Sir Paul Nurse: The Wonder of Science

:00:46. > :00:50.Thank you very much. Welcome to a unique event on BBC One. A

:00:50. > :00:55.provocative argument put by a forceful speaker, with no

:00:55. > :00:59.interviewer to interrupt, and an audience that, for once, listens

:00:59. > :01:02.but doesn't speak. Tonight's lecture is given by a Nobel Prize

:01:02. > :01:08.winner, a scientist at the top of his tree, the President of the

:01:08. > :01:14.Royal Society, the world's oldest scientific academy, Sir Paul Nurse.

:01:14. > :01:17.Now, Sir Paul's mission is to get all of us - politicians, teachers,

:01:18. > :01:26.business people, the media - to accept the vital importance of

:01:26. > :01:32.science in our lives and to do much, much more to promote it. Paul Nurse

:01:33. > :01:37.is no science geek and his career ought to encourage all slow-

:01:37. > :01:42.starters. He wasn't good at exams. He struggled to get a place at

:01:42. > :01:48.university. Oh, and he's also a pilot, a mountain walker and he

:01:48. > :01:52.rides a motorbike, a flashy one, bought with the money from his

:01:52. > :01:57.Nobel Prize. LAUGHTER His next big project is the Francis Crick

:01:57. > :02:01.Institute which will open in 2015. It is planned to be one of the

:02:01. > :02:06.biggest biomedical laboratories in the world, with 1,500 scientists at

:02:06. > :02:13.work here in London. As its director, he intends to make it, in

:02:13. > :02:17.his own words, a hot house of scientific ideas. His Nobel Prize

:02:17. > :02:21.for Medicine was awarded for work on the division of cells which has

:02:21. > :02:26.many implications, including for the treatment of cancer, the

:02:26. > :02:35.illness that killed my father when he was only 52. And his death led

:02:35. > :02:41.to the creation of the charity Dimbleby Cancer Care. Richard

:02:41. > :02:45.Dimbleby was the BBC's first news reporter, the first war

:02:45. > :02:51.correspondent and a trailblazer in the development of television in

:02:51. > :02:56.the '50s and the '60s. 40 years ago this annual lecture was set up by

:02:57. > :03:02.the BBC to commemorate him. It's established a formidable reputation

:03:02. > :03:12.and I have no doubt that tonight's lecture will further enhance it.

:03:12. > :03:31.

:03:31. > :03:36.Ladies and gentlemen, would you Thank you, David. The Dimbleby

:03:36. > :03:42.family, ladies and gentlemen, this evening I am going to talk about my

:03:42. > :03:47.passion for science. I have very personal reasons for doing so.

:03:47. > :03:52.Recently, science saved my life. Let me explain. Just before

:03:52. > :03:57.Christmas, I was planning a trip to the Antarctic Research station at

:03:57. > :04:00.Scott Base. I was to be there at the 100th anniversary of Captain

:04:00. > :04:05.Scott's expedition to the South Pole. I have wanted to visit the

:04:05. > :04:11.Antarctic for years and before going, I went for a routine medical

:04:11. > :04:16.check-up. But the medical turned out to be far from routine. I was

:04:16. > :04:21.diagnosed with a serious heart disease, and in January I had a

:04:21. > :04:25.quadruple heart bypass. The South Pole had to wait, but thanks to the

:04:25. > :04:29.skill of my NHS doctors, I am delighted to say some of them are

:04:29. > :04:35.in the audience tonight, and to the science which underpinned my

:04:35. > :04:38.treatment, I am still alive and I am able to be here tonight. I'm

:04:38. > :04:42.also passionate about science because I have been a researcher

:04:42. > :04:48.for over 40 years and want to share with you the wonder of science,

:04:48. > :04:52.what it is like to be a scientist, how it enhances our culture, our

:04:52. > :04:56.civilisation. Science can improve our health and quality of life,

:04:56. > :04:59.help solve the world's biggest problems, and support

:04:59. > :05:04.sustainability. It influences nearly everything we do, from

:05:04. > :05:11.heating our homes, turning on the radio, using our phone, browsing

:05:11. > :05:16.the internet, the food we eat, the pill we take for our headache. And

:05:16. > :05:22.science is absolutely essential to drive our economy. Science matters

:05:23. > :05:27.to us all. Science not only enriches our minds, it can also

:05:27. > :05:32.provide a trusted guide to tackle global problems that face us right

:05:32. > :05:40.now, such as feeding the world, ensuring we have sufficient energy,

:05:40. > :05:43.keeping an yoo ageing population healthy. -- an ageing population

:05:43. > :05:46.healthy. I also believe that science can play an even greater

:05:46. > :05:51.role in improving our economy, in protecting our jobs and incomes. I

:05:51. > :05:53.want to remind you of a time when science helped make Britain an

:05:53. > :05:58.economic powerhouse during the Enlightenment and Industrial

:05:58. > :06:06.Revolution, and to explore how we can make science work to better

:06:06. > :06:10.drive our economy today. But first, my own passion for science. It

:06:10. > :06:15.began when I was a nine-year-old boy. It was 1958, the beginning of

:06:15. > :06:21.the space-age. I was looking up at the London night sky and saw

:06:21. > :06:25.amongst the stars one that was rapidly moving and was very bright.

