1-20 of 175 results for subject:Science
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.419 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.008 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Science
- We searched for
- subject_t:Science OR subject_t:"Pure science" OR subject_ses:92917
Session
X
1999-00
Type
-
Early day motions (2)
+
Legislation (2)
+
Delegated legislation (2)
-
Statutory instruments (2)
+
Members' contributions (28)
-
Business questions (1)
-
Oral answers to questions (13)
+
Oral questions (13)
-
Prime Minister's questions (3)
-
Proceeding contributions (2)
+
Parliamentary committees (34)
+
Committee proceedings (14)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (14)
-
Select Committee reports (12)
-
Select Committee reports (Government responses) (6)
-
Select Committee written evidence (2)
+
Parliamentary papers (57)
-
Command papers (9)
-
House of Commons papers (35)
-
House of Lords papers (4)
-
Treaties (3)
-
Unprinted command papers (1)
-
Unprinted papers (8)
+
Parliamentary proceedings (23)
+
Debates (21)
-
Adjournment debates (2)
+
Committee proceedings (14)
-
Select Committee oral evidence (14)
-
Debates on select committee reports (2)
-
Questions for short debate (3)
+
Statements (1)
+
Oral statements (1)
-
Ministerial statements (1)
+
Parliamentary questions (89)
-
Business questions (1)
+
Oral questions (13)
-
Prime Minister's questions (3)
-
Written questions (75)
House
Session
More
1999-00 (175)
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
Answered by
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
Subjects
Disclosure of information; Executive agencies; Government departments; Government information services; Research; Science
Date
23 November 2000
Reference
619 c937-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
Answered by
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Hunt of Chesterton
(Labour)
Type
Oral answers to questions
In the light of the Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers report on the emergence of BSE and CJD, whether they will explain the principles on which they will introduce changes in the management of important scientific issues in government departments and agencies.
Subjects
Disclosure of information; Executive agencies; Government departments; Government information services; Research; Science
Date
23 November 2000
Reference
619 c937-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
In the light of the Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers report on the emergence of BSE and CJD, whether they will explain the principles on which they will introduce changes in the management of important scientific issues in government departments and agencies.
In the light of the Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers report on the emergence of BSE and CJD, whether they will explain the principles on which they will introduce changes in the management of important scientific issues in government departments and agencies.
Asked by
Lord Hunt of Chesterton
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
(Labour)
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
For answer on
23 November 2000
Answered on
23 November 2000
Subjects
Disclosure of information; Executive agencies; Government departments; Government information services; Research; Science
Date
23 November 2000
Reference
619 c937-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
1st supplementary on training of civil servants.
1st supplementary on training of civil servants.
Asked by
Lord Hunt of Chesterton
(Labour)
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
23 November 2000
Subjects
Disclosure of information; Executive agencies; Government departments; Government information services; Research; Science
Date
23 November 2000
Reference
619 c937-8
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
House
House of Lords
What progress they have to report on the allocation of the Science Budget. [HL 4776]. - Inc figures, table and ref to "The Science Budget 2001-02 to 2003-04", in Library.
What progress they have to report on the allocation of the Science Budget. [HL 4776]. - Inc figures, table and ref to "The Science Budget 2001-02 to 2003-04", in Library.
Asked by
Baroness Howells of St Davids
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Sainsbury of Turville
(Labour)
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
For answer on
22 November 2000
Answered on
22 November 2000
Subjects
Finance; Technology; Research; Science
Date
22 November 2000
Reference
619 c74-6WA; HL 4776
House
House of Lords
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will make a statement on the allocation of the Science Budget. - Inc figures. table and fact that publishing today "The Science Budget 2001-02 to 2003-04", in Library. (Dep No 00/1747).
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will make a statement on the allocation of the Science Budget. - Inc figures. table and fact that publishing today "The Science Budget 2001-02 to 2003-04", in Library. (Dep No 00/1747).
Asked by
Nigel Griffiths
(Labour)
Answered by
Stephen Byers
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
20 November 2000
For answer on
22 November 2000
Answered on
22 November 2000
Mr. Nigel Griffiths: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the allocation of the
science budget. [139831]
Mr. Byers: As a result of the Spending Review, the science budget has been increased by £725 million over the next three years. This
represents an increase in the Government's investment in science of an average of 7 per cent. per year in real terms over the next
three years. Once again the Government are making it clear that they regard a healthy science and engineering base as critical to
the nation's well-being.
