Book Description

In its report examining the work and performance of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS), set up 18 months ago, the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee finds that the department has not yet found its feet and it is too early to say if it will achieve the Prime Minister's ambitious targets. The DIUS annual report is 'impenetrable' and 'peppered with jargon', and the Committee fears that the jargon may be a substitute for having a clear idea about where DIUS is going and how it will achieve the Prime Minister's goals to make Britain one of the best places in the world for science, research and innovation. Examples of innovation in DIUS's own operations were disappointing, and the Committee also has doubts about the way DIUS presents figures and calls for the statistics in future annual reports to be reviewed independently. The Committee also expresses concern about the approach of the Government's new Chief Scientific Adviser to his role as a champion of evidence-based science, and draws attention to Professor Beddington's evidence on homeopathy in which he did not take the opportunity to restate the importance of scientific process and to emphasise the need for balance of scientific evidence. The customary, strong public voice from the Government Chief Scientific Adviser advocating policy based on evidence-based science must not become muted. The Committee also recommends that DIUS: develops a consistent method for ensuring policy is soundly based on evidence; faces up to and addresses the criticisms it received in the Capability Review; shows clearly how £1.5 billion in efficiency savings it has promised will be generated.