Just why did we miss out?

Sep 29 2007 by Adrian Pearson, The Journal

NORTH-East MPs last night demanded answers over how the region lost out on a prestige £1bn energy research project.

Minister for the North-East Nick Brown believes important questions surround the decision to base the Energy Technologies Institute in the Midlands.

The North-East produced an impressive bid to site the project at Newcastle University – securing jobs and investment as the UK’s energy research capital.

But the 10-strong group of judges opted to base the project in Loughborough – and appointed panel member David Clarke as chief executive. The new boss is the former head of technology for Rolls Royce, which has a research centre based in Loughborough.

Mr Brown said: “It is important that the reasons for this decision are fully understood because of the public money involved.” An ETI spokesman last night said

the panel’s decision was “fair and their deliberations totally transparent.”
Mr Clarke was unavailable to comment personally.

Mr Brown said he wanted a review to take a “very hard look at the reasons why this decision was made.”

He promised to go over the £1.1bn deal with “a fine-tooth comb”.

The Tyneside MP first contacted the then Department of Trade and Industry in May to ask why the ETI decision panel was chaired by professor Allan Jones.

Mr Jones is a professor at the University of Nottingham, which led the successful Midlands consortium. Malcolm Wicks, then minister for science, fully supported Prof Jones in that role.

The North-EAst ETI team were convinced their bid would succeed as privately members of the Midlands team declared the North-East “incredibly impressive.”

Blaydon MP Dave Anderson told The Journal he had been “100% certain” the region’s bid would succeed, and is also considering raising the matter in the House of Commons.

He said: “I’m not saying it was right or wrong to base it in the Midlands, but we had a very strong case and the recent appointment does raise questions”

A spokesman for the ETI board said the decision to chose Loughborough was made on the strength of the Midlands bid. He stood by the selection panel decision.

He said: “Their decision was fair and their deliberations totally transparent.

“We are 50% owned by the Government and have always been aware of the very high standards of scrutiny and propriety attached to any decision which involves public funds.”

Spending closely watched

THE Government has in place a variety of measures to scrutinise how public funds are spent.

Options open to the region’s MPs include first of all to ask questions in the House of Commons, which must then be answered by the relevant department.

The matter can also be referred to the Comptroller and Auditor General.

This independent position is part of the National Audit office who are responsible for “accounts of all central government departments and agencies, as well as a wide range of other public bodies, and will report to Parliament on the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which they have used public money.”

Any involvement of the Auditor General would lead to further inquiries by the powerful House of Commons public accounts committee.