---

Department of Health

If the OFT drives that, it will happen. The report suggested that the Department of Trade and Industry, not the Department of Health, should be the sponsoring Government organisation, but the Government did not agree with that either. I have some sympathy with the Government’s response, because we get a lot more via the PPRS than we would if accountants considered the industry on the basis of how many pounds it is worth to the United Kingdom. The OFT may take us down that road, but we will have to wait and see. If it does so and the Government respond, the Health Committee will consider what should replace the scheme, but it has great benefits. I visited Pfizer about 10 years ago and was shown the big second phase of its research and development in the UK. The company beat off Pacific rim institutions to bring that work to this country. We chatted about the UK’s science base and what our universities were delivering at that time. Why did Pfizer want to come to this country and invest such massive amounts of money, especially on the north Kent coast? It is not the most attractive place on earth. Apologies to the people who live there—they would probably think the same about my home town. There are reasons why the UK has been so successful—as successful, if not more so, than most European countries—in attracting inward investment for research and development over recent decades and the PPRS has something to do with it, although what is happening with the OFT may overturn that. Some people argue that the scheme is wrong. People who are not aware of the full R and D picture might think that small manufacturers, for example, would be better off without the PPRS, but I think that it is of great benefit. It is no coincidence that the pharmaceutical sector is the third largest in our economy. We shall see what the future brings, but that is my feeling at present. As well as the PPRS, the industry has much wider engagement with the Government. I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for what he said about the contributions to the debate. Like other Members, I pointed out the numerous aspects of the pharmaceutical sector on which the Health Committee will keep a watching brief over years to come. We shall also look at the Government’s responses. The debate has not been well attended, but the quality of the contributions and the knowledge of the participants on both sides of the House has been excellent. It shows the House and, I hope, the Executive what the Select Committee system can do to assist us in our deliberations on behalf of the nation. Parliament and the Executive can work closely together and Parliament can advise the Executive through the work of Select Committees. I hope that my hon. Friend’s positive approach to some aspects of the debate will extend to the Select Committee’s reports and recommendations in the not too distant future.