Pre-appointment hearing with the Government's preferred candidate for chair of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council PDF Download

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215042958
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 24

View

Book Description
The preferred candidate is Dr Paul Golby and the Committee recommends the appointment proceeds

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215046871
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 28

View

Book Description
The preferred candidate is Dr Paul Golby and the Committee recommends the appointment proceeds

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215067937
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 24

View

Book Description
The Committee is satisfied that the preferred candidate, Sir Drummond Bone, is a suitable candidate to chair the Arts and Humanities Research Council and recommends that the Minister proceeds with the appointment

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215038647
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 20

View

Book Description
Pre-appointment hearing with the Government's preferred candidate for Chair of the Technology Strategy Board : Tenth report of session 2010-12, Vol. 2: Oral and written Evidence

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215048387
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 442

View

Book Description
On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215062321
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 210

View

Book Description
Many of the trials taking place today are unregistered and unpublished, meaning that the information that they generate remains invisible to both the scientific community and the public. This undermines public trust, slowing the pace of medical advancement and potentially putting patients at risk. All trials conducted on NHS treatments-and all other trials receiving public funding-should be prospectively registered and their results published in a scientific journal. While the focus should be on implementing this change for future trials, the Government must also do what it can to ensure that historic trials are registered and published, particularly where they have been publically funded. The Government should also take steps to facilitate greater sharing of the raw data generated during a trial in a responsible and controlled way, with the knowledge and consent of patients. The report also draws attention to the recent fall in the number of trials taking place in the UK. It finds that the need for multiple governance approvals from participating NHS organisations remained the biggest barrier to setting up a UK trial, but that lack of public awareness was also a key issue. Recruiting participants can also be a challenge. The report calls on the Government to take its recommendations into account in ongoing discussions regarding the revision of European clinical trials legislation and in its response to the European Medicines Agency's consultation on the release of clinical trial data, which closes at the end of this month

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215071840
Category : Political Science
Languages : en
Pages : 52

View

Book Description
The Government launched its new horizon scanning programme last July, stating that 'in a tight economic climate, it is more important than ever to have the best possible understanding of the world around us, and how that world is changing'. However, as it stands, the new programme is little more than an echo chamber for Government views. The new bodies that have been created consist entirely of Civil Servants, effectively excluding the vast pool of expertise that exists outside of government. The new programme does not even have a dedicated web presence to keep interested parties informed. The programme's failings are partially attributed to a lack of ministerial oversight. The Government also needs to recognise the potential role to be played in the new programme by the Government Office for Science (GO-Science), specifically the Foresight Unit. The relative lack of impact that the Foresight Unit has historically had on policy is largely a result of its non-central location in government. GO-Science is located in the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). In contrast, the new horizon scanning programme is located in the Cabinet Office. In choosing to situate the new horizon scanning programme in the Cabinet Office, the Government has recognised the importance of location and has thereby acknowledged the strength of this argument. GO-Science should be relocated from BIS to the Cabinet Office, where it can play a more central role in the new programme and more effectively fulfill its role of ensuring that the best scientific evidence is utilised across government

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215049636
Category : Business & Economics
Languages : en
Pages : 132

View

Book Description
The UK has benefitted from having strong scientific advice available to Ministers and developing nations would see a huge benefit from being able to draw on strong home-grown institutions to inform policy decisions. A previous report by the Science and Technology Committee had criticised the Government for not paying enough attention to building the science base of developing nations. While concerns remain, MPs considered that the Department for International Development had made improvements in using a more robust evidence base and developing its own in-house expertise. An important feature raised in this report is that there had to be more attention paid to ensuring that scientists, especially those trained through UK support, were facilitated in staying in their home country and utilising the skills they had acquired. More support was needed to permit scientists from developing nations to build and develop their early career within in their native country. Only then could programmes to build scientific capacity eventually become self-sustaining. UK science benefits from collaborations in developing nations and through building connections with growing economies of the world but the MPs found that current funding streams actively discourage the participation of UK scientists. The MPs recommended that exercises such as the Research Excellence Framework recognise the contribution made by these scientists beyond their publication record.

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 0215083849
Category : Law
Languages : en
Pages : 53

View

Book Description
In its broadest sense, biometrics is the measurement and analysis of a biological characteristic (fingerprints, iris patterns, retinas, face or hand geometry) or a behavioural characteristic (voice, gait or signature). Biometric technologies use these characteristics to identify individuals automatically. Unlike identity documents or passwords, biometrics cannot be lost or forgotten since they are a part of the user and are always present at the time of identification. They are also difficult, though not impossible, to forge or share. Three future trends in the application of biometrics were identified during the inquiry: (i) the growth of unsupervised biometric systems, accessed via mobile devices, which verify identity; (ii) the proliferation of "second-generation" biometric technologies that can authenticate individuals covertly; (iii) and the linking of biometric data with other types of 'big data' as part of efforts to profile individuals. Each of these trends introduces risks and benefits to individuals, to the state and to society as a whole. They also raise important ethical and legal questions relating to privacy and autonomy. The Committee are not convinced that the Government has addressed these questions, nor are they satisfied that it has looked ahead and considered how the risks and benefits of biometrics will be managed and communicated to the public.

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee
Publisher: The Stationery Office
ISBN: 9780215053282
Category : Science
Languages : en
Pages : 76

View

Book Description
In September 2012, the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) announced a consultation process on proposals to merge the British Antarctic Survey and National Oceanography Centre. It argued that there was a strong strategic case for the merger, arising from scientific synergies between the organisations, a drive to maximise the social and economic impact of scientific research output and a need to make the most cost effective use of marine and polar infrastructure. A number of serious concerns have been raised about the prospect of merging the British Antarctic Survey and National Oceanography Centre, and the way in which the consultation has been handled. It's important that these concerns are addressed by NERC before any further action is taken. NERC has not properly consulted on whether a merger is the best way to achieve its objectives and has not provided an adequate evidence base to support its case for a merger, with the absence of projected cost savings being particularly notable. In addition, NERC does not appear to have given adequate consideration to the British Antarctic Survey's geopolitical role when drafting its consultation proposals. Nor has it demonstrated an awareness of UK political commitments on protecting the environment, and polar regions in particular. NERC should consider whether its aims could be achieved by means other than a merger. Future consultations should be carried out with better engagement with scientists and other stakeholders