:06:25. > :06:30.This was Sputnik 2, the second man- made satellite to orbit the Earth,

:06:31. > :06:37.and inside was a dog called Laika. I must admit I felt sorry for Laika

:06:37. > :06:41.because I had a dog of my own. Watching this artificial star

:06:41. > :06:45.moving in the night sky made me think about the other stars, so I

:06:45. > :06:49.went to my local public library and discovered that stars were suns,

:06:49. > :06:54.that there were galaxies up there, too, and some of the stars were

:06:54. > :06:59.planets. I pes pered my parents for a small telescope and I found I

:06:59. > :07:04.could see the crescent of Venus, the moons of Jupiter, the rings of

:07:04. > :07:08.Saturn, the craters of the moon. Go out early tomorrow evening and you

:07:08. > :07:13.will see Venus and Jupiter to the west, and Saturn to the south. Use

:07:13. > :07:19.a telescope if you can. Seeing such marvels for yourself is much more

:07:19. > :07:24.immediate and personal than looking at images on the television. The

:07:24. > :07:29.natural world is fascinating, and is even more so if you are prepared

:07:30. > :07:34.to observe, to experiment, to think, and to try and understand. That is

:07:34. > :07:40.what scientists do, and there is a little bit of the scientist in all

:07:40. > :07:45.of us, especially when we are children. I am passionate about

:07:45. > :07:48.doing science and completely agree with Sir Humphry Davy, the 19th

:07:49. > :07:52.Century chemist and inventor of the miners' safety lamp when he said,

:07:52. > :07:57."To me, there has never been a higher source of honour or

:07:57. > :08:04.distinction than that connected with the advances in science." That

:08:04. > :08:08.is why I still run a lab - it's what keeps me sane. I'm not sure my

:08:08. > :08:13.lab colleagues, some of whom are here tonight, would agree on the

:08:13. > :08:19.last point. So what is special about science that means we should

:08:19. > :08:24.trust it? What makes it so good at generating reliable knowledge about

:08:24. > :08:28.the natural world? Scientists work in a variety of ways that are not

:08:28. > :08:32.unique to science. For example, they need a historian's eye for

:08:32. > :08:37.detail, the mathematician's feel for logic, the philosopher's desire

:08:37. > :08:41.to keep asking questions - and some would say the patience of a saint.

:08:41. > :08:47.When the various ways scientists work are combined together, they

:08:47. > :08:52.produce a process that is a very powerful way of creating knowledge.

:08:52. > :08:57.The bedrock from which all science flows is reproducible observation

:08:57. > :09:03.and experiment. This means that ultimately what is observed - the

:09:03. > :09:07.data - trumps all, even the most beautiful idea. Scientists need to

:09:07. > :09:11.take account of all observations and experiments and not just

:09:11. > :09:15.cherry-pick data that happen to support their own ideas and

:09:15. > :09:21.theories. Scientific issues are settled by the overall strength of

:09:21. > :09:25.evidence. Often a particular idea drives what observations a

:09:25. > :09:30.scientist makes, but sometimes scientists make observations

:09:30. > :09:34.without a precise idea or hypothesis in mind. More

:09:34. > :09:38.whimsically, I call this "following where nature leads you". An example

:09:38. > :09:42.of this from my own research, back in the 1970s, was when I was

:09:42. > :09:47.investigating what controls the division of cells, a problem of

:09:47. > :09:51.great importance for the growth and reproduction of all life, and for

:09:51. > :09:56.understanding cancer. I was searching for genes needed for cell

:09:56. > :10:01.division, by looking for yeast mutants which could not divide.

:10:01. > :10:05.Such mutant cells get bigger and bigger and can be spotted under the

:10:05. > :10:09.microscope. I have been searching for these large-sized cells for

:10:09. > :10:14.months when I spotted something quite different, a clump of cells

:10:14. > :10:17.doing the opposite, dividing at a small size. I was not looking for

:10:17. > :10:21.such cells, it was just that nature presented them to me. But as soon

:10:21. > :10:28.as I saw them, I realised they meant something important. I

:10:28. > :10:33.dragged everyone in the lab, and a few passers-by as well to take a

:10:33. > :10:38.look. I was very excited and I am sure some people thought I had gone

:10:38. > :10:42.a little mad. This clump of cells had a mutated gene which made the

:10:42. > :10:50.cells divide faster than normal, so they did not have enough time to

:10:50. > :10:55.grow to their proper size. discovered these smalls in

:10:55. > :10:59.Edinburgh, so I called the new gene the "wee" gene. It works like the

:10:59. > :11:05.accelerator in a car. An accelerator determines how fast a

:11:05. > :11:09.car goes and a "wee" gene determine how fast a cell divides. Eventually,

:11:09. > :11:14.this led to the discovery that "wee" genes also control cell

:11:14. > :11:20.division in all of us, establishing that there is a universal mechanism

:11:20. > :11:25.controlling cell division in nearly all life. It formed the basis for

:11:25. > :11:31.my Nobel Prize and emphasises the role serendipity can play in

:11:31. > :11:36.scientific discovery. But observations alone are not enough.

