(1 day, 9 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the impact of Science and Discovery Centres on national science and technology priorities.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I am pleased to have secured this debate and look forward to contributions from hon. Members representing some of the 28 science and discovery centres, or SDCs, across the UK. My connection with science centres, and in particular Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr’s own Centre for Alternative Technology, commonly known as the CAT, is deeply personal. It is, in fact, the reason I am here today representing my constituency.
Representing a rural Welsh constituency might seem unusual for someone with a father from Surrey and a mother from Camberwell. My father was the first in his family to go to university, where he studied agricultural economics. After graduating, my parents moved to Montgomeryshire in the 1970s and settled in Machynlleth. They were among the founding members of the CAT, one of the oldest science centres in the UK. My father went on to create the agricultural section at the CAT, introduce livestock to the site, and even welcome the King—then Prince Charles—on his first visit.
My family then moved to Glyndŵr. Since they left, the CAT no longer has livestock, but it now has hot water—a luxury that the founding members of the CAT could only have dreamed of. In the intervening decades, the centre has grown from strength to strength, and now welcomes learners of all ages on visits, from schoolchildren to its own postgraduate students, as well as businesses and local authorities that want to explore the solutions that we know are possible to combat the climate and biodiversity crisis. I am immensely proud that my constituency is home to the CAT, but although Members might expect me to be partisan, it is just one of many brilliant science centres across the UK.
SDCs are a unique national asset and a proud legacy of the last Labour Government. They exist to make science open, accessible and aspirational for everyone. Their mission is to ignite curiosity and nurture a lifelong interest in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, driven by the principle that access to science is a fundamental right. Broadening participation from diverse regions and backgrounds is good not only for individuals, but for UK society and for science itself.
I congratulate the hon. Member on leading this debate and on finding a Government Department to respond to it; until now, a number have eschewed any responsibility. He is right about the world of opportunity that is open to our young people. I am privileged to have in my constituency Northern Ireland’s only SDC, the Odyssey, and particularly W5 within it. He is right to credit the last Labour Government for bringing those forward as part of their millennium investments. Does he recognise that, 25 years on, there is a challenge around capital investment, and that it would be wonderful if this Labour Government could invest again in SDCs?
Steve Witherden
I am in full agreement. As the hon. Member will see, one of my key asks is that we look at the funding for SDCs moving forward.
As a teacher, nothing matters more to me than ensuring that people have access to opportunity. As a drama teacher, STEM was never my strongest suit, but the importance of fostering curiosity—and, most importantly, ensuring that everyone can access it—has always been central to why I became a teacher and an MP.
SDCs operate in all four nations of the UK, reaching more than 5.2 million schoolchildren, families and communities through science and technology in the last year alone. Over the past two years, these organisations have worked with more than 37% of all UK schools. Fifty-five per cent of all visitors identify as women and girls, and many centres provide visits completely free of charge, enabling over 450,000 people from communities traditionally under-represented in STEM to participate in science, research and innovation each year. They are among the few places where broad and inclusive community engagement, the development of essential STEM skills among future generations, and cutting-edge scientific research all come together under one roof.
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this really important debate, and on his excellent and inspirational speech. The Centre for Life in Newcastle celebrated its 25th birthday last year. I have been inspired by its openness and how it supports young people from all backgrounds and different areas of the north-east to engage with life sciences. As an engineer from an impoverished background, knowing that the Centre for Life in Newcastle is opening up the huge universe of science and scientific curiosity is so reassuring.
Steve Witherden
It is lovely to hear that my hon. Friend is just as passionate about the SDC in her patch as I am about the one in mine.
I thank the hon. Member for giving so much time for interventions. He will not be surprised to hear that I represent one of four science centres in Scotland. Over the last 25 years, Dundee Science Centre has given STEM experiences to more than 2.5 million people, and we look forward to enhancing that through the Eden Project at the city’s former gasworks. He mentioned climate change and environmental degradation, and these things need to be challenged. I am happy to hear that the hon. Member agrees that public funding should be committed to this area. Will he go further and suggest to the Minister that there be a timetable for that funding, so that both the Eden Project and our science centres across Scotland and the rest of the UK can be supported?
Steve Witherden
I am happy to convey that ask.
Through their role as trusted anchor institutions with strong civic ties to schools, teachers, industry and research partners, SDCs have an important role to play in a number of areas. The UK faces a serious STEM skills shortage. Nearly half of engineering and technology businesses report recruitment difficulties, and these shortages are estimated to cost our economy £1.5 billion a year. The centres can help to harness the skills needed for future growth in key industrial sectors. They are also essential for building public understanding and trust around new technologies, including artificial intelligence. They can help to deliver the Government’s TechFirst programme, providing digital skills and AI learning opportunities for 1 million secondary school students and 7.5 million workers, ensuring that innovation is not only technology-led but user-centric. They can even serve as national testbeds for ethical reflection and citizen co-design in research and innovation.
The Centre for Alternative Technology is truly the jewel in the crown of Montgomeryshire. It has always been ahead of its time in pioneering a more sustainable and environmentally friendly world. For over half a century, the CAT has combined cutting-edge research with world-class education to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon future. Its history is remarkable: it installed the first hydroelectric turbine on site in 1974, followed by the first wind turbine and the UK’s first completely solar-heated building in 1975. In 2003, it installed the first community-owned wind turbine in Wales, on the hills above the CAT. From installing the first photovoltaic roof to building eco-cabins and a water-balanced cliff railway, it truly has provided a blueprint for change. In 2023, the centre celebrated 50 years of ecological innovation.
The CAT is a major employer in mid-Wales and currently supports 78 staff, with an extensive reach. It has trained over half of all UK councils in carbon literacy and hosted STEM Learning’s POP25—Protecting our Planet Day 2025—broadcasting live to more than 200,000 schoolchildren. These initiatives spark curiosity in young minds, open pathways into STEM subjects and inspire green careers. A visit to the CAT as a child can have a lifelong impact.
Andrew Ranger (Wrexham) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this excellent debate and on his excellent speech. One of the most important and exciting aspects of SDCs, such as the excellent Xplore! Science Discovery Centre in my constituency of Wrexham, which neighbours his constituency, is their ability to reach those from disadvantaged and lower-income backgrounds, and to let them see the possibilities of a career in science and where that can lead. Does he agree that it is time for the Government to recognise these SDCs, so that they can build on that?
Steve Witherden
I have a confession to make: after CAT, Xplore!, in my hon. Friend’s constituency, is my second favourite SDC—I have visited it many times. I am in full agreement with him, as the House would expect.
Solefield school has brought pupils to the CAT for 40 years. Its head of science, Kevin Farmery, said:
“I can teach them all this in the science lab, but here they see it come to life. That makes a real impact.”
