Note for: Messrs. B. D. Bramley 1-11@t
D. G. Heywood +D D F-
(Ccl 2L
Research Conference - R&D Funding
one pressing item upon which I need guidance for this year's meeting
J18 September) is the formula for allocating costs of centralised R&D
activities to the CAC companies (the total cost is less of a problem
since it is no,:@ expected to change significantly from this year's
figure).
The elements to be covered are:
(i) Southampton Fundamental Research approx. E3 mn.
(ii) Scientific Research Group contracts approx. EO .4 mn.
Fundamental Research
Historically, this is divided on an ar'-ritary allocation reflecting
turnover and size of local R&-Jd contribution to Group pool and has
been:
U.S.
U.K. 25%
Germany 1 - 1.9%
Souza Cruz: - -%
Canada
wills
-We@ need to resolve two issues:
1. Since Wills is now part of BATCO. , it will no longer contribute
separately to this pool. The Accounts Department in Millbank have
shown that it is preferable for BA':Co. to absorb the Wills 7%
making a total figure of 32% for BATCo. (since on a strictly T&A
fee basis BATCo. will receive a greater sum from wills). Is this
agreed?
2. Should, however, the allocation fo=,ula be less arbitrary an d
strictly I Inked to either t/o or Prof its 7 Canada and German@,
believe it should but B&W will resist. The relevant data is
appended and I should appreciate y;ur views.
scientific Research Group Contracts
This cost has been divided between CACs o 1 shares basis for
the past four years. We have contracts t t us for several
years and there is little opportunity nex r instance to reduce
level of activity. In any event, this ov el of expenditure on
'duty of care' projects is modest. With Wills ai@a BATCo. company,
should BATCo. pay two shares or should the total qually shared
by only four companies (the latter is hard to Jus
Could we meet :with D. salt) to discuss in the ve future7
A@IA
L.' - -@
A. L. HEARD <@
ALH/AJZ
6 September 1989
--4
Ln
BATCo document for Province of British Columbia 20 April 1999