Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Haskel (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 8 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on UK Worldwide Interests.


UK Worldwide Interests

My Lords, we look forward to hearing the noble Lord on many occasions and benefiting from his wide experience and wisdom. A couple of weeks ago, some kind person in the Foreign Office sent me an invitation to a meeting in Portcullis House. It was the annual get-together of the science and innovation department of the Foreign Office, the occasion when staff come to London and compare notes and experiences. I am not sure why I was sent the invitation. Perhaps it was because, five years ago, I had worked with the science attaché in Washington when I was there on official business. I had assumed that the position of science attaché in Washington was unique because science in America is a sufficiently important matter to justify an attaché. Imagine my surprise, then, when I went to the meeting to find that there were 44 posts in 29 countries. They worked as a network. The scientists were young—mind you, everyone seems young to me nowadays—but they were not the kind of scientists who learn more and more about less and less. They were diplomats, too, and had a rounded view about the international importance of science. I was impressed. When the noble and learned Lord, Lord Howe of Aberavon, tabled his Motion about the FCO—and I congratulate him on that—I thought that I would draw your Lordships’ attention to the science and innovation network. It is a resource that is, and will continue to be, central to the promotion of our worldwide interests. It is central because much of what we want to achieve in our foreign policy is related to science. Let us take as an example an agreement on climate change, as mentioned by my noble friend Lady Symons. Such an agreement is being negotiated at the moment and is a stated priority of our presidency of the G8 and the EU. Diplomacy, foreign policy and science are closely intertwined in this matter. Next week, in Hong Kong, we shall be discussing trade liberalisation with poor countries. The trade and development committee of the Doha round has special responsibility to build capacity in these countries, capacity to enable free trade. Central to this building of technical and scientific competence is the creation of a scientific infrastructure so that agriculture can be improved and industry can move into the modern knowledge economy. Scientific capacity is also needed to defeat AIDS and malaria, to improve health generally in these countries, and, incidentally, to slow down international migration of skilled and trained personnel from third world countries. This is science and diplomacy working together. Guaranteeing our energy supplies requires science and diplomacy to work together. The world needs international science to help clean up the old sources of energy with clean coal technology and carbon sequestration, which are important to both China and the United Kingdom. We are going to need international scientific collaboration if we are to build a new, modern nuclear power station with minimum waste. And if thermonuclear is an important future energy source, then we will need to be part of an international reactor. These are global concerns which reflect the age we live in—a scientific and diplomatic global age. My noble friend Lady Symons and the noble Lord, Lord Garden, spoke of security. Scientific concerns are becoming ever more apparent where our security is concerned. There has to be international collaboration on various aspects of cyberspace, explosives of all kinds and dangerous toxins. We need diplomatic scientists to understand and control these things. It is right that these resources should come from the Foreign Office. The relationship is too close and the risks are too great for divided loyalties. Science and diplomacy also go together in regulation. There are worldwide different and conflicting views on regulating many matters: therapeutic cloning; the ozone layer; toxicity of everyday chemicals. Regulation of these matters requires both international diplomacy and scientific understanding to ensure that the international regulatory framework provides a level playing field that encourages innovation but prevents economic and commercial damage from free-riding low minimum standards. Science and diplomacy are a joint thread running through all of this. Perhaps the most important way in which science and diplomacy can promote the worldwide interests of this country is to use science to promote British business while at the same time promoting British science to attract new investment into the United Kingdom. This country has been a big investor in science. This Government really believe in the old saying, ““If you think science is expensive, try ignorance””. I have tried to show that we will benefit from this investment not only through innovation and new technology but also through diplomacy. Science is central to our foreign policy objectives. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Howe, spoke about cuts and de-layering. My noble friend Lady Symons spoke about resources under pressure. I therefore hope that my noble friend the Minister can assure me that the science and innovation unit at the Foreign Office will receive care, attention and support from Ministers, because it is an important resource for the promotion of our worldwide interests.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c760-1 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Closures Allowances Diplomatic service Career development Finance Languages Foreign policy Non-departmental public bodies Overseas students Training Foreign and Commonwealth Office BBC World Service Embassies British Council Scholarships
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk