The lesson is, I think, that HCI practitioners clothes are no more or less invisible than anyone else. There are plenty of people out there, in a community where research funds are both so crucial and so hard to get, who are quite ruthless enough to wield the knife over a bared throat if it gives them an advantage, regardless of the virtue of the act in the wider scheme of things. To invite such a fate is, frankly, quixotic. Further arguments by John Patterson can be seen here. It is often argued that basic, blue-sky research is the most hard to defend when it comes to funding.
Companies are capable of doing short term development themselves.
It's longer term ideas that are lacking. It was pointed out frequently during the debate that UK industry is very bad at picking up ideas from UK research. Chris Johnson, for instance, stated that US companies were eager to learn, and would contact him having already read about his research. In contrast, UK industry was largely unconcerned. If our research is picked up by US industry, why should UK tax payers part with their money.