LH Laura Haynes
RR Ruth Reed
UF Unidentified female
BP Ben Page
MA Mark Adams
BB Brad Bennett
TE Tony Edwards
RS Richard Simmons
GD Gus Desbarats
UM Unidentified male
CW Chris Wise
EG Elsbeth Gibson
FP Frank Peters
AS Adam Sharples
PS Peter Stewart
VP Vicky Price
PO Pete O’Neill
JA Joanna Averley
JB Joyce Bridges
LK Lucy Kimbell
LP Liz Peace
AK Andrea Siodmok
RA Rachel
DE Debbie
MH Mike Hayes
DM Dids Macdonald
JL Jake Leith
RI Richard
GC Gavin Cawood
MB Michael Bichard
David Kester
Before we start of course, as Ben would say, you can’t possibly do this without setting... having a benchmark because it’s important to know what the House thinks at the beginning. So, could we have the motion? So, the motion is should the government have a design strategy? And I’m sure you’ve covered your views this morning. If you’d like to vote now, then we’ll go for our five seconds. Okay. Good toss. So, those are the figures. We will revisit these at the end. We’re now going to have our conversation, if I could now invite Tim Bradshaw to kick off the debate. Over to you, Tim.
Okay. Thank you very much for inviting me to open this debate on whether the government should have a design strategy or not. I think a very timely debate with economic growth stalling, public deficit at nearly 88% of GDP and debt at 84% of GDP and growing. Well, obviously my answer is, yes, the government should have a design strategy because I think it’ll help out with the challenges we face but, and it’s quite a big but, don’t bother if all it amounts to is a one-off report that sits gathering virtual dust in an electronic archive somewhere.
The last thing we need right now is a minister thinking report written, box ticked, job done. A design strategy needs to be active and ambitious, setting a clear direction of travel, focussing on realising opportunities for the UK and developing our competitive advantage, dealing with the challenges we know lie ahead and creating breathing space for the challenges we don’t yet know of. The strategy needs to be alive and coherent, be act upon on a daily basis across all areas of government and in terms of all of its interactions with the public and wider economy.
Once and for all the strategy also needs to break the link that explicitly or implicitly equates design with just the creative industries. Design is essential in all areas of policy and regulatory development, in all areas of service delivery, in business operations, in processes, product development and increasingly in changing behaviours, something that I think is absolutely critical. It should be at the heart of thinking when trying to tackle pressing issues such as climate change and obesity. A design strategy is needed that works both internally in government and externally with stakeholders such as business, which I guess I’m representing today.
So, internally the good news is I think that design is certainly on the government’s radar screen. We heard from Fergus this morning and design will certainly be in the government’s research and innovation strategy when it’s launched next week. But I think we still have a long way to go before design is embedded in thinking as the norm right across government. A proper design strategy could help move things in that direction and provide leadership. If you look at government’s plan for growth, for instance, that came out with the budget, design barely features in any meaningful way in that document and that’s despite having a whole chapter on digital and creative industries.
Tuesday’s Autumn Statement did mention design a couple of times, perhaps most encouragingly in reference to the design of procurement processes. The new National Infrastructure Plan is also encouraging considering the design of projects to achieve multiple aims and how to address interdependencies early on in the design stage so that they become opportunities rather than challenges. This is good but let’s go much, much further. Design should feature prominently in every policy. How DEFRA tackles both ITV and how the MOD addresses its defence industrial strategy and educational policy, I think you heard a little about that this morning.
A coherent approach to design thinking across government could make a real difference. The government currently spends around a quarter of a trillion pounds a year of our money on goods and services. Making wider use of design principles and thinking could see it delivering more efficiently more effective outcomes, ultimately allowing government to do more with less and have a better chance of tackling deficit.
Externally then. Well, externally in particular in dealings with business a design strategy would help to raise the profile of design, set out the UK’s vision and ambitions and stimulate investment and we need this as part of a strategy for economic growth. Mid-size businesses, for example, are being hailed by everyone, including the CBI, as the unsung heroes and the future champions of growth in the UK and looking at them objectively through the lens of the UK Innovation Survey, they did indeed look good.
Proportionately mid-size businesses invest more in R&D, patent more and registered more designs than either large or small businesses. And these are the big guys. But only 62.5% of them recognise themselves as being innovating compared with 84% in Germany and 67% in France who do much worse on the small businesses side. We have to do better than this if we’re to compete internationally and create more high value jogs and growth and I think that emphasising design is the way forward.
Innovative firms spend something like 40% more on design than they do on R&D and design is also significantly more important than novel innovation. So, if we can make more of our strengths in design, spreading this so that more companies are using it in more areas in their operations, they will be in a much better position to export, attract investment and grow.
Finally, I think it’s worth looking at the economic prize at stake if we can get this right. Jim O’Neill from Goldman Sachs was at our annual conference last week and mentioned a couple of facts that I think are worth repeating. China is currently growing the equivalent of the Greek economy, that’s the Greek economy in good times, every four months. The BRIC countries in aggregate are growing by the equivalent of the Italian economy every year and remember that Italy is the world’s eighth-largest economy. If we had a coherent cross-government design strategy that helped us make real headway into markets such as these with new products and service offerings and a design strategy that helped tackle the budget deficit and debt, had a different approach to public services, then I think I could stand here and confidently see lights at the end of the tunnel. Thank you.
David Kester
Tim, thank you. Proposing the motion sort of on behalf of the Confederation of British Industry but as an individual somewhat passionate on the subject and now I’d like to invite Laura Haynes, President of the Design Business Association, that represents design businesses in the UK.
Isn’t that a funny starting place, to come from... to be against the motion? But what you just heard were an awful lot of ifs. If we think across government, if we’re able to embed it into industry, if we begin to take design seriously. I know it’s odd my speaking against the motion because as President of the DBA I’m very concerned about the role of design and the promotion of design. I’ve also spent the last year being a member of the Design Commission where we focus on design and how to ensure that it is better embedded in the government, perhaps part of my frustration.
In many ways the government design strategy is valuable because, if nothing else, it’s a signal of government support for both the public and private sector. But what we just heard was a plea for a coherent approach towards design. Well, I’m afraid I’m a bit cynical. I think there’s three reasons why I’m concerned about this motion. First is that without an overarching vision and plan for action, a strategy is not enough, and we’ve seen and heard of a number of these.
Second, we obviously need a much deeper and more integrated approach and third is the basic truth that design, vision and thinking simply cannot follow political agenda or a political calendar, a bit like our train system here. Perhaps over the years I’ve heard far too many good words without equivalent good deeds and I think maybe the starting place is to go back and ask ourselves what are we talking about. What do we mean by design? What is our definition of design? And why should we have a strategy? Where are we going?