:11:36. > :11:41.It is the ability to prove that something is not true which is at

:11:41. > :11:45.the centre of science. This distinguishes it from beliefs based

:11:46. > :11:50.on religion and ideology which place much more emphasis on faith,

:11:50. > :11:55.tradition, and opinion. As a scientist, I have come up with

:11:55. > :11:58.ideas that can be tested. Then I think of experiments to test the

:11:58. > :12:04.idea further. If the result of the experiment does not support the

:12:04. > :12:10.idea, then I reject it, or modify it, and test it again. A great

:12:10. > :12:13.recent example of the importance of testing is the experiment at CERN

:12:13. > :12:16.which suggested that sub-atomic particles - neutrinos - were

:12:17. > :12:21.travelling faster than the speed of light. If this turned out to be

:12:21. > :12:25.true, then Einstein's theory of special relatively would need to be

:12:25. > :12:29.revised. As you can imagine, the scientific community was amazed and

:12:29. > :12:34.sceptical but they did not shout the CERN scientists down. Instead,

:12:35. > :12:39.they encouraged them to do more experiments to further test their

:12:39. > :12:43.hypothesis. I have been relying on my physicist daughter, Emily, who

:12:43. > :12:48.works at CERN and University College London, to keep me updated.

:12:48. > :12:53.The latest is, there might be either a loose connector or a

:12:53. > :12:59.faulty clock, so Einstein can probably relax, at least for the

:12:59. > :13:03.moment. Implicit in this approach is that scientific knowledge

:13:03. > :13:07.evolves. Early on in a scientific study, knowledge is often tentative

:13:07. > :13:11.and it is only after repeated testing that it becomes

:13:11. > :13:15.increasingly secure. It is this process that makes science reliable,

:13:15. > :13:19.but it takes time. This can lead to problems when scientists are called

:13:19. > :13:22.upon to give advice on issues when the science is not yet complete. We

:13:23. > :13:28.see this every day in the newspapers - whether breast

:13:28. > :13:33.implants are safe or what foods are good or bad. The public want clear

:13:33. > :13:38.and simple answers but sometimes that is not possible. People need

:13:38. > :13:43.to understand this and we should start in our schools. Science is

:13:43. > :13:47.taught based on the great ideas that have successfully undergone

:13:47. > :13:52.much testing, such as those of Newton, Darwin and Einstein, and so

:13:52. > :13:57.we tend to think all science is equally secure, as if written in

:13:57. > :14:00.stone. But that may not be the case, particularly at an early stage in

:14:00. > :14:04.research when knowledge is more tentative. This view of science

:14:04. > :14:14.should receive greater emphasis at school, because the public would be

:14:14. > :14:17.better able to appreciate how It's impossible to achieve complete

:14:17. > :14:22.certainty on many complex scientific problems, yet sometimes

:14:22. > :14:27.we still feed to take action. The sensible course is to turn to the

:14:27. > :14:30.expert science tists for their consensus view. When doctors found

:14:30. > :14:36.I had blockages in the arteries round my heart, I asked for their

:14:36. > :14:42.expert view as to what I should do. They recommended a bypass. I took

:14:42. > :14:47.their consensus advice and here I am. That is how science works. It

:14:47. > :14:53.provides a strong corrective force in the development of scientific

:14:53. > :14:57.knowledge. Look at the debate about climate change. The majority of

:14:57. > :15:00.expert climate scientists have reached the consensus view that

:15:00. > :15:03.human activity has resulted in global warming. Though there is

:15:03. > :15:07.debate about how much the temperature will rise in the future.

:15:07. > :15:11.Others argue that warming is not taking place at all or that it will

:15:11. > :15:15.happen in a catastrophic way. But they have failed to persuade the

:15:15. > :15:19.majority of climate experts, who have judged the scientific

:15:19. > :15:26.arguments made to support the more extreme views as being too weak to

:15:26. > :15:31.be convincing. There are personal qualities which are important for

:15:31. > :15:35.science, including a sceptical attitude, honesty and transparency,

:15:35. > :15:40.courtesy in scientific dispute, humility and self-doubt help as

:15:40. > :15:44.well, as the 17th century philosopher of science Francis

:15:44. > :15:50.Bacon said "If a man will begin with certainties he will end in

:15:50. > :15:53.doubt. If he will be content to begin with doubts, he will end in

:15:53. > :15:57.certainties." Put all this together and you have a process which can

:15:57. > :16:04.offer extraordinary insights into the natural world. These range from

:16:04. > :16:08.the profound to the quirky. I really liked an amusing example

:16:08. > :16:16.which reconstructed the song of a cricket that lived 165 million

:16:16. > :16:21.years ago. But the work of science can also require courage, as it

:16:21. > :16:24.sometimes strikes at the heart of accepted thinking, challenging

:16:24. > :16:28.established opinion is part of science and can bring about

:16:28. > :16:31.revolutionary changes, which can be very unsettling. Displacing the

:16:31. > :16:36.earth from the centre of the universe first to an orbit round

:16:36. > :16:41.the sun and then to the arm of a galaxy, within an infittity of

:16:41. > :16:46.galaxies has had a profound effect on the position of human kind.

