3rd Report - Flying Blind: Innovation, Growth and the Regions

The government rejects the recommendation for a new portal and Innovate UK targets, arguing that existing mechanisms are more effective. It highlights embedded regional considerations in innovation policy, roles of senior figures like the Northern Growth Envoy, and regular engagement between ministers, UKRI, and local leaders, which they believe adequately addresses regional needs.

The government partially agrees but does not commit to establishing Northern Gritstone or Midlands Mindforge-like funds for every region, instead rejecting a mandate to the British Business Bank for this purpose and stating DSIT is exploring options for a broader R&D infrastructure investment framework.

The government explicitly rejects the recommendation to remove the requirement for Catapults to raise private funding, arguing that the current mixed funding model ensures market responsiveness, prevents displacement of private activity, and provides flexibility to address regional contexts.

The government partially agrees but explicitly states it will not commit to a new Regional Graduate Retention Strategy at this time, asserting that existing policies such as Local Growth Plans, Investment Zones, and Local Skills Improvement Plans already address university-industry collaboration and local employment.

The government partially agrees, but emphasizes the Regulatory Innovation Office's focused role on regulatory barriers, stating that mapping the full research-to-market pathway and publishing a regional support strategy would cover issues beyond RIO's remit, which are addressed by wider government initiatives.

The government rejects the recommendation for an independent review examining the link between R&D, new businesses, and economic growth. It states that a substantial body of existing evidence already addresses these links at national and regional levels.

The government explicitly disagrees that funding to Golden Triangle institutions should be contingent on demonstrating economic impact elsewhere, but states it already considers both national and local impact when evaluating R&D investments to maximise impact across the UK.

The government rejects the committee's observation, stating it disagrees with the recommendation and referencing a substantial body of existing evidence and research on the economic impacts of public R&D investment at national and regional levels.