date: Tue May 21 14:30:50 2002
from: Tim Osborn <t.osborn@uea.ac.uk>
subject: Re: URGENT!!! Fwd: Letters re strategic review
to: Clare Goodess <C.Goodess@uea.ac.uk>

   I'm now making modifications and responding to suggestions...
   At 10:23 21/05/02, you wrote:

     Palaeo people: Ray Bradley, Jean Jouzel, Andre Berger, Geoffrey Boulton?

   We'll go with Ray Bradley.

     What about more impacts-related people?

   We have Arnell, Beniston, UKCIP, and I'll be adding Melvin Cannell and Richard Harding, so
   that's probably enough.

     I felt uneasy about the mention of 'people' though didnt pick up on it. I'd delete it.
     This issue is sort of covered in second question in section 2.

   I think it is the combination of "poor reputation" and "people" that is the main problem -
   it's not so bad if specific people are named in a positive manner.  Jean later suggested
   that we re-focus this question towards the "good reputation", so I'll do that.  Q2 of
   "development of CRU" is one I was considering deleting.

     3.  You've only asked about contract research.  What about CRU as a provider
     of postgraduate training - this is an essential part of our activities these
     days and it would be useful to have some responses on whether people think
     that's a good thing, how funding sources are likely to change etc.

     Yes, should be included, e.g., ENV/UEA people, NERC, possibly EC

   I agree.

     4.  I think someone like Melvin Cannell should definitely be included (and
     maybe also the head of IoH) - these are institutes like are own with similar
     preoccupations.  I can see you don't want too many people; much though I
     respect Rebecca, I don't think she can help us with this.

     yes

   I agree.

     5.  Funding bodies are quite narrowly specified also.  We could do with
     someone from industry.  (Neither Andrew nor Mike are asked about the
     future).  This could be insurance e.g., Michael Michaelides from CGNU or,
     better, Dougal Goodman.  Or it could be Nirex - they must be one of the most
     longstanding funders in CRU.  DEFRA probably only merits one person - Who is
     Peter Costigan and how well does he know CRU?

     I think Mike Thorne should be asked some questions about future.

   Yes

     CGNU - yes

   I'd rather go for Dougal Goodman, being broader-based.

     BP/Shell?

   Still not keen on this - unless someone has a name of someone closely involved in climate
   and with some knowledge of CRU or CRU's work - any names?

     Nirex: could approach Paul Degnan (closely involved in CRU work), or, going up
     hierarchy, Alan Hooper (knows about CRU work, though 1-step removed)

   I'll offer Paul and Alan as suggestions for CRU board to consider.

     EPSRC? Peter Bates?

   Similar question to BP/Shell - does Peter Bates know climate well, and CRU or CRU's work at
   least partly?

     A last quick comment is, why not go to the top in NERC - I'd send it to John
     Lawton

     Yes

   I agree

     I dont see any problem in delay and would feel happier with 'formal' endorsement of CRU
     Board.

   Yes
   Cheers
   Tim