:16:46. > :16:50.Evolution had the same dramatic impact, moving us from being

:16:50. > :16:54.specially created and separate from the rest of life to being related

:16:54. > :17:01.to every living organism on the planet. Charles Darwin recognised

:17:01. > :17:05.this in his descent of man, man with all his qualities, with

:17:05. > :17:09.sympathy, benevolence, with his godlike intellect, with all these

:17:09. > :17:16.exalted powers, man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible

:17:16. > :17:21.stamp of his lowly origin. These ideas about the earth and human

:17:21. > :17:25.kind were once unthinkable and her etical, but are now fully accepted

:17:25. > :17:30.by all those who accept knowledge an the power of reason. Science

:17:30. > :17:36.continues to be revolutionary and we always have to be ready for what

:17:36. > :17:40.it might reveal. Improved knowledge of human embryology and increased

:17:40. > :17:45.abltd to keep the unborn child alive have major implications for

:17:45. > :17:49.when life begins and ends also for intervention such as abortion.

:17:49. > :17:53.Studies of the brain will reveal correlations between neural

:17:53. > :17:58.activity and what we are thinking, memories and our emotional states.

:17:58. > :18:01.Increasingly we are likely to be able to use chemicals to alter

:18:01. > :18:07.brain function and modify behaviours. Advances will have

:18:07. > :18:12.consequences for our views on free will, on justice and diversity. How

:18:12. > :18:15.much choice do we really have when we make decisions? Is punishment

:18:15. > :18:20.for certain criminal behaviours right, if they are strongly

:18:20. > :18:23.influenced by an individual's genes? Will working neuroscience

:18:23. > :18:28.influence how we educate our children? These are issues of

:18:28. > :18:32.crucial significance which can only be properly addressed if we enjoy a

:18:32. > :18:37.healthy relationship between science and society. Scientists

:18:37. > :18:42.need to identify issues early and to encourage open debate about the

:18:42. > :18:46.implications and consequences of scientific and technological

:18:46. > :18:51.advances. Such debates will sometimes be difficult, but they

:18:51. > :18:57.must take place. This is essential if we are to have a society that is

:18:57. > :19:02.comfortable with science and that can reap the benefits it can bring.

:19:02. > :19:07.And science can bring us great practical, everyday benefits. It

:19:07. > :19:11.has always been a useful art, generating knowledge that when

:19:11. > :19:16.properly used, leads to application through technologies and

:19:16. > :19:20.engineering for the public good. Again, at the birth of modern

:19:20. > :19:25.science, Francis Bacon argued that scientific knowledge gives us a

:19:25. > :19:28.power to relieve man's estate. Robert Hooke of the royal society

:19:28. > :19:33.emphasised how scientific discoverries on motion, light,

:19:33. > :19:39.gravity, magnetism an the heavens would improve shipping, watches,

:19:39. > :19:45.optics and engines for trade and carriage. Today, the world faces

:19:45. > :19:51.major problems. Some uppermost in my mind are food security, climate

:19:52. > :19:56.change, global health and making economy sustainable, all of which

:19:56. > :20:00.need science. It is critical for our democracy to have mature

:20:00. > :20:04.discussions about these issues, but these debates are sometimes

:20:04. > :20:09.threatened by a misinform fd sense of balance and inappropriate

:20:09. > :20:13.headlines in the media which gives credence to views not supported by

:20:13. > :20:18.the science. And also by those who distort the science with ideology,

:20:18. > :20:24.politics and religion. From the very beginning of science, there

:20:24. > :20:28.have always been such threats. When Galileo argued that the earth

:20:28. > :20:33.orbited the sun, the inquisition did not argue back with science,

:20:33. > :20:36.they simply showed him the instruments of torture. It is very

:20:37. > :20:44.important that we keep such influences separate from scientific

:20:44. > :20:49.debate. The time for politics is after the science not before. Let's

:20:49. > :20:57.lock at food security. Ensuring that the world is properly fed,

:20:57. > :21:00.this is already greatly helped by science. The Green Revolution

:21:00. > :21:05.increased agricultural production in the 1960s through high yielding

:21:05. > :21:08.cereals, better irrigation an the use of fertilisers and pesticides,

:21:08. > :21:12.developments led by the scientist Norman Borlaug. The Green

:21:12. > :21:17.Revolution is often credited with saving the lives of over a billion

:21:17. > :21:21.people worldwide from starvation. However, some environmentalists did

:21:21. > :21:24.not support these initiatives, leaving Borlaug to respond. Some of

:21:24. > :21:29.the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the

:21:29. > :21:33.earth. But many of them are elitist. They'd never experienced the

:21:33. > :21:37.physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable

:21:37. > :21:41.office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one

:21:41. > :21:44.month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for 50

:21:44. > :21:49.years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertiliser and

:21:49. > :21:55.irrigation canals and the outrage that fashionable elitists back home

:21:55. > :21:59.were trying to deny them these things. Science is once again

:21:59. > :22:04.required to improve yields, to make agriculture more sustainable and to

:22:04. > :22:08.extend the range of crops that can thrive in more marginal lands. This

:22:08. > :22:12.can be helped through improving the growth of crops, assisting plant

:22:13. > :22:18.breeding and by the genetic modification of plants, which will

:22:18. > :22:22.generate crops of high productivity and reduce pesticide use, bet

:22:22. > :22:27.prortecting the environment and biodiversity. It is time to re-open

:22:27. > :22:31.the debate about GM crops in the UK, but this time, based on scientific

:22:31. > :22:35.facts and analysis. We need to consider what the science has to

:22:35. > :22:41.say about risks and benefits, uncoloured by commercial interests

:22:41. > :22:45.and ideological opinion. It is not acceptable if we deny the world's

:22:45. > :22:51.poorest access to way that's could help their food security, if that

:22:51. > :22:54.denial is based on fashion and ill- informed opinion rather than good

:22:54. > :22:59.science. Another great challenge for the world is climate change.

