The first evidence session took place at the House of Commons on 18 April, where the committee heard from representatives from British Universities and life sciences charities and companies, including Dr Ted Bianco, Director of Technology Transfer at the Wellcome Trust, and Dr Ian Tomlinson, Senior Vice President at GlaxoSmithKline. The proceedings, which can be viewed online on the Houses of Parliament website were also captured in a stream of tweets by the Purse String Theory blog using the #valleyofdeath hashtag.

Discussion during the first session focused on the ability of funding bodies to ‘pick winners’, with Dr Paul Nightingale from the University of Sussex describing this ability as ‘non-existent’, although Manchester University’s Professor Luke Georghiou defended the decision of the government to invest £50m in graphene technology.

At the second session, on 25 April, also available to view on the Houses of Parliament website, the panel heard from representatives from investment companies and small science and technology firms including Cambio, Cobalt Light Systems, and Byotrol Technology.

In this session, also storified on Purse String Theory, Anne Glover from Amadeus Capital Management argued that the new US Jobs Act would ‘revolutionise the venture capital sector’ in the United States, leaving Britain behind once again. Dr Trevor Francis of Byotrol technology lamented the lack of resources supporting Universities and companies in negotiating the patent landscape, and claimed that it would take a small company around 17 years to see their innovation adopted by the NHS.

On the same day, Lord Browne, President of the Royal Academy of Engineering, focused on the commercialisation gap in the UK, saying:

All too often we lag behind our competitors in translating the fruits of our scientific research into commercial success.

Browne argues that the balance of funding needs to be shifted further towards commercialisation, such as through the Technology Strategy Board, which received only £300m this year, in comparison to £4.6m for scientific research in general. He also argued that the country needed to train more engineers and to foster a culture ‘more tolerant of failure’ in order to support growth through innovation.

In a discussion in which she argues that solutions to the social and human problems of crime and terrorism lie ‘more fearless, more open communication’ she explains:

We are familiar with the chilling effect that libel laws have on debate. This could have a chilling effect on communication and web use.

What about the isolated gay teenager who wants to post for support on an internet discussion board, but knows that the communication is being logged for government purposes? Someone seeking advice when they feel a complaint has been mishandled by the police, but knows a profile of their interactions is being built up?

Might databases be used for fishing purposes: searching for patterns that identify classes of people, even when they’re not individually suspected of crimes? The phrases ‘false positive’ and ‘guilt by association’ rather spring to mind. Muslim friends tell me that they already worry about phone logging for these reasons.

Listen to the episode in the player below.

The Pod Delusion is an award-winning weekly news magazine radio programme and podcast about interesting things. From politics, to science to culture and philosophy, it’s commentary from a secular, rationalist, skeptical, somewhat lefty-liberal, sort of perspective.

Conference papers with the text of the amendment and the rest of the full Civil Liberties motion are available from the Lib Dems Conference site. (The CCDP amendment is listed in the Saturday Conference Daily).

Aldes committee member Dr Jenny Woods worked earlier this year to draft an amendment to the Civil Liberties Motion at the Liberal Democrat Spring Conference. The motion, which recognised the threats to individual privacy inherent in the proposed measures and proposed safeguards against them, was supported by engineer Zoe O’Connell and was passed unanimously by conference in Gateshead four weeks ago.

On April 1, the issue was picked up by major news outlets after sources indicated that a Bill containing measures from the CCDP would be included in the Queen’s speech.

Members of the Government have spoken out to defend the surveillance proposals, with Conservative Minister for Security James Brokenshire stating:

‘It’s about solving crime and ensuring the police are able to the job that they do’

Nick Clegg also spoke out on the issue, stressing that he was “totally opposed to the idea of Government reading people’s emails at will” but denying that the as-yet unseen proposals would contradict the safeguards which were written into Lib Dem party policy last month.

Reassurances from Ministers, however, do not seem to convince the growing opposition to the expansion of state powers to monitor communications data. Although relatively little is known about the exact plans, there are already online petitions at the Cambridge Lib Dems, Open Rights Group, 38 Degrees, and the Government’s E-Petitions service and individuals are expressing their opinions on Twitter via the #telldaveeverything hashtag.

Strong opposition to the plans has been voiced by Lib Dem MPs Julian Huppert and John Hemming as well as by Lib Dem bloggers Zoe O’Connell, Alex Wilcock, Millenium Elephant, Jennie Rigg, Mark Valladeres and Jonathan Calder, with slightly more cautious commentary from Lib Dem Voice editors Mark Pack and Stephen Tall.

