Queen’s University Belfast – Written evidence (LSI0083)
1. How can investors be encouraged to invest in turning basic life science research into new innovations in treatment? Why has investment been lacking in this sector? Does the research base have the necessary infrastructure to be world-leading?
Investors and companies require a high degree of confidence in new innovations to be sure they work reliably and can be produced at scale in manufacturing facilities. Industry is particularly keen to contract out pre-clinical work to universities, but quality of the research base is crucial in providing confidence to industry that the work can be successfully carried out. Funding currently is overly concentrated amongst a number of top universities - primarily in south of England - and this can make regional growth challenging.
In Northern Ireland there is a particular challenge for HE funding, where there is a structural funding deficit with the rest of the UK. It is often the case that HEIs are forced to choose between prioritising investments in various different funding streams rather than benefitting from new funding that allows us to build upon strengths. “Flat cash” settlements will only allow us to maintain current levels of quality and in the long-term are likely to mean making cuts to the research base. New funding is required. The UK as a whole under-invests in research and development, however, the current government has recently made a number of important commitments through its new Industrial Strategy, allocating approximately £4.2bn in new investment. The NI Industrial Strategy makes no commitment to any new investment in R&D. Furthermore, recent uplifts to HEIF funding in England and the introduction of the Connecting Capability Fund will include no subsequent new investment for the research base in Northern Ireland.
2. Why has the UK underperformed in turning basic research in the life sciences into intellectual property? What needs to be done to address this historic weakness in the UK and grow new companies to commercialise new research and related technologies in the life sciences?
Access to investment funding is sub-optimum, especially outside the ‘Golden Triangle’. This is a particular issue for devolved regions such as Northern Ireland where regional VC funding is difficult to come by and visibility to global investors is poor. More could be done to provide incentives for VC funding in regional growth areas such as Northern Ireland.
Even when funding is obtained, there is an expectation of rapid delivery of product to market followed by an investor exit strategy of a sale to an existing conglomerate. The pharmaceutical sector aside, the UK has few large companies to either act as early customers of scale or to buy the start-up and develop the product.
Researchers do not have a solid understanding of the full range of options available to them and how these can be used to engage with commercial partners. It is crucial that researchers are provided with adequate professional support and that funding initiatives are structured and streamlined to ensure they are easily accessible.
Researchers themselves can lack a full appreciation of the fact that partnerships with industry may be crucial to optimising the impact of their research. For example, only industry can deliver an improvement in patient care when it is vital that a product is available on a wide scale. It is crucial that this is embedded into the academic career pathway, particularly with early career researchers. Initiatives that involve sharing people between industry and academic, such as KTP, placements and secondments, are vitally important in achieving this. Funding for such initiatives is often difficult to identify and piecemeal.
There are challenges in translation of methods and techniques between academia and industry. Those approaches used in the lab can sometimes not translate well to a production environment and other industrial contexts.
Industrial Strategy
9. How do the devolved administrations and city regions fit into the strategy? Scotland has its own life sciences strategy, how will the two interact?
As outlined above, the research base in Northern Ireland is under resourced relative to the rest of the UK. This is a particular issue for life sciences. Clinical academic programmes are vastly smaller than those in the rest of the UK and no matter how active our researchers are, there are structural disadvantages with regard to the funding we can access.
In the area of Life and Health Sciences, the University has established a Global Research Institute– the Institute for Health Sciences – and two ‘Pioneer Research Programmes’ looking separately at the use of advanced technologies to improve healthcare outcomes and optimising the treatment of cancer patients by using radiation. It is important that the UK Life Sciences Industrial Strategy recognises the full scale of expertise and opportunity in this area, with over 1,000 researchers currently in place. There is clear potential for an innovative and world-class healthcare research base in NI, leading to improved patient outcomes, as demonstrated by the recent Precision Medicine Catapult (PMC) process and the £32m Centre for Experimental Medicine, funded with the support of a competitively funded grant from the UK Research Partnership Investment Fund.
However, NI currently invests at least 33% less in Health-related R&D than the rest of the UK on a per capita basis and, despite years of protracted planning, plans for a NI Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) have yet to be finalised. The BRC is a particular problem, whereby this is seen as a ‘badge of quality’ by a number of funders and its absence therefore places NI at an automatic disadvantage.
The UK Industrial Strategy rightly has a strong focus on regional growth and any devolved strategy should have significant funding attached to it in order to underpin its ambition.
A further challenge relates to the harmonisation of the regulatory environment between NI and the rest of the UK which would be crucial in further streamlining and facilitating collaboration across the UK.
Responsibility and accountability?
15. Does the Government have the right structures in place to support the life science sector? Is the Office of Life Sciences effective? Should the Government appoint a dedicated Life Sciences Minister? If so, should that Minister have UK-wide or England-only responsibilities?
The introduction of a Life Sciences minister could be useful but it will be crucial that this role is linked in with other key decision makers across government and has the ability to affect real change. Ensuring that the role has a UK-wide focus is preferable give the focus on regional growth in the UK Industrial Strategy.
Brexit
16. What impact will Brexit have on the Life Sciences sector? Will the strategy help the sector to mitigate the risks and take advantage of the opportunities of Brexit?
It is important to note that the UK’s exit from the European Union will present significant challenges for the research base in NI and consequently the delivery of the Industrial Strategy. ‘Brexit’ will not only affect the University’s ability to access valuable EU research funds (accounting for 14.5% of research funding between 2011 and 2017), but also our ability to attract and retain world-class students and staff to the region and develop collaborations with international partners.
Brexit will also affect NI’s relationship with the Republic of Ireland (ROI), particularly as it is the only part of the UK which shares a border with an EU member state. In order to deliver the ambitions of Economy 2030, it is crucial that an open and innovative R&D ecosystem exists on the island of Ireland, of particular importance given recent t reports indicating that large companies (e.g. Almac) are considering moving some operations into ROI. Over recent years a strong pipeline of collaborative research activity between NI and ROI has emerged, including 16 EU Horizon 2020 awards, a collaboration with Science Foundation Ireland which delivered 13 collaborative programmes between Queen’s and ROI partners, and the US-Ireland R&D Partnership Programme. Unfortunately these programmes have either been discontinued, scaled-back or, in the case of Horizon 2020, may no longer be accessible to NI following Brexit. It is important that strong cooperation continues to exist, and that the EU exit does not impact the ability of the research base in NI to engage with key strategic partners.
More broadly, Brexit could incur debilitating consequences for the UK with regard to both reputational and regulatory changes – if the regulatory frameworks in the UK and other countries are not easily compatible this will make it increasingly undesirable to work with the UK, particularly when there is an option to work with other countries.
17. How should the regulatory framework be changed or improved after Brexit to support the sector?
There may be a temptation to simplify the system in the UK in order to make it less ‘burdensome’ for those conducting cutting-edge work within the UK. However, it is important that this is avoided as pan-European work would become impossible unless regulatory frameworks are harmonised.
15 September 2017