:22:59. > :23:03.Discussions in this area impinge on politics, commercial interests and

:23:03. > :23:07.strongly-held opinions. And these influences have distorted the

:23:07. > :23:10.scientific debate. Solutions needed to counter global warming are

:23:11. > :23:15.likely to require more concerted world action, regulating the

:23:15. > :23:21.activities of the individual of industry and of the nation state

:23:21. > :23:24.and such restrictions are an a anathema to some are particular

:23:24. > :23:29.political and economic view points. Equally those of an opposite

:23:29. > :23:33.viewpoint may exaggerate the extent of future global warming because of

:23:34. > :23:37.their afints towards greater regulation and world Government

:23:37. > :23:41.this leads some polemicists to confuse the debate by mixing the

:23:41. > :23:47.science with the politics. The answer here is to focus on

:23:47. > :23:52.transparency and good science. There is no room for pre-conceived

:23:52. > :23:56.ideas. First we need the science, then the politics. Science will be

:23:56. > :24:00.required to develop new ways of producing energy that are

:24:00. > :24:05.environmentally less damaging, renewables like wind, wave, tidal

:24:05. > :24:09.and solar energy should be evaluated, putting vested interests

:24:09. > :24:13.aside to determine what is effective. The same applies to

:24:13. > :24:18.nuclear power. Science is needed to properly assess the risks and

:24:18. > :24:21.benefits. It is not sensible to respond in a need-jerk way without

:24:21. > :24:27.evaluation of data concerning real environmental damage and health

:24:27. > :24:31.risks, as against perceived damage and risks. Improved scientific

:24:32. > :24:37.knowledge has brought remarkable improvements also in life

:24:37. > :24:41.expectancy. 100 years ago, average life expectancy in the UK was about

:24:41. > :24:47.50 years. Now it is around 80 years. Science will continue to be needed

:24:47. > :24:51.to improve the world's health in the future. Human genetics will

:24:51. > :24:54.identify genes which pre-dispose us to different diseases allowing us

:24:54. > :24:58.to understand how genes influence disease and how they interact with

:24:58. > :25:03.lifestyle and diet, promoting new ways to treat and prevent illness.

:25:03. > :25:08.There is great promise for stem cells, which can generate a range

:25:08. > :25:12.of tissues in the body, potentially repairing muscle and nerve tissue,

:25:12. > :25:16.damage countering the effects of degenerative disease and old age.

:25:16. > :25:19.Here too, there are threats. When I worked in the United States, I

:25:19. > :25:24.received regular hate mail from those who objected to stem cell

:25:24. > :25:27.research based on their religious beliefs. There are those who

:25:27. > :25:32.challenge good science with minority opinions based on weak

:25:32. > :25:36.science. As was the case with campaigners who objected to the

:25:36. > :25:40.triple MMR vaccine. As a consequence reduction in

:25:40. > :25:45.vaccination led to children's lives being put in danger. I have no

:25:45. > :25:51.doubt that science will continue to have a major impact on all such

:25:51. > :25:56.global issues over the coming decades. But now I want to turn to

:25:56. > :26:02.the issue preoccupying many of us today, the economy. Science is key

:26:02. > :26:06.to creating jobs and putting money in our pockets. The Industrial

:26:06. > :26:09.Revolution brought scientists, engineers, tech noljists and

:26:09. > :26:14.entrepreneurs together to apply science to industry and the economy.

:26:14. > :26:19.The result was the steam engine, providing power, chemistry and

:26:19. > :26:22.geology improving ceramics and the use of natural resources, mechanics

:26:22. > :26:27.and engineering constructing machines for transport and

:26:27. > :26:33.manufacture. This era is symbolised by the Lunar Society, a group

:26:33. > :26:38.including James Watt, Darwin and Josiah Wedgwood who discussed

:26:38. > :26:42.science and how science leads to new technologies and inventions

:26:42. > :26:46.supporting the economy. They met in the Midlands once a month under the

:26:46. > :26:55.full moon, to illuminate them during their ride home after dinner.

:26:55. > :27:00.And perhaps after some wine too! Where would our economy be without

:27:00. > :27:04.electricity and electromagnetism, electronics, synthetic chemistry,

:27:04. > :27:07.ato theic physics, molecular biology. Some say Michael Faraday

:27:07. > :27:11.answered the Prime Minister of his day when asked what good his

:27:11. > :27:18.inventions of the electric transformer, generator and metor

:27:18. > :27:22.might be by saying, "Why Prime Minister, someday, you can tax it."

