Horizon Discovery in Cambridge has unveiled a new cell line that enables broader-based and faster genetic testing of blood cancers.

The UK business is first to market with its Myeloid DNA Reference Standard which will bring routine testing into practice.

Horizon’s technology will deliver a cell line-derived reference standard containing 22 mutations across 19 genes that are commonly associated with myeloid cancer.

The discovery provides genetic testing laboratories and assay developers with a tool to effectively validate and optimizse myeloid genetic tests with DNA of known genotype which closely mimics the genomic DNA format and mutations present in real patient samples.

Horizon says the Myeloid DNA Reference Standard contains variants in more genes than most clinical material, enabling quality assurance goals to be reached faster.

Blood cancers have seen increased biomarker identification and associated targeted drug development in recent years, resulting in an increase in genetic testing of myeloid cancer, which attacks the blood and bone marrow.

There are now multiple pre-designed, multi-gene next generation sequencing  assays on the market in addition to custom-designed myeloid gene panels. Myeloid cancer has more associated actionable gene targets that can direct clinical treatment options than are available for solid tumours, meaning that high quality, accurate genetic diagnosis is vital to guide treatment of cancer patients.

The new reference standard fulfils the need for clinical testing labs and assay developers to access well-characterised, multigene multiplexed reference standards, says  Horizon’s CEO Terry Pizzie.

He said” “This is an exciting new launch for Horizon as it is the largest cell-line derived reference standard hitting the market that is focused exclusively on myeloid cancer.

“Horizon has successfully developed an extensive range of genetically defined, human genomic reference standards already, and the Myeloid DNA Reference Standard further demonstrates our commitment to providing the right tools our customers need to tackle the challenges of oncology genetic testing.”

Cambridge and Bedfordshire property business Kier Group plc saw its share price increase 33p to 1,073p and its market cap top $1.3 billion after it defied market negativity following the collapse of Carillion to report excellent returns for the year to June 30, bolstered by a record order book.

Kier, which had posted a £14.2m pre-tax loss in the 2017 financial year, bounced back by reporting £106 million in PBT. Reported group revenue increased slightly to £4.2 billion from £4.1bn.

CEO Haydn Mursell said record order books of £10.2bn provided confidence for the future. The proposed full year dividend per share has been increased by two per cent to 69p.

Mursell (pictured) said: “I am pleased to report a good set of results with all divisions performing well. We have launched the Future Proofing Kier programme which will streamline the business thereby enabling us to deliver a more efficient service to clients, respond to changes in our markets and capitalise on growth opportunities, whilst, importantly, also accelerating the reduction of the group’s net debt position.

“Our strong market-leading positions, our record £10.2bn Construction and Services order books, and our £3.5bn property development and residential pipelines, will see the group deliver on its Vision 2020 targets.
 
“In addition, the Future Proofing Kier programme positions the group well for an improvement in operating margins and higher cash generation, culminating in a net cash position for FY21.”

The Future Proofing Kier programme is focused on simplifying and streamlining the group’s operations and enabling Kier to be more responsive to client needs. 

Mursell says the actions taken during FY19 will deliver annual profit and cash flow improvements of at least £20m in FY20, representing at least 10 per cent of profit from operations, together with targeted proceeds of £30-50m from the disposal of non-core businesses. 

This programme will help the group achieve its target of year-end net cash and average net debt of c.£250m in FY21.

As evidenced by the well-established R & D tax legislation, the UK government looks to support innovation through the tax system, writes Tim Shaw, associate partner with Ensors Chartered Accountants.
 
Following this theme, the patent box legislation was introduced with effect from 1 April 2013 although the effect of the legislation was phased in and full relief was not available until 1 April 2017.

The relief looks to extend support through the tax system to the point in a company’s lifecycle where intellectual property is not just being developed but is actually being exploited for commercial gain. 

Notwithstanding this, it is common for companies which are still undertaking R & D activities, and claiming R & D tax relief, to also claim relief under the patent box legislation and the patent box is designed to encourage ongoing R & D.

The intention of the legislation is for qualifying companies to pay tax (by 2017) at an effective rate of 10 per cent on patent-related profits, as opposed to the standard rate of corporation tax of 19 per cent. 

Slightly confusingly, the relief is not actually achieved by taxing profits at this lower rate; rather the relief is given by reducing the amount that is subject to tax at the 19 per cent rate. 

