:00:00. > :00:00.House of Commons. We will now go over live to the House of Lords. You
:00:00. > :00:16.can watch coverage after the daily politics later tonight.
:00:17. > :00:26.My book -- we have to attain a nonexecutive chair and that person
:00:27. > :00:32.be a person appointed to that role and a souvenir figure from business.
:00:33. > :00:36.Most funding goes to companies, not to universities or research
:00:37. > :00:42.institutes and this funding is used to support innovative and product
:00:43. > :00:47.and process -- progress. Innovate UK's support has economic benefits
:00:48. > :00:52.and will be all the more critical as we exit the EU with a changing
:00:53. > :00:58.relationship to the industry focused programmes. It needs to retain its
:00:59. > :01:06.strong business voice both in size UK and critically also outside. That
:01:07. > :01:10.voice is something that will be amplified if it is chaired by
:01:11. > :01:15.leaving -- leading industrial figures and the majority of business
:01:16. > :01:21.numbers on the board. This is the purpose of amendment 160 six. The
:01:22. > :01:29.Government amendments 173 and 183 are welcomed. Recognising the need
:01:30. > :01:33.for Innovate to develop a wide range of support to new companies which
:01:34. > :01:41.could include investing in forming companies as well as giving grants
:01:42. > :01:53.and loans. Also enforcing Innovate's role. At the moment, I beg to move
:01:54. > :02:08.amendment 160 six. Sun-macro page 105, line 16, insert the words.
:02:09. > :02:21.It is simply that on the face of it, it appears that provision and a
:02:22. > :02:25.supplementary powers 16, three subsection B, prevents the research
:02:26. > :02:32.councils from doing a number of things which are important to their
:02:33. > :02:36.fundamental function and clearly which they should be able to
:02:37. > :02:42.continue to do. I hope the Minister will be able to explain to us this
:02:43. > :02:47.amendment is unnecessary because of provisions that have not been
:02:48. > :02:59.spotted in the bill or to accept this is something that needs to be
:03:00. > :03:03.changed. I think although the wording of the amendment does not
:03:04. > :03:15.see it, this applies to it innovate UK. Innovate UK has in its function
:03:16. > :03:21.very often as to collaborate with industry and so it would seem
:03:22. > :03:26.unnecessary to forbid it from setting up joint ventures.
:03:27. > :03:37.You are as supportive as 166. I would like to make apologies that I
:03:38. > :03:40.have not been present for this item when it was dealt with the committee
:03:41. > :03:44.stage because I was abroad, but I have read carefully of the
:03:45. > :03:48.discussion that happened at that point. I also am a member of the
:03:49. > :03:57.science and technology committee which looked at this issue recently.
:03:58. > :04:01.I share the concern that was raised that the science and technology
:04:02. > :04:05.committee by a number of witnesses, concerned that the In a big UK would
:04:06. > :04:12.be hijacked by the research Council and become the commercialization and
:04:13. > :04:17.innovation of the research councils and that would usurp the current
:04:18. > :04:25.hugely valuable role that Innovate UK has in their being business
:04:26. > :04:29.facing, in supporting innovation, small businesses especially and at
:04:30. > :04:34.the very early stages, where an entrepreneur has got a bright idea,
:04:35. > :04:45.but no backers and no proof of concept. So I share the concerns the
:04:46. > :04:49.noble Baroness, Lady Brown of Cambridge, that the membership of
:04:50. > :04:54.the committee and chairmanship of the committee for Innovate UK needs
:04:55. > :04:58.to be very much business focused and to have a predominance of business
:04:59. > :05:03.focused people on it. I recognise that the Government has gone to some
:05:04. > :05:06.weight in Amendment 183 and very much welcome that. I very much
:05:07. > :05:13.welcomed the meetings that I've had with ministers, with Sir John
:05:14. > :05:18.Kingman, and with the Minister of State for universities and science,
:05:19. > :05:25.open web and is not here today, although he regularly is. But it is
:05:26. > :05:30.probably my conversations with Joe that Johnson have made me most
:05:31. > :05:34.alarmed, I'm afraid, and that, although he gives assurances
:05:35. > :05:38.throughout about the business facing role of Innovate UK, every time I've
:05:39. > :05:41.ever heard him describe it unprompted, he immediately describes
:05:42. > :05:47.it in terms of it being the innovation and research arm of the
