24.11.05 HoC 2266W,28.11.05 HoC 117W & 244W, 30.11.05 HoC 493W,1.12.05 HoC 711W, 2.12.05 HoC 840W & 8.12.05 HoC1440W

Vaccine – 12.10.05 HoC 537WPreparations – 13.10.05 HoC 584W

Emergency Preparedness – debate – 19.10.05 HoC 908Flu Vaccine – 22.11.05 HoL 1534 & 7.12.05 HoC 1405WGlobal Health Security Initiative – 28.11.05 HoC 2WS &HoL WS1H5N1 Vaccine – 24.10.05 HoC 176WHealth Ministers: Ottawa Meeting, 24-25 October –1.11.05 HoL WS12Influenza – 28.10.05 HoC 582W, 1.11.05 HoC 970W,8.11.05 HoC 395W, 10.11.05 HoC 666W, 16.11.05 HoC1303W, 21.11.05 HoC 1715W, 24.11.05 HoC 2282W &1.12.05 HoC 724W

Contingency Plan – 19.10.05 HoC 57WSPandemic – 13.10.05 HoC 586W, 19.10.05 HoL WS56, 7.11.05 HoC 258W & 23.11.05 HoC 2112W

Chief Medical Officer’s Speech – 14.12.05 HoL WA163


Vaccination – 19.10.05 HoC 1120W, 30.11.05 HoC 498W & 8.12.05 HoC 1571WVaccine – 24.10.05 HoC 181W, 12.12.05 HoC 1741W,15.12.05 HoC 2216W & 20.12.05 HoC 2706W

Pegasus Birds Quarantine Centre – 14.12.05 HoC 2015WSeasonal Influenza Vaccine Supplies – 22.11.05 HoC 1371Vaccines – 13.10.05 HoC 588W

Health (International Development)Access to Treatment – 17.10.05 HoC 724WAfrica – 18.10.05 HoC 897W & 31.10.05 HoC 766WAIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria – 26.10.05 HoC 9WS &HoL WS72Developing World – 24.10.05 HoC 29WDrugs for Neglected Diseases Initiative – 10.11.05 HoLWA90Harm Reduction: Drug use and HIV – 30.11.05 HoC32WS & HoL WS19HIV (Africa) – 3.11.05 HoC 1298WHIV/AIDS – 10.10.05 HoC 65W, 14.10.05 HoC 620W,1.12.05 HoC 687W, 6.12.05 HoC 1188W, 7.12.05 HoC1394W, 8.12.05 HoC 1488W, 12.12.05 HoC 1633W,13.12.05 HoC 1884W & 19.12.05 HoC 2513W

Children – 1.12.05 HoL 299G8 and UK Funding – 10.10.05 HoL WA34

Roll Back Malaria Programme – 29.11.05 HoC 358WTB Control – 28.10.05 HoC 632WTuberculosis – 8.11.05 HoC 310W & 14.11.05 HoC870W

Health (Service)Clostridium Difficile – 18.10.05 HoC 926W & 21.10.05HoC 1276WCommunicable Disease Control – 24.10.05 HoC 169W &26.10.05 HoC 439WContagious Diseases – 6.12.05 HoC 1222WElectronic Patient Records – 15.11.05 HoC 1167WHealth Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2004-5 – healthtechnologies – 10.10.05 HoC 9WSHospital Cleanliness – 23.11.05 HoC 2111WHospital-acquired Infections – 17.10.05 HoC 739W,9.11.05 HoL WA80, 11.11.05 HoC 816W & 14.11.05HoC 967WImmunotoxicologists – 7.12.05 HoC 1417WIndependent Nurse Pharmacist Prescribing – 10.11.05HoC 24WSHSI Infection Control – 11.11.05 HoC 817WInfluenza – 22.11.05 HoC 1808W

Pandemic – 12.12.05 HoC 1808WInformation Technology – 21.11.05 HoC 1716W &5.12.05 HoC 1063WMedical Graduates – 14.10.05 HoC 626WMedical Research: Records – 10.10.05 HoL WA47MRI Scans: EU Directive – 25.10.05 HoL 1064MRSA – 18.10.05 HoC 992W, 3.11.05 HoL WA47,21.11.05 HoC 1720W, 22.11.05 HoC 1811W, 30.11.05HoL 209 & 6.12.05 HoC 1090WNecrotising Fasciitis – 6.12.05 HoC 1230WNHS and New Medical Technologies: Select CommitteeReport – 10.10.05 HoL WS6NHS Information Strategy – 9.11.05 HoL WA83NHS (IT System Compatibility) – 5.10.05 HoC 2832WNHS Terms of Service – 1.11.05 HoC 975WNurse and Pharmacist Prescribing – 10.11.05 HoL WS64Pathologists – 28.11.05 HoC 234W

Health (Vaccines)Anthrax Vaccines – 13.12.04 HoC 1873WBCG Vaccination – 24.10.05 HoC 165W & 16.11.05 HoC1296WChild Vaccinations – 1.11.05 HoC 961W & 24.11.05 HoC2270WChildhood Vaccinations – 23.11.05 HoC 2103W &30.11.05 HoC 495WHepatitis B – 9.11.05 HoL WA80Immunisation – 14.12.05 HoC 2153W & 15.12.05 HoC2216WInoculations – 31.10.05 HoC 722WMeningitis: Combined Vaccine – 31.10.05 HoL WA8MMR Vaccines – 11.11.05 HoC 821WNew Vaccines – 14.12.05 HoC 2157WPneumococcal Vaccine Supply – 30.11.05 HoC 500WPowderJect (Vaccines) – 19.12.05 HoC 2347WRespiratory Syncytial Virus – 1.12.05 HoC 730WSmallpox Vaccination: Medical Staff – 28.11.05 HoL WA12Smallpox Vaccine – 7.11.05 HoC 274W & 19.12.05 HoLWA239Tuberculosis – 25.10.05 HoC 275WVaccinations – 17.11.05 HoC 1455W & 5.12.05 HoC1068WVaccines – 18.10.05 HoC 921W

Identity CardsBiometrics – 10.11.05 HoC 649W

Trials – 24.11.05 HoC 2305WIdentity Cards – 10.10.05 HoC 166W, 19.10.05 HoC58WS & HoL WS55, 25.10.05 HoC 349W, 7.11.05 HoC59W, 16.11.05 HoC 1260W, 28.11.05 HoC 44W, 7.12.05HoC 1361W & 13.12.05 HoC 1915WPrison Estate: Biometrics – 14.11.05 HoL 824Retina Identification – 25.10.05 HoC 355W

IndustryBusiness (Knowledge Transfer) – 7.11.05 HoC 39WManufacturing, Science and Engineering – 7.11.05 HoC92WUK Manufacturing – 3.11.05 HoC 963

Information TechnologyCyber Security – 1.12.05 HoC 666W

Adjournment debate – 23.11.05 HoC 474WHDepartmental IT Failures – DoH – 5.10.05 HoC 2815We-Government – adjournment debate – 13.10.05 HoC143WHGovernment Departments: Electronic Attack – 18.10.05HoL WA117Government Technology Strategy – 2.11.05 HoC 43WSHoL WS16Information and Communication Technology – 20.12.05HoC 2782WInformation Technology – 11.10.05 HoC 154IT Failures – Cabinet Office – 5.10.05 HoC 2772WIT Projects – DfES – 5.10.05 HoC 2784W

Intellectual PropertyIntellectual Property Crime – 5.12.05 HoL WA76

Rights – 8.12.05 HoC 1493WPatent Applications – 10.10.05 HoC 33W & 17.10.05HoC 793W

International DevelopmentAflatoxin – 28.11.05 HoC 52WAgricultural Subsidies – 15.11.05 HoC 1075W


Agriculture – 7.12.05 HoC 100WS & HoL WS67Cheap Food Exports – 14.11.05 HoC 865WCommission for Africa – 3.11.05 HoC 1295WDepartmental Research – 19.12.05 HoC 2509WDisaster Risk Reduction – 31.10.05 HoC 767WEducation and Aid Programme – debate – 14.10.05 HoL523G8 Agenda for Africa – adjournment debate – 18.10.05HoC 202WHHouse Building (Planar Technology) – 3.11.05 HoC 1299WRenewable Energy – 3.11.05 HoC 1307WSustainable Development – 15.11.05 HoC 1081WWater and Sanitation – 9.11.05 HoC 475W, 14.11.05 HoC871W, 16.11.05 HoC 1249W, 23.11.05 HoC 2031W &29.11.05 HoC 360W

Medicines and DrugsAdverse Drug Reactions – 28.10.05 HoC 565WAimspro – 10.10.05 HoC 197WAlzheimer’s – 17.10.05 HoC 759W & 21.10.05 HoC1274W

Disease – 7.11.05 HoC 241W, 11.11.05 HoC 811W, 22.11.05 HoC 1780W, 28.11.05 HoC 244W, 29.11.05HoC 397W & 20.12.05 HoC 2685WDrugs – 24.10.05 HoC 163W

Anti-psychotic Drugs – 11.10.05 HoC 466WAsthma – 11.11.05 HoC 811WAuto-immune Diseases – 17.11.05 HoC 1447WAvian Influenza – 7.11.05 HoC 199W & 20.12.05 HoC2689WBorellia – 14.12.05 HoC 2127WBreast Cancer – 19.10.05 HoC 1111WCancer – 7.11.05 HoC 243W

Drugs – 7.12.05 HoC 1401WTreatment – 17.10.05 HoC 759W

Chemical Entities – 27.10.05 HoC 506WChild Cancer Drugs – 28.10.05 HoC 574WChiron – 11.10.05 HoC 468W & 14.10.05 HoC 624WClinical Trials – 24.10.05 HoC 168WDiabetes – 24.11.05 HoC 2273W & 29.11.05 HoC 399WDrug Trials – 10.10.05 HoC 212WDrugs – 2.11.05 HoC 1142WErythropoietin – 31.10.05 HoL WA2 & 28.11.05 HoC254WEuropean Medicines Evaluation Agency – 3.11.05 HoC1337W & 7.11.05 HoC 255WEuropean Union: Food Supplements Directive – 1.12.05HoL WA61Generic Medicines – 8.11.05 HoC 391WHerbal Medicines Directive – 29.11.05 HoC 402WHerceptin – 10.10.05 HoL WA33, 28.10.05 HoC 559W &3.11.05 HoC 1339W

Adjournment debate – 1.11.05 HoC 185WHHerceptin/Velcade – 21.10.05 HoC 1283WHIV/AIDS – 8.12.05 HoC 1570WInfluenza – 18.10.05 HoC 928W & 2.11.05 HoC 1146W

Pandemic – 20.12.05 HoL WA258Internet Medicine Purchases – 29.11.05 HoC 404WMedicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency –7.12.05 HoC 1419WMedicines – 20.12.05 HoC 2709WMethylphenidate – 11.11.05 HoC 821WMifepristone – 10.10.05 HoC 223WMifepristone/Misoprostol – 5.10.05 HoC 2830WMultiple Sclerosis – 17.10.05 HoC 741W & 18.10.05 HoC993W

NHS Drug Costs – 15.11.05 HoC 1173WNICE – 17.10.05 HoC 772W & 2.12.05 HoC 853W

Appraisal – 3.11.05 HoC 51WSDrug Approvals – 1.11.05 HoC 976W, 14.11.05 HoC 970W, 28.11.05 HoC 230W & 8.12.05 HoC 1575W