The Guardian quotes an anonymous ‘senior Lib Dem MP’ in saying:

‘These proposals are entirely contrary to the core beliefs of the Liberal Democrats and the position we adopted in opposition. This could put considerable stress on the coalition not least because Lib Dem activists would almost certainly expect the party in parliament to resist.’

From the Conservative party, David Davis, MP for Haltemprice and Howden expressed his opposition to the measures saying:

‘Historically governments have been kept out of our private lives. Our freedom and privacy has been protected by using the courts by saying, “If you want to intercept, if you want to look at something, fine, if it is a terrorist or a criminal go and ask a magistrate and you’ll get your approval”. You shouldn’t go beyond that in a decent, civilised society.’

Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who last year argued in the Commons that increased use of the internet and phones by terrorists meant that the state required ‘greater surveillance and resources to fill the gap’ gave a more guarded response, claiming that:

‘The police and security services need to be able to keep up with new technology to deal with serious issues including disrupting terrorist planning, catching paedophile rings or cracking down on organised crime, as they currently use existing technology to do.’

She also affirmed, however, the need for ‘strong safeguards to protect people’s privacy’.

Useful further reading on the CCDP is available at:

• The LSE’s briefing on Labour’s 2008 plans to increase state surveillance under the IMP
• The Open Rights Group’s Wiki on the CCDP
• An FAQ on the CCDP from Privacy International

The Chancellor’s budget speech was used to launch a new £100m fund to invest in ‘major new university research facilities’ which, it is hoped, will attract further funding for university research from external sources. In addition, the Wellcome Trust  announced it was to invest £200m in a new business to support healthcare and life sciences companies. Thirdly, GlaxoSmithKline last week selected Ulverston in Cumbria as the site of a major new manufacturing facility, which would see £500m of investment split between it and GSK’s existing manufacturing facilities in Montrose and Irvine in Scotland.

GSK’s decision was influenced, at least in part, by a new ‘patent box’ scheme announced in the budget, in which companies would be able to pay a lower rate of corporation tax on profits derived from British-owned intellectual property.

Michael Moore, Scottish Secretary and Lib Dem MP for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk said:

‘The £100m investment in Irvine and Montrose is fantastic news for these communities and our life science sector. The tax measures announced by the Government are attracting investment and creating jobs. The new patent box and further reductions in corporation tax make Scotland and Britain a great place for companies like GSK to invest. Ayrshire and Angus have a proud track record in making life enhancing medicines and vaccines. This is a massive vote of confidence in their highly skilled staff. It is also a confirmation that the Government are creating the right tax environment for companies to do business.’

The new Wellcome Trust investment business, provisionally titled Project Sigma, is intended to provide the support for small and medium-sized medical and life science companies needed for them to grow into sustainable businesses. Sir Mark Walport, the Trust’s Director said:

‘This important investment opportunity will help the Trust to fulfil its vision of achieving extraordinary improvements in health, by generating returns that can be used to fund the work of outstanding researchers in the biomedical sciences and the medical humanities.’

Chancellor Osborne’s announcement of new funding for new research was cautiously welcomed by Imran Khan, the Director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering. He said:

‘Today’s announcement is the latest in a string of pledges of extra cash for science and engineering, and shows that the Government does understand that we cannot have a rebalanced economy without investment in research.

‘However, simply reversing cuts isn’t going to be a game-changer for the UK. We need to be far more ambitious if we’re serious about having a high-tech future. The Chancellor should re-invest the windfall from the auction of 4G mobile spectrum, due later this year, into science and engineering’

Dr Jenny Woods, moving the internet freedoms amendment

The Liberal Democrat conference voted unanimously in favour of a motion to uphold and extend British civil liberties in Gateshead last weekend. Delegates also unanimously backed an amendment, moved by Aldes committee member Dr Jenny Woods, aimed specifically at proposals in the Communications Capabilities Development Programme (CCDP), asking the government to guarantee that any state interception of personal communications could only occur with specific and time-limited warrants.

In 2008, the Times revealed plans (paywall) by the Labour government to increase state surveillance of electronic communications, via a series of measures under the Intercept Modernisation Programme (IMP). This would have mandated content service providers to give up their records to a centralised database. In the event, the programme was never realised in the face of public and political opposition over the costs, feasibility and concerns over individual privacy.

In 2010, Lib Dem MP for Cambridge Dr Julian Huppert challenged the Prime Minister over accusations that the Home Office was investigating implementing certain features of the IMP as part of the CCDP. Although Cameron stressed that there were no plans to hold data in a central database, he did not deny that the Home Office was looking to ask companies to keep more extensive records of their customers’ activities.