Dr Dai Morgan, who is now at the University of Cambridge, first visited the CAT as a child. That experience inspired him to study sustainable engineering, and he brings postgraduate students from Cambridge to the centre annually to encourage global action.
Our constituency may lack a university, but we have something better in the CAT. With its unique history, it continues to offer outstanding degree and postgraduate courses in partnership with Liverpool John Moores University and the University of East London. Currently, 700 postgraduate students are enrolled in programmes covering renewable energy, sustainable food and land use, sustainable architecture, green building, ecology and behaviour change.
The CAT’s influence extends beyond education. Its legacy includes the growth of over 50 sustainable businesses and organisations via its postgraduate students, inspired volunteers or research experiments that take place directly on site. Such organisations include Dulas, Aber Instruments, Adaptavate and IndiNature. Dulas, established at the CAT in 1982, invented a solar fridge that preserves vaccines and saves lives worldwide. IndiNature, founded by the CAT graduate Scott Simpson, was named manufacturer of the year by the UK Green Business Awards in 2025. The CAT is not just a centre; it is a catalyst for change locally, nationally and globally.
However, like many SDCs across the UK, the CAT is facing significant challenges. Unlike museums, art galleries, theatres and libraries, which can access Government and national lottery funding for their infrastructure needs, SDCs have historically been excluded from public funding. Like other publicly accessible cultural spaces, SDCs’ costs have risen significantly in recent years due to factors such as the cost of living crisis and energy prices. Unfortunately, these centres’ ability to grow revenues from their core audience to offset the increased costs is limited. They need to keep entry prices low and offer subsidised or free access to deliver their charitable mission and maintain access for underserved groups and communities.
As we have heard, most SDCs were built 25 years ago or more. Their buildings are reaching the end of their design life and need urgent repairs. Roofs are leaking, heating and cooling systems are outdated, and glazing no longer meets modern standards. At the same time, rising sustainability and health and safety requirements mean that repairs are far more expensive. These challenges are compounded by the fact that no central Government Department takes responsibility for the sector. Recent parliamentary questions have confirmed that the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Education do not see SDCs as falling within their remits, leaving these centres at a loss.
The Association for Science and Discovery Centres has identified urgent infrastructure projects across its member organisations. Nearly £20 million is required to deliver these works, many of which must be completed within the next 12 to 18 months. Importantly, these projects would be match funded by the centres themselves, demonstrating both commitment and value for money. A December 2025 report made it clear that without that investment, many centres will be forced to close or to operate more commercially, scaling back STEM learning, outreach, and free or subsidised access for marginalised and minority groups. That would be a real loss, not only to communities but to the UK’s future skills pipeline.
The CAT faces similar pressures. Although it continues to welcome school groups, such as those from Solefield, it had to close its visitor centre to day visitors, and future Dai Morgans currently are not able to visit with their families. The visitor centre has seen no significant capital investment for over 25 years and is in desperate need of redevelopment. Unlike universities and many charities in Wales, the CAT receives no statutory core revenue funding.
An urgent example of the work that needs to be done is the “leaky roof” project. As anyone who has visited the area knows, it rains a lot in mid-Wales. The CAT requires £500,000 to keep open the Wales Institute for Sustainable Education building—an education centre that has grown graduate courses and the innovation lab, supporting councils, communities and other organisations to take action on the climate and nature emergencies. If it is forced to close, the CAT’s entire operating model would be undermined, threatening its unique hands-on climate and sustainability education programmes.
The project is not about patching roofs simply to keep buildings open; it is about preserving the science, engagement and learning that happens beneath those roofs. SDCs are powerful but undervalued. They are beacons of sustainability, education and innovation. With recognition and investment, they can flourish, supporting national climate goals, inspiring future scientists and engineers, and ensuring that science remains accessible to all.
Given that SDCs are uniquely positioned to help unlock the full potential of UK science and technology, in order to drive growth, create jobs and ensure that all citizens live healthy, secure and sustainable lives, thereby delivering on DSIT’s science and technology framework, does the Minister accept that, although the work of the centres touches on the agendas of DSIT, DCMS and the DFE, DSIT should become the lead Department responsible for this area? That is not to suggest that all funding should come from DSIT, or that cross-departmental responsibilities should be relinquished; rather, it is to suggest that his Department should take the lead in developing shared solutions.
I thank my hon. Friend for the passionate points that he is making. I want to support him by pointing out that the answer to a parliamentary question of mine in October stated that the Minister for Science, Lord Vallance, was following up
“with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to explore a coordinated approach to supporting these centres.”
Just before Christmas, the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology wrote to me to say that
“officials from across departments with an interest in SDCs are meeting to discuss options for sustainable support.”
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is time we had an answer to the question of where sustainable support—which, as he said, DSIT should lead—would come from?
Steve Witherden
Yes, I do. I do not think that DCMS and DFE should be completely absent from the equation, but I agree that DSIT should lead.
What meaningful action does the Minister intend to take to address the funding and infrastructure challenges currently faced by science centres? Will he respond to the request from the Association for Science and Discovery Centres, supported by more than 3,100 leading scientists, academics, business leaders and educators in an open letter to the Prime Minister and the Department late last year, for £19.5 million of public funding, match funded by £19.5 million from the centres themselves, which is essential to address immediate infrastructure risks?
Does the Minister also agree that it is essential to formally recognise science centres as part of the UK’s scientific and cultural ecosystem, whether by expanding eligibility for existing funding streams or by creating a dedicated science engagement fund? Does he agree that it is unfair for SDCs to be excluded from public infrastructure funds that are available to comparable organisations, including museums and libraries?
I urge the Minister to meet the Association for Science and Discovery Centres and its members, and work with them and MPs representing science centres to find a solution to these issues. Will he collaborate with colleagues in DCMS, the DFE, English mayoral combined authorities and the devolved Governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to ensure that SDCs and their work are adequately recognised and supported? Solutions must work across all four nations.
I apologise for not being here at the very beginning of the debate; as I explained to you, Mrs Harris, I was running late because I had a meeting with a Minister beforehand.
The hon. Gentleman is right to underline these issues, which affect not just England, but Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—all of us. At the W5 in east Belfast, science is to the fore. It has exhibits on science, technology, maths and innovation, but they are always educational, and schools by their thousands attend it. But it is not just that: we have the Armagh Observatory and Planetarium, the Ulster Folk Museum, the Ulster Museum and Exploris in my constituency. I support the hon. Gentleman’s request for a meeting, but will he ask for those in Northern Ireland to be part of that process? Perhaps my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) and I could also be invited.