NIHCE – 3.11.05 HoL WS35, 6.12.05 HoC 1234W &15.12.05 HoL 1362 Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme – 11.11.05 HoC827WRoaccutane – 29.11.05 HoC 405WSeroxat – 24.10.05 HoC 190WSolpaflex – 10.10.05 HoC 233WSorafenib – 21.10.05 HoC 1290WTamiflu – 21.11.05 HoC 1728W & 23.11.05 HoC 2121WTeriparitide – 17.10.05 HoC 751WTryptophan – 28.10.05 HoC 591WVelcade – 20.10.05 HoC 1237W, 25.10.05 HoC 159,21.11.05 HoC 1729W, 19.12.05 HoC 2648W & 20.12.05HoC 2733W

Nuclear and Radiation HazardsBerkeley Nuclear Power Station – 2.12.05 HoC 866WContaminated Soil – 14.12.05 HoC 2008WDecommissioned Nuclear Submarines – 15.11.05 HoC1087WNuclear Decommissioning – 21.11.05 HoC 1566W

Authority – 14.12.05 HoC 2113WIndustry – 24.11.05 HoC 2212WInspectorate – 28.11.05 HoC 105WPlants (Coastal Erosion) – 8.11.05 HoC 323WPower – 19.10.05 HoC 1059W, 24.10.05 HoC 61W, 25.10.05 HoC 293W & 14.11.05 HoC 886WReactors – 27.10.05 HoC 522WWaste – 19.10.05 HoC 1024W, 20.10.05 HoC 1132W,8.11.05 HoC 297W, 16.11.05 HoC 1241W & 22.11.05 HoC 1847W

Nuclear-related Research – 14.12.05 HoC 2041W &2114WRadioactive Material – 14.11.05 HoC 886W & 22.11.05HoC 1890WRadioactive Waste – 25.10.05 HoC 295W, 15.11.05 HoC1068W & 6.12.05 HoC 1269W

Management – 15.11.05 HoC 1109WPolicy Group – 30.11.05 HoC 511W

Science PolicyAcademic Medical Centres – 24.10.05 HoC 162WAgeing – 12.12.05 HoC 1654WDepartmental Research – 6.12.05 HoC 1087W

Home Office – 20.12.05 HoC 2884WEuropean Institute of Technology – 9.11.05 HoC 572W &16.11.05 HoC 1347WGovernment Chief Scientific Adviser – 17.11.05 HoC1506WMedical Research Council – 17.11.05 HoC 1507WNESTA – 28.11.05 HoC 90WNICE – 10.11.05 HoC 667WPatent Office – 5.12.05 HoC 1011WResearch and Development – 31.10.05 HoC 733W,1.11.05 HoC 990W. 16.11.05 HoC 1357W, 8.12.05 HoC1484W & 20.12.05 HoC 2788W

Tax Relief – 8.12.05 HoC 1454WScience and Engineering – 13.10.05 HoC 557W

* Science and Technology – debate – 3.11.05 HoL 279Science Cities Initiative – 1.12.05 HoC 665W


* Scientific Publications: Free for all? – adjournment debate –15.12.05 HoC 501WHSmall Business Research Initiative – 13.12.05 HoC 1907W

SpaceArmed Forces: Skynet 5 – 20.12.05 HoC 190WS & HoLWS170Business Questions – 27.10.05 HoC 464EU Satellite System – 24.11.05 HoC 2211WSpace – 19.12.05 HoC 2348W

* UK Space Policy – adjournment debate – 23.11.05 HoC 417WH

Sustainable DevelopmentDeforestation – 20.12.05 HoL WA248Food (Transportation) – 17.11.05 HoC 1092Illegal Logging – 2.11.05 HoC 1049WPalm Oil – 21.11.05 HoC 1553W & 22.11.05 HoC1847WSustainable Development – 26.10.05 HoC 372W, 31.10.05HoC 716W & 1.12.05 HoC 654W

Strategy – 7.11.05 HoC 94W

Telecommunications and BroadcastingBowman – 9.11.05 HoC 553WDigital Broadcasting – 15.12.05 HoC 2181W

Switchover – 17.11.05 HoC 1401WMobile Phone Masts – 19.12.05 HoC 2631W

Technology – 14.10.05 HoC 627WNew Electronic Media – adjournment debate – 6.12.05HoC 225WHTelecommunications Masts – 10.10.05 HoC 413W,

* 19.10.05 HoC 1011W & 8.12.05 HoC 1521W

TransportAir Bags (Motor Vehicles) – 19.12.05 HoC 2291W &20.12.05 HoC 2910WAir Pollution – 14.11.05 HoC 890WAlternative Automobile Fuels – 19.12.05 HoC 2293WBiofuel Industry – 15.12.05 HoC 1426Biofuels – 14.12.05 HoC 2023W

Cooking Oil – 28.11.05 HoL WA2Carbon Dioxide Emissions – 17.10.05 HoC 675W,28.10.05 HoC 598W, 3.11.05 HoC 1284W & 6.12.05HoC 733Carbon Emissions – shipping – 18.10.05 HoC 854WCars (Air Conditioning) – 11.11.05 HoC 833WCleaner Fuels – 20.10.05 HoC 1160WClimate Change – 17.10.05 HoC 676WDepartment for Transport: Transport Research Laboratory –20.12.05 HoL WA250Departmental Research – 12.12.05 HoC 1616WDriving (Sleep Problems) – 2.12.05 HoC 810WElectric Cars – 9.11.05 HoC 507WEthanol – 17.10.05 HoC 788W & 15.12.05 HoL WA178Greenhouse Gas Emissions – 23.11.05 HoC 2038WHighways Agency – 10.10.05 HoC 92WHybrid Cars – 21.11.05 HoC 1542WIntelligent Speed Adaptation System – 10.10.05 HoC 93WLorry Road User Charge – 10.10.05 HoC 301W

* Low-carbon Vehicles – 13.12.05 HoC 1858WMotor Vehicle Emissions – 7.11.05 HoC 150WMotorway Crash Barriers – 8.11.05 HoC 285WMotorways – 10.10.05 HoC 96W

Railways: Energy Efficiency – 19.12.05 HoL WA236Renewable Transport Fuel – 10.11.05 HoC 29WS

Adjournment debate – 1.11.05 HoC 240WHObligation – 22.11.05 HoC 1857W, 8.12.05 HoL 737 & 15.12.05 HoC 2259W

Road Congestion – 6.12.05 HoC 1114WRoad Pricing – adjournment debate – 24.11.05 HoC491WHRoad Safety – 22.11.05 HoC 1861W

Cameras – 15.12.05 HoC 178WS & HoL WS156Road Traffic – 28.11.05 HoC 152WRoad User Charging – 10.10.05 HoL WA72Roads – 7.12.05 HoC 1316WSafety Cameras – 10.10.05 HoC 104W, 13.12.05 HoC1861W & 1934WSpeeding (Carbon Emissions) – 29.11.05 HoC 327WStone Mastic Asphalt – 22.11.05 HoC 1865WSurveillance Technology – 24.11.05 HoC 2224WTrain Journeys (Environmental Impact) – 24.11.05 HoC2225WTransport (Emissions) – 17.11.05 HoC 1382WTransport (Environmental Impact) –17.11.05 HoC 1097Vegetable Oil – 7.12.05 HoC 1335W

WasteAnimal Waste – 10.10.05 HoC 127WBiodegradable Waste Pilot Scheme – 15.11.05 HoC 1052WCFCs – 12.12.05 HoC 1594WHousehold Batteries: Recycling – 12.12.05 HoL WA142

10.10.05 HoC 144W, 2.11.05 HoC 1049W, 29.11.05 HoC 313W & 19.12.05 HoL WA220

Landfill Diversion – 31.10.05 HoC 688WLandfill (Former Foodstuffs) – 5.10.05 HoC 2806WMobile Phones/Printer Cartridges – 1.12.05 HoC 653WMunicipal Waste – 21.10.05 HoC 1271WPlastic Bag Tax – 31.10.05 HoC 690WPlastic Packaging – 19.12.05 HoC 2391WRecyclable Waste – 15.12.05 HoC 1437Recycling – 17.10.05 HoC 671W, 20.10.05 HoC 1128W,8.11.05 HoC 325W, 12.12.05 HoC 1603W & 15.12.05HoC 1439

Plastics – 2.11.05 HoC 1050WWaste – 21.11.05 HoC 1533W

Cooking Oil – 7.12.05 HoL WA108Disposal – 5.12.05 HoC 935WElectrical and Electronic Equipment – 6.12.05 HoC 1149W

Directive – 20.10.05 HoC 1151W & 24.10.05 HoC 62W

Management – 5.10.05 HoC 2808W, 28.11.05 HoC 20W & 12.12.05 HoC 1606WRecovery – 17.10.05 HoC 673W

WaterBritish Fluoridation Society – 24.10.05 HoL WA149Fluoridation – 14.10.05 HoC 617W, 24.10.05 HoC 174W& 28.10.05 HoC 579WMicrobiology Water Specialists – 19.12.05 HoC 2630WTap Water – 17.10.05 HoC 672WWater – 19.10.05 HoC 1029W

Desalination Plants – 2.11.05 HoC 1053WManagement – 27.10.05 HoC 473WReservoirs – 14.12.05 HoC 2016W


Euro-NewsCommentary on science and technology within the European Parliament and the Commission

Commission outlines integrated strategyThe Commission adopted a new action plan on 12October, setting out for the first time a fully integratedapproach to EU research and innovation policies, in linewith the updated Lisbon partnership for growth and jobs.This plan proposes opening a dialogue to identifyregulatory barriers to research and innovation. The planoutlined what we should be doing at EU and MemberState level and how best to monitor these activities.Investing in knowledge is the best way for Europe to becompetitive on the global stage and maintain its qualityof life.

The President’s initiativesThe EU Council President Tony Blair calls for R&D andInnovation to be co-ordinated by a European ResearchCouncil (ERC) similar to the National ScienceFoundation in the US. This should help the EU tobecome a world leader in biotechnology for example.Europe’s universities are also called upon to address theneed for increased competitiveness especially with theUS, public-private partnerships and graduate schools.Energy is also a priority where a common energy policyis needed to replace the haphazard way energy prioritiesare determined nationally. Sustainable energy fromnuclear power is not popular with some MEPs however.

Communicating scienceWolfgang Heckl is a leading scientist, and winner of theDescartes Prize, whose efforts to communicate his workto a wider audience have made him a household name inGermany and elsewhere. He states that the ultimate goalof science communicators should be to contribute to ademocratic society and the creation of responsiblecitizens.

European Research Council (ERC)The ERC should work on the basis of minimumbureaucracy and maximum trust. It will fund researchacross all fields following a peer review process of thehighest standard. The Commission’s proposals for FP7,which initiated the idea of the ERC have not beenapproved yet by Council. However the Scientific Councilbelieves that they will be in a position to develop acarefully planned strategy to facilitate a rapid start-up.

EU maritime researchEU maritime policy must be underpinned by researchaccording to Joe Borg the EU Commissioner for Fisheriesand Maritime Affairs. He invited the marine researchcommunity to take up the challenges that lie ahead bycontributing to the Green Paper for an EU maritime

policy and in ensuring maximum benefit is derived fromthe Seventh Framework Programme.

A roadmap for nanotechnologyapplicationsThe NanoRoadMap (NRM) project concentrates onmaterials, health and medical services applications andended in December 2005. The results were presented atan international conference in Cologne, “NanoSolution2005”.

Vaccine for H7N1 strain of avian fludevelopedSix partners working together in an EU-funded projecthave developed a vaccine for the H7N1 strain of avianinfluenza. The vaccine will be tested in clinical trials inspring 2006. The H7 virus can pass from poultry tohumans and caused lethal outbreaks in Italian poultry in1999 and was linked to the H7N7 poultry virus outbreakin the Netherlands in 2003 where over 80 people wereinfected and one died.

