A lack of science?

The recent survey by @ingeniousbrit showed a mixed response from small businesses on independence. There was a small majority (48%) who thought a Yes vote would harm their business but a significant minority (37%) thought it would be a positive step.  They surveyed 1000 businesses but there was little detail about their size or nature. Despite this lack of scientific method, the survey was picked up by the BBC and other media.

 

The Economy committee’s Inquiry into Scotland’s Economic Future Post-2014 restarts this week by taking evidence from business representative bodies.  However, judging by their written submissions, the scientific and technology companies will not be uppermost in the evidence session. Of the three written submissions only the CBI even mention science or spin-outs and then only in the context of university research funding.  It seems in responding to the inquiry these organisations have failed to look at the future for the economy in Scotland and particularly the new growth areas in technology and science.

In the second panel is the Reid Foundation whose paper at least looks to develop a vision for a future economy. It states

“Given Scotland's levels of education, history of innovation, natural resources and geostrategic position we should be a high-skill, high-pay, high-productivity, high-investment, high-innovation economy.”

They go on to list areas including innovation where Scotland can develop this vision. Interestingly, one thing they suggest is that education and training should be more about engineering, maths, computing and design.  But not science, then go on to champion scientific research and development in another point:

“We should seek 'smart specialisation' wherever we can developing specialisations where Scotland's high-skill workforce and research and development make us competitive in export markets.”

Their evidence may be contradictory in places but at least it addresses the actual issue of the type of economy Scotland should develop rather than the esoteric and unanswerable questions that have so far dominated the debate.

Last week it was the turn of the Education Committee to start taking evidence on the future of Scotland with representatives from Universities.   They did address the issue of research and innovation but again failed to develop a future view, simply hoping the status quo would prevail after the referendum.

At the Scottish Labour party conference in Perth, the mood was upbeat with claims of the biggest conference turnout.  However, there was little for @Posvespin to tweet although research and innovation got a passing mention in the leader’s speech. Next it is the turn of the SNP with a rally for the referendum in Aberdeen from 11 April.

Dr Tony Axon is Director of Positive Spin and can get your views on Science and technology and other policies to the decision makers and politicians.

Take a tax break?

The budget offered some assistance to science community with increased funding with research centres to develop the R&D base.  Of more immediate benefit for innovative companies is the increased tax break for R&D, broadly defined. This announcement was aimed at SMEs who do not make a profit in an attempt to increase R&D to drive new manufacturing. 

 

There are also other R&D tax breaks available for large companies.  These incentives were introduced by the labour government and have been in place in one form or another for a decade.  But it seems that the Chancellor doesn’t believe they work as he couched his announcements with scepticism:

“If Britain isn’t leading the world in science and technology and engineering, then we are condemning our country to fall behind. So we will establish new centres for doctoral training, for Cell Therapy and for Graphene – a great British discovery that we should break the habit of a lifetime with and commercially develop in Britain.”

There may be examples of failures to capitalise on research developments but there are also success and ironically the last Conservative government, run by a scientist, did as much to decimate the science base as traditional manufacturing by encouraging short-term investment. Jobs for Laser researchers were as scares as mines in my home town by the Nineties. 

However, the new policy is to encourage investment in research but are the tax breaks working?  In Scotland the BERD spend has stubbornly stayed at 0.6% of GDP over the last decade and is dwarfed by the public funding of R&D.

So the world class research undertaken in Scotland does not seem to translate to products or the development of a business and enterprise research base.  However such stimuli take time to reap rewards and the large companies, particularly in pharmaceuticals, will dominate the BERD figures. Indeed, the National statistics on innovation showed Scotland as having more robust spin-outs. So are the tax breaks encouraging research in companies? 

This question is crucial as the Finance Secretary John Swinney will be considering the policy in the future.  In setting out plans on a yes vote, he said:

“Careful and targeted use of tax credits and allowances in an independent Scotland could make a difference and break down the barriers which limit private investment in R&D and harness more effectively the research in our universities.”

With a promise of more devolved powers even in the event of a no vote, he could be considering the best ways to promote research in industry and this may impact on tech companies and spin-outs.

Dr Tony Axon is Director of Positive Spin and can get your views on this and other policies to the decision makers and politicians.