I learnt something this morning. I learnt that I want to go move to Denmark because in Denmark rather than writing a new strategy for design, they realised the starting place was to go back and establish an overarching vision, an understanding of what we mean by design and what we’re finally going to do and what direction we’re taking. Where are we heading? Why are we doing this? Without this vision we don’t know what we’re trying to achieve with any strategy. Are we to be the world’s creators? I don’t know. Are we to lead on insight and improvement? Should we look at everything through the lens of society, community, the individual user or world improvement? Or are we just doing this for competitive advantage?
Without vision leading to strategy and then action, policy is meaningless, as we have seen for the last 30 years or so. Without substance we simply have some very, very nice words but not much to move forward with. So, we need a vision and then we need a strategy and then we need some integrated plans. So, what about integration? This must be integrated and joined up through our thinking, planning and action starting from the vision but we also must have an integrated approach or at best we’ll simply confuse people and at worst all of the ideals will be completely meaningless.
I was impressed with the presentation from BIS this morning but what good is it if BIS sets up a strategy for innovation and design if while in education we stop funding design education? What message is that sending people? We’re saying design in education is not worthwhile. It’s not worth investment. It’s not worth following through. So, we won’t have the designers tomorrow to help implement business strategy for innovation. Or does the structure of budgeting and planning in the health service allow for the inclusion of new design thinking or new design initiatives? This has to be joined up. Who should own this anyway? We see BIS actively developing innovation and design strategies but does it really only apply to that sector of society? Doesn’t design impact on much, much more?
Shouldn’t it be integrated into every part of government and society? On what vision is the design of the cities of tomorrow being based? What’s the role of design thinking to improve literacy and communications? How and why are we designing better services for the provision of social benefit, health, transport, immigration? What incredibly longsighted design belief are we basing high street planning decisions on? Been down high street recently? And how does design impact public behaviour and decision-making for the greater good beyond simply the fashionable nudge theories of today? We need integrated thinking. We need to know where we’re going and we need to pull it together. At the heart, of course, design is about problem-solving. It’s about change. It’s about cause and effect. It’s about communications.
But these aren’t individual separate thoughts. And we will not improve or deliver real change or benefit with just a broad strategy, a broad brush stroke that is neither grounded in focussed outcome or delivered through detailed plans? My fear, my real fear, is that an incomplete approach like this will allow the government to tick a box and say job well done and think that we’ve made a difference yet again by having a statement like every process should have design at its core. It’s lovely. How could you disagree? Motherhood and apple pie and for that I’m ready to vote. But, as my friend, Assie [?] said to me on Tuesday night, you can’t be half-pregnant. You either have a vision, develop a strategy, and then create the plans to implement or you’ll never give birth.
As we’ve seen this morning, we’re not doing this on our own. There’s a lot going on. We need to understand where the boundaries are and where they aren’t. We need an integrated and perhaps a collaborative approach. Our zeitgeist is all about collaboration, partly because social interaction has changed as a function of technology but also because the problems are really big and they cross boundaries and they cross borders and to be successful, we need to collaborate and look for the long-term.
So, finally, and thinking about the long-term, we cannot and simply must not align the importance of design in our society to a political agenda or political calendar. Do you remember the worthy words, that design in the creative industries are the cornerstone and engine of our economy? I think that was spoken just before the cancellation of hundreds or thousands of government design frameworks and contracts with important strategic statements made, and I quote, we need to promote by all practicable means the improvement of design the products of British industry. That was made in 1944.
George Cox ably said that creativity property employed, carefully evaluated, skilfully managed and soundly implemented is the key to future business success and to national prosperity. Great words and true but it’s time for more than just words. We need a vision that has design at its core. Then we need a strategy that grows out of this vision and can be embedded into the whole of our culture and society through meaningful and integrated action plans. Thank you very much.
David Kester
Thank you, Laura, and over to you, Ruth Reed, just left, I think, as President of the RIBA, is that right?
Indeed. Morning, everybody, if it’s still morning. Well, I’m not actually sure that Laura spoke against the motion. In fact, she probably cited quite a few things that I was about to say, which puts me in a slightly awkward position because the very same unjoined-up message is what I wanted to discuss. I have had the privilege in the last two years of meeting ministers in a number of departments and seen and heard astonishingly different views on design. For instance, in Housing, yes, there is... design is mentioned in the Housing Strategy but if you talk to the Minister, he is strongly in view that it should be a popularist choice, that design is a popular agenda. He doesn’t talk about design in leadership.
In schools with my much publicised spat with Michael Gove, clearly design is something we no longer need. It’s an expensive add-on that is not necessary. Strong support for design in export. The UKTI are behind us in our endeavours to sell British design across the world. Energy distribution – they’ve realised and discussing the design of electricity pylons as one way to engage the public with the thought that we’re going to have to change the way we distribute energy, so design has become a motivator for discussions
The government’s Chief Construction Advisor says that we need just good enough design. Now, that’s rather slightly worrying because you wonder where the line is coming in terms of defining what’s good enough but the cost savings are found by reducing design aspiration. And, of course, heritage is just completely full of traditional and modern tensions but I think I probably shouldn’t know that. I am really pleased to see design so strongly supported in the National Policy Framework but at the moment it’s lacking some indication of leadership in that. It’s back to the housing argument, about it needing to be something that is a popularist decision.
I think that it’s good to hear also that it’s very strongly embedded in innovation but, as Chris Wise so very wisely said at the beginning, the good design isn’t always about innovation, it’s about choosing existing technologies and thinkings and producing wonderful solutions that transcend previous discussions but are still within the framework of what we already know. And I was also heartened to hear Tim Horton say that it can be the route to government integration. You can actually fuse things around design as a concept to get government departments to think together. So, it has a sort of added benefit, this idea of producing a strategy.
Can I illustrate it within my own profession? In the last two years I’ve had to deal with a concept that architects are people that cream off cash from their own government by taking money out of teaching innocent children in order to furnish their own egos. On the other hand I’ve heard really strong support that we are the products of some of the best design educations in the world and should be promoted as such to growing economies. So, is good design a component of growth or an extravagance? For example, are we going to grow through our need to meet the 2020/50 carbon commitments or are we just merely demonstrating that we own eco bling?
So, British design, is it worth promoting? In Los Angeles I saw stationery that was designed in British, made in Korea and sold to the Americans. Let’s face it, nobody does cultural context like we do. We’re acutely aware of design and style and we can and do sell this across the world. We’re a multicultural society and we synthesise global design and we re-export it. And in a recession we need a government that promotes that. It’s not advertising that costs money that we’re asking for, it’s marketing. We want our politicians to market us; a few chosen words attending design expos, a ministerial lead, design policy across all public procurement. It’s a very small investment in promotion in order to maintain and grow market. We all know from our businesses it’s good business practice to have a coordinated design approach.