NESTA funding approvedThe European Commission has approved the UK’sNESTA invention and innovation programme, a €35.3million risk capital fund that supports newly createdinnovative micro and small-sized enterprises (MSE’s) inthe UK.

No “brain drain” from the UKA new report from the Higher Education Policy Institutein the UK has concluded that there is no “brain drain”from the UK. The UK benefits from a substantial netimmigration of academics. Researchers from Europeancountries are beginning to treat the UK as UK researchersregard the US, coming here to begin their careers andestablish their reputations, and then returning to theirhome countries to continue their careers.

CaSE favours commercial research atuniversitiesAlthough the Campaign for Science and Engineering inthe UK (CaSE) considers that commercial research isboth desirable and essential, the practice of governmentfunding schemes that are only unlocked whenuniversities raise “matching funds” are generally onlyavailable where an industrial company has enoughinterest to spend large sums of its own money, thusrestricting money spent on “blue-sky” research. This isharmful to the economy in the long term as it isfundamental research that generates new ideas. TheEuropean Research Council will therefore concentratespecifically on funding basic research.



European Union - DigestThe references are to the Official Journal of the European Communities (OJ), Adopted Legislation from the L Series (OJL) and Proposals

and Opinions from the C Series (OJC).

AgricultureCouncil Regulation 1567/2005 on organic production ofagricultural products – OJ L252(p1)28.9.05Commission Directive 2005/91 on examination of certainvarieties of agricultural plant species – OJL331(p24)17.12.05Commission Decision 2005/772 on marketing of a GMmaize product – OJ L291(p42)5.11.05

AviationCommission Regulation 2150/2005 laying down commonrules for the flexible use of airspace – OJL342(p20)24.12.05Economic and Social Committee Opinion on aCommunity Air Traffic Controller Licence – OJC234(p17)22.9.05

Animals and Veterinary MattersCommissionDirectives 2005/86 and 2005/87 on undesirable substancesin animal feed – OJ L318(p16&19)6.12.05Regulations:1458/2005 on additives in feedingstuffs – OJL233(p3)9.9.051459/2005 on additives in feedingstuffs – OJL233(p8)9.9.051810/2005, 1811/2005 and 1812/2005 on additives infeedingstuffs – OJ L291(p5,12&18)5.11.051980/2005 on feed additives – OJ L318(p3)6.12.052036/2005 on authorisations of additives in feedingstuffs –OJ L328(p13)15.12.052037/2005 amending conditions for authorisation of a feedadditive – OJ L328(p21)15.12.052067/2005 on alternative means of disposal and use ofanimal by-products – OJ L331(p12)17.12.05Decisions:2005/648 on protection measures in relation to NewcastleDisease – OJ L238(p16)15.9.052005/656 amending list of laboratories authorised to checkon vaccination against rabies – OJ L241(p63)17.9.052005/692 on protection measures in relation to avianinfluenza OJ L263(p20)8.10.05; OJ L263(p22)8.10.05; OJL267(p29)12.10.05; OJ L269(p42)14.10.05; OJL274(p102)20.10.05; OJ L276(p68)21.10.05; OJL280(p23)25.10.05; OJ L301(p20)18.11.052005/731 laying down additional requirements for thesurveillance of avian influenza in wild birds – OJL274(p93)20.10.052005/734 laying down security measures to reduce the riskof transmission of avian influenza – OJL274(p105)20.10.052005/744 laying down requirements for the prevention ofavian influenza in birds kept in zoos – OJL279(p75)22.10.052005/745 amending 734 on biosecurity measures for theprevention of avian influenza – OJ L279(p79)22.10.052005/773 on swine fever in Luxembourg – OJL291(p45)5.11.052005/780 on purchase and storage of foot and mouthantigens – OJ L294(p7)10.11.05

2005/828 on bluetongue in Spain – OJ L311(p37)26.11.052005/855 amending 2005/734 on biosecurity measures inrelation to avian influenza – OJ L316(p21)2.12.052005/862 on measures to combat avian influenza – OJL317(p19)3.12.052005/873 on eradication of animal diseases – OJL322(p21)9.12.052005/926 on measures to control avian flu in Italy – OJL337(p60)22.12.052005/950 on eradication of classical swine fever in feral pigsin certain areas of Germany – OJ L345(p30)28.12.05Recommendation 2005/925 on inspection regardinganimal nutrition for 2006 – OJ L337(p51)22.12.05Court of Justice Judgment on Establishment of amaximum residue level for progesterone – OJC217(p6)3.9.05

ChemicalsCommissionDirective 2005/70 on maximum residue levels for certainpesticides in certain products – OJ L276(p35)21.10.05Decision 2005/814 on importing certain chemicals – OJL304(p46)23.11.05Economic and Social Committee Opinion on chemicalslegislation REACH – OJ C294(p38)25.11.05

Dangerous GoodsCouncil Directive 2005/59 on dangerous substances – OJL309(p13)25.11.05Commission Decisions:2005/747 on the use of hazardous substances in electricaland electronic equipment – OJ L280(p18)25.10.052005/903 on transport of dangerous goods by road – OJL328(p62)15.12.05Judgment of the Court on dangerous substances – OJC271(p3)29.10.05Economic and Social Committee Opinion on use ofdangerous substances and preparations – OJC255(p33)14.10.05

EngineeringEconomic and Social Committee Opinion on IndustrialChange in the Mechanical Engineering Sector – OJC267(p9)27.10.05

Energy and Nuclear IndustriesCouncil Regulation 1775/2005 on natural gas transmissionnetworks – OJ L289(p1)3.11.05CommissionDecisions 2005/844/Euratom and 2005/845/Euratom onnotification of a nuclear accident – OJL314(p21&27)30.11.05Opinion on disposal of radioactive waste from Sizewell ANuclear Power Station – OJ C274(p9)5.11.05Economic and Social Committee Opinions:Use of Geothermal Energy – OJ C221(p22)8.9.05Shipments of radioactive waste – OJ C286(p34)17.11.05Calls for ProposalsSustainable Energy Systems – OJ C233(p53)22.9.05Euratom Fusion Training Scheme – OJ C244(p5)4.10.05Intelligent Energy – Europe – OJ C248(p7)7.10.05

Research and Training in Nuclear Energy field – OJC250(p15)8.10.05

EnvironmentEconomic and Social Committee Opinions:Flood risk management – OJ C221(p35)8.9.05European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register – OJC255(p55)14.10.05

Education and TrainingCouncilDirective 2005/36 on recognition of professionalqualifications – OJ L255(p22)30.9.05Resolution on mobilising the brainpower of Europe – OJC292(p1&3)24.11.05Economic and Social Committee Opinions:Industrial districts and new knowledge networks – OJC255(p1)14.10.05Quality assurance in higher education – OJC255(p72)14.10.05Calls for proposalsSocrates programme – OJ C212(p21)31.8.05European associations acting at European level in the fieldof education – OJ C216(p5)3.9.05

FisheriesCouncil Regulations:27/2005 – corrigendum – on fishing conditions for 2005 –OJ L281(p1)25.10.051568/2005 on protection of deep-water coral reefs – OJL252(p2)28.9.051660/2005 on fishing off the Comoros 2005-2010 – OJL267(p13)12.10.051936/2005 on herring, Greenland halibut and octopus – OJL311(p1)26.11.052115/2005 estabishing a recovery plan for Greenlandhalibut – OJ L340(p3)23.12.052166/2005 establishing recovery measures for Southernhake and Norway lobster stocks – OJ L345(p5)28.12.05Council Decisions:2005/937 on fishing off Seychelles – OJ L348(p1)30.12.052005/938 on the International Dolphin ConservationProgramme – OJ L348(p26)30.12.05Commission Regulations prohibiting fishing for certainsspecies:1426/2005 – OJ L225(p13)31.8.051444/2005 – OJ L229(p4)6.9.051448/2005 – OJ L230(p3)7.9.051449/2005 – OJ L230(p5)7.9.051485/2005 – OJ L238(p3)15.9.051486/2005 – OJ L238(p5)15.9.051499/2005 – OJ L240(p40)16.9.051504/2005 – OJ L241(p3)17.9.051625/2005 – OJ L259(p19)5.10.051635/2005 – OJ L261(p18)7.10.051644/2005 – OJ L263(p6)8.10.051674/2005 – OJ L269(p14)14.10.051753/2005 – OJ L284(p3)27.10.051765/2005 – OJ L285(p23)28.10.051779/2005 – OJ L288(p12)29.10.051780/2005 – OJ L288(p14)29.10.051781/2005 – OJ L288(p16)29.10.051882/2005 – OJ L301(p6)18.11.051883/2005 – OJ L301(p6)18.11.051894/2005 – OJ L302(p26)19.11.051902/2005 – OJ L303(p26)22.11.051903/2005 – OJ L303(p28)22.11.052017/2005 – OJ L324(p19)10.12.05

2031/2005 – OJ C327(p15)14.12.052032/2005 – OJ C327(p17)14.12.051539/2005 extending emergency measures for theprotection and recovery of the anchovy stock – OJL247(p9)23.9.051570/2005 on management of fishing fleets – OJL252(p6)28.9.051804/2005 on recording of information on catches of fish –OJ L290(p10)4.11.052164/2005 reopening the fishery for Greenland halibut byvessels flying the flag of Spain – OJ L342(p71)24.12.05Commission Decisions:2005/629 establishing a Scientific, Technical and EconomicCommittee for Fisheries – OJ L225(p18)31.8.052005/668 declaring operational the Regional AdvisoryCouncil for the North-Western Waters under the commonfisheries policy – OJ L249(p18)24.9.052005/742 on importation of live fish, their eggs andgametes – OJ L279(p71)22.10.052005/770 & 2005/813 on approved farms with regard todiseases in fish – OJ L291(p33)5.11.05 &L304(p19)23.11.05

FoodCommissionDirective 2005/79 amending 2002/72 on plastic materialsintended to come into contact with food – OJL302(p35)19.11.05Regulations:1518/2005 on establishment of maximum residue limits ofveterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs – OJL244(p11)20.9.051895/2005 on epoxy derivatives in materials intended tocome into contact with food – OJ L302(p28)19.11.052073/2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs – OJL338(p1)22.12.052075/2005 on controls for Trichinella in meat – OJL338(p60)22.12.05Judgment of the Court on labelling of foodstuffs – GMOs– OJ C271(p2)29.10.05Call for expressions of interest: European Food SafetyAuthority: membership of scientific committee and panels –OJ C289A(p1)22.11.05

Intellectual PropertyEconomic and Social Committee Opinion on the legalprotection of designs – OJ C286(p8)17.11.05

IT, Telecommunications and BroadcastingCouncil Directive 2005/82 on frequency bands for pan-European land-based public radio paging – OJL344(p28)27.12.05Commission Decisions:2005/752 establishing an expert group on electroniccommerce – OJ L282(p20)26.10.052005/928 on harmonisation of 169.4-169.8125 MHzfrequency band – OJ L344(p47)27.12.05Economic and Social Committee OpinionsConfidence in electronic markets – OJ C255(p29)14.10.05Satellite radionavigation – OJ C221(p28)8.9.05European Data Protection Supervisor Opinion onretention of data relating to public electroniccommunication services – OJ C298(p1)29.11.05

Minerals and MiningCommission Regulation 1574/2005 on the KimberleyProcess certification scheme for the trade in roughdiamonds – OJ L253(p11)29.9.05