:05:48. > :05:52.research councils. So I would hope that the Minister would recognise
:05:53. > :05:59.that the role of Innovate UK needs further strengthening and to give it
:06:00. > :06:03.a business -based chairman and a predominance of business based
:06:04. > :06:08.members on the committee would strengthen that very much. I welcome
:06:09. > :06:15.the Government Amendment 183, which addresses the issue that the noble
:06:16. > :06:21.Baroness has just referred to, and I can confirm as the chairman that we
:06:22. > :06:27.were indeed concerned at the original proposals, some months back
:06:28. > :06:30.now, that Innovate UK should be put together with the research England
:06:31. > :06:34.into research Council because it was clearly absolutely essential that
:06:35. > :06:39.the business community should have confidence that they had Innovate UK
:06:40. > :06:44.very much at their disposal, their organisation and it wasn't somehow
:06:45. > :06:56.going to be subsumed by the research Council, and I think I accept that
:06:57. > :07:04.the concerns expressed by the noble Baroness Lady Brown and Lady Young
:07:05. > :07:08.have validity, but I do recognise that the Amendment Government has
:07:09. > :07:16.put forward, particularly a and B of this Amendment, in 183, requiring
:07:17. > :07:23.arrangements to have regard to personal engage business activities
:07:24. > :07:27.and the need of priority, to have on the face of the bill goes a very
:07:28. > :07:32.long way from where we were a few months ago, so I am content to
:07:33. > :07:41.accept this as meeting most of the concerns that I at least had
:07:42. > :07:46.originally. My Lords, I draw my attention to my interest as a
:07:47. > :07:54.declared registered specifically to my chairmanship of WMT. I should
:07:55. > :07:57.also mention that I served as a member of the review of the UK
:07:58. > :08:05.research and innovation scheme that put it all together. As piece
:08:06. > :08:09.appears to be breaking out today, I hope those who labored for so long
:08:10. > :08:15.and the salt mines of the committee stage will allow a few brief words
:08:16. > :08:21.on Amendment 16 six, 173 and one 83. All three will help innovate
:08:22. > :08:26.Innovate UK promote partnership between business and academia. I can
:08:27. > :08:34.tell you that can be a tough job. When I started WMT, we encountered a
:08:35. > :08:40.lot of opposition, academics are protective of their independence
:08:41. > :08:44.from commerce, however engineers do like making an impact, the bigger
:08:45. > :08:54.the better, so their curiosity won out in the end. We know academic can
:08:55. > :08:57.obstruct business collaboration. For example, grant application rating is
:08:58. > :09:01.a prized skill in universities and for a very good reason. Critical
:09:02. > :09:07.assessment of research proposals is vital to academic debate. Business
:09:08. > :09:12.sees this rather different. Especially if they are expected to
:09:13. > :09:19.disclose commercially sensitive knowledge. The technology strategy
:09:20. > :09:26.Board was created and must address this, was critic here. We debated
:09:27. > :09:29.here for about four years before this was formed, because there was
:09:30. > :09:33.an argument, should Government intervene, should we pick winners?
:09:34. > :09:42.And all the other arguments at that time. But we won and the technology
:09:43. > :09:48.strategy Board was created. The body is now of course Innovate UK. Change
:09:49. > :09:53.is constant, my Lord. So innovate UK needs leaders who understand the way
:09:54. > :09:59.of business and science are changing and the flexibility to create the
:10:00. > :10:05.right partnerships. Amendment 16 is which of this. Today, every business
:10:06. > :10:07.is multidisciplinary will stop if you make cars coming need
:10:08. > :10:15.programmers, the photographers, medical researchers as well as
:10:16. > :10:19.engineers. Bringing Innovate UK's and the research Council under the
:10:20. > :10:28.same roof makes scientific and commercial sense. I'm 173 and 183
:10:29. > :10:32.would ensure business and scientific knowledge in its leadership,
:10:33. > :10:41.allowing it to build flexible partnerships. Innovate UK's role is
:10:42. > :10:46.to act as a catalyst. However, my Lords, while flexibility is needed,
:10:47. > :10:53.Innovate UK should not be a bank. It has neither the resources. They
:10:54. > :11:00.should use their commercial expertise to create incentives, to
:11:01. > :11:05.encourage businesses to invest in innovation. It is a matchmaker, not