Steve Witherden
I am glad that the hon. Gentleman made that intervention. I am an MP from a devolved nation, too. There are few of us here, and it is fundamentally important that we recognise that this is a four-nation issue. It is complicated by the fact that education is devolved, which is the main reason that I think science centres should sit with DSIT so that all four home nations can be encompassed more easily.
Finally, I request a meeting with the Minister on additional support for Welsh science centres. Perhaps unsurprisingly, given our size, Wales has only a handful of science centres: the CAT in my constituency, Xplore! in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger) and Techniquest in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty). I am eager to ascertain how we as Welsh MPs can best support our science centres, not only to ensure their continued survival but to create a climate in which they grow, flourish and thrive. I would therefore greatly appreciate a meeting with the Minister to address that issue.
I thank the Association for Science and Discovery Centres, Eileen and all those who work tirelessly at the CAT, and every dedicated individual across the 28 SDCs nationwide. Their contributions inspire curiosity, advance STEM engagement and create truly invaluable climate solutions. SDCs are not optional extras, but vital national assets. The UK-wide network of 28 centres is a cornerstone of our broader science and research ecosystem. That is a key legacy of the last Labour Government. With proper recognition, urgent investment in infrastructure and long-term capital renewal funds, the CAT and the other outstanding centres across the UK can continue to ignite curiosity, expand green skills and unlock the full potential of UK science and technology for a healthy, secure and sustainable future. I am confident that today’s debate will demonstrate the strength of cross-party support for this cause.
Several hon. Members rose—
Order. I will start the Front-Bench contributions at 3.28 pm, and I will impose an unofficial five-minute limit to start.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing the debate. His absolutely fantastic speech got everyone really enthusiastic, riled up and excited about supporting science.
One reason I am here is that the Winchester Science Centre is not just the biggest indoor attraction in Hampshire, but the UK’s largest stand-alone planetarium, and it has 185,000 visitors a year. I am so pleased to have it in my constituency, because science has given me the most wonderful career. I look back on the amazing things I have done because I studied science at school and took science A-levels. I have worked in Africa studying how to improve cattle production by making them more resistant to a protozoan parasite spread by the tsetse fly called trypanosomiasis, trying to create more cattle genetically resistant to that disease. I have worked in Iraq, India, all over the UK and New Zealand, simply because I studied science at school. It is the most exciting, enabling subject to study.
Growing up on a farm, loving animals and loving science at school, I naturally went down the veterinary route, but my first love in science was astronomy. On the farm in Devon where I grew up there was little light pollution and the stars were incredible. I could name every constellation from the age of eight. The reason I am so moved to speak about this subject today is that the single most exciting trip we made when I was at primary school was to a planetarium. That fired up my love of science, and then watching “Star Trek” and nature documentaries while growing up on a farm shaped my world view and career trajectory.
When I was a teenager, I had a favourite magazine. [Laughter.] I should probably clarify that it was New Scientist. To be asked a few years ago to write a few articles from a veterinary perspective for New Scientist was an ambition fulfilled. When I look back on those visits to science centres and planetariums, I wonder how many people got into science because of stars and dinosaurs. It sounds like a cliché, but they bring science to life for everyone, especially children. They help them realise what an exciting subject science can be, opening their eyes not only to studying science for a career, but to better understanding our place in the world and the importance of conservation.
The hon. Gentleman is right to recall his youth and how his love of the countryside energised him to seek the job and life he wanted. Marine biology and local sea life can do something similar. In my earlier intervention on the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden), I mentioned the Exploris Aquarium in Portaferry in my constituency. Thousands of children and adults attend every year to learn about marine biology. Young people are stimulated by the project to rescue seals and invigorate them prior to return to Strangford lough, as part of the ecosystem. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that is the sort of programme our children should be chasing every day?
Dr Chambers
I completely agree with the hon. Member. We are not here to support science centres just for themselves, just for the tourist industry or just for the economy. Some of the biggest challenges facing civilisation at the moment—global challenges such as climate change, antimicrobial resistance, risk of pandemics, biodiversity collapse, and even how to feed and provide energy sustainably for 8 billion people—are also science challenges. We need to inspire the next generation of children to recognise those as urgent problems that need to be solved. They are not hypothetical challenges; they are current challenges.
Science centres are vital to inspire children to create the next generation of scientists who will help solve all those problems. We are in an era of rampant misinformation, with geopolitical turbulence and global health challenges. Places such as the Winchester Science Centre inspire collaboration, learning and the sharing of information. In a world of falling vaccine uptake, climate change denial and precarious geopolitical frameworks, it is the scientists who will do the heavy lifting to keep us all safe, and yet they are probably the most overlooked.
Museums have the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to back and champion them; science centres do not have a Government Department specifically to do that. I urge the Minister to consider getting a Department such as DSIT to really champion them.
Several hon. Members rose—
Order. If Members continue to exceed five minutes, I will have to impose a formal time limit.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing the debate and on making such a brilliant case for science and discovery centres. I am not sure many of us could add much more to the core case he made, other than to talk about our own areas.
I am very pleased to speak about this issue today and its importance to our communities and, more widely, to the UK’s proud history as a world-leading pioneer in science and technology, which we should not forget. My hometown of Widnes is somewhat different from Devon; it was a very industrialised area in the ’60s and ’70s, when I was growing up, and it was dominated by the chemical industry.
It was once a rural village on the northern banks of the River Mersey, and in 1801 it had a population of just 1,063, most of whom were engaged in farming and fishing. By the end of the 19th century, it had become a town of more than 28,000 people. The cause of that remarkable transformation was the creation of the chemical works on the banks of the Mersey. Progress was made possible thanks to the superb infrastructure, with the likes of the Sankey navigation canal, railway links from the river to St Helens and a dock created at the southern end of the town.
Immigration from Ireland and eastern Europe brought workers, while industrial entrepreneurs such as John Hutchinson, Sir John Brunner, Henry Deacon and Holbrook Gaskell helped to turn Widnes into the heart of the modern chemical industry. There were not many people without a family member who worked in the chemical industry when I was growing up, not least in Imperial Chemical Industries, which also dominated the town.
The legacy is reflected in the prosperity of many local businesses. That chemical industry is now gone, but we still have many really good prosperous, local businesses—a fact reflected recently when the Prime Minister came to Hutchinson Engineering in my constituency to launch GB Energy, heralding a new chapter in our national industrial history. That rich, local legacy leads me on to today’s debate.
John Hutchinson’s original administrative building is now the grade II listed Catalyst Science Discovery Centre. It is situated on the River Mersey, with amazing views, including of three huge bridges—the Railway bridge, the Silver Jubilee road bridge and the huge new billion-pound Mersey Gateway bridge, and looking across to Runcorn. That brilliant institution is a hub for research, development and learning. Generations of people from our region have benefited from the pioneering work done at the centre and its outstanding STEM education. It is a point of pride that my constituency serves as its home.