Public Health and PharmaceuticalsCommission Directive 2005/80 on cosmetic products – OJL303(p32)22.11.05Commission Regulation 1662/2005 on medicines – OJL267(p19)12.10.05Judgment of the Court of Justice: Food supplements – OJC217(p19)3.9.05Economic and Social Committee Opinions:Medicinal products for paediatric use – OJC267(p1)27.10.05Patents for pharmaceutical products for export to countrieswith public health problems – OJ C286(p4)17.11.05Call for interest: European Centre for Disease Preventionand Control – OJ C244A(p1)4.10.05

Plants and their Protection ProductsCouncil Regulation 1947/2005 on market in seeds – OJL312(p3)29.11.05Commission Directives:2005/53 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC toinclude 5 substances as active substances – OJL241(p51)17.9.052005/54 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC toinclude tribenuron as active substance – OJL244(p21)20.9.052005/57 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC toinclude MCPA and MCPB as active substances – OJL246(p14)22.9.052005/58 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC toinclude 2 substances as active substances – OJL246(p17)22.9.052005/72 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC toinclude 5 substances as active substances – OJL279(p63)22.10.052005/74 amending 90/642/EEC on residue levels of certainsubstances – OJ L282(p9)26.10.052005/77 on organisms harmful to plants – OJL296(p17)12.11.05Commission Decisions:2005/635 on a genetically modified oilseed rape product –OJ L228(p11)3.9.052005/743 allowing Member States to extend provisionalauthorisationis granted for 4 new active substances – OJL279(p73)22.10.052005/788 on plant protection products containing naled –OJ L296(p41)12.11.052005/864 on non-inclusion of endosulfan – OJL317(p25)3.12.052005/949 on propagating certain plants – OJL345(p28)28.12.05Commission Recommendation 2005/637 on spillage ofgenetically modified oilseed rape product – OJL228(p19)3.9.05

Science PolicyCouncilDirective 2005/71 on admitting third-country nationals forscientific research – OJ L289(p15)3.11.05Decisions:2005/766 on Agreement on Scientific and Technical Co-operation between the EC and United Mexican States – OJL290(p16)4.11.052005/781 on Agreement for scientific and technological co-operation between the EC and Brazil – OJL295(p37)11.11.05Recommendations:2005/761 on short-stay visas for researchers from third

countries – OJ L289(p23)3.11.052005/762 to facilitate the admission of third-countrynationals to carry out scientific research – OJL289(p26)3.11.05CommissionDecisions:2005/746 on researchers who may access confidential datafor scientific purposes – OJ L280(p16)25.10.052005/754 on appointment of members of European Groupon Ethics in Science and New Technologies – OJL284(p6)27.10.05Notice on amendments to call for proposals: Integratingand strengthening the European Research Area – OJC227(p2)16.9.05Economic and Social Committee Opinion on EuropeanCoal and Steel Research – OJ C294(p7)25.11.05Calls for Proposals:Integrating and strengthening the European Research Area –OJ C215(p8)2.9.05; OJ C245(p11)5.10.05; OJC263(p46)22.10.05; OJ C325(p25,29&35)22.12.05Integrating and Strengthening the European Research Areaand on Science and Society: Rene Descartes Prizes – OJC322(p18,21&22)17.12.05Science and Society – OJ C251(p23)11.10.05; OJC282(p9)15.11.05Specific activities covering a wider field of research – OJC266(p5)27.10.05

SpaceEconomic and Social Committee Opinion: Infrastructurefor spatial information – OJ C221(p33)8.9.05

Sustainable DevelopmentEconomic and Social Committee Opinion on sustainabledevelopment – OJ C267(p22)27.10.05

Toy SafetyCouncil Directive 2005/84 on phthalates in toys andchildcare articles – OJ L344(p40)27.12.05

TransportCouncil Directives:2005/39, 2005/40 and 2005/41 on safety belts in motorvehicles – OJ L255(p143,146&149)30.9.052005/44 on harmonisation of river information services –OJ L255(p152)30.9.052005/55 on emissions from engines in vehicles – OJL275(p1)20.10.052005/64 and 2005/66 on motor vehicles – OJL310(p10)25.11.05Commission Directive 2005/78 on emissions from engines– OJ L313(p1)29.11.05

Transmissible SpongiformEncephalopathiesCommission Regulation 1974/2005 on national referencelaboratories and specified risk material – OJL317(p4)3.12.05Economic and Social Committee Opinion on prevention,control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiformencephalopathies – OJ C234(p26)22.9.05

WasteCommission Regulations:1445/2005 on quality reports for waste statistics – OJL229(p6)6.9.051446/2005 adopting derogations on waste statistics – OJL229(p13)6.9.05



Science DirectoryAerospace and AviationSEMTA

AgricultureBBSRCCABI Bioscience Campden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationInstitute of BiologyLGCUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneSCISociety for General MicrobiologyUFAW

Animal Health and Welfare,Veterinary ResearchABPIAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Veterinary AssociationCefasThe Nutrition SocietyUFAW

Astronomy and Space ScienceCCLRCPPARC

Atmospheric Sciences, Climateand WeatherCCLRCUniversity of East AngliaNatural Environment ResearchCouncilUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

BiotechnologyBBSRCCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationUniversity of East AngliaInstitute of BiologyLGCUniversity of LeedsNational Physical LaboratoryUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneRoyal Society of ChemistrySCISociety for General Microbiology

Brain ResearchABPIMerck Sharp & DohmeUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

Cancer ResearchABPIUniversity of East AngliaUniversity of LeedsUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

CatalysisUniversity of East AngliaInstitution of Chemical EngineersRoyal Society of Chemistry

ChemistryCCLRCUniversity of East AngliaInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGCUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneRoyal InstitutionRoyal Society of ChemistrySCI

Colloid ScienceLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreRoyal Society of Chemistry

Construction and BuildingInstitution of Civil EngineersLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneSCI

Cosmetic ScienceSociety of Cosmetic Scientists

Earth SciencesUniversity of East AngliaEnglish NatureUniversity of Leeds

Ecology, Environment andBiodiversityAMSIBritish Ecological SocietyCABI BioscienceCefasUniversity of East AngliaEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilEnglish NatureEnvironment AgencyFreshwater Biological AssociationInstitute of BiologyInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersLGCUniversity of LeedsNatural Environment ResearchCouncilUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneRoyal Botanic Gardens KewRoyal Society of ChemistrySCISociety for General MicrobiologyUniversity of Surrey

Economic and Social ResearchEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilUniversity of LeedsUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

Education, Training and SkillsABPIAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Association for theAdvancement of ScienceBritish Ecological SocietyBritish Pharmacological SocietyBritish Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyCABI BioscienceCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationClifton Scientific TrustEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilInstitute of Biology Institute of Mathematics and itsApplicationsInstitute of PhysicsInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGCLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreNESTAUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneRoyal InstitutionThe Royal SocietyRoyal Statistical SocietySEMTA

EnergyCCLRCInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneSCI

EngineeringCCLRCEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreRoyal Academy of EngineeringSCISEMTA

Fisheries ResearchAMSICefasFreshwater Biological Association

Food and Food TechnologyCABI BioscienceCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationInstitute of BiologyInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGCUniversity of Leeds

University of Newcastle upon TyneThe Nutrition SocietyRoyal Society of ChemistrySCISociety for General Microbiology

ForensicsLGCRoyal Society of Chemistry

GeneticsABPIBBSRCUniversity of East AngliaHFEALGCUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

Geographical InformationSystemsUniversity of East AngliaUniversity of Leeds

Geology and GeoscienceAMSIUniversity of East AngliaInstitution of Civil EngineersNatural Environment ResearchCouncil

Hazard and Risk MitigationInstitution of Chemical Engineers

HealthABPIAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Pharmacological Society British Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyUniversity of East AngliaEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilHFEAInstitute of Physics and Engineeringin MedicineLGCMedical Research CouncilUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneThe Nutrition SocietyRoyal InstitutionRoyal Society of ChemistrySociety for General Microbiology

Heart ResearchABPI

Hydrocarbons and PetroleumUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneRoyal Society of Chemistry

Industrial Policy and ResearchAIRTOCCLRCEconomic and Social ResearchCouncil

DIRECTORY INDEX


Institution of Civil EngineersRoyal Academy of EngineeringSCI

Information ServicesAIRTOCABI Bioscience

IT, Internet, Telecommunications,Computing and ElectronicsCCLRCUniversity of East AngliaEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilUniversity of LeedsUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneUniversity of Surrey

Intellectual PropertyABPIThe Chartered Institute of PatentAgentsNESTAUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

Large-Scale Research FacilitiesCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationCCLRCLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentrePPARC

LasersCCLRC

ManagementUniversity of Leeds

ManufacturingABPIAMSIEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreSCI

MaterialsCCLRCUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreNational Physical Laboratory

MathematicsInstitute of Mathematics and itsApplicationsUniversity of Leeds

Medical and Biomedical ResearchABPIAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Pharmacological SocietyBritish Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyUniversity of East AngliaHFEAUniversity of LeedsMedical Research CouncilUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneUniversity of SurreyUFAW

Motor VehiclesUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreSEMTA

OceanographyAMSICefasNatural Environment ResearchCouncil

OilInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGC

Particle PhysicsCCLRCUniversity of LeedsPPARC

PatentsThe Chartered Institute of PatentAgentsNESTA

PharmaceuticalsABPIBritish Pharmacological SocietyBritish Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyUniversity of East AngliaInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGCMerck Sharp & DohmeRoyal Society of ChemistrySCI

Physical SciencesCavendish LaboratoryEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreNational Physical LaboratoryPPARC

PhysicsCavendish LaboratoryInstitute of PhysicsUniversity of LeedsNational Physical LaboratoryPPARC

PhysiologyUniversity of Leeds

Pollution and WasteABPIAMSICABI BioscienceCefasUniversity of East AngliaEnvironment AgencyInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreNatural Environment ResearchCouncilUniversity of Newcastle upon Tyne

PsychologyBritish Psychological SocietyUniversity of Leeds

Public PolicyBritish Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilHFEANESTAProspect

Public Understanding of ScienceAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Association for theAdvancement of ScienceBritish Society for AntimicrobialChemotherapyClifton Scientific TrustUniversity of East AngliaEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilHFEAInstitute of BiologyInstitute of PhysicsInstitution of Chemical EngineersMedical Research CouncilNESTAProspectRoyal Academy of EngineeringRoyal InstitutionThe Royal SocietyRoyal Society of Chemistry

Quality ManagementCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationLGC

Radiation HazardsCefasHPA Radiation Protection Division

RetailMarks and Spencer

Satellite EngineeringUniversity of Surrey

Science PolicyABPIAcademy of Medical SciencesBritish Association for theAdvancement of ScienceBritish Pharmacological Society CefasClifton Scientific TrustEconomic and Social ResearchCouncilEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch CouncilHFEAInstitute of PhysicsInstitution of Chemical EngineersLGCMedical Research CouncilNESTAThe Nutrition Society ProspectRoyal Academy of EngineeringRoyal InstitutionThe Royal SocietyRoyal Society of Chemistry

The Science CouncilUFAW

Seed ProtectionCABI Bioscience

Sensors and TransducersAMSICCLRC

SSSIsEnglish NatureRoyal Botanic Gardens Kew

StatisticsRoyal Statistical Society

Surface ScienceCCLRC

SustainabilityBritish Ecological Society CABI BioscienceCefasUniversity of East AngliaEnglish NatureEnvironment AgencyInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreUniversity of Newcastle upon TyneSCI

