Horizon 2020
Item 4 is the response to our horizon 2020 report, which Jen Bell will briefly talk us through.
The Government’s response is generally positive. It details a number of activities that are specific to the committee’s recommendations that the Government and the Scottish research and technological development steering group are undertaking.
Members will recall that most of the findings for the report derived from a conference that the committee held back in May. Some main points at the conference concerned procurement policies, and the Government has drawn attention to the consultation that it launched on 10 August on the proposed procurement reform bill. It is seeking views on how procurement can be used
“to encourage innovation and growth”
and
“to help businesses develop and commercialise new ... goods, services and works for internal and international markets”.
Delegates at the conference raised those issues, to which the Government has responded.
Delegates highlighted the popularity of funding from the Scottish proposal assistance fund—SPAF—which the Government said was to be discontinued. Delegates asked the Government to look into analysing whether the new funding mechanism has been implemented and is successful. The steering group is taking that forward. The Government has acknowledged the SPAF’s popularity, but it has highlighted drawbacks such as
“limited capacity building in SME applicants”.
In keeping with the theme of funding programmes, the Government’s response says that the funding support that the proposal assistance for co-ordination of European research—PACER—programme provided is now provided through PEER. That is another acronym, which stands for pools engagement in European research.
09:30
The final response is on the committee’s call for a single portal for information. Again, delegates to the conference highlighted that as an important recommendation. The Government explains that it would be difficult to achieve because different bodies deliver different elements within the EU programme under contract with the Commission. However, the steering group will consider how to signpost the relevant portals and advice. That should come through in its findings as well.
Thanks, Jen. Do members have any questions or comments?
I will make a comment on bridging the gap between research and business.
At the conference that we held in the chamber, which members might remember, some of the business representatives commented that one of the main difficulties seems to be combining with university research. I have heard the same thing said since. The university research is very good, but the problem seems to be getting the innovation side of the business community linked into it. I am probably not expressing that well, but the problem has been portrayed to me by businessmen.
Might it be worth inquiring as to whether the people who appeared at our conference agree with the findings on that point or whether they are still unhappy? It is not that there was particular unhappiness, but it is important to get excellent research moving into producing products and business. I do not know what you think about that, convener.
You are absolutely right, Jamie. The same exercise will be undertaken with this response as will be undertaken with the response on EU structural funds, in as much as we will send it out to a number of key delegates. Perhaps we will specifically look out the people who raised the business issues, because there were a few.
There were one or two.
You highlighted some of them yourself.
For your information, I have a meeting next week with Kevin Moore, who was one of the main contributors and who spearheads some of the life sciences in Scotland. I am meeting him, a number of other people from academia and representatives of Scottish Enterprise to consider how we can identify the problems with linking up innovation and business—the very point that you make, Jamie.
I am happy to report back to the committee on that meeting. However, you are absolutely right that we need to get the information out to the stakeholders, get their feedback and take it from there.
I happened to meet a gentleman called Melfort Campbell, who came to the event in the chamber, at a funeral last week. He reiterated the point that there seems to be a lack of synergy between research and innovation.
The life sciences sector does that extremely well, so I want to learn how it does that and try to apply the lessons that it has learned to other business sectors. Melfort Campbell’s comments at the conference were helpful, and we should ensure that we get a proper response from him to help to inform where we go from here.
Thank you, convener.
That is really important. The point also came through in the Scotland Europa conference that, although Scotland’s research is second to none in the world, we are not capitalising on it and the benefits of it seem to be going outside the country.
Even though the life sciences seem to be doing well, they still underperform in capitalising on research. It would be interesting to get some research on other sectors to find out whether that is a trend, to identify countries that are capitalising on their research better than Scotland and, perhaps, to learn some lessons. It would be really useful to see the overall picture.
We might be able to commission that work from SPICe. If SPICe gives us the feedback, we can bring it back to the committee, consider it and follow it up with appropriate questions to whomsoever.
It might be worth getting a small panel of people who attended the conference to come before us and explain the intricacies of what they mean when they say that there is a gap somewhere. As a layman, I find it difficult to take on board exactly what the problem is.
That would be helpful.
That makes sense.
I will outline the schedule. We will write to each of the participants in the conference to give them the Government’s response. We will follow up with the business players the issues that have been raised and will commission from SPICe an analysis of how the different sectors are performing or underperforming. Once we have that information, we can bring in a small panel to discuss the findings of that work. That evidence session may well take place at either the end of this year or the beginning of next year.
My attention was drawn to the committee’s recommendation in paragraph 41.3 on page 8 of EU/S4/12/12/2. It struck me as being almost the same plea that the convener made on the previous item, when you asked for information and support for those making applications for funding. The committee’s recommendation states that awareness should be raised
“As a matter of urgency”.
That immediately drew my attention to the issue.
I have read the response from the Scottish Government. What happens if a small to medium-sized enterprise does not know how to engage with both agencies? Is it left out of the loop? I noticed the comment over the page at the tail end of that response that organisations can use
“social media as well as conventional email alerts”
and so on. Do committee members feel that enough is being done to reach out and ensure that all the organisations are aware of the potential funding opportunities?
You highlight an issue that I picked up myself. That is one of the topics on the agenda for a meeting that I will have next week. The Scotland Europa conference that was held to celebrate its 20th anniversary took place at the Parliament. A number of people in the room had been very successful in working with Scotland Europa but a number of people who should be working successfully with Scotland Europa were not in the room. It has identified that as one of its targets. I will meet Scottish Enterprise next week to look at the issue.
Another place where we do not look as often as we should is chambers of commerce. One recommendation that the committee should take forward is to engage much more with chambers of commerce and perhaps link them with Scottish Enterprise and Scotland Europa. Those organisations link well with the chambers of commerce in ordinary circumstances, but we should get them working together to push this specific issue forward, because thousands of businesses that are members of a chamber of commerce will not even know that Scotland Europa exists. We must address that problem.
It is probably worth reiterating a theme that came out from the SMEs at the conference that we held in the chamber, which is the timescales involved. Although horizon 2020 is streamlining the process, reducing timescales and so on, the decision-making processes still take a long time. The best target is to bring the timescale down to three months. A lot of SMEs work in such a way that the timescales keep them out of the process. We still have to do a bit of work on that issue.
Thank you.