The centre plays a very important role generally in bringing science, technology and engineering to young people, including in disadvantaged areas such as mine in Widnes and Halewood. We cannot overestimate the importance of these science and discovery centres in doing that and enthusing young people to want to get involved. I am very grateful that Catalyst continues to raise awareness and belief among the local population, making them aware that science is relevant to them, their lives and their future careers.
Other Members today, as we have heard already, will have similar appreciation for the science and discovery centres in their own communities. We therefore share the same concerns that the hubs are now at real risk. Financial pressures threaten not just individual centres, but a network of technological heritage, research and development that has made an important contribution to our national development.
The Government are well aware of a petition signed by more than 3,000 scientists and leading figures urging us to work with the sector to find an urgent solution. As we have already heard, increased financial costs are having a major impact, so I ask the Minister to consider carefully every feasible option to support these centres. The Government are right to take such an ambitious approach to their green energy plan, but without the skills pipeline and a framework to help young people—our future scientists and engineers—to engage with that future, our targets will be far more difficult to meet.
The Catalyst centre receives no public funding of any kind and operates as an independent charity. Its trustees tell me that they spend a huge amount of time fundraising because of the rising operational and salary costs and the ageing capital and building, as we have heard from previous speakers. The catalyst building, I must add, is stunning. It dates back to the beginnings of the chemical industry and overlooks the Mersey but, again, it is an old building that needs a lot of maintenance and support.
Centres including Catalyst do truly remarkable work every day to preserve our heritage and work towards a better, greener future. I pay tribute to all those who contribute to this vital sector, and I hope we can demonstrate that we recognise their support and invaluable work. There are a lot of people who work very hard at Catalyst, but I want to point to a couple of people: Dr Diana Leitch MBE, who is a trustee director of Catalyst, and Chris Lewis, who has been involved in Friends of Catalyst for as long as I can remember. They keep these centres going. I do not believe that anyone who has ever visited the Catalyst has gone away disappointed; I urge the Minister to come and visit the as soon as he possibly can.
Thank you for keeping us all in line today, Mrs Harris—although I think this is a fairly good-tempered debate, because we are all in favour of our local science centres. I congratulate the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on introducing the debate. It was really cool to hear about the CAT; it is one of those science centres that has been around a bit longer than the others, but it sounds as though it is doing absolutely amazing work.
That is one of the things I wanted to touch on: although this is a network of science centres, they are all different. They all work for the benefit of their local communities, looking at the innovation, technology and science that makes the most sense for those, rather than the Government’s priorities, because that is how it should be. They should be capturing the imagination of the people in the local area, and they can do that only if it is relevant and if they are able to keep moving with the times and catching that imagination.
In Aberdeen we have the Aberdeen Science Centre, which was in my constituency until the boundaries changed. It was refurbished in 2020 and is in a stunning building—it was an old tram shed, so it looks really cool—but it was first opened in 1990 on a different site, and next month it will be 36 years old. I think I first visited the Aberdeen Science Centre, which was originally called Satrosphere, before I even went to school. It has always been part of the fabric of our city. Everybody goes there as a schoolchild; it is a place that everybody goes along to and visits, and that everybody knows about.
When the centre moved to the new premises, it suggested getting rid of one of the exhibits, which is a sheep: visitors press the button and the sheep eats the food, and it goes around the sheep and then something comes out the other end. There was uproar from the parents of the children who currently go to the centre, saying, “How dare you get rid this exhibit that we loved when we were children?” The comment that the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr made—that a visit as a child can have a lifelong impact—absolutely resonates. Everyone who has had those science centres in their life for as long as I have will remember those visits when they were a child.
I sometimes find it difficult in debates when we talk about the economic impact of these things or the innovation they drive. We could also just talk about the fact that they are joyful places to be. We do not have to justify an art gallery on the basis of its economic impact; we can justify these science centres on the fact that they create curiosity and joy in children—and adults. I love going to science centre; it is very difficult to get me out of Aberdeen. I come to London for work, but I do not like leaving my city; it is the best place on earth. However, I say to my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee Central (Chris Law) that the Dundee Science Centre is one of the few places that I would trail to with my children when they were little, because it is absolutely excellent. It had diggers that they could play with, and my little boy, who was tractor-obsessed, completely loved going to visit.
As the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) was saying, in this time when people are willingly denying facts and we are fed up of experts, having that hands-on experience of science and actually talking about how the earth moves and the way that climate change is changing our society and creating extreme weather events, or about the industries in the local areas and the science that fuels them, gets the next generation of people excited about those things. It gets them thinking about how those things work in a way that the school classroom cannot always manage. Sometimes it does—sometimes we are lucky enough to have an inspiring teacher who can make us think and consider the future; there are many of them out there—but going and getting hands-on in a science centre is something really special.
Lastly, on the differences that there are, our science centre in Aberdeen has, in recent times, covered climate change and has had a link with NASA when it had a spacecraft made in the science centre. It is currently running a Demystifying AI programme and there are some ridiculous photos of me in the science centre trying out virtual reality, because I always get super excited by it. Given the importance of these centres to us and all our constituents, the changes they make in people’s lives and their lifelong impact, it is reasonable for us to ask two things: please look at funding, and please choose a Government Department. It does not cost the Government anything to do that. Just choose one—and champion these centres.
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing this important debate. Seeing the passion and excitement among the speakers, I have found my people—let us go with that.
It is also wonderful to meet another trypanosomiasis person, the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers). I also studied that in Dundee, so I thought, “Amazing—where have you been?”—and there is our love for Dundee and the amazing science centre there. My hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr made many incredible points in this debate, so I will skip to the fun bits.
I am a research scientist and a science teacher. My real love of science was fostered when we were able to visit places in London, because we lived nearby. Learning about Alexander Fleming—about antibiotics and the impact they have had on our world, which we now take for granted—was amazing. The challenges we have coming forward in the next few years, if not longer, are those big questions that the hon. Member for Winchester spoke about: how we feed 8 billion people, and how we power the nation. We have the talent in this country, and that is what these science centres really represent.
Obviously, 25 years ago there was a slew of new centres off the back of Aberdeen and other places, and they have been inspiring youngsters and adults throughout that time. I made one quick visit to the Dundee Science Centre last summer, where they have a water drop machine. Someone can watch the water drop and then, as it makes impact, have a photo taken of them going, “Oh!” It is quite cool. It also has volcanoes, and the brainwave machine, which is also quite cool, where someone has to calm their brain so the ball moves along. I nearly had it—then I saw I was winning, and the ball came back to me.