After taking advice from the Director General of the Research Councils, I have decided that the science budget should be allocated
as follows. A total of £356 million is for investment in science and engineering research; of this, £252 million is to be spent over
three years on three high-profile programmes across the Research Councils. The three programmes are as follows. Genomics: a £110
million investment to increase understanding of gene function and related applications. This should lead to the development of new
diagnostics, drugs and materials. E-science: a £98 million investment to solve key problems of processing, communicating, storing
and accessing data across a range of scientific disciplines, with additional investment to develop core generic technologies. This
investment is absolutely essential for large scale, modern science, but I expect it to have important industrial implications over
the coming decade. Basic technology: a £44 million investment to build up the UK's technology capability. This has value in itself
but will also act as the springboard for more advanced science.
A £1 billion Science Research Investment Fund (SRIF) will fund renewal and development, of which £375 million of this will come from
the science budget, £300 million from the Department for Education and Employment, and £225 million from the Wellcome Trust. My
Department is currently discussing with other interested parties the basis for the allocating of £900 million of this fund to
universities.
The remaining £100 million of SRIF will be invested in Research Council Institutes and large science facilities. The allocations I
am announcing today to the Research Councils include £32 million of this. The remainder will be allocated later this year.
There will be a new £140 million Higher Education Innovation Fund to encourage exploitation of knowledge by Higher Education
Institutions. This will incorporate the current Higher Education Reach Out to Business and the Community Fund (HEROBC). This total
includes around £60 million from the Department for Education and Employment, and £80 million from the science budget. There is also
£20 million from the science budget for the University Challenge and Science Enterprise Challenge Schemes.
£34 million is being allocated to the Research Councils to fund increases in the basic PhD stipends from £6,800 this academic year
to £9,000 in 2003-04. This represents an increase of 23 per cent. in real terms over the period, following the Comprehensive
Spending Review in 1998. It sends another clear signal that the Government believe that postgraduate research should no longer be
seen as a Cinderella career choice.
The detailed allocation is as follows. Further details are available in a report I am publishing today, "The Science Budget 2001-02
to 2003-04", which I have placed in the Library of both Houses.
Resource and capital, figures include baseline and allocations of new funds
£ million
_________________________________________________________________________________________________.
2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Total
Allocations to Cross-Council programmes
Genomics 15.000 39.500 55.500 110.000
E-science 13.000 29.500 55.500 98.000
Basic technology 2.000 15.000 27.000 44.000
Allocations to Research Councils{ 1}
MRC 339.614 349.930 358.151 1,047.695
BBSRC 209.987 219.603 226.151 655.741
NERC 191.865 201.414 208.750 602.030
EPSRC 426.202 429.540 436.911 1,292.653
PPARC 203.289 212.383 217.208 632.881
ESRC 73.447 79.263 85.033 237.742
CCLRC 6.421 6.613 7.452 20.486
Allocations to other areas
Research Council Pensions 26.970 28.450 29.740 85.160
Schemes
Royal Society 25.945 28.745 29.245 83.935
Royal Academy of Engineering 4.270 4.770 5.270 14.310
DIAMOND 20.000 20.000 20.000 60.000
Joint Infrastructure Fund 125.000 -- -- 125.000
Science Research Investment -- 125.000 250.000 375.000
Fund
Joint Research Equipment 10.000 10.000 10.000 30.000
Initiative
Capital yet to be allocated -- 34.000 34.000 68.000
Higher Education Innovation 20.000 20.000 40.000 80.000
Fund
University Challenge -- 5.000 -- 5.000
Science Enterprise Challenge -- 5.000 10.000 15.000
Exploitation of Discoveries 10.000 -- -- 10.000
at public sector research
establishment
Foresight Challenge -- 3.000 5.000 8.000
Cambridge-MIT Institute 14.000 14.000 14.000 42.000
OST Initiatives 3.000 3.100 3.350 9.450
OST Administration Costs 11.192 11.192 11.192 33.576
Exchange Rate and 15.264 15.464 16.014 46.742
Contingency Reserve
Total 1,766.467 1,910.467 2,155.467 5,832.401
_________________________________________________________________________________________________.
{1} Excluding Cross-Council programmes
Subjects
Finance; Higher education; Research; Science
Date
22 November 2000
Reference
139831; 357 c199-202W;357 c199-201W
House
House of Commons
Debate on a motion to approve the Information Select Committee first report of session 1999/2000 (HC 659) on the future of the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. Agreed on question.
Debate on a motion to approve the Information Select Committee first report of session 1999/2000 (HC 659) on the future of the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. Agreed on question.
Lead member
Lord Allan of Hallam
Answering member
Paddy Tipping
Type
Parliamentary proceedings
Subjects
Advisory bodies; Technology; Science; POST
Date
21 November 2000
Reference
357 c275-83
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Commons statement on the outcome of the Research Council held in Brussels on 16th November; and if he will make a statement.
Commons statement on the outcome of the Research Council held in Brussels on 16th November; and if he will make a statement.
