CONTENTS

ADVERTORIAL
ADVERTORIAL
STRONG BREXIT DEAL IS A
MUST FOR UK INNOVATION!
Richard Brook OBE FREng
President AIRTO
(Association of Innovation,
Research and Technology
Organisations)
www.airto.co.uk
@airtoinnovation
With Brexit looming ever closer, getting a strong deal with the
European Union (EU) will be just as vital for the innovation
ecosystem that underpins the UK’s prosperity, productivity
and competitiveness, as it will be for our high profile university
research and science base.
Whilst the UK ranks second in the world in terms of scientific research, it is
also second in the Global Innovation Index. Without access to EU networks,
partners, skilled staff and financial underpinning, or to other comparable
international communities and financing, this positioning could easily be
lost with consequent damage to the UK economy. Britain’s large and thriving
Innovation, Research & Technology (IRT) sector contributes £32-36 billion
per annum to the economy. The IRT organisations that AIRTO represents
(including Catapult Centres, Independent Research and Technology
Organisations, Public Sector Research establishments and specialist private
companies) are a significant component of the UK’s innovation ecosystem,
focused on commercial translation of applied research.
IRT sector organisations already do twice as much business with the rest of
the world as with EU clients. However, diminution of links to EU collaboration
networks and funding for science and research will hamper capacity to
advance innovation. While ready to further expand links with global partners,
IRT organisations need continuing access to investment in research and
innovation, and procurement contracts to maintain their world-leading edge.
AIRTO’s immediate priorities for the UK’s £8bn IRT sector are to minimise any
negative impact on UK science and economic growth more widely, and to
harness any opportunities that Brexit presents. Nevertheless, negotiation of
a satisfactory deal with the EU is vital, mainly to ensure that opportunities for
participation in collaborative programmes with potential business and future
supply chain partners remain available to the UK.
Science, research and innovation are intrinsically coupled to economic
prosperity, so it is important to continue resourcing scientific and
technological advances. In the wake of the Brexit vote, sustained investment
in research and innovation, particularly in the underpinning skills,
infrastructure and science and engineering disciplines, is critical for the
nation’s continuing success as a world-leader in innovation.
Working alongside government, and Innovate UK in particular, in 2015
the AIRTO community had already committed to driving real-term growth
over the next decade, but this is only achievable by embedding more
productivity-enhancing innovations into the private and public sectors,
and now – crucially - by achieving a strong Brexit deal.
Key priorities for government to tackle are:
Preserving access to networks and current levels of collaborative
EU research and innovation, and funding during and following the
transitionary period of exit.
Making available additional UK-sourced research and innovation
funding to industry, the IRT Sector and universities in the transitionary
period, and post-Brexit if access to EU funding sources cannot be
secured. EU research and innovation funds will inevitably fall during the
immediate Brexit aftermath. Loss of momentum is a threat to our skills
base, technology ownership and competitiveness; competitors could
capitalise on any emerging UK weaknesses.
Ensuring the IRT Sector is involved in Brexit planning to achieve the best
possible solutions.
Key aspects that must not be lost sight of include:
Partnering: the importance of conserving our capacity to partner with EUbased
RTOs, universities, business partners and SMEs.
Investing in local regional infrastructure: compensating for the probable
loss of EU structural funding to rejuvenate parts of the UK ‘left behind’ by
changes to the UK’s industrial infrastructure.
People: the supply of innovation skills remains a major challenge, so
free movement of people is vital and threats to this would be detrimental
to the IRT sector; post-Brexit the government must take steps to improve
the supply of skills from within the UK in both research and technology
specialisations and innovation management.
Industrial commitment: Uncertainty surrounding future economic prospects
undermines confidence and retaining inward investment by multi nationals
will be vital in stimulating innovation and competitiveness, providing an
important stimulus and laying the foundations for the necessary customer
base needed to maintain the UK’s trade in key high value sectors such as
pharmaceuticals and aerospace.
Innovation strategy: having elected to push forward with establishment of
UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), this should be implemented without
delay whilst ensuring that innovation retains a high profile and business-led
mission.
Regulation and standards: the ability to shape and influence EU regulations
is vital. In particular, the impact of Brexit for the UK’s Notified Bodies (which
require EU resident status to operate with EU clients) needs to be addressed.
Brexit negotiations must ensure that our national innovation
infrastructure is not damaged and is indeed further developed if we
are to see productivity increase and our economy prosper in the UK’s
post-Brexit trading in an increasingly competitive global marketplace.
Uncertain times?
Harold Wilson is attributed with the quote that: “A week is a long time in
politics.” Never a truer word was said!
At the time of writing, just a few weeks since the referendum on European
Union membership, and even less since a new Prime Minister and
Cabinet have taken up office, I cannot recall such a time of change, at
such a pace in UK politics. The same can be said for the optical sector.
The Foresight Report* forecasts that the end is almost nigh and, having sat
on a panel and debated “Will we still need optometrists in 2020?”, it would
seem, perhaps, that there is light at the end of the tunnel, but things will
need to change and soon.
I recently attended two pre-consultation events run by the Department of
Health before formally consulting on proposals for reform with regard to
the Regulation of Healthcare professionals which include my profession
– opticians and optometrists, students, contact lens opticians and optical
businesses. The prime reason for those pre-consultation events were for
the DH to ‘test with interested parties’ that:
The DH has identified the relevant issues regarding professional
regulation; and
The DH is posing the right questions to address this.
Debate around the tables, with interested professionals from different
disciplines, was deep and impassioned. Each profession was fighting
their case, and saying why they deserved to be seen as professionals and
regulated in an expedient way. We all understand that the DH has a huge
role to play and has to have regulators which are ‘fit for purpose’ and fair
in their dealings with registrants and to maintain public protection at all
times. Not an easy task!
The mix of professionals represented were each the same but different to
their neighbour. Some worked in the NHS within a hospital setting, others
in the community; only my colleagues from pharmacy were based on the
High Street like me. However, we are all delivering NHS services, despite
being a disparate group. All bound by codes of conduct, standards of
practice and ethics, yet our working environment is very different.
To come back to the Foresight Report*, which is a report detailing
potential changes and challenges to the optical sector with the advent of
increasing use of technology in optical practice. Automation of process
which is currently carried out by humans and the real possibility of selftesting
and remote diagnosis will make for even more challenges for
regulators. It is not inconceivable for a patient to self-scan the back of their
eyes via a booth in a shopping mall, pay by credit card, enter an email
address and have the images critiqued by an ophthalmologist based in
the United States or Australia. Now, how does a regulator regulate that?
It would seem to me that regulators do need to be reviewed - there must
be lots of duplication across the nine regulators which we currently have
- but I would not be hasty, and I would not advocate merging them all
into one ‘super regulator’. Economies of scale may abound by sharing
common costs – such as ‘back office’ administration, secretarial and
even premises - but, when dealing with a diverse mix of professionals, it
would be unwise to dilute specialist knowledge when Fitness to Practice
cases come to the fore. Then we need strict governance and specialist
knowledge from expert witnesses to ensure right and proper investigation
for all professions.
Uncertain times alright!
Fiona Anderson BSc (Hons)
FBDO R SMC(Tech)
President, Association of British Dispensing Opticians
* The Foresight Report was published in March 2016 and
was commissioned by the Optical Confederation and the
College of Optometrists.
Members of the Optical Confederation are:
Association of British Dispensing Opticians (ABDO)
Association of Contact Lens Manufacturers (ACLM)
Association of Optometrists (AOP)
Federation of Manufacturing Opticians (FMO)
Federation of (Ophthalmic & Dispensing) Opticians (FODO)