Dr David Bennett – Written evidence (LSI0019)

Life Sciences and the Industrial Strategy Response

This welcome inquiry and Sir John Bell’s recent Life Sciences Industrial Strategy report commissioned by the government [1]&[2] do not refer to several vital omissions which need to be taken into account for any comprehensive strategy for the life sciences and industries.

Executive Summary

1.              Life sciences and their related industries include the medical, agricultural and veterinary fields.

2.              The UK is pre-eminent in life sciences and industries which are dependent on researchers and workers from both EU and non-EU countries. Clear policies and mechanisms for implementing them need establishing for both maintaining their freedom of movement and monitoring and managing student and worker flows.

3.              The UK life sciences and their SMEs receive major funding from EU programmes which, although currently underwritten by government, is already threatened by adverse reactions from the EU. A strategy for their continued equivalent funding and active participation in related EU committees needs to be established.

4.              The UK is a major importer and exporter of agricultural produce with the EU which must conform to EU regulations. UK farmers receive major subsidies from the EU and are dependent on EU migrant agricultural workers. Farm subsidies, migrant workers and regulations all need clear policies and mechanisms for managing and maintaining them.

5.              Industrial biotechnology makes valuable bio-based products from renewable plant-based material and reduces dependence on fossil carbon sources and thus greenhouse gas emissions. A strategy is needed for the development of the UK’s industrial biotechnology sector.

6.              Modern advances in the life sciences in DNA sequencing, epigenetics, genetic modification, RNA interference and CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing can be transformational in their applications. They need to be a specific part of any future strategy for the life sciences and industries.

7.              Historically the UK has been a leading force in regulating the safety and ethics of advances in both the medical and agricultural life sciences. Provisions are required for their proportionate legislation and regulation based on sound scientific and ethical evidence.

8.              The UK as a Member State enjoys common access, tariffs and regulations with the EU for the applications of the life sciences in the pharmaceutical, agricultural and many other associated industries. Forward planning for the alleviation of the impacts of Brexit in these areas is urgently required in a future strategy for the life sciences and industries.

Narrative

1. The broad nature of the life sciences and industries

No mention is made to the plant sciences and their major applications in agriculture nor of the veterinary sciences in the livestock industry.  Neither is there mention of mycology with its uses, for example, in bread, beer and spirits making, mushroom farming and meat alternatives nor of other key fields such as virology, bacteriology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, etc. and the modern advances in the biosciences such as in genomics, bioinformatics, biotechnology, nanobiotechnology, synthetic biology and industrial biotechnology. The diverse range of 1,164 biotechnology companies in the UK is demonstrated in a database.[3] These are all life sciences with important industrial applications for the UK which need consideration in the development of any comprehensive strategy for them.

2. Their dependency on researchers, students and workers from both EU and non-EU countries

The life sciences in UK universities, research institutions and industries are reliant on their international staff, students and workers of all skill levels. These people’s status is in question following the Brexit referendum, some are already leaving or planning to do so and some have already been deterred from coming to the UK.  Both the pre-eminent position of the UK’s universities and their finances are at risk. The life sciences, like all sciences and their industries, are international by their very nature and flourish in large part because of the international mobility of their staff and students. Their continued freedom of movement must be guaranteed after the UK leaves the EU.

The House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology published a report in 2014 stressing that the numbers of international students studying key subjects at UK universities were falling, particularly from India, because tighter immigration rules were creating an "unwelcoming" impression and putting university courses in the STEM subjects of science, technology, engineering and maths of vital importance to the UK under threat.[4] EU applicant figures to undergraduate courses in UK universities decreased by 7% in 2017.[5] Consequently there have been many calls to remove international students from the UK’s immigration statistics.[6] These are notoriously inadequate, although steps are reportedly being made to coordinate data from different sources,[7] and UK public opinion surveys show that foreign students and NHS and other professionals are not unwelcome to the majority of the UK population.[8] The Office for National Statistics has recently published data showing a substantial fall in net migration into the UK accounted for by changes in EU migration and that almost all foreign students left the UK after their studies.[9] Universities and research institutes, the NHS and the agricultural and food processing, retailing and catering industries are dependent on workers from both the EU and worldwide. Training UK nationals to replace those from EU and non-EU countries for these roles will take many years, if indeed possible with the UK unemployment rate at currently 4.3% and below the rate the Bank of England regards as full employment. A clear strategy therefore needs establishing for managing and accurately monitoring flows of students and workers of all skill levels from both EU and non-EU countries.