Profits potentially qualifying for the lower effective rate of corporation tax include those arising from the sales of patented items, licence fees, proceeds from the sale of the patent itself and infringement income.

The benefit of the patent box legislation is available only to companies. Consequently, where an individual inventor has applied for or obtained a patent, relief will not be available unless the patent is first sold to, or licensed to, a company. Before doing so, the inventor should consider any commercial issues and personal taxation exposures that could arise from this. 

The relief extends to patents granted by the UK Intellectual Property Office and the European Patent Convention and to certain patents granted by specified EEA states. Importantly, US registered patents do not qualify for relief (unless the patents have also been registered with the above bodies). 

It should be noted that the legislation does not apply to profits arising from other intellectual property such as copyright or trademarks. Relief is also available in respect of the patent pending period provided that the company has elected into the patent box, although the tax savings are only crystallised when the patent is actually granted.

Computing tax relief under the legislation requires a complex eight-step calculation (not set out here for brevity) with income and costs being streamed into patented product or process streams – this must be done separately for each patent. 

Further adjustments have to be made for ‘routine’ and marketing returns and various other steps before finally reaching an amount to be deducted from taxable profit so as to give the required relief. Claims under the legislation are restricted to ensure that the claimant only benefits for patents developed in-house or by the use of unconnected subcontractors.

The benefit of the patent box legislation is not automatic, and companies must elect to make use of the scheme. The election must be made within two years from the end of the accounting period for which it will first apply, which need not be the period in which the patent is applied for or granted.

The patent box legislation is well intentioned and can deliver substantial tax savings to companies which fall into it. However, it is clear that it has not been utilised by taxpayers in the same way as the R & D tax regime (patent box claimants number approximately five per cent of those claiming R & D tax relief). 

The latest available statistics (albeit that these are for the 2014/2015 year where full relief was not yet available) show 1,135 companies claimed patent box relief totalling £651.9m. Of this amount, almost 95 per cent was claimed by ‘large’ companies.

The relative complexity of the legislation has undoubtedly contributed to the low take up of available relief. In addition, the phased in nature of the relief has also not helped as the value of the relief available in 2013 was relatively low. 

There is a perception amongst smaller companies, and often their advisers, that patent box relief is excessively complex and geared to larger companies with greater resources (and budgets) for compliance matters. However, this should not be the case as well-advised SMEs making profits that qualify for relief can often obtain substantial benefits even when compliance costs are taken into account.

It should be noted that the European Commission ruled that the original patent box legislation was anti-competitive, and the UK rules were amended with effect from 1 July 2016. 

The above has set out the position under these updated rules but it is therefore possible that patent box may be an area of legislation that is reconsidered subsequent to Brexit.

The patent box legislation is complex and professional advice should always be taken before any claims are made under the legislation or any relief is assumed. Nevertheless, it is a valuable tax relief for companies of all sizes that make appropriate qualifying profits.

• You can call Tim Shaw on 01223 428314 or email: tim.shaw [at] ensors.co.uk

The mergers and acquisitions (M & A) outlook in 2018 looks robust with global corporates seeing deals as a significant opportunity for growth this year, writes Mark Day, Corporate Finance director at EY, East of England.

We’ve just experienced the biggest first half for global deals on record. Meanwhile, in the UK, deal values in H1 2018 were only surpassed by H1 2007.

There is a heightened appetite to do deals in the next 12 months among global executives looking to acquire, with digital transformation remaining a core driver of M & A. 

In our Digital Deal Economy survey of more than 900 executives, 90 per cent are elevating digital priorities in their strategic planning over the next two years. 

The drive toward a digital future will likely see more innovative start-ups and nimble tech-enabled businesses targeted, with companies continuing to reshape themselves and acquire technology and digital assets that will help define their future. 

Tech-smart deals will help companies future-proof their operations and address continuously changing business models. Companies are proactively finding solutions to regulatory challenges to help ensure deals are done – standing still from an M & A perspective is no longer an option.

Companies that do no more than put digital wrappers around their existing brands and propositions may find their future under threat. Digital disruption requires asking hard questions about what your organisation is today and what it needs to be tomorrow. The ability to continually innovate quickly is critical. 

Forging a successful digital future will likely mean buying as well as building capabilities in-house. Today, investors are prepared to reward companies that make bold technology and transformational acquisitions. 
Digital M & A is defined by the key process and new ways in which digital capabilities are built through M & A. 

In the future, those who can execute digital M & A over a sustained period will have a competitive advantage. 

However, we find clear differences between companies in their ability to transform strategic thinking into digital M & A capabilities and outcomes. There is great variance between those who embrace the opportunities of digital transformation, who lead at digital M & A, and those who are still learning. 

There are three levels of digital maturity: leaders, adopters and aspirers. Only 14 per cent of respondents from EY’s survey are ‘leaders’ with robust digital M & A capabilities; 57 per cent are ‘aspirers’ and 29 per cent are ‘adopters’. 

To succeed in the new digital world is not just a one-off sprint. It is a continuous race to stay ahead of changing customer demands amid ever morphing landscapes. Becoming leaders in the transformational age requires a digital-centric approach to capital strategy, dealmaking and processes.

On the basis of our research, there are four priority areas across the transaction lifecycle, where organisations should focus efforts to transform to become leaders: 
Strategy and ecosystem

Establishing the digital ecosystem to fast track innovation, allocate resources and build capabilities will be critical to realise the potential of your vision. Understanding the evolving external environment and aligning strategic digital goals is the primary driver of success. 
Acquisitions are clearly an important part of the mix – three quarters (74 per cent) of survey respondents are looking outside their own company for digital growth. 

Also, leaders in our survey are more likely to have the CEO as the person driving the primary aspects of digital transformation strategy. That highest-level sponsorship is critical, but it is also paramount that this vision and strategy is embraced throughout the company. 

Capital and portfolio review

Continuously reviewing the business portfolio to sustain ambitious acquisition and investment goals is key to future-proofing your business. Our survey respondents clearly understand there is a cost associated with digital transformation. 
The vast majority of respondents (90 per cent) are considering digital priorities in their capital allocation planning over the next two years. 
There is a clear recognition that capital is needed to enable the company’s buy or build strategy, however only 48 per cent agreed that they have a coherent and aligned buy and build approach to digital. 

Deal process

Rebooting M & A capabilities and processes to meet the specific deal demands of the digital environment is fundamental to success. When it comes to the deal process, more than half of all companies (54 per cent) believe their diligence in acquiring digital assets is highly effective, with a further 45 per cent citing their effectiveness as “moderate”. A mere fraction (one per cent) say their diligence is ineffective. This would suggest an overall level of confidence around the processes companies are using to evaluate targets. 

Integration

Realising maximum value requires strategic integration approaches tailored to digital transactions. Many organisations lack the performance measures to understand whether they are succeeding with critical post-merger integration considerations. 

For example, just a third (34 per cent) of organisations have KPIs in place to measure people or culture success, such as levels of organisational engagement. 

Companies may have a number of digital targets in their sights at the same time, so the ability to integrate multiple digital assets at multiple speeds simultaneously will be key to delivering value. 

How you manage your capital agenda today will define your competitive position tomorrow. EY works with clients to create social and economic value by helping them make better, more-informed decisions about strategically managing capital and transactions in fast-changing markets. 

Whether you’re preserving, optimising, raising or investing capital, EY’s Transaction Advisory Services combine a set of skills, insight and experience to deliver focused advice. 

We can help you drive competitive advantage and increased returns through improved decisions across all aspects of your capital agenda.

Cambridge-based mobile payments powerhouse Bango is ramping its technology to increase by tenfold the amount of end user spend its platform is comfortably able to cope with.

The current £5 billion EUS capacity could be scaled to as much as £50bn as Bango continues to evolve the platform, CEO Ray Anderson revealed to Business Weekly.

Anderson (pictured) also disclosed significant expansion of Bango’s capability in Asia where it has already grown its Japan office and its team in Korea. Expect to see an uptick in other key centres such as Taiwan and Singapore. 

Bango is already growing its influence in India through its client Amazon and has a strong European springboard from its offices in Milan following the acquisition of Italian-quoted business Audiens.

Bango powers mobile payments around the globe for online stores such as Google, Amazon, Samsung, Microsoft and other key operators. They use the Bango Platform to collect payments from tens of millions of customers.
The company’s first half results to June 30 showed an inexorable march towards profit in 2019 without exhausting current cash in hand; the payments business is already EBITDA positive.

End user spend in the first half increased 138 per cent to £220m; total revenues increased 54 per cent to £2.63m.