That centre is so much fun and bring so much curiosity and excitement. I think the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) made the point that we sometimes get bogged down in the economic and inspiration arguments, and they are incredibly valid, but fun and memories are also incredibly important.
My asks are that SDCs have a home and a Department that champions them. From meeting with and speaking to representatives from science and discovery centres, there is currently a revolving door, and they need a home. I raised this with the Secretary of State fairly recently, and she is looking at it. I hope the Minister can provide an update today on where that home might be. More than 3,000 scientists, academics, business leaders and educators have signed an open letter on this issue. It is something that is desperately needed.
We live in a world challenged by misinformation and disinformation about what is fact, what is not fact, and how we consider evidence: these are places where we can prod that evidence and gather understanding. I will conclude by saying that I hope the Minister has heard all these things loud and clear, and will have many stories of his own to draw on, and thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr again for securing this debate.
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. It is a shame that my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) has departed, because I remember spending much of my time as a child in the Centre for Life, and to hear it was 25 years since it opened has made me realise that I have aged quite a bit in the meantime.
I want to speak primarily about the Kielder Observatory, and I am delighted to see so many scientists observing our proceedings; but first I want to take a brief moment, as the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) did, to reflect on the worrying attacks on scientists, on the truth and on the concept of science itself that are taking place not just in this country but globally. I take note that no Reform MPs have come to discuss the importance of the sciences to our national life; I think that tells its own story quite powerfully.
Kielder’s dark skies observatory is a world-leading facility. It marks the rural west of Northumberland as a real gem, not just for the amazing landscapes it offers and the fantastic contribution it makes to our national life through our hospitality and our tourism, but also for our ability to understand space and the stars and to see them. There is a moment of tranquility that you get when you go into Kielder forest and into the communities around it, and you see how special it is to be able to look up and see the darkness and the stars within it.
I will not repeat the points that my more eloquent, better qualified colleagues have made about the importance of investment in the sciences, but I know the Minister is an incredibly capable and dynamic individual, and I hope that he will cut through the siloing that Whitehall sometimes brings and take responsibility for SDCs and ensure that Kielder receives some of the attention that it needs in order to continue its function. It provides an incredible function in opening up space to schoolchildren. It has reached about 10,000 pupils and engaged about 50 schools, while also getting 15,000 visitors. Those who have come to rural Northumberland know that it is not the easiest place to get around, often involving long drives. People who visit my constituency often get to the Tyne valley and then realise there is another significant drive up the smaller roads from the A69 to get to Kielder forest.
I want to touch on the work that Kielder does with the tourism sector, which is a major employer in my constituency. It is not simply promoting the sciences; it is also promoting local establishments like the Twice Brewed inn and the Battlesteads hotel. If I can depart from the subject of the debate slightly, the tourism industry in Otterburn is also well supported by visitors to Kielder; I would like to thank the staff at Le Petit Château there for hosting my wedding reception on new year’s eve, which remains one of the greatest days of my life.
I also want to speak about the importance of the wider science sector in the north-east. I am privileged to represent many scientists studying and working at both Newcastle and Northumbria universities, making incredible contributions not just to academia but to industry. When I meet them, a lot of it goes well above my head. I emphasise that I got a 2:1 in history, and therefore I can read the history of the subject without necessarily understanding the particulars of it.
In my remaining time, I would like to echo a plea not only for those silos to be cut through, but for the infrastructure around the SDCs to be considered. I often joust with my local Conservative council, as Members would expect, but unfortunately, rural west Northumberland does not have world-leading infrastructure—it deserves it, but it does not have it. I would like the Minister to go away and make the case that access to these centres is incredibly important, and although it is not his Department’s responsibility, it is essential that the roads leading to these centres are properly repaired and that opportunities to access them are properly promoted. He is more than welcome to visit Kielder with me at any point, to sample some of the local hospitality that I praised and see the dark skies for himself.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) for securing this very important and enlightening debate. Science and discovery centres have a crucial part to play in nurturing and developing curiosity and scientific endeavour for thousands of young people across the country, including in my Bracknell constituency.
The Look Out discovery centre in my constituency played a defining role in my childhood, and fostered in me a lifelong love of science, and I know that many constituents will have similarly fond memories of visiting the Look Out as children. I have been delighted to return there not only last year as Bracknell’s MP, but with my nieces, to introduce the next generation of Swallows to everything that this remarkable place has to offer. The Look Out offers more than 90 interactive exhibits: visitors are invited to touch, pull, push, launch flying machines, play with circuits and explore their senses. That is all designed to spark curiosity in children aged three to 12, as well as in the adults who accompany them.
This Government have been clear that they want the UK to take a leading role in the development of new technologies, and that that will accelerate development not only across our economy, but in our health system, our universities and our national security. I welcome that ambition, but it will not be possible to achieve those aspirations without a strong foundation on which to build. Whether it is AI, semiconductors, lifesaving research or cutting-edge innovations, bringing up a young generation with a love of learning and a passion for the pursuit of the new—in our ever more complex world—is a fundamental prerequisite for the pioneering role that this Government want the UK to take.
This year, I have heard about how the outdoor learning programmes and discovery shows at the Look Out have taken young people who did not believe that STEM could be for them, and transformed their attitude and perceptions to such an extent that the same young people are inspired to enter STEM-based careers. Discovery centres provide a vital space for exploration outside the pressures of school. At the Look Out, young people are given the opportunity to develop a wide range of skills in a relaxed and fun extracurricular environment—as a former teacher, I say that learning should be fun, and it should be fun to learn.
For those who alight on a newly discovered passion, the Look Out also takes on work experience students to support and provide a step up in their STEM-related career ambitions. Colleagues may know that the opportunity to engage and measure skills-based learning both in and outside of schools is a particular passion of mine, and I am pleased that a renewed recognition of the importance of skills-based learning is driving much of this Government’s approach to education. It is critical that we recognise that centres such as the Look Out have a fundamental role to play in inspiring and developing the workforce of the future and equipping them with the skills that matter.
The Look Out is also an important place for our community to meet. It hosts live family-friendly science discovery shows such as the “Superhero Science show”, birthday parties, school group visits, home educator days and toddler days, as well as offering inclusive facilities such as wheelchair-accessible play. It is also a place for many members of the community, including those with toddlers and those supporting adults with special educational needs and disabilities, to meet. Overall, science centres across the country welcome more than 5.2 million people every year. This Government are firm in their belief that educational opportunity must be accessible to everyone, whatever their needs or background, and science and discovery centres play a huge part in delivering that commitment in communities.
The Look Out is special not only for what the centre itself offers, but for its location—situated, as it is, in the heart of Swinley forest. I know that many families use the Look Out as a launch pad to explore nature. The land is actually owned by the Crown Estate, which I thank for its ongoing support for the centre.