Technology TransferCABI BioscienceCampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationCCLRCLGCUniversity of LeedsLondon Metropolitan PolymerCentreNESTANational Physical Laboratory

Tropical MedicineSociety for General Microbiology

VirusesABPISociety for General Microbiology

WaterAMSICampden & Chorleywood FoodResearch AssociationCefasUniversity of East AngliaEnvironment AgencyFreshwater Biological AssociationInstitution of Chemical EngineersInstitution of Civil EngineersLGCRoyal Society of ChemistrySCISociety for General Microbiology

WildlifeBritish Ecological Society University of East AngliaEnglish NatureInstitute of BiologyUFAW


Association of Marine Scientific Industries Contact: John Southerden, Director

Association of Marine Scientific Industries

4th Floor, 30 Great Guildford Street

London SE1 0HS

Tel: 020 7928 9199 Fax: 020 7928 6599

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.maritimeindustries.org

AMSI is a constituent association of the Society of

Maritime Industries; the other associations are:

Association of British Offshore Industries (ABOI)

British Marine Equipment Association (BMEA)

British Naval Equipment Association (BNEA)

Ports and Terminals Group (PTG)

AIRTOContact: Professor Richard BrookAIRTO : Association of Independent Research& Technology Organisationsc/o CCFRA, Station Road, Chipping Campden,Gloucestershire GL55 6LD.Tel: 01386 842247Fax: 01386 842010E-mail: [email protected]: www.airto.co.uk

AIRTO represents the UK’s independentresearch and technology sector - memberorganisations employ a combined staff of over20,000 scientists and engineers with aturnover in the region of £2 billion. Workcarried out by members includes research, consultancy, training and global informationmonitoring. AIRTO promotes their work bybuilding closer links between members andindustry, academia, UK government agenciesand the European Union.

Biotechnology and BiologicalSciences Research CouncilContact: Dr Monica Winstanley, Head of External RelationsBBSRC, Polaris House, North Star AvenueSwindon SN2 1UH. Tel: 01793 413204E-mail: [email protected]: www.bbsrc.ac.ukThe BBSRC is the UK’s leading funding agency foracademic research in the non-medical life sciences andis funded principally through the Science Budget of theOffice of Science and Technology. It supports staff inuniversities and research institutes throughout the UK,and funds basic and strategic science in: agri-food,animal sciences, biomolecular sciences, biochemistryand cell biology, engineering and biological systems,genes and developmental biology, and plant andmicrobial sciences.

British Associationfor the Advancementof Science - the BAContact: Sir Roland Jackson Bt, Chief Executive The BA, Wellcome Wolfson Building,165 Queen’s Gate, London SW7 5HD.E-mail: [email protected]: www.the-BA.netThe BA is the UK’s nationwide, open membershiporganisation dedicated to connecting people withscience, so that science and its applications becomeaccessible to all. The BA aims to promote opennessabout science in society and to engage and inspirepeople directly with science and technology and theirimplications.Established in 1831, the BA organises major initiativesacross the UK, including the annual BA Festival ofScience, National Science Week, programmes ofregional and local events, and an extensive programmefor young people in schools and colleges.

BritishEcologicalSocietyContact: Nick Dusic, Science Policy ManagerBritish Ecological Society 26 Blades Court, Deodar Road, Putney,London, SW15 2NUTel: 020 8871 9797 Fax : 020 8871 9779E-mail: [email protected]: www.BritishEcologicalSociety.org

The British Ecological Society promotes thescience of ecology worldwide. The Society has4,000 members who are active in advancing thescience and application of ecology.The BES publishes four internationally renownedscientific journals and organises the largestscientific meeting for ecologists in Europe. TheBES also supports ecologists in developingcountries and fieldwork in schoolsthrough its grants.The BES informs and advises Parliament andGovernment on ecological issues and welcomesrequests for assistance from parliamentarians.

Academy of Medical SciencesContact: Mrs Mary Manning, Executive DirectorAcademy of Medical Sciences10 Carlton House TerraceLondon SW1Y 5AHTel: 020 7969 5288 Fax: 020 7969 5298E-mail: [email protected]: www.acmedsci.ac.uk

The Academy of Medical Sciences promotesadvances in medical science and campaigns toensure these are converted as quickly aspossible into healthcare benefits for society. TheAcademy’s eight hundred Fellows are the UnitedKingdom’s leading medical scientists fromhospitals, academia, industry and the publicservice. The Academy provides independent,authoritative advice on public policy issues inmedical science and healthcare.

Association of the BritishPharmaceuticalIndustry Contact: Dr Philip Wright12 Whitehall, London SW1A 2DYTel: 020 7747 1408Fax: 020 7747 1417E-mail: [email protected]: www.abpi.org.uk

The ABPI is the voice of the innovativepharmaceutical industry, working with Government,regulators and other stakeholders to promote areceptive environment for a strong and progressiveindustry in the UK, one capable of providing the bestmedicines to patients.The ABPI’s mission is to represent the pharmaceuticalindustry operating in the UK in a way that:● assures patient access to the best available

medicine;● creates a favourable political and economic

environment;● encourages innovative research and development; ● avoids unfair commercial returns

Contact: Sarah-Jane StaggBritish Pharmacological Society16 Angel Gate, City RoadLondon EC1V 2SGTel: 020 7417 0113Fax: 020 7417 0114Email: [email protected]: www.bps.ac.uk

The British Pharmacological Society has now beensupporting pharmacology and pharmacologistsfor 75 years. Our 2,400 members, fromacademia, industry and clinical practice, aretrained to study drug action from the laboratorybench to the patient’s bedside. Our aim is toimprove the quality of life by developing newmedicines to treat and prevent the diseases andconditions that affect millions of people andanimals. Inquiries about drugs and how theywork are welcome.

The BritishPsychologicalSocietyContact: Dr Ana PadillaParliamentary OfficerThe British Psychological Society33 John StreetLondon WC1N 2ATTel: 020 7692 3412Fax: 020 7419 6922Email: [email protected]: www.bps.org.uk

The British Psychological Society is anorganisation of over 34,000 membersgoverned by Royal Charter. It maintains theRegister of Chartered Psychologists,publishes books, 10 primary science Journalsand organises conferences. Requests forinformation about psychology andpsychologists from parliamentarians arewelcome.


CABI BioscienceContact: Dr Joan Kelley, Director, UKCABI Bioscience, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey TW20 9TY.Tel: 01491 829080 Fax: 01491 829100E-mail: [email protected]: www.cabi-bioscience.org

CABI Bioscience is a new breed of internationalorganisation specialising in sustainableagriculture, the conservation of biodiversity andinvasive species management. Globally thework of CABI Bioscience focuses on the farmerand his need to adapt and respond to thechanges and challenges of the markets – thesemay be for organic produce or dealing with theeffects of climate change or alien invasivespecies in a safe and sustainable way.

CABI Bioscience UK is one of a network of 6global CABI Bioscience centres and a division ofCAB International, a not-for-profit, UN treaty-level organisation. Its sister enterprise is CABIPublishing, a leading international life sciencepublisher.

Campden &ChorleywoodFood ResearchAssociationContact: Prof Colin Dennis, Director-General CCFRA, Chipping Campden, Gloucestershire GL55 6LD.Tel: 01386 842000 Fax: 01386 842100E-mail: [email protected]: www.campden.co.ukA independent, membership-based industrial researchassociation providing substantial R&D, processing,analytical hygiene, best practice, training, auditing andHACCP services for the food chain worldwide.Members include growers, processors, retailers,caterers, distributors, machinery manufacturers,government departments and enforcement authorities.Employs over 300; serves over 2,000 member sites;and has a subsidiary company in Hungary. Activitiesfocus on safety, quality, efficiency and innovation.Participates in DTI’s Faraday Partnerships andcollaborates with universities on LINK projects andstudentships, transferring practical knowledgebetween industry and academia.

Council for the Central Laboratoryof the ResearchCouncilsContact: Natalie BealingCCLRC Rutherford Appleton LaboratoryChilton, Oxfordshire, OX11 0QXCCLRC Daresbury LaboratoryDaresbury, Cheshire, WA4 4ADTel: 01235 445484 Fax: 01235 446665E-mail: [email protected]: www.cclrc.ac.uk

The CCLRC is the UK’s strategic agency for scientificresearch facilities. It also supports leading-edge scienceand technology by providing world-class, large-scaleexperimental facilities. These advanced technologicalcapabilities, backed by a pool of expertise and skillsacross a broad range of disciplines, are exploited by morethan 600 government, academic, industrial and otherresearch organisations around the world each year. Theannual budget of the CCLRC is c. £150 million.

CharteredInstitute ofPatent AgentsContact: Michael Ralph -Secretary & RegistrarThe Chartered Institute of Patent Agents95 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1DTTel: 020 7405 9450Fax: 020 7430 0471E-mail: [email protected]: www.cipa.org.uk

CIPA’s members practise in intellectual property,especially patents, trade marks, designs, andcopyright, either in private partnerships orindustrial companies. CIPA maintains the statutory Register. It advises government andinternational circles on policy issues and provides information services, promoting thebenefits to UK industry of obtaining IP protection, and to overseas industry of usingBritish agents to obtain international protection.

CavendishLaboratoryThe Administrative Secretary, The Cavendish Laboratory,J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK.E-mail: [email protected]://www.phy.cam.ac.uk

The Cavendish Laboratory houses the Department of Physics ofthe University of Cambridge.

Its world-class research is focused in a number of experimentaland theoretical diverse fields.

Astrophysics: Millimetre astronomy, optical interferometryobservations & instrumentation. Astrophysics, geometricalgebra, maximum entropy, neutral networks.

High Energy Physics: LEP, SPS & future LHC experiments.Detector development. Particle physics theory.

Condensed Matter Physics: Semiconductor physics, quantumeffect devices, nanolithography. Superconductivity, magneticthin films. Optoelectronics, conducting polymers. BiologicalSoft Systems. Polymers and Colloids. Surface physics, fracture,wear & erosion. Amorphous solids. Electron microscopy.Electronic structure theory & computation. Structural phasetransitions, fractals, quantum Monte Carlo calculationsBiological Physics.

Clifton Scientific TrustContact: Dr Eric AlboneClifton Scientific Trust 49 Northumberland Road, Bristol BS6 7BATel: 0117 924 7664 Fax: 0117 924 7664E-mail: [email protected]: www.clifton-scientific.org

Science for Citizenship and Employability,Science for Life, Science for Real

We build grass-roots partnerships betweenschool and the wider world of professionalscience and its applications• for young people of all ages and abilities • experiencing science as a creative,

questioning, human activity • bringing school science added meaning and

notivation, from primary to post-16• locally, nationally, internationally (currently

between Britain and Japan)Clifton Scientific Trust Ltd is registered charity 1086933

British VeterinaryAssociationContact:Chrissie Nicholls7 Mansfield Street, London W1G 9NQTel: 020 7636 6541Fax: 020 7637 4769E-mail:[email protected]

BVA’s chief interests are:* Standards of animal health* Veterinary surgeons’ working practices* Professional standards and quality of service* Relationships with external bodies, particulary

governmentBVA carries out three main functions which are:* Policy development in areas affecting the

profession* Protecting and promoting the profession in

matters propounded by government and otherexternal bodies

* Provision of services to members

British Societyfor AntimicrobialChemotherapyContact: Tracey Guest, Executive OfficerBritish Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy11 The Wharf, 16 Bridge Street,Birmingham B1 2JS.Tel: 0121 633 0410Fax: 0121 643 9497E-mail: [email protected]: www.bsac.org.uk

Founded in 1971, and with 800 membersworldwide, the Society exists to facilitate theacquisition and dissemination of knowledge inthe field of antimicrobial chemotherapy. TheBSAC publishes the Journal of AntimicrobialChemotherapy (JAC), internationally renowned forits scientific excellence, undertakes a range ofeducational activities, awards grants for researchand has active relationships with its peer groupsand government.