This Spring, conference clearly stated their opposition to expansion of state interception of personal communications, backing the right to privacy by:

a) ensuring that there shall be no interception of telephone calls, SMS messages, social media, internet or any other communications without named, specific and time-limited warrants;

b) guaranteeing that any communications data kept by service providers in accordance with the EU Data Retention Directive are kept securely by the service providers, and that they be only released to government bodies with strict and strengthened safeguards;

c) ensuring that service providers are not mandated by law to collect communications data by any method that would also provide access to content information, unless specifically authorised by a warrant;

d) ensuring that service providers are not mandated by law to collect third-party communications data for non-business purposes by any method;

e) renegotiating the EU Data Retention Directive and changing how it is implemented into UK law, to provide a better balance towards privacy.

Moving the amendment, Jenny Woods said:

In years to come we’ll often have debates like this: technology now gives us the power to do something, should we therefore do it? In this case the answer is, very definitely, “no”. We don’t give police blanket permission to enter every home in the land without a warrant, just on the off-chance a crime is being committed inside, so why should we monitor the communications of every citizen, just in case they do something wrong?

The proposal is illiberal, unworkable and eye-wateringly expensive – the London School of Economics estimated it would cost £12bn.

If you truly want to prevent crime and terrorism, invest that in community cohesion and education; invest it in rehabilitation; but don’t waste it on a white-elephant, black-box surveillance system intruding into the privacy of every innocent person in the country.

Conference, let’s shove this unwanted beast back in its box. Vote to continue upholding our founding role as the party that protects freedoms within a free society, vote for this amendment and vote for the policy motion.

Aldes will also be taking a stand to the Open Rights Group’s conference on 24 March 2012 to support their campaign against the CCDP.

Additional participants took part both in person and via Google+’s hangouts service and included Julian Assange, Ian Blair, Russell Brand and Peter Hitchens.

The debate was the first of Google+’s new debate series, entitled Versus. The audience, both present at the event and via the web, were vastly in favour of ending the war on drugs, with 92% in favour before the debate and 95% in favour afterwards.

At the Autumn Conference in Birmingham in 2011, the Liberal Democrat Party voted overwhelmingly to set party policy to begin investigating the decriminalisation of drugs in the UK, passing a motion moved by Ewan Hoyle.

The entire Versus debate can be watched on YouTube, below:

He began the lecture on a personal note, revealing how modern medical science had saved his life recently after a routine checkup had flagged up a serious heart problem for which he needed bypass surgery. He also recalled his childhood fascination for astronomy, speaking about how he watched Sputnik 2 travelling across the London night sky.

He highlighted four key challenges in which science played an essential role: food security, climate change, global health and making economies sustainable. On each of these issues, he stressed the importance of transparent and open dialogue between scientists, policy makers and the public and warned against ideological positions taking precedence over scientific debate. With regard to health, for example, he recalled:

When I worked in the United States I received regular hate mail from those who objected to stem cell research based on their religious beliefs. There are also those who challenge good science with minority opinions based on weak science, as was the case with campaigners who objected to the triple MMR vaccine. As a consequence reduction in vaccination led to children’s lives being put in danger.

His central point, however, was the importance of involving a strong scientific culture in politics and entrepreneurship, recalling the Enlightenment-era Lunar Society. He noted that British culture was in general supportive of the scientific process, stating:

Many features important for good science are well embedded in the UK. We have a tradition of respect for empiricism, emphasising reliable observation and experiment. Most importantly, science in the UK is carried out in a culture of openness and freedom. This should never be underestimated. The scientific endeavour is at its most successful when there is freedom of thought. Scientists need to be able to freely express doubts, to be sceptical about established orthodoxy, and must not be too strongly directed from the top, which stifles creativity.

He concluded by highlighting the relatively small investment that Britain makes in scientific research: only 1.8% of GDP in comparison to the USA’s 2.9% and South Korea’s 3.7%, and also that Britain’s patent output was rapidly falling in international league tables. Instead, he advocated reinvesting in science at all levels in order to put the British economy on a more sustainable footing, saying:

Science is, and always has been, one of Britain’s greatest assets. I am optimistic that the time has come for a new deal between science and society to achieve all of these things. If we are to hold our own on the world stage, then it is time to make sure we don’t take it for granted, but encourage, cherish and promote our science.