Bango has £5.88m cash which Anderson expects will fund the group through to profitability and cash generation. He said the war chest was sufficient to support both planned investment to grow sales and develop new products.

In the first half, Bango expanded the use of billing integration technology, enabling customers to sign-up for Amazon Prime Video in the US, UK and India.

Pandora, a leading music streaming service, chose the Bango Platform for mobile operator launch in the US.

Additional Google Play routes in Africa and South America were opened up and Anderson sees these as high growth territories along with Asia.

The business model Bango has evolved ranks alongside those of other Cambridge enterprises that have shown long-term sustainability, notably Marshall, Domino, Arm and more recently Grapeshot.

Anderson said: “We work hard to ensure we deliver what we say we will deliver. And I am sure investors are encouraged by the fact we refuse to rest on our laurels; we are constantly evolving our technology to improve our offering to customers and expand our client base globally.”

Mobile operators around the world are seeing the substantial additional profit they can make by working with Bango. An increasing number are expected to upgrade to Bango in the coming months.  

For its part, Bango is able to control spend by improving its technology to leverage efficiencies rather than pile on headcount. While its workforce is ethnically diverse the company is in the talent stakes rather than a numbers game. 

“We have managed to recruit a number of non-UK hires to boost our talent pool but that is the key – to improve our staff not just put bums on seats. Our continuous technology upgrades enable us to invest wisely in the things that will improve service to clients and make Bango stronger,” Anderson told me.

Six times Cambridge artificial intelligence pioneer PROWLER.io tried to bring in one of the best mathematical brains in the world from Africa and six times the Home Office rejected the visa bid.

Finally, after six months of campaigning with the aid of an in-house immigration law specialist, the company succeeded in getting their man from Kenya – identified by chairman  Carl Rasmussen as essential to PROWLER.io’s dream of creating a Cambridge technology that could lead the world for half a century or more.

PROWLER.io has since, on the advice of its home-grown immigration law expert Eba Kamaly, tapped into an advisory service from the Home Office designed to prevent the pitfalls and pratfalls that can beset a company committed to hiring the best brains on the planet on behalf of the Cambridge technology cluster and UK plc.

PROWLER.io co-founder and CEO Vishal Chatrath tells Business Weekly that the business is in the process of raising between $30 million and $40m in the next few months. But he says he invested the company’s very first dollar in hiring Kamaly and “it has been the best money we have ever spent.”

Chatrath attended a recent summit with Government officials who asked attendees to cite the biggest threats to their businesses. There was no hesitation from the PROWLER.io camp. If the Government facilitated a drain on global talent to the UK after Brexit, the opportunity of a lifetime would be lost to Cambridge and Britain, he told them. 

Chatrath, who employs 27 nationalities among one of the fastest growing workforces in UK technology, told me: “The US would normally, based on history, expect to replicate what it has done in the past and dictate the pace of a new wave of technologies but that is not the case here – not in AI.
“A lot of companies in the UK and further afield are saying they are at the leading edge of AI but this is pure hype; they are thrashing around in the space. 

“We are creating the ultimate model in developing an Artificial Intelligence stack that represents the world’s best, most reliable and innovative platform for genuine decision making. The decision making capability is the Holy Grail and that is what PROWLER.io is leading the world in creating.

“We are building an entire AI decision making ecosystem in Cambridge which can allow the cluster to dominate the field for the next 50 years. It is a once in a century opportunity and if we screw it up it will only be because the UK is not allowing the global talent to come to Cambridge where they know we are leading the world.

“Forty-eight per cent of our staff is non-UK so does Cambridge and the UK want to build a genuinely world-leading business in AI or not?”

Chatrath revealed that PROWLER.io has regularly spent £25k per head to bring AI superstars and their families from overseas to Cambridge where headcount will be up to 200 in the next 18 months. Once they are tempted here, finding accommodation is presenting another problem but the company is working with the entire family to find solutions. 

“We talk to the employee’s wife or husband – even their children – to establish their requirements and then work hard to ensure they are adequately looked after. 

“It has become a prime consideration; to be honest, finding the right people wherever they are based on the planet and pulling out all the stops to get them here and settled is the only way we as a company and Cambridge as a technology sector can establish our credentials and credibility. Otherwise the prize goes elsewhere and why should it when we have the market lead and the solutions in our own hands?”

PROWLER.io moves this month into a new 26,000 sq ft office headquarters in Hills Road – a stone’s throw from Apple’s Cambridge base. 