Centre for Environment,Fisheries & Aquaculture ScienceContact: Anne McClarnon, CommunicationsManagerPakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HTTel: 01502 56 2244Fax: 01502 51 3865E-mail: [email protected]: www.cefas.co.uk

Cefas offers multidisciplinary scientific researchand consultancy for fisheries management andaquaculture, plus environmental monitoring andassessments. Government at all levels,international institutions (EU, UN, World Bank)and clients worldwide have used Cefas servicesfor over 100 years. Three laboratories with thelatest facilities, plus Cefas’ own ocean-goingresearch vessel, underpin the delivery of high-quality science and advice to policy-makers.


Engineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilContact: Lucy Brady, Head of Marketing and Communications, EPSRC, Polaris House, North Star Avenue, Swindon SN2 1ETTel: 01793 444147 Fax: 01793 444005E-mail: [email protected]:www.epsrc.ac.ukEPSRC invests more than £500 million a year inresearch and postgraduate training in the physicalsciences and engineering, to help the nation handlethe next generation of technological change. Theareas covered range from mathematics to materialsscience, and information technology to structuralengineering.We also actively promote public engagement withscience and engineering, and we collaborate with awide range of organisations in this area.

EnglishNatureContact: Dr Keith Duff,Chief ScientistEnglish NatureNorthminster House, Peterborough, PE1 1UATel: 01733-455208 Fax: 01733-568834E-mail: [email protected] address: www.english-nature.org.uk

English Nature is the Government’s wildlifeagency working throughout England. Withour partners and others we promote the conservation of wildlife and natural places.

We commission research and publish scientificpapers which underpin the development ofpolicies and programmes to maintain andenhance biodiversity

EnvironmentAgencyContact: Steve Killeen, Head of Science, Environment Agency, Block 1 Government BuildingsBurghill Road, Westbury on Trym, Bristol BS10 6BF.Tel: 0117 914 2980Fax: 0117 914 2929E-mail: [email protected]: www.environment-agency.gov.uk

The Environment Agency is responsible forprotecting and enhancing the environment inEngland and Wales. We contribute tosustainable development through theintegrated management of air, land and water.We commission research to support ourfunctions through our Science Programme thatis based on a 5 year plan developed throughconsultation.

FreshwaterBiologicalAssociationContact: Dr Roger Sweeting, Chief Executive.The Freshwater Biological Association, TheFerry House, Far Sawrey, Ambleside,Cumbria LA22 0LP.Tel: 015394 42468 Fax: 015394 46914E-mail: [email protected]: www.fba.org.ukThe Freshwater Biological Association is anindependent organisation and a registered Charity,founded in 1929. It aims to promote freshwaterscience through an innovative researchprogramme, an active membership organisationand by providing sound independent opinion. Itpublishes a variety of specialist volumes andhouses one of the finest freshwater libraries in theworld.

Human Fertilisation and EmbryologyAuthority

Contact: Tim Whitaker21 Bloomsbury StLondon WC1B 3HFTel: 020 7291 8200Fax: 020 7291 8201Email: [email protected]: www.hfea.gov.uk

The HFEA is a non-departmental Governmentbody that regulates and inspects all UK clinicsproviding IVF, donor insemination or thestorage of eggs, sperm or embryos. The HFEAalso licenses and monitors all human embryoresearch being conducted in the UK.

University of East AngliaContact: Science Communication Officer University of East AngliaNorwich NR4 7TJ

Tel: 01603 593007Fax: 01603 259883E-mail: [email protected]: www.uea.ac.uk

From award-winning technology translatingspeech into sign language, to internationally-renowned climate research, and from theintricacies of diseases such as cancer to thelarge-scale hazards of earthquakes andvolcanoes, UEA scientists are carrying outworld-class research and teaching. A stronglyinterdisciplinary science cluster: BiologicalSciences, Chemical Sciences and Pharmacy,Environmental Sciences, Computing Sciencesand Mathematics.

Economic andSocial ResearchCouncilContact: Lesley Lilley, Senior PolicyManager, Knowledge Transfer,Economic and Social Research Council, Polaris House, North Star Avenue,Swindon SN2 1UJTel: 01793 413033 Fax 01793 [email protected]://www.esrc.ac.uk

The ESRC is the UK’s leading research and trainingagency addressing economic and social concerns. Wepursue excellence in social science research; work toincrease the impact of our research policy andpractice; and provide trained social scientists whomeet the needs of users and beneficiaries, therebycontrbuting to the economic competitiveness of theUnited Kingdom, the effectiveness of public servicesand policy, and quality of life. The ESRC isindependent, established by Royal Charter in 1965,and funded mainly by government.

Health ProtectionAgencyRadiation Protection Division (formerly NRPB)

Contact: Dr Michael ClarkRadiation Protection Division ScientificSpokespersonChilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0RQTel:01235 822737 Fax: 01235 822746Email: [email protected]: www.hpa.org.uk/radiation

The Radiation Protection Division was formed on 1April 2005 when the National RadiologicalProtection Board merged with the Health ProtectionAgency, under the provisions of the Health ProtectionAgency Act 2004.

As part of the Centre for Radiation, Chemical andEnvironmental Hazards, the Division carries out theAgency’s work on ionising and non-ionising radiations.It undertakes research to advance knowledge aboutprotection of people from the risks of these radiations;provides laboratory and technical services; runs

training courses; providesexpertinformation and has asignificant advisory role in the UK.

InstituteofBiology

Contact: Prof Alan Malcolm, Chief Executive

9 Red Lion Court, London EC4A 3EF

Tel: 020 7936 5900

Fax: 020 7936 5901

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.iob.org

The biological sciences have truly come ofage with the new millennium and theInstitute of Biology is the professional bodyto represent biology and biologists to all. Asource of independent advice toGovernment, a supporter of education, ameasure of excellence and a disseminator ofinformation - the Institute of Biology is theVoice of British Biology.


Marks &Spencer PlcContact:David S GregoryWaterside House 35 North Wharf RoadLondonW2 1NW.

Tel: 020 8718 8247E-mail: [email protected]

Main Business ActivitiesRetailer - Clothing, Food, FinancialServices and Home.Over 400 stores in 30 countriesworldwide. Employing 65,000 people.

We offer our customers quality, value,service and trust in our brand byapplying science and technology todevelop innovative products andservices.

Institute ofPhysics andEngineeringin MedicineContact: Robert Neilson, General SecretaryFairmount House, 230 Tadcaster Road,York, YO24 1ESTel: 01904 610821 Fax: 01904 612279E-mail: [email protected]: www.ipem.ac.uk

IPEM is a registered, incorporated charity for theadvancement, in the public interest, of physics andengineering applied to medicine and biology. Itaccredits medical physicists, clinical engineers andclinical technologists through its membership register,organises training and CPD for them, and providesopportunities for the dissemination of knowledgethrough publications and scientific meetings. IPEM islicensed by the Science Council to award CSci and bythe Engineering Council (UK) to award CEng, IEngand EngTech.

Institution of Civil EngineersContact: Neal Weston, External Relations ManagerOne Great George Street, Westminster,London SW1P 3AA, UKTel: 020 7665 2151Fax: 020 7222 0973E-mail: [email protected]: www.ice.org.uk

ICE aims to be a leader in shaping theengineering profession. With over 75,000members, ICE acts as a knowledge exchangefor all aspects of civil engineering. As aLearned Society, the Institution providesexpertise, in the form of reports and comment,on a wide range of subjects from energygeneration and supply, to sustainability and theenvironment.

London MetropolitanPolymer CentreContact: Alison Green, London Metropolitan University166-220 Holloway Road, London N7 8DBTel: 020 7133 2189Fax: 020 7133 2184E-mail: [email protected]: www.polymers.org.uk

The London Metropolitan Polymer Centre providestraining, consultancy and applied research to the UKpolymer (plastics & rubber) industry. The trainingcourses are delivered through a programme ofindustrial short courses and customised courses andthese, together with distance learning and otherflexible delivery methods, lead to qualificationsranging from technician to Masters level. Recentsuccesses include a WRAP sponsored programme todevelop new commercial applications for recycledPET and several technology transfer projects withcompanies.

University of LeedsContact: Dr W E Lewis, Director of Research Support UnitResearch Support Unit, 3 Cavendish Road,Leeds LS2 9JTTel: 0113 3436028Fax: 0113 3434058E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/rsu

The University of Leeds is among the largest research universities in Europe. We have some 3000 researchers, includingpostgraduates, and an annual researchincome of more than £70m. Research activityextends across nine faculties representingmost core disciplines and often crossestraditional subject boundaries. In the lastResearch Assessment Exercise, we had 35schools rated internationally or nationally‘excellent’.

LGCQueens Road, TeddingtonMiddlesex, TW11 0LYTel: +44 (0)20 8943 7000 Fax: +44 (0)20 8943 2767E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.lgc.co.uk

LGC, a science service company, is Europe's leadingindependent provider of analytical and diagnostic servicesand reference standards. LGC's market-led divisions -Forensic Services, Food Chain and Environment, LifeSciences, Pharmaceutical and Chemical Services and LGCPromochem (for Reference Materials) - operate in adiverse range of sectors for both public and private sectorcustomers.

Under arrangements for the office and function ofGovernment Chemist, LGC fulfils specific statutory dutiesand provides advice for Government and the wideranalytical community on the implications of analyticalchemistry for matters of policy, standards and regulation.

LGC is based in Teddington, Middlesex, with other UKoperations in Runcorn, Edinburgh, Culham, Risley andTamworth and facilities in France, Germany, Italy, Poland,Spain, Sweden and India.

The Institute of Mathematics and its ApplicationsContact: Lynn Webster, Personal Assistant toExecutive DirectorInstitute of Mathematics and its ApplicationsCatherine Richards House, 16 Nelson StreetSouthend-on-Sea, Essex SS1 1EFTel: 01702 354020Fax: 01702 354111E-mail: [email protected]: www.ima.org.uk

The IMA is a professional and learned society forqualified and practising mathematicians. Its mission isto promote mathematics in industry, business, thepublic sector, education and research.Forty percent of members are employed in education(schools through to universities), and the other 60%work in commercial and governmental organisations.The Institute is incorporated by Royal Charter and hasthe right to award Chartered Mathematician status.

Contact: Public Relations Department76 Portland Place, London W1B 1NTTel: 020 7470 4800E-mail: [email protected]: www.iop.org www.einsteinyear.org

The Institute of Physics supports the physicscommunity and promotes physics togovernment, legislators and policy makers.

It is an international learned society andprofessional body with over 35,000 membersworldwide, working in all branches of physicsand a wide variety of jobs and professions –including fundamental resarch, technology-based industries, medicine, finance – andnewer jobs such as computer games design. The Institute is active in school and highereducation and awards professionalqualifications. It provides policy advice andopportunities for public debate on areas ofphysics such as energy and climate changethat affect us all.

Institution ofChemical EngineersIChemE is the hub for chemical,biochemical and process engineeringprofessionals worldwide. We are the heartof the process community, promotingcompetence and a commitment tosustainable development, advancing thediscipline for the benefit of society andsupporting the professional developmentof over 25,000 members.

