ICON66 – Volume 7
Lord West Talks Defence Tactics
The UK defence industry reports that investment in research and technology has been falling; and warns that we will lose an important part of the industry unless action is taken. ICON talks to Lord West about the importance of continued investment.
ICON’s Alan Bristow speaks to the Minister for Counter Terrorism.
ICON: The Government is appealing to industry, academics and individuals to develop new technologies to fight terrorism. You recently watched the trials of an anti terror gun boat which has the ability to stop a speed boat, possibly laden with explosives, from reaching its target. What counter terrorism technologies are you looking for?
LORD WEST: We are looking for technologies to help protect crowded places and our national infrastructure. We are also interested in technologies that can detect and counter improvised explosives or chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear threats. Finally we want technologies to protect against cyber terrorism and improve our ability to analyse data. But this is only a subset of the challenges facing us. We’re interested in any technology that can help us reduce the threat of international terrorism.
ICON: Typically the big procurement mandates are won by the big players; is there an opportunity within the framework for smaller entrepreneurs?
LW: It is unsurprising that large development and integration contracts often fall to big companies. However SMEs are a key part of UK innovation and are vital to our security and counter-terrorism programme. Our call for new technologies in the Ideas and Innovation brochure, along with the work of the INSTINCT programme (Innovative Science and Technology in Counter- Terrorism) both place an emphasis on SMEs. There are opportunities in all areas for SMEs who have something new to bring.
ICON: Government has been clear about its desire for companies to innovate in the security space, and has encouraged UK industry to invest in developing new capabilities. Once this in itial innovation phase is completed, however, it’s often difficult for companies to understand how Government customers will exploit these new capabilities. How can Government provide a clearer path from security research and development to procurement?
LW: There is no doubt that the security market is complex. There are over 50 police forces across the UK and more than 30 Government departments involved in security and counterterrorism. To help establish a more co-ordinated approach to the purchase of counter-terrorism equipment, the Home Office will be working with key sectors and in particular, with the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to make exploitation easier. We are also hosting an expanded version of our Home Office Scientific Development Branch Exhibition from 16-18 March in Farnborough. This will allow a diverse range of exhibitors, from companies of all sizes, to display and demonstrate their law enforcement and public security products to thousands of government, police and security buyers from across the UK and the globe.
ICON: Hundreds of bodies, from MI5 to the Coast Guard to BT, are seeking to use innovation and technology to protect themselves against threats and hazards. For innovative companies in this market, this could be a huge opportunity, but the absence of a single public sector customer means it’s hard for suppliers to understand where their technology could help. Should the Government be bringing together common requirements to provide clarity for the whole market about future business?
LW: We are absolutely committed to intelligent cross-Government procurement, as demonstrated by the recently published brochure ‘Ideas and innovation: how industry and academia can play their part’. It’s the first of a series of steps intended to give the private sector information about the requirements of the UK counter-terrorism community and how they can work more closely with us. The booklet explains what technologies are important to us and what innovations we are looking for. Similarly websites such as bluelight.gov.uk and supply2.gov.uk show many requirements in one place. The former for instance, allows companies to register to receive free email notifications of new tender opportunities issued by police authorities that match their capabilities. Equally, however, we should not underestimate the advantages of separate markets and the flexibility that this gives suppliers, especially at the smaller end of the spectrum. Different organisations often have quite different requirements and this separation allows people to try new approaches without having to involve central Government.
ICON: As you will be aware the Government supports a large level of the UK’s current venture capital funding through Government backed funds such as the University Challenge Funds, Regional Venture Capital Funds, Capital for Enterprise Fund, and most recently the UK Innovation Investment Fund – which Gordon Brown aims to become a £1Bn source of funding. Do you support the continued investment in such schemes by the Government, particularly given that a significant share of that investment subsequently goes into Security and Defence-related tech companies?
LW: All innovation requires funding and I fully support the Government’s efforts to channel that funding to the most useful and exciting ideas. It’s also important to remember that the European Union is also a significant source of funds. For example, the European Commission’s Framework Programme 7 has a security research programme worth approximately €200M. For more details about the Home Office Science Strategy: www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/science-strategy