The misinformation and disinformation that are spread, particularly online, about lifesaving innovations such as vaccinations do nothing for our unity and prosperity as a nation; they serve only to erode trust in expertise, science and, ultimately, democracy itself. That is why it is so important that we support science and discovery centres, which have a role in building public trust, understanding and dialogue about new technologies. That has to come alongside making sure that we have the right support for capital funding. As other Members have mentioned, discovery centres do struggle to access some of those grants.
I am committed to working with Bracknell Forest council and other partners to ensure the long-term future of the Look Out, so that not only this generation of Bracknell Forest children can access it, but many generations to come can continue to visit and enjoy the centre. I know that you are keen for me to wrap up, Mrs Harris, so I will just finish by saying a huge thank you to everyone who works at the Look Out for all that they do to make science accessible and exciting for young people in Bracknell Forest and across the country.
Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing the debate and on his excellent opening speech. Indeed, his speech and all the speeches we have heard today have been really enthusiastic, and that is the whole point of these science centres: to generate enthusiasm. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) about how his enthusiasm for astronomy ended up with his becoming a vet, so we do not know precisely where that young person will end up, but giving them that enthusiasm gets them exploring and thinking about STEM and maybe, ultimately, what career they might do. The Liberal Democrats believe that curiosity and engagement in STEM subjects should be encouraged from a very early age.
We all know that science, technology and engineering will forge the future of this country, by generating advanced technologies, rethinking national infrastructure and making strides in new medical treatments, yet we face a serious shortage in STEM skills. Science and discovery centres play a central role in engaging millions of young people around the country every year, and lighting that spark of enthusiasm could hopefully form the foundation of their future careers. I agree that the Centre for Alternative Technology is a fantastic place, and it gives many examples of how we can all live more sustainably through things we can easily do in our own homes.
As we heard earlier, it is very good that this debate has found a Minister to respond, because, like many people, I was shocked that there does not appear to be a Department wanting responsibility for these wonderful places. I suggest that DSIT grabs it with both hands, before somebody else does.
I am proud to host, within my constituency of Ely and East Cambridgeshire, Cambridge Regional College, Cambridge science park and the Cambridge science centre. Like the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, I do not have a university in my constituency, but I have three around it; the science park hosts many of their spin-outs, and the science centre is what is encouraging young people to study STEM subjects, either into apprenticeships or through to university.
Cambridge science centre will soon begin its “building a better future” programme, which will engage young people in STEM by considering real-world problems that our communities face into the future—things such as house building, energy, transport and green technologies. They are all critical to the lives of young people, and it is exciting to consider the potential of science centres in building local skills to tackle issues within our area. However, Cambridge science centre told me that it has serious concerns over, in its words,
“the growing chasm existing between innovation in STEM sectors and younger people”.
It wants to play a key role in making sure that our young people know what is going on in STEM, with all the new developments—and there are some exciting, cutting-edge ones in my constituency—but it needs money and support to do that.
Science and discovery centres are clearly a national asset, with an important role to play in growing our STEM skills base, investing in national renewal and rebuilding our reputation as a leader in science and innovation. As we have heard, they are also important local assets, connected to the local industries and skills needs of the area, and able to mobilise the enthusiasm of local young people for STEM towards tackling the problems facing their communities into the future. I hope that the Minister can give us an update on which Department will be responsible for the science centres, and for developing a coherent strategy with funding. Will the Minister agree to fully engage with science centres across the country on a plan to ensure that the education and engagement of young people keeps up with the pace of change in science, technology and engineering?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) on securing this debate and bringing parliamentary attention back to a subject that has not been properly considered for some years: the role of science and discovery centres within our tech and science ecosystem, the pressures they face, and the contribution they continue to make.
I enjoyed hearing about the hon. Member’s connection to the Centre for Alternative Technology, which clearly has such personal resonance given his father’s link, as a founding member in the 1970s. I knew the hon. Member was a teacher, but I did not realise he was a drama teacher, which perhaps explains why he is so fantastic at carrying his voice in this Chamber and speaking with such incredible passion.
I confess that I had not appreciated how extensive the network of SDCs is. The Eden Project, which I visited again last year, is just one of the 28 science and discovery centres spread across every part of the UK, and it is a perfect example of what these institutions do so well. It is a major visitor attraction, it is deeply rooted in its local economy, and it has scientific discovery and public engagement at the heart of its mission. These centres are not arms of the state; they are independent, agile and largely self-sustaining organisations, generating income through admissions, partnerships and commercial activity.
Many SDCs were established around the turn of the millennium. Indeed, my first visit to the Eden Project was back in 2000, on my very first girls’ holiday. We did not, as Essex girls, choose Marbella; we chose Cornwall and Devon—very rock and roll. But the Eden Project really embodies the optimism of that moment. It is an old claypit, turned into a very future-focused and futuristic-looking plant wonderland with a scientific mission at its core.
While there were early Millennium Commission grants and support, that funding rightly came to an end, and these centres have now operated for many years without routine public subsidy. That independence has been a strength, allowing them to innovate and respond quickly to new scientific developments and to retain the trust of the communities they serve. But there was always an understanding that the materials in the buildings designed for the SDCs would require renewal after around 25 years, which is now. Many centres have now reached that point and face major capital projects at exactly the same time in a far more difficult operating environment.
SDCs are a distinctive part of our national infrastructure. They are the only places where cutting-edge science, public engagement and development of essential STEM skills come together under a single roof. Collectively, they reach more than 5 million people every year, and they have engaged with over a third of UK schools in the past two years alone.
The hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) talked with beautiful passion about the role of science in his own life, having been fired up by an early visit to a planetarium. It was the same for the hon. Member for Gravesham (Dr Sullivan). We also heard from the hon. Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) about his connection to the Look Out; as he was speaking, I thought back to the time I was hit by a Segway in Bracknell forest, and I started to get PTSD.
As SDCs rely on their own income rather than public subsidy, they have been particularly exposed to recent shocks, such as the pandemic and the energy price surge after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Although Government support schemes helped many organisations through that period, SDCs fell between several stools. They were not eligible for cultural recovery funding, and they did not have national lottery support either. They survived those challenges, but they did not anticipate facing simultaneous capital renewal pressures alongside the impact of the 2024 Budget.
We have all spoken to hospitality businesses in our constituencies about the sharply rising costs, particularly when it comes to employing people, given the national insurance and business rates issues coming through. Those pressures are now pushing some of these science and discovery centres towards a tipping point. Two of the largest in the UK have announced significant redundancies. One set of accounts explicitly cites the inflationary impact of the Budget and increased national insurance costs, and 75 jobs have already gone at one centre. Some centres have warned that, without intervention, closures within the next 12 to 18 months are a real possibility.