A Cambridge HQ will remain crucial to the company’s global growth strategy in the long term, Chatrath insists. The company employs 41 PhDs – a balance which a lot of technology companies would sniff at, he believes. Recruiting top brains from Cambridge University is integral to the company’s ongoing growth plans.

Chatrath said: “It is a myth that PhDs and mathematicians cannot help grow a highly focused technology business such as ours. We are disproving that prejudice on a daily basis.

“These are all highly intelligent people playing a central role in the ongoing development of our business towards being the UK and world number one AI decision-making platform. I am an engineer but can recognise and appreciate the brainpower our PhDs are bringing to our development.”

• PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS: Vishal Chatrath, CEO of PROWLER.io

A Cambridge UK life science innovator has been identified as a global gamechanger in tackling the rising tide of diabetes.

Arecor has secured £6 million investment from new and existing backers for the clinical development of its speciality pharma portfolio of proprietary diabetes products.

The equity investment was led by UK institutional investors Calculus Capital, Downing Ventures, and Albion Capital with significant participation from Arecor’s existing backers. 

Arecor’s next-generation diabetes product pipeline represents exciting technology progress in the field of diabetes that will enable important new treatment regimens and offer greater control of blood glucose to patients, which is key to improving outcomes and quality of life. 

The pipeline includes:-

• Proprietary formulations of insulin analogues that are ultra-rapid acting and more closely match a healthy body’s physiological response to blood glucose, leading to better blood glucose (sugar) control – currently a significant challenge
• Highly concentrated rapid acting insulin optimised for the next generation of body-worn miniaturised delivery devices, including the artificial pancreas
• Stable aqueous ready to use glucagon used in an emergency to treat severe hypoglycaemia and enabling future use in bi-hormonal artificial pancreas systems

These programmes will be progressed through development to demonstrate improved product profiles and health outcomes in human clinical trials. 

In addition to these clinical programmes, the investment will allow Arecor to progress its pre-clinical pipeline of diabetes combination products, as well as a range of additional superior biotherapeutics addressing critical unmet needs in key disease areas.

The management of diabetes is one of the major global health challenges.  Indeed, the International Diabetes Federation estimates that there are nearly half a billion (425 million) people currently living with diabetes around the world and adds hat if the global direct and indirect healthcare costs from diabetes are included, the economic impact of the condition exceeds $1trillion.

Arecor chairman Dr Andy Richards told Business Weekly: “Arecor has been a growing success story over the last few years under CEO Dr Sarah Howell’s leadership. She is truly impressive.

“This fundraising also signals that you can make real therapeutic progress without always raising 10s of millions, by being smart and focused.
“You will find very few other innovative companies in the UK tackling diabetes despite the size of the market and the medical need.”

While Arecor will be taking its product portfolio into clinical development itself, it will ultimately look to partner with specialist diabetes companies for late stage clinical studies and global market access.

The company, which was originally based on unique protein chemistry technology and insights spun out from Unilever, has refined and developed these into the Arestat formulation technology platform.

This platform has been used extensively to improve the solution properties of numerous protein, antibody, vaccine and peptide formulations both in collaboration with pharmaceutical partners, as well as for Arecor’s own pipeline.  

Arecor has established a proven track record in applying this technology platform to deliver superior biopharmaceutical product profiles across a broad range of therapeutic areas. 

CEO Dr Sarah Howell (pictured) said: “With diabetes reaching epidemic proportions worldwide and with close to half a billion people living with the condition today, the opportunity of advancing our diabetes products into human clinical trials and their potential to significantly improve the treatment of this debilitating disease, represents a very exciting and ground-breaking proposition.”

In the second of a series of articles on Tax & Technology, Tim Shaw, associate partner with Ensors Chartered Accountants, looks at the UK’s R & D tax relief regime.

Notwithstanding the impending Brexit, the UK continues to be one of the most attractive locations for businesses to innovate and this is supported by the generous R & D tax relief regime. 

The financial impact of the support given by this legislation is huge. HMRC’s statistics show that £2.9 billion of R & D tax relief was claimed in 2015-16, an increase of 20 per cent over the previous year. 

Furthermore, since the launch of R & D tax relief in 2000, £16.5bn in tax relief has been claimed. Somewhat unusually, successive UK governments have actively promoted the reliefs available and have been supported by HMRC in this.