:11:06. > :11:08.a moneymaker. Their role has to be to improve productivity in this
:11:09. > :11:15.country from scientific research. The amendments in this will help
:11:16. > :11:18.them deliver on that task. More generally, the amendments being
:11:19. > :11:26.proposed elsewhere today will do the same for out right as a whole. I
:11:27. > :11:32.just want to emphasise how much to speak to Amendment one 66. Just
:11:33. > :11:38.emphasise again the importance of having individuals from a business
:11:39. > :11:41.background. All too often these initiatives, I have seen that the
:11:42. > :11:44.Government has the best of intentions, but there are people
:11:45. > :11:48.involved to do not have experience in business, who have not run
:11:49. > :11:51.businesses, and is when you run businesses you realise innovation
:11:52. > :11:55.and creativity is at the heart of it. I would've thought go further
:11:56. > :11:59.than this and say they must come from science related business
:12:00. > :12:03.backgrounds. Any good business have to be innovative, food and junk you
:12:04. > :12:09.have to be innovative, but is the key issue that you have to have
:12:10. > :12:15.business backers of the top table. -- food and drink. I just wanted to
:12:16. > :12:21.confirm that we are signed up to Amendment 166 in support, it is
:12:22. > :12:25.important to get the balance right, it is probably another Goldilocks on
:12:26. > :12:31.coming up but I'm sure the Minister will pick it up and hope we will get
:12:32. > :12:34.some responses on that. We have also signed up to Government amendments
:12:35. > :12:42.173 and 183, at the heart of the debate. Again, the argument made by
:12:43. > :12:50.the local Lord Mr, there are ways to improve the spell. We have been able
:12:51. > :12:54.to explore them in committee. There are support around the House of your
:12:55. > :13:00.pleased to be apart of. We feel are constraints which may emerge more
:13:01. > :13:06.from the business consideration then perhaps so far, and the noble friend
:13:07. > :13:11.has pointed out the genesis of all this through technology strategy
:13:12. > :13:15.Board through to Innovate UK, I think it is important that we learn
:13:16. > :13:20.from our history and Dave for the experience they've had over this
:13:21. > :13:24.period of time, the formation of UK our eye, the involvement of Innovate
:13:25. > :13:28.UK in that was not recommended, they felt the issue should be looked at.
:13:29. > :13:30.The Government decided to move forward and I think it is a
:13:31. > :13:35.Government's is possibility that we get the most out of that therefore.
:13:36. > :13:42.We're not talking that the question of a bank we're talking about an
:13:43. > :13:45.opportunity to create incentives, a group that moves forward with the
:13:46. > :13:48.support of industry movement, much better than one that tries it would
:13:49. > :13:53.on its own and I look forward to hearing what the noble lord and Mr
:13:54. > :13:59.has to say about that. Dillon my Lords, I think I find myself in
:14:00. > :14:09.really a complete agreement with the noble lady, Lady Brown. -- my Lords.
:14:10. > :14:17.I think all the sentiments are the same. They pick up on a phrase from
:14:18. > :14:20.the noble lord about the purpose of Innovate UK. To sum it up in three
:14:21. > :14:27.words, which he did, it was productivity from research. An
:14:28. > :14:32.earlier we were discussing the first Amendment, and a Lord talked about
:14:33. > :14:37.the sometimes serendipitous spurt that can spring from blue sky a sick
:14:38. > :14:42.research. I think the point of Innovate UK's to ensure that more of
:14:43. > :14:49.those fruits take root in the UK, rather than ending up in Israel or
:14:50. > :14:53.the valleys that are more innovative than we are. The whole point of
:14:54. > :14:58.Innovate UK, the whole purpose of this to bring Innovate UK with the
:14:59. > :15:05.research Council is to create more for tile soil for some the great
:15:06. > :15:11.ideas and research that comes out of our universities. In creating
:15:12. > :15:16.Innovate you are right, we are creating something new. We are not
:15:17. > :15:20.nearly bolted together nine separate bodies. To make this work, the
:15:21. > :15:27.Government structures need to change. Weird introducing an
:15:28. > :15:30.overarching board in UK are I, a high profile chair and executive. It
:15:31. > :15:33.is appropriate that the governance of the councils change as well to
:15:34. > :15:39.reflect this. We've been listening to this debate for some time now,
:15:40. > :15:51.particular contributions from the noble Baroness Lee lady Brown.