All of this matters because the mission of science and discovery centres is to make science, technology, engineering and maths more accessible, engaging and relevant to people from all backgrounds. They provide trusted spaces where the public can explore new technologies to understand their applications and build confidence in engaging with them—a recent example is a project to demystify AI. The hon. Members for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) and for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) mentioned how these centres play a critical role in the skills pipeline.
Glasgow Science Centre’s learning labs programme has worked with thousands of teachers and reached over 100,000 pupils. That shows how these centres complement formal education and help young people to see themselves as future scientists, engineers and innovators. The hon. Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) talked about the importance of SDCs in challenging anti-science narratives. I congratulate him on his recent nuptials—I am sure Le Petit Château had a very lively night over the new year.
Ministers have recognised all these strengths. The Secretary of State herself has spoken in this Chamber about the National Space Centre, which is in her own city of Leicester, and the role it plays in future jobs and prosperity. The constituency of the right hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), who is one of her Ministers, neighbours the amazing Dynamic Earth SDC. I know his constituency is not close to Montgomeryshire, but I am sure he does not want to take on and disappoint the Welsh mafia, if I may say that, in this Chamber by not backing SDCs very fully.
That touches the heart of the problem. These centres need a Department to recognise them, engage with them and champion them, and DSIT is their obvious home. These centres were born of a Government-led vision to create trusted environments for public engagement with science and tech, and they have built strong partnerships with universities, industry and local communities. They are ready to support national missions, but they need the Government to show them that ownership.
I have a number of fairly straightforward questions for the Minister, which are reflective of the very disciplined briefing behind the scenes by the Association for Science and Discovery Centres. I would be grateful if he could let us know whether DSIT will formally accept responsibility for the sector and act as its champion across Government. Will Ministers meet SDC representatives as a matter of urgency? Will the Department consider whether underspends can be directed towards the £20 million that the SDCs believe is essential for capital upgrades, which they are confident they can match-fund through partnerships? Will Ministers engage directly with DCMS colleagues on opening up access to national lottery funding for science and discovery centres? Finally, will the Minister make representations to the Treasury about the wider impact of current tax and business rates policy on SDCs, which runs directly counter to what the Government say they wish to promote when it comes to science and technology?
SDCs are a quiet success story. They are independent, entrepreneurial and deeply embedded in communities. They support public understanding of science, they develop future skills and they are inspirational to future generations. They are not asking to be taken over or paid for, and they know what to do when it comes to continuing their great work long into the future, but they need help with short-term challenges that are not of their own making. They are asking to be recognised, engaged with and enabled to continue doing what they already do well for the benefit of science, society and the economy.
As a senior member of the Welsh mafia, I am presumably the Godmother.
I now call the Minister, and I remind him to make sure he leaves time at the end for the Member in charge to wind up.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan)
Thank you, Mrs Harris. I pay my due respects to you as the godmother of the Welsh mafia. It is always a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, but particularly on this occasion. With my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden) initiating his first Westminster Hall debate on this deeply important subject, you in the Chair and me responding on behalf of the Government, I am deeply proud that the Welsh enthusiasm for science and technology is right at the heart of the debate.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr for securing this important debate on the impact of science and discovery centres on national science and technology priorities. I am grateful to all Members who contributed to the debate. It has been a total delight to hear about the wonderfully distinct flavours of science and discovery centres across the country, and about the distinct stages of our lives at which they have touched us. As my hon. Friend said, they include the experiences of our parents, of our childhood, of our schooling, of our enlightened first girls’ holidays, of our weddings and of our professional work too.
Growing the economy is the Government’s No. 1 priority, and science and technology are central to achieving that ambition. That is why the Government have committed to an unprecedented £86 billion investment in UK research and development over the next five years—the largest ever by any Government. That investment is about driving innovation, creating jobs and securing long-term economic growth. It signals our determination to put science and technology at the heart of our national priorities.
Of that investment, £38 billion is allocated to UK Research and Innovation to deliver our core priorities across the research and innovation buckets. That includes £14 billion for advancing curiosity-driven research, £7 billion to support the formation and growth of innovative companies and £8 billion for funding research into the Government’s priorities, including the industrial strategy priority areas. For the first time, UKRI will map its investments against priority sectors, with £9 billion of direct support for the industrial strategy across buckets 2 and 3. Those allocations reflect our national science and technology priorities, ensuring the UK leads in critical fields such as artificial intelligence, clean energy, advanced manufacturing and life sciences—areas that are essential to our future prosperity.
I am conscious that investment alone is not enough. To turn this unprecedented commitment into real-world impact, we need a world-class STEM workforce—a pipeline of talented individuals equipped to transform ideas into breakthroughs. That is why the Government believe in the value of a strong STEM workforce and have committed to ensuring that everyone, regardless of background, has the opportunity to pursue a rewarding career in science, technology, engineering and maths.
A strong, skilled STEM workforce is vital to delivering innovation, driving productivity and strengthening our country through our mission-led approach. That means inspiring the next generation, broadening participation and ensuring that science does not just happen behind closed doors but belongs to everyone. That is exactly the motivation behind our £187 million TechFirst programme, which will touch the lives of 1 million young people right across the UK.
The Government acknowledge that that is one of the key areas in which science and discovery centres play a deeply important role. Although some centres conduct research, their primary purpose is to serve as cultural institutions and visitor attractions that embed science within the UK’s cultural fabric, making it open, inclusive and aspirational. They maintain strong civic links with schools, teachers, industry, businesses and research partners, and they meet the growing demand for STEM education and learning opportunities for people of all ages, backgrounds and abilities. Through their engagement right across the UK, these centres enrich our cultural life, much like museums and galleries do for art and heritage. They deliver outstanding experiences that spark curiosity, foster critical thinking and build problem-solving skills, which are qualities that collectively drive innovation.
The Explore Your Universe: Valuing Inclusion programme has taken hands-on science into schools and communities that rarely have access to those opportunities, building confidence and inspiring future STEM careers. The Life Science Centre in Newcastle and Dynamic Earth in Edinburgh are active delivery partners in this national programme, bringing inclusive, practical physical science engagement to schools and families.
Through Next Gen Earth, centres are connecting young people with climate and environmental science, linking classroom concepts to real-world data and local action. The Centre for Alternative Technology in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr continues to play a leading role in this programme, helping young people to engage with climate science through hands-on workshops and youth-led projects. Mindsets + Missions has supported new ways for science and discovery centres and museums to co-create with local audiences, strengthening trust, inclusion and civic value, alongside scientific literacy. UKRI support, through its research councils, has been pivotal in enabling those programmes, aligning public investment with priority sectors and ensuring that research outcomes reach learners, teachers and under-represented communities nationwide.