Contact: Andrew FurlongMember Networks Directort: +44 (0) 1788 534484f: +44 (0) 1788 560833e: [email protected]


Particle Physics andAstronomyResearch CouncilContact: Nigel CalvinPolicy and Public Affairs ManagerParticle Physics and Astronomy Research CouncilPolaris House, North Star AvenueSwindon, Wiltshire SN2 1SZTel: 01793 442176 Fax: 01793 442125E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.pparc.ac.uk

The PPARC is the UK’s strategic science investmentagency that directs and funds research in national andinternational programmes in fundamental physics.

It is this research into fundamental physics that liesbehind some of the major technological advances of the20th Century, and delivers world leading science,technologies and people for the UK.

The NationalEndowment for Science,Technology and the ArtsContact: Tangiwai BakerPolicy & Public Affairs AssistantFishmongers’ Chambers110 Upper Thames Street, London EC4R 3TWTel: 020 7645 9500Fax: 020 7645 9501Email: [email protected]: www.nesta.org.ukNESTA aims to be the single most powerful catalystfor innovation in the UK. In everything it does, it isseeking to increase the UK ’s capacity to fulfil its vastinnovative potential. Through a range of pioneeringprogrammes, it invests at every stage of theinnovation process; providing early stage seed capitalfor promising ideas for new products and services;investing in UK talent to ensure it stays in the UK;and experimenting with new ways of engaging thepublic in science, technology and the creativeindustries.

National Physical LaboratoryNational Physical LaboratoryHampton Road, TeddingtonMiddlesex TW11 0LWTel: 020 8943 6880 Fax: 020 8943 6458E-mail: [email protected]: www.npl.co.uk

The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) is theUnited Kingdom’s national standards laboratory,an internationally respected and independentcentre of excellence in research, developmentand knowledge transfer in measurement andmaterials science. For more than a century, NPLhas developed and maintained the nation’sprimary measurement standards - the heart ofan infrastructure designed to ensure accuracy,consistency and innovation in physicalmeasurement.

NaturalEnvironmentResearch CouncilContact: Sheila Anderson,Head of CommunicationsPolaris House, North Star AvenueSwindon SN2 1EUTel: 01793 411646 Fax: 01793 411510E-mail: [email protected]: www.nerc.ac.uk

The UK’s Natural Environment Research Councilfunds and carries out impartial scientific researchin the sciences of the environment. NERC trainsthe next generation of independent environmentalscientists.

NERC funds research in universities and in anetwork of its own centres, which include:

British Antarctic Survey, British GeologicalSurvey, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology,Southampton Oceanography Centre and Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory

University ofNewcastle upon TyneContact: Dr Douglas RobertsonNewcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RUTel: 0191 222 5347 Fax: 0191 222 5219E-mail: [email protected]: www.ncl.ac.uk

The University of Newcastle upon Tyne is amember of the Russell Group of researchintensive Universities. Newcastle has aconsiderable reputation in undertaking'research with a purpose'. The University has awell balanced portfolio of research funding andhas one of the highest levels of research projectsfunded by the UK Government Departmentsand a very significant portfolio of FP6 EUactivity (with over 100 projects involving morethan 1800 partners). The University is takingits commitment further through thedevelopment of Newcastle Science City.

MedicalResearchCouncilContact: Simon Wilde 20 Park Crescent, London W1B 1AL.

Tel: 020 7636 5422 Fax: 020 7436 2665E-mail: [email protected]: www.mrc.ac.uk

The Medical Research Council (MRC) isfunded by the UK taxpayer. We areindependent of Government, but work closelywith the Health Departments, the NationalHealth Service and industry to ensure that theresearch we support takes account of thepublic’s needs as well as being of excellentscientific quality. As a result, MRC-fundedresearch has led to some of the mostsignificant discoveries in medical science andbenefited millions of people, both in the UKand worldwide.

Merck Sharp &Dohme ResearchLaboratoriesContact: Dr Ray HillLicensing and External Research,EuropeTerlings ParkEastwick RoadHarlowEssex CM20 2QR.

Tel: 01279 440167Fax: 01279 440713E-mail: [email protected]

Drug discovery for brain diseases.

ProspectContact: Sue Ferns, Prospect Head of Research and SpecialistServices, Prospect House75 – 79 York Rd, London SE1 7AQTel: 020 7902 6639 Fax: 020 7902 6637E-mail: [email protected]

Prospect is an independent, thriving andforward-looking trade union with 104,000members. We represent scientists,technologists and other professions in thecivil service, research councils and privatesector.

Prospect’s collective voice champions theinterests of the engineering and scientificcommunity to key opinion-formers andpolicy makers and, with negotiating rightswith over 300 employers, we seek to secure abetter life at work by putting members’ pay,conditions and careers first.

The Nutrition Society Contact: Frederick Wentworth-Bowyer, Chief Executive, The Nutrition Society,10 Cambridge Court, 210 Shepherds Bush RoadLondon W6 7NJTel: +44 (0)20 7602 0228Fax: +44 (0)20 7602 1756Email: [email protected]

Founded in 1941, The Nutrition Society is the premierscientific and professional body dedicated to advancethe scientific study of nutrition and its application to themaintenance of human and animal health.Highly regarded by the scientific community, the Societyis the largest learned society for nutrition in Europe.Membership is worldwide and is open to those with agenuine interest in the science of human or animalnutrition.Principal activities include: 1. Publishing internationally renowned scientificlearned journals2. Promoting the education and training of nutritionists3. Promoting the highest standards of professionalcompetence and practice in nutrition4. Disseminating scientific information through itspublications and programme of scientific meetings


Contact: Tom McLaughlan, Director of Communications29 Great Peter Street,London SW1P 3LWTel: 020 7227 0500 Fax: 020 7233 0054E-mail: [email protected]: www.raeng.org.ukFounded in 1976, The Royal Academy of Engineeringpromotes the engineering and technological welfare ofthe country by facilitating the application of science.As a national academy, we offer independent andimpartial advice to Government; work to secure thenext generation of engineers; pursue excellence; andprovide a voice for Britain’s engineering community.Our Fellowship - comprising the UK’s most eminentengineers - provides the leadership and expertise forour activities, which focus on the importance ofengineering and technology to wealth creation and thequality of life.

The RoyalInstitutionContact: Dr Gail CardewHead of ProgrammesThe Royal Institution21 Albemarle Street, London W1S 4BSTel: 020 7409 2992 Fax: 020 7670 2920E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.rigb.org

The Royal Institution has a reputation establishedover 200 years for its high calibre events thatbreak down the barriers between science andsociety. It acts as a unique forum for informingpeople about how science affects their daily lives,and prides itself on its reputation of engaging thepublic in scientific debate. During 2006 the Ri isclosing for the refurbishment of its Grade 1 listedbuilding. The public and schools' eventsprogramme will continue throughout this time.For more details on this and our refurbishmentplans, please see our website.

The Royal SocietyContact: Dr David Stewart Boak, Director CommunicationsThe Royal Society, 6-9 Carlton House Terrace,London, SW1Y 5AG.Tel: 020 7451 2510 Fax: 020 7451 2615Email: [email protected]: www.royalsoc.ac.uk

Founded in 1660, the Royal Society is an independentacademy promoting the natural and applied sciences. It aims to: • strengthen UK science by providing support to

excellent individuals• fund excellent research to push back the frontiers

of knowledge• attract and retain the best scientists• ensure the UK engages with the best science around

the world• support science communication and education; and

communicate and encourage dialogue with the public• provide the best independent advice nationally and

internationally• promote scholarship and encourage research into the

history of science

The Royal Society ofChemistryContact: Dr Stephen BennParliamentary AffairsThe Royal Society of ChemistryBurlington House, Piccadilly, London W1J 0BATel: 020 7437 8656 Fax: 020 7734 1227E-Mail: [email protected]: http://www.rsc.orghttp://www.chemsoc.org

The Royal Society of Chemistry is a learned,professional and scientific body of over 46,000members with a duty under its Royal Charter“to serve the public interest”. It is active in theareas of education and qualifications, sciencepolicy, publishing, Europe, information andinternet services, media relations, publicunderstanding of science, advice and assistanceto Parliament and Government.

The Science CouncilContact: Diana Garnham, Chief Executive OfficerThe Science Council210 Euston Road, London NW1 2BETel 020 7611 8754 Fax 020 7611 8743E-mail: [email protected]: www.sciencecouncil.org

The Science Council has a membership of over27 professional institutions and learnedsocieties covering the breadth of science andmathematics. Its purpose is to provide anindependent collective voice for science andscientists and to maintain standards across allscientific disciplines. We are active in sciencepolicy issues including science in education,health, society and sustainability. In 2003 theScience Council was granted its Royal Charterand in 2004 it launched the Chartered Scientist(CSci) designation as a measure of highstandards in the practice, application,advancement and teaching of science. We nowhave over 10,000 Chartered Scientists.

Contact: Dr Bernard CapaldiDirector of Industry Products and ServicesSEMTA, Wynyard Park House, Wynyard Park, Billingham, TS22 5TBTel: 01740 627000 Fax: 01740 644799Email: [email protected]: www.semta.org.uk

SEMTA (Science, Engineering and ManufacturingTechnologies Alliance) is the Sector Skills Council for thescience, engineering and manufacturing technology sectors.

Our Mission is ‘to ensure that our sector has the knowledgeand skills required to meet the challenges faced by theworkforce of the future.’

Our sectors account for a significant proportion of the UKeconomy. There are about 2 million people employed inabout 76,000 establishments in the core Science,Engineering and Technology sectors, currently contributesover £74 billion per annum – about ten per cent – of totalUK GDP.

Contact: Dr Faye Stokes,Public Affairs AdministratorMarlborough House, Basingstoke Road, Spencers Wood, Reading RG7 1AG.Tel: 0118 988 1843 Fax: 0118 988 5656E-mail: [email protected]: http//www.sgm.ac.uk

SGM is the largest microbiological society inEurope. The Society publishes four journals ofinternational standing, and organises regularscientific meetings.

SGM also promotes education and careers inmicrobiology, and it is committed to representmicrobiology to government, the media and thepublic.

An information service on microbiological issuesconcerning aspects of medicine, agriculture,food safety, biotechnology and the environmentis available on request.

The Royal StatisticalSocietyContact: Mr Andrew GarrattPress and Public Affairs OfficerThe Royal Statistical Society12 Errol Sreet, London EC1Y 8LX.Tel: +44 20 7614 3920Fax: +44 20 7614 3905E-mail: [email protected]: www.rss.org.ukThe RSS is much more than just a learned society.We lead the way as an independent source of adviceon statistical issues and play a crucial role in raisingthe profile of statistics, through our links withgovernment, academia and the corporate andvoluntary sectors. We have a powerful voice atRoyal Commissions, Parliamentary SelectCommittees and at public consultations, offeringour own unique view on just about anything, fromfreedom of information to sustainable development.


University ofSurreyContact: Katy LeiversUniversity of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XHTel: 01483 683937Fax: 01483 683948E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.surrey.ac.uk/

The University of Surrey is one of the UK’s leadingprofessional, scientific and technological universitieswith a world class research profile and a reputationfor excellence in teaching and learning. Ground-breaking research at the University is bringing directbenefit to all spheres of life - helping industry tomaintain its competitive edge and creatingimprovements in the areas of health, medicine, spacescience, the environment, communications, ionbeam and optoelectronics technology, visual multimedia, defence and social policy.

