Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 21
21
UKRI recognised the need to think about R&D expenditure in terms of what it described...
Conclusion
UKRI recognised the need to think about R&D expenditure in terms of what it described as the ‘place part of the agenda’.58 Comparing the distribution of the Fund with what it described as normal R&D expenditure, UKRI asserted that it thought that investment through the Fund in London was “very comparable” and that for the South East it was about “one third up”. UKRI considered that the level of investment received by the West Midlands was “over twice the level…you see normally”.59 It told us that this was due to the nature of some of the challenges on which the Fund focused, particularly mobility and the fact the UK’s advanced manufacturing base was located in the West Midlands.60 54 Q 41 55 C&AG’s Report, para 2.10 56 C&AG’s Report, para 2.10, HM Government, UK Research and Development Roadmap, Policy Paper, 1 July 2020 57 Q 44; C&AG’s Report paras 2.11–2.12, Figures 8 and 9 58 Q 46 59 Q 44 60 Qq 44, 46 16 Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund
Government Response
A response document is linked to this report, dated 2 September 2021. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document ↗