The legislation only applies to companies and to qualify for R & D tax relief, a company must be looking to develop new or improved products, software, processes, materials, services or devices that represent an advance in science or technology through the resolution of scientific or technological uncertainty. Mere commercial developments, or enhancements, of existing technology are not sufficient to qualify for the reliefs available.

The scope of the relief is broad, probably more so than was originally appreciated by the accounting profession. The reliefs can be relevant to almost any company, provided that the necessary conditions are met.  

Experience has shown that companies which may potentially claim the reliefs extend beyond those which would typically be associated with ‘R & D’ and claims are seen not just in respect of the expected sectors such as pharmaceuticals, software, biotechnology, FinTech, manufacturing and engineering but also sectors that have not traditionally been associated with innovation such as retail, construction, financial services and foodstuffs.    

There are now two applicable R & D tax regimes: the small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) scheme, and the R & D expenditure credit (RDEC) scheme for expenditure that does not fall into the SME criteria.

An SME for these purposes is defined, in broad terms, as a company that has fewer than 500 employees, and either annual revenues not exceeding €100m; or gross assets not exceeding €86m.

Where a company is connected with other enterprises (and this definition goes beyond companies), for example by membership of a group or through a significant (greater than 25 per cent) shareholder, the relevant details for the company’s “linked” and “partner” enterprises must be included when applying these limits to assess the company’s SME status.

Consequently, investment by private equity, venture capital or institutional investors should be carefully reviewed to establish whether a company is eligible for claims under the SME regime. Often such investment can push relatively small companies out of the SME scheme into the RDEC scheme.

The SME regime, which is the most tax advantageous of the two schemes, provides relief in two key ways.

Profitable companies which are tax paying can obtain an enhanced deduction equivalent to 230% (being the original expenditure plus a 130% uplift thereon) of qualifying expenditure (generally staff costs, subcontracted costs, consumables, software licences and a proportion of heat, light and power). 

This enhanced deduction can be used to reduce a tax liability in a current, previous or future tax year. Based upon a corporate tax rate of 19 per cent, this gives a £43.70 deduction per £100 of qualifying spend (being 230% x £19). 

For companies that are loss making, a more immediate relief is available. A claim can instead be made to surrender the full 230 per cent enhanced deduction for a cash payment at a rate of 14.5 per cent, giving an immediate cash flow benefit of £33.35 per £100 spent.  

This is therefore a direct cash flow subsidy to qualifying companies from the UK Government and whilst, deliberately set at a lower level of relief in percentage terms than if the enhanced deduction was instead retained as a loss carried forward or carried back to be used against prior profits, this provides welcome cash flow support.

Alternatively, the RDEC scheme is available to companies that fall outside of the SME size limits, or that are otherwise disqualified from the SME scheme (for example, due to receipt of subsidies or grants, or acting as a subcontractor to a third party).

Under the RDEC scheme, the benefit is delivered as a taxable “above the line” credit (i.e. in the main body of the company’s income statement, before the tax charge), based on 12 per cent of the qualifying expenditure in the period (giving an after-tax benefit of £9.72 per £100 of qualifying expenditure).  

The after tax above the line credit can be offset against corporation tax liabilities for profitable companies or claimed as a repayment by loss-making companies.

A company claims R & D relief through its corporation tax return and it is customary to file an R & D report in support of the claims made in order to reduce potential enquiries by HMRC.

The above is just a high-level summary of the appropriate legislation. As always with tax legislation it is not necessarily straightforward and professional assistance should be obtained before making a claim for R & D tax relief.

• For more details, call Tim on 01223 428314 or email: tim.shaw [at] ensors.co.uk

Six years after the Government consolidated 1,000 pages of national policy guidance into just 50, an updated version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published at the end of July 2018, writes Colin Brown, Partner, Planning & Development at Carter Jonas .

An earlier draft version had been released in March 2018 resulting in more than 29,000 consultation responses. So, what has changed between the draft (NPPF1) and the revised final version (NPPF2), and what opportunities does this present? 

In summary, not much has changed. At 73 pages it is slightly longer than its predecessor version, but you have to look pretty hard to find any significant changes. 

There are a number of changes to definitions and clarifications in the glossary at Annex 2 and subtle text changes throughout but little of substance has changed on the big-ticket issues of Green Belt, heritage and town centres. 