The British economy is in a reductive wage and an enormous business that needs promoting. What we must want... What we must strive for is stopping the mixed messages from politicians, that at times have suggested that the country’s designers are selling its population short. Can I go back to procurement, and there are others in the room that I think want to make this point. We cannot support good design through risk-adverse systems. We have to learn to do the fuzzy logic bit at the beginning and trust our designers to deliver effectively and with... efficiently and maintain a reasonable level of risk control.
This government needs to show that it’s in love with the modern world. We cannot aspire to put all the population in regency homes and offices with stoned spring courses and cornicing and educate them on vast playing fields of some Etonville.
Audience response
That’s what they like.
Ruth Reed
You’ll get your turn in a minute, Bev. I know what you’re going to say. Modern aspirational solutions need to be celebrated and we cannot afford the politicians’ visions of a green and pleasant land because there isn’t enough space for it. But we can afford good design. Let’s be under no allusion; this is a government run by individuals who have been allowed to promote their personal taste, and that’s a tough thing to say, without understanding the impact it’s having on the design industries. A design strategy with strong leadership across all departments is the responsible approach. Thank you.
David Kester
Ben Page, Head of Ipsos MORI.
Lovely to see you all. Look, I come to you really more in sorrow than in anger. I do feel that my opponents in this debate have actually been more helpful than I could ever imagine in making the case and I do wonder whether a meeting like this at the Design... And obviously it’s a bit risky to suggest that a meeting like this at the Design Council might actually vote against government having a policy on things that they hold dear but I think we’ve just heard some eminent series of reasons why we might want to ask the government a number of questions.
So, I think I’m absolutely in favour of the motion but I find myself having to oppose it for three reasons. I would be in favour if the government actually believed in it. And on this, as we’ve just seen so eloquently, we have a government that exhibits, as so much population do in many areas, cognitive polyphasia.
They like to... You know, they have... They hold conflicting ideas about the same thing at the same time and feel no apparent dissonance. So, you know, we have... They sort of like some aspects of design but others... CABE, a body that I’m very fond of and was previously connected with, you know, one of them calls it bureaucratic unaccountable design cracks in posing an architectural mono culture on Britain. Another very prominent member of the Cabinet, Building Schools for the Future, what was this, characterised by massive overspend, tragic delay, botched construction projects, needless bureaucracy.
A Secretary of State who says that this government is all about dismantling barriers that stymie growth, hold back investment and, you know, regulation of bureaucracy, the enemies of enterprise. And effectively we have a government that in many ways doesn’t actually like government and we’ve already seen that... from one of my opponents that design currently barely features in government statements.
We have a minister where it’s sort of tucked into his job description, I think we heard somewhere, David Willetts, and I think frankly until we hear somebody like George Osborne from the Treasury rather than BIS saying five consecutive occasions that he thinks design is the way out of the current economic crisis, frankly we should not produce another lovely electronic statement, lovely though they are and I’m very keen on them and very happy to do some research about it.
Secondly, I would also be absolutely in favour of voting for this if the economic situation encouraged it. Now, some of us may argue, of course, that that’s precisely the point, at a time of national peril like this, where 64% of us believe that young people today will face lower living standards than we have at the moment for the foreseeable future where more of us now believe that our kids are going to be worse off than we were for the first time ever, certainly since we started clothing in the late 1960s, I would be in favour of but, you know, at the moment, quite frankly, if I... if somebody rocks up from anywhere, from China, India, Russia and offers to carpet large parts of the country in big blocks or sheds, government will probably say yes and celebrate it and say hallelujah, jobs are being created, and the design of those blocks will not be a big issue, quite frankly. So, I would believe that if they said no to certain things. But at the... Currently it’s all about growth, it is not about beauty, utility or any of the things that many of the people in this room may hold dear.
Thirdly, I would be in favour of it if this government or any government in this country showed any signs of ever being able to inflow in this type of joined-up initiative. The previous government said good words. Many of us have been involved in trying to encourage departments to be coordinated about this and, frankly, we have to argue that even with money flowing as never... probably never again or certainly not in our lifetimes, it turned out to be impossible. Now, government can do a few things in extremis. It can do terrorism if it has to, it can sort of just about do the Olympics but, really, we are endear of, as we’ve heard, the need for a coherent and aligned strategy across departments, you know, championed by one or two of them and then everywhere else. Frankly, the chances of this I would say are absolutely nil.
So, my feelings about this are that at the moment, even though many of us may be in favour, I would suggest that more in sorrow than anger we should actually vote against having a government with design strategy, until in our hearts we believe that the government actually really wants to do this. This would include more than one or two Cabinet ministers being enthusiastic and, you know, actually feeling confident that the government really did want to celebrate British design because there is something noble there, there is something great, but at the moment it just ain’t going to happen and I think it would make far more impact if you voted against it and the report you might get for that than if you just did the usual thing. Thank you very much.
David Kester
So, the debate is taking its twists and turns but we now open that up. As we said right at the beginning, the whole point of these forums is all about making sure that these conversations are provocations. We are going to go back to our speakers in the end to get their nano nuggets before we vote. We will be able to, and you may want to, recraft some of the positions that we take during the conversation. Just to remind you how we’re going to do this, you’re going to... When you speak, please speak very clearly. The boom is going to move around, is that all right, to make sure that we pick up the debate so that we can broadcast the debate and do say who you are as well. If you want to say where you’re from, that’s also fine. Get your views put and, come on, let’s have the rest of the debate.
Audience member
Thank you. I just wanted to come back to Ben, actually. I thought really repent taste and... or, no, what is it, taste and repent at leisure. Ben, I thought your comment on the carpeting and the blocks was very short-termist and actually surely that’s exactly what we don’t need, the repenting at leisure. We need to be planning, to be thinking in an integrated way, to be looking at the big picture and not to be spending millions of pounds later. So, thank you.
Mark Adams
My name is Mark Adams. I’m Managing Director of Vitsoe. Well, we’ve had the Dane speak this morning and I think we are all reasonably convinced. My background... The company’s background, which I just want to put into context, it’s a Danish name but we work with a... I’ve had the privilege of working with a German designer for 25 years but we’re a British manufacturing business. We make and export. And what I have been hearing today is the absolute need for a bottom-up approach. The German system of government, the federal system of government, allows so much to be brought up the agenda and... I’ll pause on that point, thank you, if I may.