The lecture can be watched on iPlayer until 6 March 2012 and the transcript can be downloaded from the website of the Royal Society.

Sir Martin Sweeting

Professor Sir Martin Sweeting pioneered the concept of rapid-response, low-cost and highly-capable satellites utilising modern commercial off-the-shelf devices to ‘change the economics of space’. In 1985 he formed a spin-off University company called SSTL – Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd – which has now designed, built, launched and operates in orbit a total of 36 nano, micro and mini-satellites including the first Galileo satellite for ESA, the European ‘GPS’.

SSTL employs 450 commercial staff, has annual revenues of £100M and total export sales in excess of £600M. SSTL will launch 5 new satellites this year and is currently manufacturing 14 navigation payloads for the Galileo constellation. Sir Martin is also director of the Surrey Space Centre, leading a team of 90 researchers investigating new satellite concepts and techniques, acting as the research lab for SSTL.

Sir Martin has been appointed OBE and knighted by HM The Queen, elected a Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering and a Fellow of the Royal Society. In 2010, Sir Martin was awarded the Faraday Medal by the Institute of Engineering and Technology, and an Elektra Lifetime Achievement Award by the European Electronics Industry. He is a member of the UK Space Leadership Council.

Richard Peckham, Business Development Director, Astrium Ltd

Richard Peckham

Richard joined Astrium, Europe’s largest space company, in 2000 having worked in the defence and aerospace sector for the last 30 years, specialising in radar, meteorology, air traffic management and navigation, across a broad range of roles in design engineering, system engineering, project management, departmental management and business unit management. Richard managed the Astrium navigation strategy and business development activities across Europe until appointment to his current post in 2007.

Richard holds a BSc degree in Electrical and Electronic Engineering and a Masters in Business Management, both from the University of Portsmouth, is a chartered engineer and member of the Institute of Engineering and Technology, and fellow of the Royal Institute of Navigation.

In his current post, Richard leads UK business acquisition, manages the company relationship with government and Parliament, leads on UK national strategy and acts as the deputy to the CEO on UK national issues. This has included working closely with BIS and other government departments to increase government and parliamentary awareness of the UK space industry – including its world-leading technology and contribution to the economy and society at large.

Richard was until recently chairman of UKspace, the trade association for the UK space industry and also Vice President – Space for A|D|S, the trade association for the UK aerospace, defence and security industries. He continues supporting UKSpace as Head of the Space Innovation and Growth Strategy (IGS) Delivery to ensure the IGS meets its expectations. Richard is also a non-executive director of ISIC (the International Space Innovation Centre) and Trustee and board member of INTECH.

20:15 after the conference rally in room MEC 19

This spring, our conference is titled ‘The UK Space Industry: An Unsung Success Story’ and it promises to be an extremely interesting and uplifting debate about one of the UK’s industrial triumphs; the high-tech satellite manufacturing industry. The UK space industry has bucked the national trend and has seen impressive growth during the recession. Areas such as satellite broadcast, communications, equipment and support services have grown by 5-10% year-on-year and are likely to continue to do so.

Our fringe event will explore a number of key questions.

1. What is it that has allowed the space industry to grow so successfully during the recession?
2. Are there any lessons that other British industries can learn from the space industry in order to repeat this success?
3. What is it that the UK space industry needs from the government to continue this trend?

The panel that we have lined up to answer these questions is second-to-none. The chair of the event is Simon Wright MP, our Liberal Democrat member of the Parliamentary Space Committee. Simon is the vice chair covering environmental matters and has worked extremely closely with the space industry over the last couple of years. Simon will talk about his work on the committee before introducing our two guest speakers: Professor Sir Martin Sweeting, the executive chairman of Surrey Satellite Technology and director of the Surrey Space Centre, and Richard Peckham, business development director at Astrium, Europe’s largest space company and one of the prime contractors for the European Space Agency.

The final member of our panel is Vince Cable MP, Secretary of State in the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Vince’s department is responsible for the UK Space Agency, a relatively new public body set up in the last days of the previous government, with the aim to ‘ensure that the UK retains and grows a strategic capability in space-based systems, technologies, science and applications’. Vince will provide the government perspective of the UK Space industry.

UK-Built Spacecraft. Left to right, NigeriaSat-2, Techdemo Sat-1, ADS-1B and NovaSAR

 Our fringe event has been sponsored very kindly by UKSpace, the UK space industry’s trade association, allowing us to provide attendees with a buffet and drinks. Places at the event are very limited, so make sure that you arrive early enough to get a seat!

We look forward to seeing you there!