date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 10:29:05 +0100 from: "Phillip Williamson" subject: Re: PRESCIENT to: , John - and Keith With NERC there is a genuine choice between cock-up and conspiracy. The former category covers events taking an order of magnitude greater than they ought to, without anyone really being to blame. In the case of PRESCIENT, a suitable Chair for the Steering Committee was identified - and invited - some months ago. He/she did not immediately accept, then spent some time abroad, not replying to emails before deciding to decline. An alternative Chair was then identified, invited and has now (last Friday) accepted: Tom Wigley. The shortlistof suggestions for other members of the SC will be discussed with Tom asap, so that the group can hold its first meeting and get the programme underway - issueing the AO etc. Given the above situation (as described to me this morning by Liz Feldman of the ESTB group) I don't think it would be either necessary or desirable to hassle Simon C-M (who may not anyway yet be aware of the most recent developments). As a general comment, NERC has made life more difficult for itself by now emphasising the need for the Chair for thematic programmes to be as independent as possible - debarring (in most cases) UK academics. There is also reluctance to appoint programme proposers to the SC, on the basis that that only strengthens their "inside track" knowledge of the programme (and hence gives an unfair advantage when bidding for support). But the need for some continuity of conceptual development is also recognised... so a balance has to be struck. Regards Phil