David Kester
Okay. Rab
I mean, I would just like to say initially of course the government does already have a design strategy. I think it’s important... I should have said I’m Rab Bennett, I’m an architect but I’m also a trustee of the Design Council. The strategy of course is... A key part of that strategy is how designers are chosen and we all know there’s an absolute link between the quality of design and the quality of the designer and the choice of that designer is fundamentally important. But of course what happens at the moment, the design strategy that the government has is it’s chosen... the designers are chosen on the basis of the cheapest, the largest and the most experienced, which basically means low quality all around, young firms get nowhere and of course the buildings are poor.
Now, that is the current strategy. So, what I’d like to suggest is we do have a strategy but we change it because the current one is bad for business, it’s bad for the future with firms coming through, it’s bad for UK plc and of course it’s bad for the public who have to experience the quality results that are coming from the system. So, let’s change it, not reinvent it from scratch.
David Kester
I’m going to keep us going, gathering some of the various thoughts. I might actually let some of the... our provocateurs in as well. But let’s catch some more of the views around the room
Tony Edwards
So, I’m Tony Edwards from Place Design + Planning, a landscape architect and architect. I think we have to be careful when we talk about designing, whether we’re talking about spaces because we heard from Tim Horton, which is essentially land use planning or product design or process design or, as we heard when Jonathan Ive came here in June, if you’re going to do a successful project, you’ve got to put it all together. It’s not just you sorting out the electronics, it’s what it looks like, how you market it, how you brand it and integrate all those things together, which are important considerations and... But it... I think if it’s going to be a recipe for purely resurging manufacturing, that’s also not going to work as well because in the programme immediately after we heard that discussion it was pointed that Apple get $80 per iPad for all the intellectual rights and the factory in Taiwan gets $5 to actually assemble it, so it will not be a resurgence in the manufacturing industry either.
David Kester
Okay. So, the key point there integration as well and design leadership.
Richard Simmons
Richard Simmons, University of Greenwich and formerly Chief Executive of CABE. I’m quite depressed about the terms in which this debate has taken place so far this morning because it’s all about the economy. If you look at how the Danes are defining good design, we saw... or their strategy which we saw on the screen, the first thing it says is about quality of life and it seems to me that a democratically-elected government should be deeply concerned with the issue or quality of life. I’m not a massive believer that strategy is going to work but if we are going to have a strategy, it needs to focus not just on the economy but actually on the quality of people’s lives and improving it.
Laura Haynes
I agree with you entirely. It was one of the points perhaps I didn’t make as strongly as I should have but that we need to have a vision about what role design has, what its purpose is and where we’re going with it beyond just short-term economic quick fixes and I think until we remove the debate from this temporary government fixation which is not developing new strategy, we need to stand back, much as the Danes do, and say before we wrote our strategy we will develop a vision for the future.
David Kester
It might be interesting here to hear back from not just the other side but also from the Federation of British Industry.
Tim Bradshaw
I absolutely agree with you, though. I think quality of life is fundamental to what I was talking about but I guess my approach to it is by realising economic growth so that we have enough money and funds to actually fund some of the fantasy designs and quality things that we might like for the future. So, I wouldn’t just... I wouldn’t put... I think economic growth comes first. If we can achieve that, then we will realise quality of life.
Richard Simmons
Can I come back for two seconds and say that only works if you believe in the fantasy of trickle-down effect which doesn’t actually really work.
David Kester
Okay. We’ve got some comments coming in over here. Can we go along this line?
Gus Desbarats
Gus Desbarats, Chairman of British Design Innovation. In a way, to build on that, isn’t there not at the core of this an understanding that all innovation, the success of it depends on its interaction with people eventually and what we’re arguing for here is humanism in the practice of innovation and so that’s what we should be talking about. It seems to me that there are two things that need to be done to reframe the question, which is, one, say should the government have a useful design strategy and should we clarify that when we talk about design in this way we’re actually talking about a humanistic approach to design, which is what bridges architecture, industrial design and planning and all of these other factors where you connect economic activity to innovation and to a better quality of life?
David Kester
Well, I thought that we were hearing maybe integration beyond innovation and that actually...
Gus Desbarats
Well, again, change, making sure that change represents progress is done by putting a humanistic approach at the heart of how you do it. And that’s what designers do.
Chris Wise
Chris Wise, former trustee here and past master of the Royal Designers for Industry, among other things. I was struck by the T-shirt designer and I found myself thinking what shape are the politicians and the project managers and the best I got with is a slug. It would be really good... Horizontally-shaped politicians would be very useful, not in the tabloid sense, obviously, and... Because I think you want people who are broad because I found myself, contrary to the way I voted at the beginning of this, agreeing with the opposers to the motion because I think you can’t have a strategy without a vision, you can’t have a vision unless you’re broad and I think unless politicians change from being I-shaped politicians, which is what they seem to obsess about most of the time, to being slug-shaped, we probably won’t get the vision. So, I’ll be arguing a change of politician... political shape from Is to slugs.
David Kester
So, you’re saying change the politicians.
Chris Wise
Change them from vertically and specialised in narrow areas into broad-based so that we get a decent vision first and don’t have a strategy before you’ve got vision.
Elspeth Gibson
My name is Elsbeth Gibson. I work in local government and in Suffolk County Council we’ve benefited from the Design Council programme, Public Service by Design, and I’m concerned... Laura spoke of we can’t be half pregnant which I think is a great phrase but also let’s not, you know, switch off the baby’s life support at first breath because in a local government context, design... one of the biggest challenges we have is how you convey value in something that hasn’t yet been released. I don’t think a lot of local government settings and situations we’ve realised that design isn’t an object-based type activity that goes on as a design school. We haven’t incorporated it into the way we look at our services, so I’m a very strong advocate of don’t cut it off before it’s really not... you know, not yet begun. Let’s find a way of making design process habitual, not routine because it would lose its edge then but really just keep the energy around it because there is so much to do.
David Kester
So, in essence as well beyond taking the grand stance, that you can keep taking the little stance as well.
Audience member
But something I would encourage. You know, are we asking Eric Pickles to come forward and announce what the, you know, government’s design policy is for local government? I’d rather fear that probably not being what we want.
Ruth Reed
Can I just say this worries me slightly, this completely defeatist... this idea that we, you know, that the government doesn’t understand us therefore we will not ask for a design strategy. Come on. You know? We’ve got the government we’ve got. Our role is to go out there and influence them to support British design industries.
Audience member
Yes. And I think Ben was saying, well, let’s wait until everyone’s signed up before we have a strategy and that is completely defeatist.
David Kester
Okay. Did you want to come back on that?
Ben Page
I’m just a realist.
David Kester
Okay. We’ve got a number of hands going up over here. Frank Peters and a gentleman in front of him at the bank. Frank.
Thank you very much. Focussing on that comment that’s on there, the fact of government having a role in design strategy, it does worry me. I think the design sector should have a design strategy to influence government as much as if you look at developers, constructors etc. They’ve had a brilliant strategy in terms of influencing the National Planning and Policy Framework which has... you know, has been labelled a developers’ charter.