:15:52. > :15:55.Landlord Brewers. -- Lord. However, introducing a nonexecutive chair for
:15:56. > :16:03.the councils into these new lines of accountability would risk confusing
:16:04. > :16:10.accountability with UK are I and undermined the strategic role. --
:16:11. > :16:15.UKRI. I can of course see the attraction of having a well-known
:16:16. > :16:21.leading industrialist as nonexecutive chair of Innovate UK,
:16:22. > :16:27.but it would not sit well with the governance structure of UKRI, and I
:16:28. > :16:33.think would fatally undermine the whole concept of UKRI. However, we
:16:34. > :16:36.acknowledge there are valuable roles back and play outside of direct
:16:37. > :16:43.lines of accountability. For example, given support to the chief
:16:44. > :16:47.executive, as a route to the high-level communication. We averted
:16:48. > :16:52.discuss my noble lord's suggestion that we give each member of the
:16:53. > :16:54.Council the role of the senior independent member and given
:16:55. > :17:02.assurances that this will be done. We hope this is adequate to address
:17:03. > :17:07.the concerns. Lord Mandelson gave a very good description of the
:17:08. > :17:16.importance role that independent member can play in the circumstances
:17:17. > :17:22.without undermining the integrity of UKRI. This Amendment, 166, also
:17:23. > :17:27.seeks to determine the background of Innovate UK's councilmembers. As has
:17:28. > :17:31.been discussed in respect to UKRI board members in an earlier
:17:32. > :17:36.grouping, prescribing the background of councils in legislation would
:17:37. > :17:41.encroach on the freedom of UKRI and its Council to manage their own
:17:42. > :17:45.affairs and could be unhelpful in achieving the best possible mix of
:17:46. > :17:50.individuals at any one time. However, we agree with the
:17:51. > :17:53.sentiments express. In the case of innovate UK, the Government would
:17:54. > :17:57.have a strong expectation set the guidance that a substantial report
:17:58. > :18:01.of member should have a science related business background.
:18:02. > :18:04.Innovate UK's current board never should speaks for itself with most
:18:05. > :18:08.of the councilmembers having signed the technology business related
:18:09. > :18:15.background. In addition to this, the board contains much complement three
:18:16. > :18:21.experience of universities, finance, consulting and Government. Turning
:18:22. > :18:27.to Amendment 173, my Lords, many of you have asked to see stronger
:18:28. > :18:31.language on the face of the bill to protect Innovate UK's business
:18:32. > :18:34.facing role. At Lords committee, the Government undertook to reflect on
:18:35. > :18:39.how this could be done and we have tabled an Amendment that achieves
:18:40. > :18:45.this in two ways. Firstly, in introduces stronger language to
:18:46. > :18:50.describe UK's role, Innovate UK's role, in supporting the business
:18:51. > :18:56.community. And record the need of support is more direct than the
:18:57. > :19:00.previous tax. Secondly, introduces a new requirement to have regard to
:19:01. > :19:06.need to promote innovation by persons carrying on business in the
:19:07. > :19:11.UK. Finally, it maintains the overarching mission to increase
:19:12. > :19:16.economic growth in the existing duty to have her guard to desirability of
:19:17. > :19:20.improving quality. It has been said productivity is not everything, it
:19:21. > :19:26.is nearly everything and if there is one word that should be on Innovate
:19:27. > :19:35.UK's, in its DNA, it is the word productivity.
:19:36. > :19:46.It couldn't be clearer to support innovation and it is distinct from
:19:47. > :19:52.the other councils of UK R I E. Lady Brown and the Lord Mayor raised
:19:53. > :20:00.concerns in the committee that it Innovate UK freedoms appear overly
:20:01. > :20:06.restrictive. There will be no diminishing of the current freedoms
:20:07. > :20:10.ins the move. It is based on conditions that apply to all
:20:11. > :20:17.Government departments and public bodies and is approved by their
:20:18. > :20:24.Treasury. It is intended to make it clear that it can enter into joint
:20:25. > :20:34.ventures subject to safeguards and the broad parameters will be set out
:20:35. > :20:38.clearly in advance and can be reiterated at Innovate UK's
:20:39. > :20:44.portfolio as it develops. I hope these amendments reassure noble
:20:45. > :20:48.Lords over the positive intent. These reforms come in the context of
:20:49. > :20:51.the historically large Autumn Statement settlement of innovation
:20:52. > :21:05.funding as part of the industrial strategy. Turning to amendment 173
:21:06. > :21:10.a, I hope this meets the point raised by the noble Lord. Let me
:21:11. > :21:17.reassure the noble Lords that it is not the intention of this bill to
:21:18. > :21:22.disrupt commitments and obligations within the current councils. The
:21:23. > :21:26.Government will not require UKRI to seek permission to continue with
:21:27. > :21:32.joint ventures as part of the legal process to set out UKRI. In new
:21:33. > :21:39.ventures, the Government will not subject councils to any oversight
:21:40. > :21:43.from the Secretary of State that the councils do not already undergo. It
:21:44. > :21:49.is our ambition is that they will be subject to less process and
:21:50. > :21:52.concentrate more on their functions. Noble Lords may not be aware that a
:21:53. > :21:59.great deal of work is currently underway in the councils and their
:22:00. > :22:03.parent departments to ensure a smooth transfer of personnel
:22:04. > :22:11.activities from the current organisations to OFS and UKRI. Joint
:22:12. > :22:15.ventures alongside many other forms of corporate arrangements are in
:22:16. > :22:20.scope of this work. The bill provides tools in schedule ten to
:22:21. > :22:26.transfer these assets from the councils to UKRI through proper
:22:27. > :22:34.transfer schemes. If more intervention is required, wet bed
:22:35. > :22:38.joint-venture is not a range, the joint ventures will be individually
:22:39. > :22:43.addressed. I hope this reassures noble Lords of two things. We do not
:22:44. > :22:53.intend to inflict any due process, any undue process on UK -- UKRI.