:27:22. > :27:26.Although almost certainly never said by Faraday, this anecdote

:27:26. > :27:31.captures the view of some politicians and business leaders

:27:31. > :27:36.who failed to grasp how science can enhance industrial tapabilities and

:27:36. > :27:42.create wealth. -- capabilities and create wealth. Faraday did end up

:27:42. > :27:51.on the back of the 20-pound note and entrepreneur Borlaug and Watt,

:27:51. > :27:56.act tects of the steam engine appear on the 50-pound note. How

:27:56. > :28:00.can we make sure that science thrives in the UK and continues to

:28:00. > :28:05.bring benefits to our economy? I strongly argue that the first

:28:05. > :28:10.requirement is to have a high quality science base. We are very

:28:10. > :28:14.good at science here and have been for centuries. Britain played a

:28:14. > :28:17.major role in founding modern science and its applications for

:28:17. > :28:21.the public good, through the efforts of the royal society,

:28:21. > :28:28.beginning in the 17th century and the Industrial Revolution in the

:28:28. > :28:31.18th and 19th centuries. Today, the UK is second only to the USA in

:28:31. > :28:36.contributions to the world's science and it's probably first in

:28:36. > :28:40.termed of cost efficiency. This is an amazing achievement for our

:28:40. > :28:46.country. There is also an increasing respect for technology

:28:46. > :28:49.and engineering in the UK, as seen with the recent founding of the �1

:28:49. > :28:52.million Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering, sponsored by the

:28:52. > :28:56.Government and the Royal Academy of engineering.

:28:56. > :29:02.We do not need to create world class science in our country, we

:29:02. > :29:05.already have it. Our task is to maintain, Cherish

:29:05. > :29:13.and encourage our scientific endeavour and to promote its use

:29:13. > :29:16.This is an issue that can no longer be ignored. Science is one of

:29:16. > :29:22.Britain's greaters resources N the future, we will not be able to

:29:23. > :29:26.compete on the world stage with low labour costs or by exploiting vast

:29:26. > :29:30.reserves of mineral resources. We will have to compete with our

:29:30. > :29:36.brains and with our science. Many features important for good science

:29:36. > :29:40.are well embedded in the UK. We have a tradition of respect for

:29:40. > :29:44.empiricism, emphasising reliable observation and experiment. Most

:29:44. > :29:50.importantly, science in the UK is carried out in a culture of

:29:50. > :29:54.openness and freedom. This should never be underestimated. The

:29:54. > :29:59.scientific endeavour is at its most successful when there is freedom of

:30:00. > :30:03.thought. Scientists need to be able to freely express doubts, to be

:30:03. > :30:09.sceptical about established orthodox Si, and must not be too

:30:09. > :30:12.strongly directed from the top, which stifles creativity. These

:30:12. > :30:16.features are characteristic of British science, but this is not

:30:17. > :30:20.the case throughout the world, even amongst some countries heavily

:30:20. > :30:24.investing in science. In more closed societies, it may be

:30:24. > :30:28.possible to pursue a directed programme when the underpinning

:30:28. > :30:33.science is already clear, like building a nuclear weapon for

:30:33. > :30:38.example, but making scientific discoveries and using science in

:30:38. > :30:41.innovative ways is very difficult if the society is not free. During

:30:42. > :30:46.the Cold War, Russia was able to build a nuclear bomb and send the

:30:46. > :30:51.first man into space, two achievements base ds on previously

:30:51. > :30:56.known physics. But work on genetics and crop improvement were

:30:56. > :31:01.completely destroyed because for ideological reasons, Stalin backed

:31:01. > :31:04.the charlatan Lysenko who rejected Mendelian genetics, widely accepted

:31:04. > :31:08.everywhere else in the world. Similarly, in Nazi Germany, Hitler

:31:08. > :31:14.rejected the work of Einstein because it was "Jewish Physics". In

:31:14. > :31:20.the UK, we have the freedom to do science and we need to keep it that

:31:20. > :31:24.way. We have to keep our spirit of adventure, to take risks and be

:31:24. > :31:29.prepared sometimes to fail, as research at the cutting-edge is not

:31:29. > :31:33.always successful. This is a lesson that UK industry might learn from

:31:33. > :31:36.scientists. When I ran Rockefeller University in New York, I saw how

:31:36. > :31:43.American entrepreneurs, were prepared to be bold to take risks

:31:43. > :31:48.to bring science to the marketplace. We need more of that here in the UK.

:31:48. > :31:53.For science to flourish, a broad portfolio of research investment is

:31:53. > :31:57.required. There is a continuum of research, ranging from discovery

:31:57. > :32:01.science, through research aimed at translating knowledge for

:32:01. > :32:04.application, on to subsequent innovation ultimately leading to

:32:04. > :32:09.the development of new technologies. The temptation to invest too

:32:09. > :32:13.heavily in a particular part of this spectrum should be resisted.

:32:13. > :32:18.Sometimes it is argued that we should concentrate only on

:32:18. > :32:22.translation and innovation and not discovery, but that is a mistake.