The scale of these centres’ reach is remarkable. In 2024 alone, they welcomed over 5.2 million visitors, including hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren and families. More than 450,000 people from disadvantaged or under-represented communities were able to access the centres free of charge. Over the past two years, science and discovery centres have worked with 37% of UK schools, supporting the science curriculum and STEM skills in 96% of parliamentary constituencies. Importantly, these centres help us to tackle one of the biggest challenges in science and technology: diversity. Last year, 55% of visitors were female, and targeted outreach programmes are bringing science to communities that have historically been excluded from STEM careers.
Close to my heart, I am particularly excited about the way in which the centres speak to diversity of place as well, ensuring an offer for rural places, such as those highlighted by my hon. Friends the Members for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr and for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg). That is the case right across every part of our Union, as represented so ably by Members’ contributions today from across England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales—diversity not just in theory, but in practice.
I listened carefully to the concerns expressed by Members about the financial and operational challenges faced by the centres. As highlighted, many have ageing infrastructure, which needs replacement, and many operate as charities without a consistent funding stream. They often rely on low ticket prices to ensure that accessibility is a priority and to deliver on inclusive community engagement. I recognise those pressures, as we do right across Government, and we understand the difficult decisions that many centres face, but with limited income sources and major infrastructure needs, building financial resilience will be a key part of long-term success for the centres. I know that they will reflect on diversifying income and exploring innovative ways to strengthen sustainability as part of the solution.
I am also keen to highlight the available funding streams that UKRI will continue to provide, some of which may be of relevance and support to the centres. I am conscious of the focus on investment that delivers the greatest impact across the centres—working with centres to develop sustainable models and innovative partnerships will deliver on resilience and value for money.
Dr Sullivan
To clarify on UKRI, will the Government therefore allow it to distribute funds to the science centres? Will the Minister clarify the point that he made?
Kanishka Narayan
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for her experience of science societies that she described so vividly. Historically, as I mentioned, UKRI has funded specific programmes. I am conscious that where there is available programme funding for eligible centres, they ought to ensure that they apply for it. I am keen to make sure that UKRI is working keenly and engaging with the centres, flagging up such funds as relevant.
Looking ahead, we remain committed to strengthening the STEM pipeline in collaboration with science and discovery centres, UKRI and industry, so that together we can inspire the next generation and secure the UK’s future as a science and technology leader. We will continue to champion programmes that broaden participation and that embed science in our culture, while exploring practical ways to support the infrastructure that enables the centres to thrive, always guided by the principle of long-term sustainability.
I am particularly conscious of the questions asked by Members from across the House. In response to the question about departmental engagement, I am keen—I have turned up here—that DSIT engages closely, but I am also conscious that the cultural contribution of discovery centres is a fundamental part of what motivates them and those who visit them. I am therefore keen to commit to close cross-Government working right across DCMS, DSIT and any other Departments.
I am keen not just to meet the low bar of having turned up to the debate as a Minister, but to take up the requests of hon. Members across the House to ensure that today is the start of the conversation, not the end of it. I am therefore delighted to commit to a meeting with my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr and with the Association for Science and Discovery Centres to progress the conversation in a tangible way as well.
On the question of potential sources of funding, whether underspends or Treasury, I am afraid that I have neither the power, nor—on this occasion—the willingness to commit to particular sources of funding and to write a fiscal event live in this debate, but I have heard loud and clear the concerns expressed about the funding resilience of science and discovery centres.
It would be remiss of me not to pay a personal tribute to the science and discovery centres. As true as the preference for magazines of the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) is, it is also true that growing up faced with the choice between Techniquest in Cardiff Bay, and the cinema and bowling alley neighbouring it, I made a commitment to my parents—and I commit the same to the House—that my preference was always Techniquest.
On that note, I thank all Members who have spoken today. The debate has highlighted not only the extraordinary contribution of science and discovery centres, but the shared responsibility that we all have to ensure that they succeed in a sustainable way, and that the inclusive way in which they engage young people and families right across this country is maintained for as long as possible.
Steve Witherden
I thank all the speakers in today’s debate. There were some lovely speeches. I was interested to hear the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers) speak about his work on tsetse flies in New Zealand, which emphasises the global contribution that our science centres make. I was extremely relieved to hear that his favourite magazine in his youth was the New Scientist.
My hon. Friend the Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) spoke at length about the chemical industry. Our two constituencies have a very close link: Glyndŵr, the other half of my constituency, was home to the biggest chemical plant in the world in the 1920s and was the biggest producer of the chemical phenyl. Just as in the last two centuries science and technology were the driver of the industrial revolution and growth and development of this country, I hope that in this century it will be the cleaner science and technology that drives the green industrial revolution.
The hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) spoke passionately about Aberdeen’s science centre. I was very glad to hear that it had kept the defecating sheep. That is great news. Learning about the digestive system is incredibly important. Like her, I live in dread of boundary changes because the CAT sits very close to Ceredigion and Dwyfor Meirionnydd.
My hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Dr Sullivan) is another Member who has had a fantastic science career, with a great passion for the pedagogical aspect of science centres. My hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) was not the only Member to speak about the concerning rise in what we might call anti-science and anti-facts. One of the things that inspired me to get into politics was when the former Member for Surrey Heath famously said he thought people had “had enough of experts”—the antithesis of what I think. If I hurt my back, I want to speak to an expert in back injuries. I will take experts, thank you very much. I was glad to hear that my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) still regularly visits and supports his local science centre and never forgot visiting as a child.
Turning to the two Opposition spokespeople, the hon. Members for Ely and East Cambridgeshire (Charlotte Cane) and for Hornchurch and Upminster (Julia Lopez), politics can be quite a cynical game, but it is so lovely when there is cross-party consensus on a topic, so I really enjoyed hearing both those speakers. I can reassure the hon. Member for Hornchurch and Upminster that I am most certainly not a member of the Welsh mafia.
I thank the Minister for coming here today. He spoke very reassuringly, and I look forward to meeting him. For too long, the issue of science centres has been treated like a bride left at the altar by the groom. No one is representing it, and no Departments are taking it on, so I hope that DSIT does. I look forward to working with him on that in the near future.
Finally, as well as thanking all the visitors in the Gallery, some of whom have travelled a very long way to come here to be with us today, I also want to thank you, Mrs Harris, for your excellent work in the Chair. As always, it gives me great pleasure that this debate has been a very Wales-centric affair. Diolch.
In the spirit of sharing and showing how shallow I am, my favourite magazine is Vogue.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the impact of Science and Discovery Centres on national science and technology priorities.