FST JOURNAL

Following the presentations, the speakers at the event formed a panel and took questions from the audience. Some of the key points raised are shown below.

One question noted that in the UK, we see a lot of support for research and development, a lot of support for startups and exporting, but very little support for getting traction in our own markets for technology, and went on to ask whether it was now the time (within this current generation of industrial strategy), to be more proactive in the co creation of markets and adopt technologies as we create them? In response, the panel mentioned various initiatives in the USA looking at outcomes-oriented innovation and procurement and suggested that the UK should be clearer on matching its investment to its missions. Particularly where money is tight, opportunities exist in regulation and procurement. Productivity performance in the UK has been sluggish – new technology can help drive improvements, but so can the dissemination and wider adoption of existing technologies. In some cases the technology is the easy bit, and issues around IP are much more problematic.

The panel were asked about whether the government, through the industrial strategy, should support specific industry sectors, with the example of the automotive industry given. In response, the panel noted the strengths of the UK car industry, and argued that whilst the industrial strategy should not be used to save an industrial sector, it should look at where the UK has strengths and there is also demand. The UK’s innovation budget should then be utilised to help focus on how we can keep them. For example, the Faraday Institution was created to support our research in battery technology, feeding directly into electric vehicle manufacturing. However, there is the danger of the government being “captured” by certain sectors and introducing poor regulation as a result of lobbying. Some previous R&D tax incentives have increased profits but not increased investment. You want companies to invest and to innovate and do what they wouldn't have done otherwise, and then you help them if they are willing. The UK should move away from picking winners and instead pick the willing.

It is important to understand how the UK is different to other countries. We do not have patient, long-term finance – we have short-term finance. Catapult centres spend 10 times less than the German Fraunhofer Institutes, and Brexit has cost the UK some market opportunities. But we can learn lessons from others. Denmark is the number one provider of high-tech green digital services to China, which came about through demand-side policies, and the Danish push to make Copenhagen the greenest city in Europe. That created a market to allow small tech start-ups to thrive.

It is important that the UK has “staying power” – clarity of purpose and focus for the long term. This will allow the UK to build on the foundations of the academic sector and create whole new industrial sectors such as floating offshore wind and large-scale, complex, integrated systems.