:22:54. > :23:01.They will continue to have delegated autonomy over matters pertaining to
:23:02. > :23:06.their subject areas. Addressing Innovate UK and UKRI's freedoms, I
:23:07. > :23:15.request the noble Baroness Lady Brown to withdraw her amendment. I
:23:16. > :23:20.thank the noble Lords that have contributed to this debate. I
:23:21. > :23:26.recognise from what he says that we have a very strongly shared joint
:23:27. > :23:29.objective of pertaining the -- retaining the different roles and I
:23:30. > :23:33.think in the light of the Government amendments which go a long way to
:23:34. > :23:37.doing that and indeed his earlier and positive assurances on an
:23:38. > :23:42.important role the senior independent members of the council
:23:43. > :23:48.'s, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Sun-macro is it your
:23:49. > :23:58.pleasure that it should be withdrawn?
:23:59. > :24:19.The question is amendments 167 to 173 be agreed. Amendment 1703A. Not
:24:20. > :24:36.moved. Amendments 173 and 174. The question is 174 and 175 be agreed
:24:37. > :24:45.also. In clause 88, amendment 176. I beg to move amendment 170 six. I
:24:46. > :24:48.express my gratitude to Lady Brown who worked constructively with me
:24:49. > :24:56.and my colleagues over the last few weeks and months. I am indebted to
:24:57. > :25:01.my noble friend Lord Willis who has written and will continue to be a
:25:02. > :25:04.beacon for ministers setting out in detail this important principle and
:25:05. > :25:10.its practical applications. The Government has been clear in stating
:25:11. > :25:19.the spirit of the principal through various provisions is already, in
:25:20. > :25:23.the words of Lord Mandelson, hard-wired into the bill. I am
:25:24. > :25:32.grateful to all the noble Lords who spoke on this point. A second
:25:33. > :25:37.reading and committee. Many refer to the principle itself. I offered to
:25:38. > :25:41.reflect on this and I'm delighted to move amendment 100 91. I hope noble
:25:42. > :25:51.Lords will be delighted to accept it. We define the principle is the
:25:52. > :25:54.principle that decisions on individual research proposals are
:25:55. > :25:59.best taken following an evaluation of the quality and likely impact of
:26:00. > :26:05.the proposals such as the peer review process. This amendment is
:26:06. > :26:09.both hugely symbolic and an important protection for UK
:26:10. > :26:19.research, putting reference to the principal and legislation for the
:26:20. > :26:22.first time. There was a duty on the Secretary of State to consult
:26:23. > :26:28.formally before laying regulations to alter the names, number of fields
:26:29. > :26:32.of activity of the research councils. I'm grateful to the noble
:26:33. > :26:35.Lord Lord Stevenson who asked the clarity on the point of prior
:26:36. > :26:42.consultation at committee stage. I hope these amendments to live my
:26:43. > :26:47.promise to address the noble Lord's question. Why this Government
:26:48. > :26:49.committed to consult before altering the Council, these amendments would
:26:50. > :26:54.bind future governments to this commitment also. This Government has
:26:55. > :27:01.been consistent in its pledge to allocate separate budgets to each
:27:02. > :27:06.council of UK -- of UKRI. I listened to the greater protections for the
:27:07. > :27:12.noble Lords and the noble Baroness Lady Brown. I have reflected on
:27:13. > :27:16.their speeches and the Government is tabling amendment 188 which will
:27:17. > :27:20.require the Secretary of State on making grants to ten to publish the
:27:21. > :27:28.whole amount in a separate allocation which will go to each
:27:29. > :27:32.council. It will give transparency on all funding allocations to UKRI
:27:33. > :27:41.and research councils, Innovate UK and research England. My global and
:27:42. > :27:47.learned friend spoke about the definition of specialist employees
:27:48. > :27:50.in clause 90 one. This proportion is intended to ensure research councils
:27:51. > :27:57.may continue to recruit certain specialist staff that are employed