So, it does worry me, making government get involved. And also they’ve had a strategy. They set up the Council of Industrial Design in 1948. Why we’re having to raise their perception with a crane, I don’t understand that bit, and also it was fairly clear from, I think it was Fergus, when he actually said we had to change the name of something for the politics. Well, that’s the problem, is we’re short-term, we’re involved in a political game etc. etc. The design sector, I think, should have its own strategy and that will influence government.
David Kester
Okay. So, that’s... In a way you’re almost in opposition to take... to come in on that which is should the design sector have a design strategy to influence government but somebody may want to respond. Was that a response to that? ... No, it was not.
Good morning, Adam Sharples, until recently in the department for Work and Pensions. I just wanted to say I thought the most persuasive case in favour of the motion was, in fact, made by Laura speaking against it. Yes, of course we need the vision but just try having visions without strategies and imagine how far you get. Not very far, in my view. What’s the alternative to having a strategy? Well, a lot of rather random inconsistent interventions. So, yes, let’s have the vision, let’s have the practical plans but strategy is essential to join them up. If I could just add one thought, linking with the gentleman behind me, I do think that there is a communication issue and I think most people in government, when you talk about design, just think about architecture and occasionally public space. It’s how things look whereas for me the most powerful message here is that design is about how things work and if we can get that embedded in the government strategy, that will start to make a real difference.
Thanks. Peter Stewart, I’m an architect and once ran the Design Review programme at CABE a few years ago. I’m sort of really speaking about the built environment side of things and, you know, my answer to the question put in front of us is there probably should be a design strategy but perhaps it’s not the government who should have it, as has already been suggested. But I wanted to reflect on the South Australia example, which I thought was interesting because it strikes me that the chances of localism, the precepts of localism resulting in anything remotely good in respect of design emerging is absolutely zilch.
Government may or may not have a role but I think between those two sorts of scales there’s a really important aspect of place and scale to do with the city or the city region so that the point that came across about South Australia was there was a group of people in a place who were committed to making that place a large functioning entity, i.e. a city, making it a better place. It was their place. That is not the same thing as being in UK or English government. So, I think there’s a, you know... And one could imagine under a different sort of dispensation one could imagine London being a place like that. So, I think it’s quite important and I suppose I’m limiting myself to the built environment but it could apply to other things too, to think about the possibilities of the design ethos of a place smaller than a country. That might be why the Germans don’t have it at federal level because they might have this stuff going to state level.
David Kester
Can I just ask whether anybody wants to pick up on that point about place? Place, of course, is not just about buildings and built environment, it’s also about all the interactions of services and products and so forth and I wondered whether there’s anybody... You said you were speaking on behalf of the built environment.
I don’t know whether anybody else wants to come in on that but, anyway, that’s... It’s another thought. I want to get this part of the room in but there were a lot of hands that went up over here, so I’m going to do a little arc here and come over to this side, so get your hands ready.
Vicky Pryce
Vicky Pryce. I was just thinking in terms of trying to link what we all would like to see on the design front with sort of just negation of the economic side and therefore having a strategy implemented. I mean, clearly whatever strategy’s put together or a vision that’s created, it’s part of the strategy. You can’t have a strategy without a vision, so I don’t see... think we’re having a proper argument about this right now. It is really to think of the win-win, how design can help economic growth, and there’s an interesting sideline to that which is the unemployment aspect which Ben mentioned.
Of course what we do see is that quite a lot of design companies are basically, you know, self-starters up to a point. There’s a lot of a different notion of that goes on in this area. A lot of people study it, then go on and do something themselves which is the sort of thing that the government is trying to encourage anyway. So, let’s not think that the two things are incompatible. Actually design can actually help both the unemployment situation... or design education the unemployment issue, particularly among the young and also contribute to greater growth.
David Kester
That’s good.
Chris Krupp
Chris Krupp. I represent the house-building industry, where I’ve spent most of my professional career. I can vote for a motion that said should the government have an innovation strategy but I think the design strategy is for us to influence. Can I just make the point that the only residential scheme to win Sterling prize is a result of British design skill and local government innovative control and it’s a very, very successful place but I don’t think necessarily localism should prevent creative design.
Peter O'Neill
Pete O’Neill, landscape architect, once ran the Public Space Enabling Programme for CABE. I wanted to know a bit more about what the core priorities for the strategy would be before I think I can vote for it and I think Tim and Ruth talked about particularly the value of being integrated and across government is key but I think there were three words that came out of the Danish presentation about solving grand challenges and I’m really interested to know if we have a strategy, what are the key grand strategies beyond economic growth that... sorry, key grand challenges beyond economic growth should be in that design strategy.
David Kester
That’s very interesting. So, I mean, you know, the key point is if you’re going to [unclear]. I’m going to come back... We will come back to this part but we’ve been a little bit one-sided over here, so I’m coming back over here. Who was putting up their hand? Oh, I’m sorry. Yes, Joanna.
Joanna Averley
Joanna Averley from Centre for Cities. The question about should it be a government design strategy somebody else has raised. My view is the government needs an investment strategy and by which it uses design to make the right decisions. It’s a slightly different emphasis because in any form of business investment thinking you have to know where to invest to get the best results and the best outcomes and design has a role to play, whether that’s where you put the housing, where you put the infrastructure, the use of design within supporting different businesses and so on. So, does government need a design strategy? Government needs an investment strategy informed by creative design that’s place-specific and business-specific and it’s a slightly different take. I think the question is slightly wrong.
David Kester
So, maybe the question is should government have an investment strategy. Now, lots of hand have gone up over here. Joyce, we’ll start here.
Joyce Bridges
I’m Joyce Bridges, a former CABE commissioner and I’m a member of the Mayor of London Citizens Advisory Panel. I mean, I thought they were excellent presentations but I was struck by Ben’s point, that, you know, until we can influence George Osborne we’re just not getting anywhere and I think in the current climate, we should be concentrating on how we can raise the case for design, how we can influence government to recognise the role of leadership and we shouldn’t be too diverted into some grand process-driven strategy. We should really use our resources to be campaigning and working where we can to make a difference. So, the National Planning Policy Framework talks about design. How can it be made stronger? The Housing Strategy talks about design. So, what is going to be done to ensure it happens? It’s these kind of questions, I think, that can move things forward in the current climate.
David Kester
Can we come down here actually?