:32:23. > :32:26.As Sir George Porter, Nobel Laureate and a previous President

:32:26. > :32:30.of the Royal Society, said: "To feed applied science by starving

:32:31. > :32:36.basic science is like economising on the foundations of a building so

:32:36. > :32:43.it may be built higher. It is only a matter of time before the whole

:32:43. > :32:46.edifice crumbles." Research needs a longer timescale than is usual with

:32:46. > :32:51.the more short-term priorities of private business, or for that

:32:51. > :32:55.matter of politicians elected on a five-year cycle. This causes

:32:55. > :32:59.problem with longer term projects such as translating scientific

:32:59. > :33:05.advances into useful applications. We have a real opportunity in the

:33:05. > :33:08.UK of improving the translation of biomedical science into better

:33:08. > :33:13.treatments through an innovative partnership between researchers,

:33:13. > :33:19.the NHS and industry, promoted by the Academy of Medical Sciences.

:33:19. > :33:27.The UK has a great advantage with a very strong life sciences research

:33:27. > :33:31.base, a unified Health Service, and an active pharmaceutical industry.

:33:31. > :33:34.If all three work together we can carry out research which will not

:33:34. > :33:38.only bring better Health Services but also help our economy. Because

:33:39. > :33:42.the NHS belongs to people, it is my view that NHS patient also be open

:33:42. > :33:47.to participating in research which will bring better Health Services

:33:47. > :33:52.to the nation and also help our economy. This certainly applies to

:33:52. > :33:57.me. The NHS helped me and I feel responsibility to assist in

:33:57. > :34:04.clinical trials, allowing what could be learned from me to improve

:34:04. > :34:09.treatment of future generations. It is time to turn the NHS into a

:34:09. > :34:17.healthcare producer as well as a healthcare provider. Bridging the

:34:17. > :34:22.often short-term pressures from commerce and politicians with the

:34:22. > :34:26.longer time required to develop dois-of-discovery research to

:34:26. > :34:29.effective applications is crucial. Greater collaboration between

:34:29. > :34:33.publicly-funded research and private companies can help move

:34:33. > :34:37.from science to application. Great scientific research requires talent.

:34:37. > :34:41.The most accomplished scientists in the world need to be trained here

:34:41. > :34:45.and attracted here. The UK is known to be excellent in research and

:34:45. > :34:49.scientists of the highest quality from around the world want to come

:34:49. > :34:53.and work here, which can only be to the country's good. The necessity

:34:53. > :34:59.to attract highly-trained scientists from abroad has to be

:34:59. > :35:03.reflected in the UK's immigration policy. The Government needs to

:35:03. > :35:08.show leadership by publicly emphasising that scientists are as

:35:08. > :35:11.welcome asent ests, ministers of religion and sports stars to come

:35:11. > :35:15.and work here. The Immigration Minister has argued that he wants

:35:15. > :35:19.to encourage the brightest and best migrants to come and work here. But

:35:19. > :35:22.this must not be merely rhetoric. He has to make sure that the best

:35:22. > :35:30.scientists from around the world know that they are welcome in the

:35:30. > :35:34.UK. Science education also needs attention. People need an education

:35:34. > :35:38.that allows them to fully participate in a democracy that

:35:38. > :35:42.will increasingly require engagement with scientific matters.

:35:42. > :35:47.Teaching should be of a quality such that those pupils with the

:35:47. > :35:50.talent and inclination to become scientists are inspired to do so.

:35:50. > :35:54.This will be difficult if we continue as now, with nearly all

:35:54. > :35:58.primary school teachers, over a quarter of chemistry teachers and

:35:58. > :36:04.nearly a third of physics teachers, having no specialist qualifications

:36:04. > :36:07.in science. There should be greater attention on practical science in

:36:07. > :36:12.schools including natural history, reinforcing the fact that science

:36:12. > :36:18.is built on observation and experiment. Pupils must be inspired

:36:18. > :36:22.by the wonder of science, and need to understand why science generates

:36:22. > :36:28.reliable knowledge. At the very least, everyone leaving school

:36:28. > :36:34.should know the difference between astronomy and astrology. LAUGHTER I

:36:34. > :36:38.was inspired at school by my biology teacher, Keith Neal, his

:36:38. > :36:43.focus on practical science and on communicating the wonder of science

:36:43. > :36:50.was critical to me becoming a scientist. We need more Keith Neals

:36:50. > :36:54.in our schools. Most important for the UK is a culture shift to fully

:36:54. > :36:58.recognise what science can contribute. We should reawaken the

:36:58. > :37:03.spirit of the Enlightenment, a respect for science and rationality,

:37:03. > :37:07.a free-sharing of ideas and thinking with people from all walks

:37:07. > :37:12.of life, revive the energy of the Industrial Revolution, and have the

:37:12. > :37:16.courage to take risks and be true entrepreneurs. We can learn from

:37:16. > :37:21.the Lunar Society where scientists, intellectuals and entrepreneurs met

:37:21. > :37:26.together. But the world is more complex now. We have become more

:37:26. > :37:31.focused on specialist areas cut off from each other. Scientists are

:37:31. > :37:34.insufficiently ex-polzed to other scientific disciplines. There are

:37:34. > :37:37.barriers between scientists and technologists and engineering

:37:37. > :37:40.blocking the exchanges needed for innovation. There are further

:37:40. > :37:45.blocks between these communities and those who lead the public

:37:45. > :37:49.services and industry who need the applications of science. It is

:37:49. > :37:54.essential to breakdown these barriers, through increasing the

:37:54. > :37:59.permeability of both ideas and people between different sectors.

