European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — House of Lords, 2018-02-26
Topic: Technology
Narendra Babubhai Patel (Crossbench, Unknown): I support this amendment and will go a bit further. As we have heard, the UK is a major player in research and innovation in European countries and worldwide. A recently published document, Building a Strong Future for European Science: Brexit and Beyond, is Wellcome’s recommendation from the future partnership project, based on a survey of 200 institutions and top scientists in Europe. It might form the framework based on which the Government may wish to negotiate beyond Brexit If nothing were to change and we were to remain as we are, there would be no problem—the UK would remain a major player in science and innovation. But on the basis that we will have to negotiate post Brexit, I would say, as the document says: "Brexit presents the UK and EU with choices about their future relationship on research and innovation" European nations, including the United Kingdom as a major player, have developed, "a world-leading location for research and innovation" The EU and associated countries—there are countries which are not part of the EU but are currently associated with Erasmus and other EU research programmes— "should accelerate and deepen development of the European Research Area (ERA), to help Europe and EU Framework Programmes capitalise on the strengths and talents of a wider group of nations" Each of these nations, including the UK, contributes heavily to these programmes. We have to find a way to continue, both for Europe and for us An EU-UK research and innovation agreement for Brexit could be possible: "Evidence and views gathered through the Future Partnership Project showed the importance of finding a way for the EU and UK to maintain their important partnership" There was a strong view, both from scientists and research organisations in Europe, outside the UK, that they would like this partnership and strong relationship to continue As to funding, as has already been mentioned: "The EU’s Framework Programmes are the most effective multilateral funding schemes in the world" The UK needs to be part of this, so: "The UK should therefore secure Associated Country status in an excellence-focused Framework Programme 9"— that will follow programme 8— "as this would be the best way to participate in European research. To achieve this, the UK should be pragmatic about the cost of a good deal to access FP9, and the EU should be pragmatic about the terms of FP9 association for the UK" There are benefits for both sides, which the science community certainly recognises There will, of course, have to be some alliance with regulation and research policy. A later amendment in my name relates particularly to clinical trials, which are important for the life sciences industry in this country. It is important, therefore, for, "the UK to participate in the EU’s harmonised clinical trials system", including the new system that will come. The report states: "A research and innovation agreement should promote dialogue on areas of research policy where the EU and UK can provide global leadership, for example on open research … A research and innovation agreement should support full researcher mobility between the EEA and UK" Proposals of this kind, which have come from Wellcome and the Royal Society, could be the framework for future negotiations, particularly on research and innovation.