Luck Kimbell
Lucy Kimbell, Young Foundation and Saïd Business School. I was struck by the distinction that Chris Wise alluded to earlier, the distinction between incremental improvement and innovation and if we... We know that innovation is messy, it’s disruptive, it leads to the reconfiguration of people and things doing stuff differently and it’s profoundly unknown. The consequences may be quite short-term and quite long-term. Governments are not in the business of doing innovation. They are not in the business of disruption. They are in the business of incremental improvement.
So, seeking... trying to ask a government to have a design strategy that’s for innovation is not going to happen but I think it’s also the wrong place to look for change and radical... of the kind that we need to address some of the contemporary challenges. So, I think the question that’s being posed today is wrong. It’s interesting. Not so much should government have a design strategy but how can we... As individuals and members of organisations, how can we do strategy locally, regionally, nationally, internationally and pose that question back to ourselves?
David Kester
Okay. Joanna, could I just come back to you and ask you...? Because I thought that actually what Fergus was saying that it’s not government’s role to just be innovative but to create environments. This was about systems and things which... And actually government has a role as an investment partner in creating some of that , that environment, which is where presumably [unclear].
JA Again, it’s an interesting question and I’m really interested in those points that Fergus and also Ben made. But it’s like do you really... does one really think that government has the levers to do some of that stuff, really? And we know the bond markets... You know, should they have a strategy for design? They probably have more of an influence on design in the UK and globally than even the Chancellor.
DK Liz.
LP Hi, I’m Liz Peace, I’m Chief Executive of the British Property Federation but I was a civil servant for 27 years and, you know, I have a bit of a feel for governments can and can’t do. I don’t think governments are capable of having large soviet-style strategies. Well, the Soviet Union tried and look where it actually got them. I found it deeply worrying that somebody said they thought localism was actually going to be the enemy of achieving good design. I’m talking particularly in the context of the built environment because actually at the end of the day that’s where it happens, in a local place that means something to a lot of local people. So, I think the only strategy central government should have is finding ways of facilitating other people lower down the chain to work out a strategy.
DK I’ll keep going around here.
PM Peter Mason, National Measurement Office but my standpoint as a still practising civil servant dealing with design issues for several years. And I think there are certain optional elements in what we’ve been talking about. I mean, should government be influencing business the way business applies design, yes or no? Should government be promoting design businesses, yes or no? Should they be changing the way that design skills are developing, yes or no?
But there’s one element which is non-optional and that is that when government buys things or, indeed, as Adam has pointed out, when it designs things, there is a design element and the question is, is that a conscious design element or an unconscious design element or an unconscious design element and does that produce good design or bad design? Now, it does seem to me that if we talk about that form of government design strategy, it is both non-optional and something where the design community has a great deal to contribute.
AK Andrea Siodmok, Chief Designer at Cornwall Council, currently writing a local government design strategy. But I agree with Ben which is that I think it has to come from the heart and so I was really pleased to see David Cameron at IDEO experiencing it. So, if government needs to value design, they should get real and on the ground and see it in the live. You know, it’s been quite fashionable in innovation to talk about backing winners and now I hear the innovation jargon is about backing racers. Well, I think in the design sector we have a global thoroughbred, so government should crack the whip.
UF A couple of things. Firstly, just to remind everybody that George Osborne of course did end his budget speech in April with talking about made in Britain, designed in Britain, created in Britain and I’m not sure that was quite the order but actually he was making a commitment there. Where that’s going I really don’t know but I think the point that I wanted to make was to pick up on something that Laura mentioned, which was around education because it seems to me that the reason we have fantastic creative industries in this country was because there was investment in our colleges in practical and academic education and an education system that produced fantastic people and I think there’s a real issue that we have in the way in which design technology and craft for that matter – I represent the Crafts Council – is taught or not going to be taught in the future in schools and also how that then cuts off the supply of new designers, new makers, architects, engineers but also reduces demand because you then have a generation of people who don’t know anything about design and for me that’s a hugely important part of this argument and it’s not being made and I think we really do need to focus on it.
UM I’d like to bring some lessons from business into this and as a practising designer, I spend a lot of time convincing boards and industry to spend large amounts of money on leading their innovation projects with a humanistic approach. And people talk about people not getting it and things like that and it seems to me that one of the reasons we do need a strategy is to move from a posture as an industry where we really depended on other people getting tacit things and we need to actually connect with where business is and where business is is in a situation where fields of economics like behavioural economics have more credibility now than they ever had.
There’s a realisation that a lot of the economic modelling at the root of business is grossly oversimplistic and the business itself is understanding that actually the value in industry and the notion of excellence in organisations is in the experience of the interaction between you and not just users but customers and all the other stakeholders. And so in business it’s quite straightforward to talk about experience-led innovation as actually an imperative in business and that goes into architecture and all the other areas and that language, that’s the language that we need to adopt, and that’s the language that will be understood in Nr. 10 as well. You know, they’re quite... There’s nothing wrong with being a sceptic.
DK Rachel.
RA It might be good to have a strategy but, as we’ve just heard, design gets everywhere and how we embed a strategy in government, I think the Design Council... If you look at the Design Council, the Design Council has been in the position of delivering government policy even though it may not have been official government policy because it was funded by the government and it responded. So, if you look at the history, in the 1940s the Design Council was promoting the textiles industry, even though it was going in decline. We are now in a position where the Design Council and CABE have sort of been liberated and we should actually be using the Design Council and CABE to deliver proactive evidence-based support for where design can help the economy and wellbeing and society and drive that through the different departments. So, I think we do need a strategy but I think it needs evidence-based outside organisations to drive it.
DK Debbie at the back here.
DE David, I’ve got a proposition to make which is that if government truly believed in design, it would ask the design industry in its broadest form to come up with the vision that we so desperately need. It’s what we do. It’s what we get paid for. Against which I think a co-owned strategy could be developed, funded which is their bit of it and implemented.
DK Seems to be an important point that’s coming through. Let’s take some more questions here. We can do a little cycle around here.
MH Mike Hayes. I think I may be beginning to move from a yes to a no and I’m doing that because I’m struggling with two words. The first word is design and the second word is strategy. I think the language here is becoming extraordinarily important. I think design is a very, very difficult word for people to get their head around but we should be talking about fitness for purpose, renewable, quality of life, safety, security, economic efficiency, value for money. To deliver any of those you need to design the outcome. So, don’t talk about the design process, let’s talk about the outcome. And rather than strategy, maybe we just need debate and conversation to raise the question, how do we do these things.
UM Isn’t there something about...? Because we heard about defining one’s terms there about design.
UM Beauty should we mention?
MH Well, absolutely. I agree absolutely with that. Well, maybe but we have to have a language that people embrace and understand and want to achieve.
DK Vicky just wanted to come in.
VP Since you’re over here and given that I have been involved in a number of strategies which have been implemented or up to a point, there is no way that anyone can produce a strategy without, A, having the vision and, B, involving the community that is interested in this. So, when we’re talking about design together, we’ve all got different things. No strategy worth its salt can actually be developed without active participation of the sector.
