Bust-up at No 10 a blow to ‘moonshot’ innovation

Britain’s £800m Advanced Research Projects Agency is thrown into doubt by departure of PM’S adviser

THE f uture of Britain’s £ 800m Advanced Research Projects Agency (Arpa) has been thrown into doubt with the departure of Dominic Cummings from Downing Street, senior industry officials have warned.

Boris Johnson’s senior adviser was a “strong advocate for public investment in research and development and therefore a positive voice”, according to Ian Campbell, the outgoing chairman of research agency Innovate UK.

“His leaving may reduce government interest and spend in this area, which would be hugely negative,” he said.

Mr Campbell warned that the future of a new moonshot funding agency may be “in doubt” after Mr Cummings’ departure because he had been the “biggest advocate of this approach”.

However, Downing Street says it remains committed to the launch of the agency and there has been speculation that Cummings could stay on to adopt a new leadership role there after his exit from his current role as a top adviser to the Prime Minister.

The Government is in the process of setting up Arpa, modelled on the successful US Defence Department’s Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency ( Darpa), which would fund “moonshot” research ideas that could prove successes in future and would sit separately to the UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) agency.

One source described plans for the creation of a British Arpa as Mr Cummings’s “baby”.

Concerns over whether political appetite for the new funding agency would be put at risk were echoed across the technology sector. Daniel Korski, a former adviser to David Cameron and chief executive of govtech fund Public, said Mr Cummings had “goaded innovation, been an agitator for reform and a friend of technology. With him leaving there is definitely a risk that the jungle will grow back, and that projects will slow down,” Mr Korski said.

Government insiders admitted that Mr Cummings had been the “driving force” behind much of the policy in this space. They said he was a “key ally” on bulking up research funding.

However, they insisted that Downing Street remains committed to the initiative. A Department for Business spokesman said: “The UK’S new blue-skies research agency will have the independence to experiment with new funding models to back cutting-edge, high-risk, high-reward science here in the UK. The Government continues to progress plans to establish the agency as soon as possible, backed with at least £800m in funding.”

Meanwhile, the defence industry has reacted with “relief ” and “joy” at news of Mr Cummings’ departure from No 10.

Military analysts and i ndustry sources have described a sense of “chaos” caused by “lack of understanding” on the part of the PM’S adviser as he delved into defence spending plans.

One leading figure in the industry referred to an air of “mutual contempt between Cummings and the MOD”, which meant determining the UK’S security needs had been “distorted”.

Mr Cummings used his blog to attack defence contracts, saying they were loaded with “flawed incentives so big, powerful companies continue to loot the taxpayer”. A favourite target of his was the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carriers, which Mr Cummings thought were outdated and “already cannot be sent to a serious war against a serious enemy”.

Francis Tusa, of Defence Analysis, said: “For those who dealt with him, it’s a case of good riddance. There’s a degree of joy in the industry.”

The defence think tank Rusi said that while Mr Cummings’ unorthodox methods did bring some new ideas, they could be harmful. Trevor Taylor, of Rusi, said: “The views he held seemed to be significantly based on a lack of understanding on aspects of defence and its centrality to national power.”