Britain should consider focusing its science spending on a few specialised areas in which it can lead the world, the Science and Innovation Minister said today.

Instead of funding many projects across a wide variety of fields as at present, the Government should highlight narrower national priorities such as medical research and climate change, Lord Drayson said.

The radical proposal for a national science strategy will alarm many scientists, as it would lead to funding cuts in those areas that are not ranked highly by ministers.

It also threatens the long-standing convention that while the Government decides how much taxpayers’ money is available for supporting research, scientists themselves decide how it is spent through the research councils.

Lord Drayson told the Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills committee that he wanted to start a debate about the need for more focus.

“I think that we need to look at the global environment, we need to note that the countries with whom we are competing have made strategic choices about the areas they believe they are best placed to focus on,” he said.

“There is a strong case for asking the question about where we are best placed to compete in the future based around our strengths. We recognise that we need to see a rebalancing of our economy and we need to look at where we have a strategic advantage.”

He highlighted medical research as a prime example of a field in which greater prioritisation could deliver results. “An area I would point to where the UK has something nowhere else has is the NHS,” he said. “The whole world faces the challenges of ageing populations. There is an enormous need for the development of effective modern healthcare.

“We in this country are uniquely well placed because of the asset of the NHS. The patient base and expertise offers a unique opportunity to develop a real strength in the life sciences, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, to promote a world leadership position that could be developed into exports.

“We have to ask ourselves whether or not this competitive advantage requires us to be clear about what is the vision for our country’s future, and how does the research base best supports what we want to do.

“I’m calling for a serious debate about the areas of focus for this country in the future. This is not about ministers making these choices. We do have a very effective process based on peer review. But it’s about asking the question, given that we are in an environment where other countries are doing this, given we see real need to rebalance our economy, we need to be clear about what are our assets that put the UK in a strong position, and where they are deployed to our best interests.

“I sincerely believe we could be the world’s best in life sciences if we really put out minds to it.”

Evan Harris, a Liberal Democrat member of the committee, said: “This is a radical proposal and it is going to be very challenging to do. It will not be possible unless there is buy-in across government and a willingness to make tough choices.”

Times Recommends

• Should Knox’s trial even have reached the courtroom?
• All that glitters is not sold in Wright’s world
• Believe it or not, Big Brother is your friend