DK Right. Now, what I’m going to do is we’re going to take a few, three/four quick inputs here. I want to make sure that we have a formulation of questions as well. So, I’m going to propose some but others may come forward. But let’s get these quick comments.
UM Very struck by the comments for the need of evidence-based and I do feel that we wouldn’t be having this discussion if we actually had the measures. Earlier in the morning there was a bit of talk about sort of old-fashioned or legacy disciplines around, sorry to say this, the economics, accounting the value paradox, you know, managing intangibles and how we do all of that today. I feel that the design strategy need question wouldn’t be a question if we could prove it and maybe the focus needs to be on the evidentiary base for the future.
DK Evidenced research. And we might want to pick up... I know that there was a comment made by Fergus in his talk about the research base. I think there’s much more that we’ll need to talk about and we’ve actually been already proposing that we do the next forum on the whole research and evidence base.
DM Dids McDonald, Anti Copying in Design. It’s taken 15 years to get intellectual property and design used in the same sentence, which has been translated into government recommendation number seven from the Hargreaves Review. As intellectual capital underpins the whole of the design sector, whilst I agree with all the ifs that Laura made and also Tim in terms of ideally we’d like to have a government will rather than being chain-ganged, in the land of reality the fact remains that even in a recession this is a quarter of a trillion spend using design which could do more with less. And also the reality is that we need economic growth to survive, so can we afford to wait another 60 years?
UF I think that one of the things in common with all the four speakers who started was that they were saying design strategies were necessary but not sufficient and I want to emphasise the point someone else made, that we have a government that’s beginning to say design matters. Let’s not throw that baby out before it’s even had the chance to grow. I don’t think we can hold their feet to the fire if we don’t have some strategies that can be measured and where we can go and say, well, did you do it there and, if it matters, why aren’t you doing it here? So, I was very tempted by the no arguments but I’m still in the yes camp.
JL Jake Leith, President of the Chartered Society of Designers. I believe that we do need a design strategy but it should not be the government who is setting this, it is... We are a world-leading... As far as design goes, the designers that we have, we have the history, we have the pedigree and what we need is support if we’re going to be serious about exports, attracting investment, growth. All those things need to be done in a more collaborative model.
DK Richard.
RI Thanks. The DCMS, a happy memory, used to say that they didn’t have an architecture policy for the UK because they had CABE and I think I want to reinforce the point about activism which we haven’t really talked much about. The Design Council, now combined with CABE, is the focus for activism in this area. It’s important and for me more important even than the strategy, that the government provides it with the industry with a sustainable model for its future, which it doesn’t yet have and so for me that’s where I would start.
MA I’ll get back on the horse, if I may, David. What I think has been fascinating as we go right back to the first point that was made at the beginning of today, was that the Germans do not have a design policy and I think what we’re hearing today is because it is utterly endemic in Germany society, Danish society we did hear today, that it comes from the bottom up and it comes through the education system, it comes through the mittelstand which we have killed, our equivalent of the mittelstand, over the last 30/40 years, not been mentioned today at all, and therefore we have to take it back to our education system so that it is endemic. Therefore the politicians are receptive to it. They don’t have to have it imposed from the top as a policy. They have it within their body and soul and that’s what you see in Germany and Denmark and I think that is what we have gone such a long way to losing in this country.
DK Just to clarify, Mark, I think the point... I don’t know whether... Is Gavin still here?
GC Yes.
DK Gavin, I think the point was that your study didn’t include Germany, not that Germany didn’t have a design policy, is that right?
GC The map... It wasn’t just our study. It was looking at the whole of Europe but, I mean, building on what you were saying as well, Germany’s had a kind of different approach and when I was looking at innovation quite a while ago, they’ve got... they look at investments in infrastructure and in industry for plant etc. on a much longer investment period whereas over here it’s kind of three years you need to pay for it but Germany’s maybe ten years.
DK So, it’s in the core of the system I think is the point.
GC Yes.
DK Okay. I think... I’m going to take two more points and then we’ll have to go into our voting, otherwise we’ll run out of time. Am I okay for time?
UM Yes.
UF Yes.
UM An extremely quick point. It’s just to say that of course government expenditure represents 40% of the construction industry, so we must have a policy for that.
UF My point builds on that entirely. If there is a government design strategy, it should focus on procurement and the power of government to make a difference and I think in that sense as a person in local government, if I could lay my hand on 1,000 service designers right now, that would be a good thing for the UK economy because we have big problems and I think those kinds of approaches, which we haven’t talked about today, really have a foothold in the future.
UM The government is so active in the economy that we do need a policy to make sure that what business know is about design excellence is applied but I think that that strategy should be led... I agree with the points made by the CSD, DBA and on behalf of DDI make the same point, that the practitioners in industry who earn a living making these arguments day in, day out should be leading that strategy.
DK Okay. I’m going to say... As I said, nano comments from over here. So, they’re going to be very, very brief. If you want to just say something we’ll go back in the order that we started. Tim.
TB I think [unclear], so long as the strategy has a vision embedded and that it is taken forward across government. It’s lovely to see some other government departments here, not just BIS, but I notice from the attendance list that we don’t have the likes of the Highways Agency, the Environment Agency, DEP, DEFRA, MOD, MOJ, HMRC, HMT, the NHS etc. in this room. Wouldn’t it be lovely if they would be engaged? I think [unclear] across government they would be engaged. I absolutely agree with the timing of procurement. That’s absolutely a fundamental way forward.
And I’d just like to sort of finish with one paraphrase from [unclear] who was here on Tuesday with the Expo Designers Prize. I paraphrase but what he said was that design allows you to see better solutions, not just the obvious ones and I think if we had a strategy, we’d see more of these better solutions being delivered by business and by [unclear].
DK Laura.
LH There is no debate there for [unclear] design, absolutely none. We can sit here all day and talk about it and I’m in complete agreement with... as you know, with what’s been said but please do not let us let any government get away with believing that they have really done something by simply stating a strategy. As everyone here has said, we need to look beyond that. We need to look at the vision, we need to look at the integration, we need to create the plans. We can’t just tick a box. Gavin showed one slide with colours, I think, of every country that had a quote design policy and then he said, oh, well, at least they mentioned design somewhere. We can’t do that. We have to create something with real meaning so that this true value of design can be capitalised on.
DK Thank you. Where are we now? Ruth.
RR I’ve heard lots of elements about what the strategy is going to contain. It’s about growth, quality of life, procurement, integration, it’s about how things work, it’s about reducing unemployment. None of these are an argument against having a strategy and, in fact, making design endemic will not happen spontaneously and it will happen with leadership from the top and because I’ve very keen on messaging, be very careful if this room votes against the government having a design strategy. It will undermine our message forever to government but it will also undermine our industry. So, vote for the motion.
