Volume 2

Defence Research Agency / Select Committee on Science and Technology.

  • Great Britain. Parliament. House of Lords. Science and Technology Committee.
Date:
1994
Catalogue details

Licence: Open Government Licence

Credit: Defence Research Agency / Select Committee on Science and Technology. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    20/344 (page 8)
    [Chairman contd.] (Mr Bell) 1 have two main functions. I advise Ministers on matters relating to the ownership function of the Defence Research Agency and I act as coordinator of business affecting the DRA across the board in the Ministry of Defence. 4. Are you, therefore, precisely reflecting the recommendations of Sir Angus Fraser in the document of 1991, ‘“‘Making the most of Next Steps”, where I think this was a recommendation? (Mr Bell) I do regard myself as a Fraser figure in those terms, yes. 5. Do you conform to the pattern which is set out in that document? (Mr Bell) | think so. There is no precise rule. The role of the Fraser figure does depend a lot on circumstances and on the relationship with the agency concerned. I think my role is perfectly consistent with Fraser, yes. 6. That is very helpful. Perhaps we could start by way of introduction, and this is a question which I think you have seen listed, by your telling us something about how you perceive the DRA’s transition. Do you think that the service being rendered now to the Ministry of Defence has changed in any respect, either in terms of quality, performance or the like? Are you satisfied that the new remit and the new mode of operation is working to your satisfaction? (Mr Bell) Could I turn that question to the principal customers, starting perhaps with Dr Pope? (Dr Pope) Our experience is very much that the relationship now developing with the DRA, where we have trading with them, where money actually changes hands, is in fact having a very beneficial effect on the kind of service they are providing to us and it is also providing them with a strong incentive to make their operations more efficient. As you will be aware from the paper work that you have seen, a number of initiatives have been taken by them in that regard. This is particularly important clearly at a time when public funding is very short. In a sense, it may seem strange that as a customer for strategic research—the long term speculative work—I am actually talking in terms of a sharp customer- contractor relationship. What I would say is that with speculative work you need to get your research workers to identify the bright idea that they have. Speculative work necessarily starts from the scientist seeing something of potential value to defence, rather than us defining exactly what is required. Even then, when they have defined what they think they should be looking at and how to go about it, one does want a proper customer-contractor kind of structure, so that one can see which of these ideas is really going to lead on to something which will be carried through into defence exploitation and which will wither on the vine. If one is talking about the long term speculative element of the work, there will necessarily be some of the latter. So far as the success of the arrangement generally is concerned, I would like to say that in the early days there was one source of concern which was expressed to me by industry and which I am sure you may well pick up in other evidence, that in going to a more competitive environment, there was at first some worry on the [Continued part of industry about their relationship with the Defence Research Agency. This is not just an issue related obviously to technology transfer, but also to the kind of joint programmes which had been so beneficial in many defence fields—going back into my own experience, for instance, bringing together lots of different pieces of technology into a total system which is the kind of thing which at the technology demonstration phase has always been very much a partnership between research establishments and industry. I believe myself that there is nothing intrinsic in the new arrangement which prejudices that kind of work in any way but there was a trough when the DRA was first started because of worries about the competitive issue. In fact, I think that competition has now been defined in a manner which does satisfy industry. I believe myself that although we have not fully recovered the ground, we will do so in due course. The issue is not something intrinsic; it was just a transitory phase. (Sir Roger Austin) With the applied programme, which is the newer term programme, it is the MoD customers who decide what that programme is to be and they pay for it. I think the research is now more accurately targeted into projects that we have in the nearer years through more detailed specification and the performance of the DRA is more closely monitored. That has brought about a fairly considerable culture change in the DRA, resulting in a very much more responsive organisation. As far as we can tell, the quality of the research is at least as good as it was before. It certainly has not deteriorated. My subjective judgment is that it is probably a little better; certainly value for money is better. The only area of minor dissatisfaction we have is a concern about the interface between us and the DRA. The administrative and __ financial arrangements need a little refining. That work is in hand and not a long term worry at all. 7. May I pursue that latter point? You rightly point out it is for the Ministry of Defence to determine what it requires of its contractor. Is there in any sense a role for the DRA itself to make a contribution to helping the MoD to determine what its priorities might be? Is there technology push as well as customer demand? (Sir Roger Austin) Yes, there is, because when creating the programme we clearly discuss it with the DRA beforehand as to what the general aim is and the best way of going about it. The programme we task them with is the result of some negotiation and discussion between us. There is ample room for DRA to put their views. 8. Does this happen? (Sir Roger Austin) Yes, it does. Baroness Hilton of Eggardon 9. Clearly things have changed enormously in the world at large in the last three years in strategic terms. What you have been talking about really is projects at the ground level, practical projects. You are suggesting, I think, Dr Pope, that the scientists often have bright ideas of their own and you let them pursue them. There was some suggestion that you were letting the customers, presumably the various