3. Their dependence on and replacement of EU research funding

The UK government has committed to underwriting UK university participation in EU research grants awarded while Britain remains a member of the EU even if projects continue beyond that time. This assurance does not take into account anecdotal reports and personal experience that potential UK applicants are already being deterred from applying for such grants, requested to withdraw from applications by mainland EU participants and being down-graded by European Commission grant proposal evaluation panels. If EU grant proposals involving UK participants are not awarded for any of these reasons they will not be funded by the UK government whereas otherwise they might have been funded according to the UK government’s promise. 

The government has recently published a paper on the proposed partnership with the EU in research programmes after the UK leaves the EU without specifying any financial contribution and stating that “Associated countries do not have a formal vote over the work programme, but can attend programme committees, which provides them with a degree of influence.” [10] However it has also been reported that the government is to offer to pay more than £1 billion per year to continue to participate in EU research programmes.[11] Thirteen counties have such EU Associated Country status and contribute to EU Framework Programme budgets proportionally to their GDP.[12] Switzerland, for example, participates in Horizon 2020 with financial contribution but only as an observer in its committees.[13] Any strategy for life science funding and its industrial applications must include funding to the Horizon 2020 research programme containing the European Research Council, Future and Emerging Technologies, Research Infrastructures and the Marie Skłodowska-Curie student study abroad scheme and their successors together with guarantees about the status of the highly skilled EU researchers already working in the UK and active participation in the expert and grant proposal evaluation committees which greatly influence them, and be part of this inquiry.

We note that the Royal Society stated that “The UK is one of the largest recipients of research funding in the EU. Over the period 2007 – 2013 the UK received €8.8 billion out of a total of €107 billion expenditure on research, development and innovation in EU Member States, associated and third countries. This represents the fourth largest share in the EU. In terms of funding awarded on a competitive basis in the period 2007 – 2013 (Framework Programme 7), the UK was the second largest recipient after Germany, securing €6.9 billion out of a total of €55.4 billion.” [14]

4. Agriculture post-Brexit

As yet the government has not formally published a position on what it is seeking with regard to the UK relationship with the EU about import and export tariffs of agricultural products nor about farm subsidies. UK farming’s use of precision agriculture based on high-tech, IT and GPS technologies, its dependence on temporary migrant workers and its use of modern advances in crop and animal breeding are key factors for its profitability and sustainability. Consideration needs to be given to these issues in any comprehensive strategy for the crop and veterinary sciences and their applications in agriculture.

We note that the UK National Farmers Union has stated that “The EU is the world’s largest agricultural trader. Its agri-food exports totalled €122 billion in 2014 and it has a positive trade balance with the rest of the world of €18bn. The UK is a net importer of agri-food products, totalling £39.6bn in 2014.  We import nearly twice as many agri-food products from the other EU countries than we export, however our exports are significant. In 2014 we exported £12.8bn worth of products. Approximately 73% of our total agri-food exports were destined for other European member states.”…. “In 2015 UK farmers received €3,084bn direct support, also known as the Basic Payment Scheme (BPS). In England and Wales this equates to an average payment of €235 and €179 per hectare respectively.” [15]

5. Industrial biotechnology

Industrial biotechnology uses enzymes and microorganisms to make bio-based products from renewable plant-based material in sectors as diverse as chemicals, materials, pharmaceuticals, plastics, food and feed ingredients, detergents, pulp and paper, textiles and bioenergy. Industrial biotechnology has been recognised as a Key Enabling Technology (KET) by the European Commission underlining the strategic importance of this sector as a major driving force behind the development of new innovative products, competitiveness, jobs and growth.[16] Similar consideration needs to be given to the development of the UK’s strategy for the industrial biotechnology sector and to be a component of this inquiry.