Asked by
Jim Hood
(Labour)
Answered by
Patricia Hewitt
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
16 November 2000
For answer on
21 November 2000
Answered on
21 November 2000
Mr. Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the outcome of the Research Council held in Brussels on 16
November; and if he will make a statement. [139508]
Ms Hewitt: I am pleased to report that the Council of 16 November: Received presentations from the Commission on its recent
Innovation and European Research Area Communications, and after an exchange of views adopted a Resolution which endorses the
approach outlined in the latter. Adopted a Resolution on the Commission Communication "Europe and Space: turning to a new chapter".
Approved a negotiating mandate for the Commission, on a legal entity for the construction of the International Thermonuclear
Experimental Reactor (ITER), subject to any future decision to build one. Discussed the links between Science and Society. Under
Other Business, the Council received information from the Presidency on a mechanism for independent scientific advice to the
European Institutions, policy for a European approach to therapeutic trials concerning AIDS, and Alpha Galileo, an internet-based
press centre for European science, engineering and technology.
Subjects
HIV/AIDS; EU action; Research; Science; Nuclear reactors; Space technology; EC Research Council
Date
21 November 2000
Reference
357 c108-9W; 139508
House
House of Commons
Type
Unprinted papers
Author
Nesta
Laid on
16 November 2000
Subjects
Arts; Gifts and endowments; Technology; Science
Commons Library location
UP 1808 1999/2000
Date
16 November 2000
House
House of Commons
Type
Select Committee reports (Government responses); House of Commons papers;
Parliamentary committees
Committee
Science and Technology Committee
Notes
Received 23.11.00
Subjects
Finance; Expenditure; Government departments; Engineering; Research; Science and Technology Committee; Technology; Science; Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
Commons Library location
CS 902
Date
15 November 2000
Reference
HC 981 1999/2000
House
House of Commons
Type
Command papers
Author
Department of Trade and Industry; Office of Science and Technology
Laid on
10 November 2000
Notes
Received 10.11.00
Subjects
Business; Expenditure; Industry; Engineering; Public expenditure; Staff; Statistics; Technology; Research; Science
Commons Library location
Stats 410.79
Date
10 November 2000
Reference
Cm 4902
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, How many grants have been awarded by the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts; and what proportion of funding has been allocated to (a) science, (b) technology and (c) the arts. (Failed OPQ). - Inc figures and...
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, How many grants have been awarded by the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts; and what proportion of funding has been allocated to (a) science, (b) technology and (c) the arts. (Failed OPQ). - Inc figures and...
Asked by
Ian Gibson
(Labour)
Answered by
Lord Smith of Finsbury
(Labour)
Answering body
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
24 October 2000
For answer on
6 November 2000
Answered on
6 November 2000
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many grants have been awarded by the National Endowment
for Science, Technology and the Arts; and what proportion of funding has been allocated to (a) science, (b) technology and (c) the
arts. [135361]
Mr. Chris Smith: NESTA does not invest according to rigid boundaries between science, technology and the arts, and many of the
individuals and projects which it has so far supported do not fall into exact distinctions between these disciplines. However, I can
confirm that £500,000 of the £3 million so far awarded, has been given to projects predominantly related to science, £600,000 has
been spent on projects which are mainly concerned with engineering and technological innovation, and awards principally focusing on
the arts total £1.9 million. Further awards in all three areas will be announced by NESTA in the near future. I am asking the Chief
Executive of NESTA to write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible with details of each award made so far and shall ensure that a
copy of the letter is placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament.
Subjects
Arts; Finance; ICT; Grants; Science; Nesta
Date
6 November 2000
Reference
356 c55W; 135361
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, If he will make a statement on his programme for the public understanding of science. (Failed OPQ).
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, If he will make a statement on his programme for the public understanding of science. (Failed OPQ).
Asked by
Claire Curtis-Thomas
(Labour)
Answered by
Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
27 July 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on his programme for the public
understanding of science. [133924]
Mrs. Liddell: My Department's Public Understanding programme aims to create as many opportunities as possible for people to learn
about recent scientific developments and to debate their value and the issues that they raise for society. It also aims to generate
interest in SET among young people in order to develop and encourage lifelong interest in these subjects and possibly leading to the
pursuit of science-based careers.
Subjects
Science
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c580W; 133924
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what priorities his Department has set for the funding of science projects based in the North West of England.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what priorities his Department has set for the funding of science projects based in the North West of England.
Asked by
Nicholas Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kim Howells
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what priorities his Department has set for the funding
of science projects based in the North-West of England. [135867]
Dr. Howells: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry's Departments criteria for the funding of science
projects across the United Kingdom science base is scientific excellence.
