MPs have now taken both written and oral submissions in their probe into the new UK Space Agency.

Some of the leading lights in the British space sector went before the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee on Wednesday to give their "thrupp'nce" on the topic. There were no major headlines but we did get some insight into the progress - or lack of it, depending on your point of view - of the move towards a new way of doing space in the UK.

If you missed the session, you can still watch it here . It lasts about 70 minutes.

I've got some random thoughts, but just to recap first - very briefly - for anyone coming fresh to this topic:



The new executive space agency was set up on 1 April to bring together all elements of policy and activity that previously had been spread across a disparate bunch of government departments and scientific research councils.

The main bugbear had been the obvious lack of coherence in this old club of space "users", which had often left the UK floundering on many important space projects, particularly within the European Space Agency where 76% of the UK civil space budget (£270m) is spent.

From now on, the UKSA is supposed to be the driver of the decision-making process. And, critically, it is also supposed to control the funding that underpins those policy decisions.

So much for the theory.

Well, before Wednesday's oral evidence, I had sight of some written submissions and they were critical of the pace of change towards this new vision. Not much appeared to have happened since the Big Bang on 1 April, they said.

This view was echoed in the select committee hearing by Andy Green, the CEO of Logica and the co-chair of the UK Space Leadership Council, and Richard Peckham, the chair of UK Space (an industry umbrella group) and an executive at EADS Astrium. Andy Green said:

"Because of the difficulties of the election, the changes of leadership that go with that, and then the spending review - from our angle it's very difficult to see any concrete progress. I'm not particularly being critical - it's a really horrible time to do this, [so] we have to be realistic about it. But it's important. It's a PR issue inside government; the agency needs to be widely respected by all the other departments who are engaged in the needs, applications and outputs of space. We need to get that on the front foot; momentum matters. If it's seen to drift away then the other departments will start to ignore it and then the benefits... will be missed."

Dr David Williams, the acting chief executive of the UKSA, recounted the achievements made so far in bringing the previously fragmented responsibilities and budgets under one roof. In the past fortnight, the Department of Transport had finally agreed to come onside, Dr Williams said. This would mean, he explained, that the UKSA would now assume control of matters relating to Galileo, Europe's proposed satellite-navigation system. The UK is a major player in this project.

Dr Williams said an understanding had also now been reached with the MoD and the Home Office on how their space interests would be managed in future. In the case of the MoD, it is retaining oversight of matters that affect frontline activities.

So, for example, this means the UKSA will have to take a back seat when it comes to weather forecasting (the MoD funds the Met Office which is dependent on weather satellites which provide the forecasts for our forces). But the UKSA will get involved in the research and development of future weather satellite technology. This potentially is a very important change and something I'll return to in a later posting.

Overall, Dr Williams tried to get his audience to understand the complexities involved in some of the changes, right down to the apparently mundane issues like recruitment policies that can so often frustrate the pace at which new initiatives are implemented.

"We plan to have an open meeting, probably in London. We thought it was only sensible to do that at the end of the spending review when we can set out the way forward and say, 'this is how we're going to do it; this is the internal structure of the agency now and this is the resource we've got for the next four years to work with'. And in terms of the momentum of change - many space programmes are actually committed for the next or so. Changing the content of the space programme within a year is very difficult because of the way the commitments are made."

The big issue right now I guess is the level of funding the agency will have to work with following October's Comprehensive Spending Review.

The "space minister" David Willetts has lauded the efforts of the UK space community at every opportunity since taking office, but he's also reminded everyone at the same time of the difficult fiscal climate.

Mr Willetts' boss, Business Secretary Vince Cable, has delivered the blunt message in a speech about science and technology that the public sector would now have to do "more for less".

If you were looking for any straw to clutch in what Mr Cable said this week, it would be the line in his speech where he said there was "a case for identifying and building up the areas where the UK truly is a world leader", which included "stem cells and regenerative medicine, plastic electronics, satellite communications, fuel cells, advanced manufacturing, composite materials and many more".

On 20 October, we will get a sense of where the government wants to prioritise funding. It will be some weeks after that date, however, before we know precisely how much cash will be put in the hands of the UKSA.

(You can listen to Mr Willetts debate science funding with Professor Colin Blakemore, former chief executive of the British Medical Research Council, by clicking here. The pair were on the BBC's Today programme on Thursday. Again, Mr Willetts refers to space as a UK "strength".)