We note a Europe-wide report that states concerns about greenhouse gas emissions and their effect in climate change together with the needs to reduce dependence on fossil carbon, to use resources more efficiently and sustainably to provide for a growing global population and the importance of promoting the transition towards a renewable bio-based economy have led to an emphasis on industrial biotechnology.[17]

6. Modern advances in the life sciences

These include such as in DNA sequencing, epigenetics (heritable characteristics not carried in DNA), genetic modification (GM), gene-silencing RNA interference (RNAi) together with other technologies including conventional breeding techniques and marker assisted selection which are non-GM and precise CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, still to be classified, can be transformational. They can be used to greatly increase both crop yields and nutritional value and resistance to pests and drought, critical to developing countries such as in Sub-Saharan Africa as well as important in the UK.

In a recent UK public opinion survey two-thirds of respondents said that they would support GM food as long as it did not harm public health or the environment.[18] GM wheat field trials on the Rothamsted Research farm during 2017 to 2019 reportedly have not been attacked despite initial opposition from anti-GM campaigning organisations.[19] However cultivation of GM crops was banned in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2015 while the EU imports almost 34 million tonnes of GM soya annually mainly for animal feed[20] and the UK imports an estimated 140,000 tonnes of GM soya and 300,000 tonnes of GM maize[21].

The CRISPR-Cas9 technique has recently been shown to correct the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) mutation in human embryos responsible for myocardial disease, one of over 5,000 single gene diseases.[22] The UK has been at the forefront of advances such as in vitro fertilisation and three-parent babies and could be with gene editing for curing genetic diseases.

Consideration of these modern techniques needs to be part of a strategy for the life sciences and their related medical, agricultural and industrial applications.

7. Ethical, legal and social aspects of the life sciences and industries

Key initiatives have enabled the UK life sciences to maintain their world-wide pre-eminent position especially in the field of human reproduction research and its implementation. In the UK the National Farmers’ Union has long supported the growing of GM crops.[23] Progress of the crop sciences and their agricultural applications in the UK has been hindered greatly both by public concerns about GM crops and by the European Commission’s and Parliament’s continuing bans and long delays in approvals for growing GM crops (as in 6 above) for which the European Ombudsman reprimanded the European Commission.[24] Brexit may enable the UK to be free of these constraints. However, food exported to the EU would still have to be below the level of 0.9% adventitious GM presence permitted there. A UK strategy for the life sciences and their associated industries needs to embody continued provisions for these and their possible subsequent novel advances by proportionate legislation and regulation when required based on sound scientific and ethical evidence and with which UK society is comfortable.

We note that historically the UK has led and been very influential globally in the consideration of the safety and ethics of advances in both medical and agricultural life science research and bodies and in legislation regulating them (e.g. UK’s Genetic Manipulation Advisory Group (GMAG)  established in 1976; Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990; the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA); Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Research Purposes) Regulations 2001 to permit embryo research involving stem cells and cell nuclear replacement thus allowing therapeutic cloning; Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001; Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 which repealed the Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001 and replaced it with a wide range of constructive up-to-date provisions regulated by the HFEA; Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) which regulates field trials of genetically modified (GM) crops under the Environmental Protection Act 1992; Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) which is a non-statutory, independent body of scientific experts that advises the Food Standards Agency on novel foods (including GM foods) and novel processes (including food irradiation)).

8. Tariffs, regulations and dispute resolution

As a member of the EU the UK currently enjoys common tariffs and regulations for the industrial applications of the life sciences in the pharmaceutical, agricultural and many other associated industries which it will lose when it leaves. The UK will have to establish its own regulations, regulatory authorities and legal mechanisms for dispute resolution to govern them to replace such as the European Medicines Agency and the European Court of Justice. The UK will have to align and conform with EU regulations for exports to the EU. Consideration of the impacts of these possible tariffs, conformity with EU regulations for exports to it and the regulatory provisions required to be put in place similarly need to be components of a comprehensive strategy for the life sciences and their related industries.

14 September 2017