:27:58. > :28:04.in relation to a council's field of activity. He raised concerns that
:28:05. > :28:09.the current definition could lead to ambiguity for relevant staff but may
:28:10. > :28:12.not be considered by some to be researchers or scientists. I have
:28:13. > :28:18.reflected carefully and the case that he put forward and I am happy
:28:19. > :28:23.to table amendment 170 82 addresses points. This amendment draws on the
:28:24. > :28:27.language my noble friend employed in his own amendment at committee,
:28:28. > :28:31.expanding the definition to include any person with knowledge,
:28:32. > :28:35.experience or specialist skills relevant to the council's field of
:28:36. > :28:40.activity who is employed by UKRI to work in a field of activity. I hope
:28:41. > :28:44.this amendment alleviates the concerns of my noble and learned
:28:45. > :28:49.friend. I look forward to hearing noble Lord speak on other matters
:28:50. > :28:59.and will respond after they and other noble Lords have had a chance
:29:00. > :29:09.to speak to these amendments. Amendment proposed, Claude -- clause
:29:10. > :29:17.80 eight. At the end insert the words on the martial's paper. I rise
:29:18. > :29:23.to debate two brief points. I hope I will be forgiven for taking the
:29:24. > :29:29.opportunity to pay the warmest and pay tribute to my admiration to my
:29:30. > :29:34.own friend 's Lord Stevenson and Lord Watson for the sterling work
:29:35. > :29:42.they put in on behalf of this side of the bill. My Lords, there is a
:29:43. > :29:52.great deal of feeling in the research about the points covered by
:29:53. > :29:57.these amendments. I think there is a recognition and a tremendous amount
:29:58. > :30:02.of work has gone in to try and find an acceptable formula of words that
:30:03. > :30:10.I think it should be put on record that many of those who are involved
:30:11. > :30:22.in the most outstanding research in our universities remain mystified as
:30:23. > :30:29.to why such a process should be appearing in brackets when it should
:30:30. > :30:41.be in capital letters because the review is essential to the process.
:30:42. > :30:45.Also there is something that the word, excellent, should not have
:30:46. > :30:55.disappeared. Quality is important but what matters ultimately in the
:30:56. > :31:00.research record of our universities and in the contribution to Britain's
:31:01. > :31:06.noble standing in the world about the quality of our research is its
:31:07. > :31:13.emphasis on excellence. I do therefore put on record that this
:31:14. > :31:25.goes forward, it will be essential to keep those two important concerns
:31:26. > :31:39.of the research community in mind. I am involved in three universities
:31:40. > :31:51.and I have been a governor for very many years and am now a governor. I
:31:52. > :31:56.rise briefly to thank the noble minister for his introduction of
:31:57. > :32:05.these amendments and I want to refer briefly to amendment 180 nine, 190
:32:06. > :32:10.and 191 and say how delighted I am that the principle is on the face of
:32:11. > :32:15.the bill. We have heard Joe in discussions during the passage of
:32:16. > :32:22.this bill, many different views on what the principle is. Whether it
:32:23. > :32:30.should be called something else. One of the key references is the paper
:32:31. > :32:38.by the nobleman Lord Will it. It really is about peer review and
:32:39. > :32:42.deciding which individual projects are funded within broader areas. It
:32:43. > :32:52.is reasonable for ministers to have priority is just as when the noble
:32:53. > :32:57.Lord was Minister, P describe the... The peer review system, the
:32:58. > :33:03.practitioners and others close to the action should be the ones who
:33:04. > :33:08.decide which projects are funded. Although the wording says quality,
:33:09. > :33:12.I'm sure if I was on a committee, I would interpret quality as including
:33:13. > :33:16.excellence echoing the point the noble Lord May. I support this
:33:17. > :33:18.amendment.