Society ofChemicalIndustryContact: Andrew Ladds, General Secretary and Chief ExecutiveSCI International Headquarters14-15 Belgrave Square, London SW1X 8PSTel: 020 7598 1500 Fax: 020 7598 1545E-mail: [email protected]: www.soci.org

SCI is an interdisciplinary network for science,commerce and industry. SCI attracts forward-looking people in process and materialstechnologies and in the biotechnology, energy,water, agriculture, food, pharmaceuticals,construction, and environmental protection sectorsworldwide. Members exchange ideas and gainnew perspectives on markets, technologies,strategies and people, through electronic andphysical specialist conferences and debates, andpublish journals, books and the respectedmagazine Chemistry & Industry.

UniversitiesFederation for Animal WelfareContact: Dr James Kirkwood, Scientific DirectorThe Old School, Brewhouse HillWheathampstead, Herts. AL4 8AN.Tel: 01582 831818. Fax: 01582 831414.Email: [email protected]: www.ufaw.org.uk Registered Charity No: 207996

UFAW is an internationally-recognized independentscientific and educational animal welfare charity. Itworks to improve animal lives by:• supporting animal welfare research.• educating and raising awareness of welfare

issues in the UK and overseas.• producing the leading journal Animal Welfare and

other high-quality publications on animal care and welfare.

• providing expert advice to governmentdepartments and other concerned bodies.

Society of Cosmetic Scientists Contact: Lorna Weston,Secretary GeneralSociety of Cosmetic ScientistsG T House, 24-26 Rothesay Road, Luton,Beds LU1 1QXTel: 01582 726661Fax: 01582 405217E-mail: [email protected]: www.scs.org.uk

Advancing the science of cosmetics is the primaryobjective of the SCS. Cosmetic science covers a widerange of disciplines from organic and physicalchemistry to biology and photo-biology, dermatology,microbiology, physical sciences and psychology.

Members are scientists and the SCS helps themprogress their careers and the science of cosmeticsethically and responsibly. Services includepublications, educational courses and scientificmeetings.

ScienceDiaryThe Parliamentary andScientific CommitteeContact: Annabel Lloyd020 7222 7085www.scienceinparliament.org.uk

Wednesday 1 MarchAnnual LunchSpeaker: The Lord Rees of Ludlow PRSSavoy Hotel

Tuesday 14 March 10.00-14.00Science and SocietyScience Week SeminarOne Birdcage Walk, SW1H 9JJ

Monday 24 April 17.30Discussion MeetingSubject to be confirmed

Monday 22 May 17.30AGM and Discussion MeetingSubject to be confirmed

The Royal InstitutionThe Royal Institution21 Albemarle Street, London W1S 4BSDue to refurbishment, all Ri events areto be held at external venuesthroughout 2006. See www.rigb.org ortelephone 020 7409 2992 for fulldetails and to book tickets.

Friday 3 March 20.00Motor neurone disease. how can welengthen a very short straw?Prof Chris ShawUniversity College London

Friday 10 March 20.00Getting to the heart of matter – thestory of quarksProf Christine DaviesUniversity College London

Monday 13 March 18.00Breaking the spellProf Daniel C Dennett and the RevdProf Alister McGrathThe RSA

Friday 17 March 20.00Oxidative stress and cardiovasculardisease. the enemy within Prof Salvador MoncadaUniversity College London

Thursday 23 March 20.00Plagues and people. planning forpandemicsProf Roy Anderson King’s College London

Friday 24 March 20.00‘Frankenstein researchers createbunny monster’ – an insider explainspop scienceDr Alun AndersonUniversity College London

Tuesday 28 March 09.20-16.30What makes us human? Prof Robin Dunbar, Dr Simon Fisher,Baroness Susan Greenfield, the Rt RevdRichard Harries and Prof Charles PasternakMagdalen College School, Oxford

Thursday 11 May 2005 19.00Behind the scenes of drug discovery Prof Monique SimmondsJodrell Lecture Theatre, Royal BotanicGardens, Kew.

Friday 12 May 09.30–17.30Consciousness and anaesthesia Various speakers19.00Are you comfortably numb? Prof Mike Alkire and Prof Peter Sebeland Baroness Susan GreenfieldThe Royal Society of Medicine

The Royal Academy ofEngineering29 Great Peter Street, London SW1P 3LW.For further information visitwww.raeng.org.uk/events or [email protected]

Thursday 9 MarchFuture Technology HorizonsDr Craig Barrett, Chairman, IntelCorporationInternational Lecture7 Carlton House Terrace, SW1Contact: Clare [email protected]

Monday 13 MarchNuclear Power: economics andclimate protection potentialAmory Lovins, Founder of The RockyMountain InstituteRAEng & Forum for the Future Lecture66 Portland Place, London W1BContact: Clare [email protected]

Thursday 30 MarchInnovation in Engineering EducationSymposiumThe RSAContact: Ian [email protected]

The Royal Society ofEdinburgh22-26 George Street, Edinburgh EH2 2PQ.Tel: 0131 240 5000 Fax: 0131 240 [email protected] events require registration and takeplace at the RSE.

Monday 6 March 17.30Towards the Semantic Web: TheReturn of the LinkProfessor Wendy Hall CBE FREng

Thursday 30 March all dayDentist at the BarMedical Legal Interactive Conference

Thursday 27 and Friday 28 April all dayBeyond the Human Genome:Deciphering Biology and DiseaseFull day conference

The Royal Society6-9 Carlton House TerraceLondon SW1Y 5AGThe Royal Society runs a series of events,both evening lectures and two daydiscussion meetings, on topics coveringthe whole breadth of science,engineering and technology. All theevents are free to attend and open to all. Highlights in the next few monthsinclude:

Monday 13 March 18.30Microscopy goes cold: frozen virusesreveal their structural secrets

Monday 10 and Tuesday 11 April (all day)Energy beyond oil - a scientific lookat the various energy optionsPlease see www.royalsoc.ac.uk/eventsfor the full events programme and moredetails about the above highlights.

Royal Society of ChemistryContact: [email protected]: 020 7437 8656

Tuesday 28 February 12.30-15.00Voice of the Future Science Question Time for youngscientistsThe Attlee Suite Portcullis HouseHouse of Commons LondonAll young scientists (20-35) welcome

Tuesday 28 February 16.00-17.00Archives for Africa The science capacity building initiativeThe Attlee Suite Portcullis HouseHouse of Commons LondonAll P&SC members welcome


Officers of the Parliamentary& Scientific Committee

President: The Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior

Chairman: Dr Douglas Naysmith MP

Deputy Chairmen: Dr Desmond Turner MP

Mr Robert Key MP

Hon Treasurer: Dr Brian Iddon MP

Hon Secretaries: Dr Evan Harris MP

Mr James Paice MP

Vice-Presidents: Dr Ian Gibson MP

The Rt Hon Lord Jenkin of Roding

Professor Alan Malcolm

Dr Richard Worswick

Ms Sandra Gidley MP

Mr Stephen Cox CVO

Mr Peter Raymond MBE

Professor Jane Plant CBE

Advisory Panel: Dr David Dent

Professor Peter Saunders

Professor Julia King CBE FREng

Secretariat: Professor Peter Simpson

Mrs Annabel Lloyd

Science in Parliament

3 Birdcage Walk, London SW1H 9JJTel: 020 7222 7085 Fax: 020 7222 7189

Editor: Professor Peter Simpson

Editorial Assistant: Mrs Annabel Lloyd

Editorial/Management Board:

Dr Brian Iddon MP (Chairman)

Mr Robert Freer

Dr Ashok Kumar MP

Professor Alan Malcolm

Mr Andrew Miller MP

Dr Douglas Naysmith MP

The Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior

The BA (British Association for theAdvancement of Science)

Friday 10 – Sunday 19 MarchNational Science WeekOver 1,000 events across the UK. Thisyear we will be launching “Click for theClimate”, encouraging people to pledgeto take action to combat climate changeduring the week.www.the-ba.net/nsw

Thursday 6 and Friday 7 AprilScottish Science CommunicationConferenceOur Dynamic Earth, Edinburgh.Focussing on issues in Science inSociety, Science Education and ScienceCommunication in a Scottish context.Organised with the support of theScottish Executive and ecsite-UK.www.the-ba.net/scienceinsociety

Science Communication Conferencewill this year run on 13 and 14 July (not in May).

SCI14/15 Belgrave SquareLondon SW1X 8PSContact: [email protected] or 020 7598 1562Unless otherwise stated events are at SCI

Thursday 2 MarchMicrowave Chemistry - Into theProcess Domain; Prospects andChallenges

Thursday 16 MarchBridge Decks

Tuesday 21 MarchBoosting R&D Productivity byStructured Networking

Wednesday 29 MarchYoung Chemist in Industry

Monday 27 – Wednesday 29 MarchPesticides in Soil and WaterUniversity of Warwick

Thursday 30 MarchSeparations of Value-added Productsin Food

Monday 3 AprilFrontiers of Research: Synthesis ofPolymers of Controlled Architectureand Structure

Tuesday 11 AprilColloid Science of Mixed Ingredients Rideal Lecture and supportingSymposium

Tuesday 25 AprilSynthesis from the Six Nations

Wednesday 27 AprilIntroduction to useful PhysicalOrganic Chemistry

Thursday 11 MaySecrets of FormulationPart I (Formulation Technology)

Sunday 14 – Wednesday 17 MaySCIpharm 2006Edinburgh International ConferenceCentre, Scotland

Monday 22 – Tuesday 23 MayProteinase

Royal PharmaceuticalSocietyContact: [email protected]

Monday 20 – Wednesday 22 March 2006Controlled releaseProduct development technologiesand the regulatory issuesEleventh Arden House EuropeanConferencePresented by the Royal PharmaceuticalSociety, in partnership with theAcademy of Pharmaceutical Sciences,and the American Association ofPharmaceutical ScientistsHarrington Hall, London

Wednesday 26 to Friday 28 April 2006Pharmacovigilance of herbalmedicines: current state and futuredirectionsInternational SymposiumRoyal College of Obstetricians andGynaecologists,Regent’s Park, London

Sunday 14 – Thursday 18 MayPharmacokinetic - PharmacodynamicData AnalysisAdvanced Level WorkshopRoyal Pharmaceutical Society of GreatBritain and the Swedish Academy ofPharmaceutical SciencesCambridge, UK

SCIENCE IN PARLIAMENT

Published by the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee, 3 Birdcage Walk, London SW1H 9JJ.Published four times a year. The 2006 subscription rate is £65.00. Single numbers £16.25ISSN 0263-6271All enquiries, including those from members wishing to take the front or back covers, advertise in the journal or appear in the directory to Mrs AnnabelLloyd, Tel 020 7222 7085Copyright ©2006 by Parliamentary and Scientific Committee. All rights reserved. None of the articles in this publication may be reproduced, stored in aretrieval system or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying recording or otherwise without the prior writtenpermission of the copyright owner.Typeset and printed by APR Print and Design Ltd


EMOTIONS OF LIVING DONATIONPhotographs and personal quotations from kidney donors and

recipients have been used to develop new materials for renal anddialysis units throughout the UK.

Holly is donating her kidney to her brother John.

“I really hope he can have a normal life again. I’d like John to have what I have in life.”

Tapati travelled from India to donate a kidney to her sister.

“I could see my sister’s suffering and she was crying so much.All I could think was how quickly can I give my kidney.”

Maggie donated a kidney to her 16 year old son Sam“The operation was the light at the end of the tunnel.”

Susan donated a kidney to her partner Richard.“We had to do it for the kids. We had no family life.”

Spring 2006 - Science in Parliament

Documents

Spring 2006 - Science in Parliament