DK Ben.
BP I think I’m not going to say anything.
DK Right. Now, I want to test some... my wise people in the corner who’ve been scribbling away and they’ve got some formulations and some questions that you might want to consider and I jotted one down as well. One is does the UK need an integrated design vision first? That could be one question that we vote on. Another is should the design sector develop its own strategy? Should the design strategy focus on quality of life is another. And I’ve also got my own formulation, which is this House believes that government should fund a co-created joined-up design vision and follow it through with a strategy and action plan. That sounds like maybe I find myself in the middle but so does anybody violently disagree or want to give me an instant formulation of another question that is a better formulation?
UF I think they’re four elements to be part of the strategy.
DK Yes, but they’re good questions to ask.
UF They’re good questions but they can be part of the strategy.
DK So, we’re all happy we ask those questions.
UM Not instead of.
DK Not instead of the motion. We’re going to finish with the motion. We’ll just get a few little testers going.
UF I would add should a government strategy for design apply only to government, to what government should do, not to what the industry is...?
DK Well, I think that’s... We’ll capture that, yes.
UF Or should government be held to implement its own strategy.
UM Does Britain [unclear]?
DK Yes, I think it’s this government, isn’t it?
DK Yes.
UM Well, Scotland thinks it has one.
DK Okay. So, what we’re going to do is you’ve already just quickly formulated. Have you got those three down?
UF We can now put them up. If people disagree with the question we can change it.
DK Okay. So, we’re not going to vote on whether we... So, does the UK need an integrated design vision first is... you’re going to vote on. Five, four, three, two, one, gone. Right. A lot of people for an integrated design vision first. The second question was should the design sector develop its own strategy.
UF The strategy.
DK Hang on, let’s pause there. Let’s change that. Is everyone happy? So, should the design sector develop the strategy? Here we go. Real time.
UF I have a problem with why we’re saying design sector.
DK Well, vote.
UM Can we know if it means a collaborative...?
DK Yes.
UM Right.
DK Vote on the question. Five, four, three, two, one, go. And the third question is should a design strategy focus on quality of life. These are testers. Five, four, three, two, one, zero. The quality of life comes up very high. Now, I... There’s two more we’ve got coming up. Should government do more to promote the UK as a design nation? We’ve got one more. So, should a design strategy be focussed on local and national government use? Is that right? What was that, sorry? Should a design strategy...?
UF The government strategy, should it focus on how they spend money.
DK So, basically this is the commissioning point. Should a design strategy be focussed on how government uses design?
UM But there’s certainly primarily, as part of the overall strategy for... What is focus on...?
DK This is actually saying that if it had a design strategy, would it be primarily on government, it spends its money.
UM Primarily.
DK Primarily. So, should a design strategy primarily focussed...? So, we don’t change it but if everyone understands that, should it be primarily focussed on how government uses design.
UF So, have we forgotten skills completely in this? So, nobody seems to...
DK No, we cannot vote on that.
UF I.e. the government [unclear].
DK Let’s get this one in. We’ve got a high proportion. Okay. Well, can we actually try reformulating that on the education?
UF [Inaudible]
DK Focussed on education.
UF Yes, it’s a different question.
DK We’ll reformulate the question. We’d need to reformulate that one. So, we’re just reformulating that. So, I think the question is should the government strategy primarily focus on education or have a strong focus on education.
UF [Inaudible]
DK Two more questions after this one, which is [unclear]. [Overtalking]. So, should the design strategy be focussed on education? It doesn’t mean it’s primarily but it’s obviously got to be an important part of it.
UF [Inaudible]
DK Three, two, one, gone. Education is important. And ultimately...
[Overtalking]
DK So, I’m just going to dictate to you. Government should fund a... This is me trying to bring it all together. Government should fund a co-created joined-up design vision and follow it through with a strategy. You don’t like it? Forget it. If you don’t want to vote on it, let’s move on. Okay. You’ve heard... This was the motion that we came to debate. We heard all of the context first of all, we took a break, we’ve had some fantastic stimulation/provocation from our speakers. I think it’s been a fantastic discussion, by the way. Thank you very much, everybody, for coming and making that happen. This is the debate – should the government have a design strategy, yes or no. You see, [unclear] slightly different result. There’s a lot to interpret in there, a lot for us to think about.
UM [Inaudible]
DK Do we get to see the figures? It was 73, it dropped to 54...
UM [Inaudible]
DK I’m going to hand over to Michael.
MB Everything I was going to do [unclear] has now been done. I think we just need to remember that... I think there’s quite a lot of consensus in the room that we do need clarity of vision, that we need a clarity of strategy and I think some of it is about whether it should be government or the UK or whoever but there is a need for us to be clearer about where we’re going with design in this country and the power of design and I think as far as government is concerned, also let’s not forget some of the things that came out today.
There are no design debates across government, that’s absolutely clear. There is no government [unclear] head of profession and there is no champion, I have to say, with sufficient clout and we love having David Bullets [?] and one or two other people in the room but actually, Ben’s right, until George Osborne starts getting up and talking about the power of design, the intention of design to improve quality of life and growth, then I think we have a problem.
So, I think we’ve articulated... Again many of you will say the problem... I think you’ve given us actually a number of pointers as to how the Design Council and the wider community might take this forward in a way that I don’t think we’ve had before. So, I know that many of you will go away remembering phrases like cognitive polyphasia, you can’t be half pregnant and slug-shaped politicians but I’d like you to go away with maybe a bit more substantial positive reflection upon this debate, which I agree with David, has been absolutely brilliant. Thank you for coming.
We really will take this forward. I think, you know, I suppose I’m convenor, as it were. I want to see us kind of reflect on this with a number of people in this room and come back to all of you, you know, with some conclusions on what we’re going to do about the things that we’ve talked about today. Because someone said there is a design strategy. The government does have a design strategy. It works on a strategy which is entirely inappropriate and unhelpful. If we’re going to shift that, then we’d have to put something in its place which is more positive and more powerful.
So, thanks for coming. There’s some lunch and what am I supposed to do that I haven’t done?
DK No, I just want to say that we will be convening our next forum in March and we will be looking at what a UK-wide design research agenda could look like. It is actually based on the fact that we have a new culture with AA Chelsea and we believe that announcements will follow about university-funded design research programme in the UK.
MB And we always have that to be the last word. So, I want to say we want these events to be relevant and interesting to you and others. If you’ve got ideas about issues, subjects which you think we should give half a day to and which we could usefully give half a day to, let us know. But thanks very much. Have some lunch.