Recommendation 30

HM Government Not Addressed

The government partially agrees with the recommendation. We agree with the Committee on the importance of mapping existing capabilities and prioritising infrastructure development. In 2018 to 2019, the government commissioned UKRI to develop a research and innovation infrastructure roadmap, based on an understanding of our existing landscape and identifying future opportunities to grow our capability. This guided decision making and supported the identification of priorities up to 2030, enabling a more strategic approach to major infrastructure investments. A landscape analysis and opportunities report were published in 2019 and they have provided confidence, strategic direction and a common approach to research and innovation infrastructure planning. The roadmap programme, in combination with UKRI’s Infrastructure Fund approach to investment NAO 2016 report recommendations on ‘BIS’s capital investment in science projects’ to ensure we are continuing to support long-term economic growth. UKRI is currently undertaking a refresh of the infrastructure roadmap which will be published later in 2026. The scope includes research and innovation infrastructure accessible to users, both publicly and privately funded. Hence its scope is broad and it could be used more widely by other funding bodies. Where places can identify innovation and R&D clusters with the potential to be world-leading, UKRI will partner with them to align its investment levers, including infrastructure, behind that cluster. The programme has engaged with almost 300 operational research and innovation infrastructures across the UK and beyond to update our understanding of the landscape. An additional ten workshops have been held in the nations and regions of the UK with stakeholders from industry and sector groups, regional and national government and the academic research community. The programme will demonstrate the impact and benefits of infrastructure investment to world-class research and innovation, our lives and livelihoods. It will identify transformative opportunities to guide future investment to grow our regional and national strengths, support economic growth and advance technological development. On the longer-term strategy for science infrastructure investment, we believe it is the role of the National Wealth Fund to support the development of innovation infrastructure in partnership with the private sector. The National Wealth Fund is the UK government’s principal investor and policy bank with £27.8 billion of capital. In January NWF published its Strategic Plan, setting out its focus on the government’s economic growth and clean energy missions. NWF’s strategy is centred around: unlocking growth opportunities on the pathway to clean energy, accelerating place- based investment and strengthening sovereign & strategic capabilities. NWF’s Strategic Plan identifies 25 sectors and value chains – including batteries, nuclear and transport infrastructure – where it expects to be active over the next five years. These sectors reflect areas where the NWF can address access-to-finance gaps most effectively. NWF focuses on large capital-intensive investments in its priority sectors, where there is an undersupply of private finance. It deploys a range of financial products including equity, debt and guarantees. While long-term strategic planning for UK science and innovation infrastructure is critical, the BBB is not structured or mandated to undertake infrastructure investment, and introducing such a role would create duplication and confusion across the public finance landscape. BBB’s role in the market is focused on supporting SMEs, start-ups, scale-ups and venture/growth markets, using loans, guarantees and equity to address access-to-finance barriers for smaller businesses. It does not finance large capital-intensive infrastructure projects. Given these distinct and complementary roles, we believe that allocating a ring-fenced infrastructure mandate to BBB would blur institutional boundaries, duplicate existing NWF functions, and undermine the clarity achieved through recent reforms to the public finance ecosystem. The NWF is the appropriate vehicle through which government should continue to develop and deliver long-term science and innovation infrastructure investment including an example of a recent NWF investment supporting technology development is that NWF committed up to £599m to Rolls-Royce SMR to support the development of its small modular reactors. In terms of a framework, we recognise the importance of research and innovation Infrastructure, and we are working with UKRI and other stakeholders to determine how it can best deliver government priorities across the whole lifecycle of infrastructure investment (options analysis, construction, operation or repurpose, upgrade, and decommissioning). DSIT is exploring options including developing a framework and toolkit to support R&D infrastructure investment decisions.