With regard to the North-West Science Review, the overriding priority remained scientific excellence, however other criteria such as
the likely impact on the north west science base and the potential contribution to the future of the north west economy were also
taken into account.
Subjects
Grants; Science; North West
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c582W; 135867
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will list the recipients of funding recently announced by the North West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. - Inc figures.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will list the recipients of funding recently announced by the North West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. - Inc figures.
Asked by
Nicholas Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kim Howells
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list the recipients of funding recently
announced by the North-West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. [135868]
Dr. Howells: On 16 October my noble Friend the Minister for Science and Technology, announced that nine science projects in the
north-west were to share in £26 million of Government funding. The Daresbury Laboratory, the University of Liverpool, the Liverpool
John Moores University, the University of Manchester, the University of Salford and UMIST are all in the lead on projects being
funded. The other members of the successful consortia are the University of Lancaster, the Salford Royal Hospitals Trust, the
Christie Hospital Trust and the Paterson Institute for Cancer Research.
Subjects
Grants; Science; North West
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c582W; 135868
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will list the reasons why the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid was not granted funding by the North West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. - Inc figure.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if he will list the reasons why the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid was not granted funding by the North West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. - Inc figure.
Asked by
Nicholas Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kim Howells
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will list the reasons why the Jodrell Bank
observatory Merlin project bid was not granted funding by the North-West Science Review; and if he will make a statement. [135869]
Dr. Howells: A total of 52 proposals were received by the North-West Science Review Team. They were not only subjected to peer
review to ensure that only excellent science would be funded but also judged by other criteria such as their likely impact on the
north-west science base, and on their potential contribution to the future of the north-west economy. The e-Merlin proposal was not
ranked highly enough to receive funding when judged against these criteria.
Subjects
Grants; Science; North West
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c582W; 135869
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, when he expects a decision from the North West Science and Daresbury Development Group on the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid for funding; and what representations he has received regarding the funding review.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, when he expects a decision from the North West Science and Daresbury Development Group on the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid for funding; and what representations he has received regarding the funding review.
Asked by
Nicholas Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kim Howells
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects a decision from the North-West Science
and Daresbury Development Group on the Jodrell Bank Observatory Merlin project bid for funding; and what representations he has
received regarding the funding review. [135871]
Dr. Howells: The North-West Science and Daresbury Development Group is not considering the e-Merlin project proposal. This proposal
was considered by the North West Science Review Team, whose recommendations for funding were announced by my noble Friend the
Minister for Science and Technology on 16 October 2000. This proposal was not recommended for funding.
With regard to representation, I have received one letter from Chris Davies, Member of the European Parliament and in addition, the
Minister for Science has received one letter from my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs. Ellman).
Subjects
Finance; Research; Science; North West; Jodrell Bank Observatory; Astronomy; Optical equipment
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c583W; 135871
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what representations he has received about (a) the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid to the North West Science Review and (b) the future funding of the observatory.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, what representations he has received about (a) the Jodrell Bank Observatory MERLIN project bid to the North West Science Review and (b) the future funding of the observatory.
Asked by
Nicholas Winterton
(Conservative)
Answered by
Kim Howells
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
26 October 2000
For answer on
2 November 2000
Answered on
2 November 2000
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received about (a) the
Jodrell Bank observatory Merlin project bid to the North-West Science Review and (b) the future funding of the observatory.
[135870]
Dr. Howells: (a) My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has received one letter from a Member of the
European Parliament about the e-Merlin project bid to the North-West Science Review. In addition, the Minister for Science has
received a second letter on the same topic from a Member of Parliament.
(b) My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has received one letter on the future funding of Jodrell Bank
from a Member of Parliament. In addition, the Minister for Science has received two letters on the same topic, one form a Member of
Parliament and one from a representative of a local Government association. The Prime Minister has received one letter on this topic
from a member of the public.
Subjects
Finance; Research; Science; North West; Jodrell Bank Observatory; Astronomy; Optical equipment
Date
2 November 2000
Reference
355 c583W; 135870
House
House of Commons
Type
Treaties;
Command papers
Author
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Laid on
30 October 2000
Coming into force
14 July 2000
Notes
Received 27.10.00
Subjects
International cooperation; Technology; Science; Brazil
Date
30 October 2000
Reference
Cm 4885;Treaty 124 (2000)
House
House of Commons
Type
House of Commons papers
Author
National Museum of Science and Industry
Laid on
26 October 2000
Notes
Received 20.12.00
Subjects
Industry; Museums and galleries; Science; National Railway Museum; National Museum of Science and Industry; National Museum of Photography, Film and Television; Science Museum; Wellcome Museum of the History of Medicine
Commons Library location
CS 786.6
Date
26 October 2000
Reference
HC 933 1999/2000
House
House of Commons