:37:59. > :38:04.With permeability will come more innovative ideas and greater mutual

:38:04. > :38:09.respect, leading to better progress in translating science into useful

:38:10. > :38:13.applications. I want to put these ideas into practice at the new

:38:13. > :38:19.Francis Crick Institute being built in London next to St Pancras

:38:19. > :38:23.Station. When it opens in 2015, it will house 1,500 scientists in what

:38:23. > :38:27.may well be the biggest biomedical laboratory building in the world.

:38:27. > :38:33.It will not just be a place for scientific experts, but also a

:38:33. > :38:37.place for experimenting in the way science is done. As Director of the

:38:37. > :38:42.Institute, I want to create a cultural and economic hot house of

:38:42. > :38:47.scientific ideas and applications, to make exciting discoveries

:38:47. > :38:50.improving our health and driving our economy. I do not want

:38:50. > :38:54.scientists to stay in their labs. I want them to mix with the best

:38:54. > :39:00.minds from industry, the city, the public services, the media, to

:39:00. > :39:05.spark off new ideas to help science benefit us all. It will be a place

:39:05. > :39:10.without departments or restricting hierarchies with scientists free to

:39:10. > :39:15.pursue their own creative ideas in a highly interactive and open

:39:15. > :39:20.building. If it sounds a bit like anarchy, that is because it will be

:39:20. > :39:27.a bit like anarchy. It is often in mixed up and chaotic circumstances

:39:27. > :39:33.that the most creative work is done. Remember Harry Lime in The Third

:39:33. > :39:39.Man who said: "In Italy, for 30 years under the Borgias, they had

:39:39. > :39:41.warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced

:39:41. > :39:46.Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland,

:39:46. > :39:52.they had brotherly love, they had 500 years of democracy and peace,

:39:52. > :39:56.and what did they produce? The cuckoo clock." The Francis Crick

:39:56. > :39:59.Institute is a thrilling opportunity to create the world's

:39:59. > :40:04.leading biomedical research facility right here in the UK,

:40:04. > :40:10.attracting the best minds from all over the world, and could also be a

:40:10. > :40:13.model for getting our economy to work better. Good science needs

:40:13. > :40:18.good long-term support and the UK must look at the scale and the

:40:18. > :40:21.scope of the funding it provides for science, both from public and

:40:21. > :40:26.private sources. The Government has protected science in the recent

:40:26. > :40:31.cuts which is very welcome, but even so in real terms, support for

:40:31. > :40:35.science has been reduced. The Government needs greater courage to

:40:36. > :40:41.properly support its stated aspiration of harnessing science

:40:41. > :40:46.and engineering to rebalance the economy towards innovation-based

:40:47. > :40:54.sustainable growth. The UK spends 1.8% of GDP on research and

:40:54. > :40:59.development. The Americans 2.9%. The South Koreans 3.7%. And we are

:40:59. > :41:07.dropping down international league tables for the production of

:41:07. > :41:11.patents. And even greater problems is spend by industry in the UK on

:41:11. > :41:16.research and development, at present only 0.8% of GDP. This low

:41:16. > :41:20.level of investment in science from industry means it lacks the

:41:20. > :41:25.research capacity to reach out and exploit the scientific knowledge

:41:25. > :41:28.being produced. There needs to be a shift in the boardroom to

:41:28. > :41:32.understand and appreciate what science can bring, with more focus

:41:32. > :41:36.on the longer term. Typical of the problem is what happened to the

:41:36. > :41:39.utilities. In the years following privatisation, there was a collapse

:41:39. > :41:45.in spend on research and development, good for short-term

:41:45. > :41:49.profits maybe, but not for long- term sustainability or long-term

:41:49. > :41:54.profits. I am passionate about science because it has shaped the

:41:54. > :41:59.world and made it a better place, and I want to see science placed

:41:59. > :42:04.more centre stage in our culture and economy. Our present economic

:42:04. > :42:10.troubles have promoted a debate about the future of our economy,

:42:10. > :42:15.and that future must include a major role for science. We need a

:42:15. > :42:25.new Enlightenment, an Enlightenment for the 21st Century and Britain is

:42:25. > :42:32.the place to do it with its h -- its history of freedom, rationality

:42:32. > :42:35.and scientific achievement. We need more science in Government, the

:42:35. > :42:38.boardroom and public services, we need more funding for science, we

:42:38. > :42:41.need greater engagement with the public and a society comfortable

:42:41. > :42:44.with science, we need to convey the wonder of science and what it

:42:45. > :42:49.contributes to our civilisation. If we want science to deliver all of

:42:49. > :42:53.this we must up our game, with the vision to think big, bigger than

:42:53. > :42:58.our competitors and to imagine where we want to be in the future.

:42:58. > :43:04.Science can help us get there, just as it did in the past. If we get it

:43:04. > :43:08.right, our whole society will benefit. Science is, and always has

:43:09. > :43:13.been, one of Britain's greatest assets. I am optimistic that the

:43:13. > :43:17.time has come for a new deal between science and society to

:43:17. > :43:22.achieve all of these things. If we are to hold our own on the world