The parts that have seen most change relate to housing and to development plans. Local Planning Authority’s (LPAs) responses may have had some sway in watering down unachievable expectations but the Government’s clear ambition to ‘deliver more homes’ is still predominant throughout NPPF2. 

Good design has been significantly strengthened as it is ‘fundamental to what planning and development should achieve’. 

Early liaison with LPAs is promoted and entering into voluntary Planning Performance Agreements for large and complex projects is encouraged. The use of collaborative workshops as one way of achieving early engagement with local communities is suggested. 

These requirements have the potential to frontload the development process resulting in a lengthier pre-application process but potentially fewer resident objections and a more streamlined determination period. Reference to Garden City principles for large scale development has been reinserted following its omission in NPPF1. 

A key addition in NPPF2 is the requirement for LPAs to ensure quality is consistent from approval to completion. This could result in more detailed submissions and less LPA flexibility on planning condition discharge. It could also vary the perception of what constitutes a non-material amendment. Might this be the end of post consent value engineering?

A finer detailed point is the inclusion of a footnote setting out that the Government’s accessible and inclusiveness standards should be used in housing policies where there is an identified need. This requirement will to be factored into development appraisals at an early stage. 

NPPF2 has scaled backed the percentage of small sites that should be allocated in a development plan and within Brownfield Registers from 20 per cent to 10 per cent. Sites must not be larger than 1 hectare. 

A get-out clause has also been inserted for those LPA’s unable to meet this requirement, no doubt driven by LPA’s consultation responses. NPPF2 promotes the use of Local Development Orders for not only small sites, as per NPPF1, but also for ‘medium’ sized sites therefore confirming the acceptability of brownfield developments of 10 plus units on sites less than one hectare in size. 

There is a clear intention of optimising density in city and town centre locations that are well served by public transport.

Acknowledgement of the timescales to deliver large scale development is recognised and it asks for identification of measures to support delivery. The revised NPPF seeks to clarify the role of Neighbourhood Plans following significant litigation. 

It sets that strategic policies should establish a housing requirement figure for designated neighbourhood plan areas and there should be no need to review this at examination stage. The intention here must be to speed up Neighbourhood Plan Examinations. 

A subtle change in wording in NPPF2 sets out that planning obligations ‘must’ only be sought when they meet the CIL Regulations. This compares to the ‘should’ wording in NPPF1. This clear position should make the process more transparent for the Applicant and LPA. 

It also sets out that the onus is on the applicant to justify a viability assessment and the weight to be given to it is a matter for the decision maker. As up-to-date policies that set out the contributions are assumed to be viable, viability assessments in this case could carry less weight. 

NPPF2 omits an entire paragraph on when the presumption in favour of sustainable development should apply if an authority cannot meet its five-year supply of housing- the legal interpretation of this is one to watch. 
It also amends the wording of ‘Strategic Plan’ to ‘Strategic Policies’ and ‘Local Plan’ to ‘Non-Strategic Policies’. This is perhaps to avoid perceptions of the defunct regional planning.   
 
The only real change in NPPF2 relating to the Green Belt, is the strengthening of the need for ‘fully evidenced and justified’ exceptional circumstances in which to amend Green Belt boundaries.

Support of high tech industries and the knowledge economy is emphasised whilst greater flexibility and diversity in town centres is encouraged to deliver ‘a positive strategy for the future of each centre’. This can be through identifying a range rather than a fixed set of use classes. 

Lastly, the section on environmental issues has been amended in NPPF2 to be in line with the obligations and provisions in the Climate Act 2008. 
The word ‘enhance’ has been incorporated several times in reference to areas of outstanding natural beauty and amendments have been made to definitions of Veteran and Ancient tree and the Bird and Habitats EU Directives have been removed from the glossary. 

Transatlantic partners Cambridge Consultants in the UK and Exact Imaging in Toronto, Canada are leveraging Artificial Intelligence to improve the way in which prostate cancer is visualised and detected.

Cambridge Consultants says it is applying deep learning to high-resolution micro-ultrasound imaging to identify potential suspicious regions of tissue and inform urologists who may want to consider this additional data in their biopsy protocol. The technology product design consultancy says that early results “show real promise.”

Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death in men in both the US and the UK. There is an urgent need for improved accuracy in the detection and diagnosis of aggressive prostate cancers.

The current standard-of-care ultrasound, which guides prostatic needle biopsies that help to diagnose prostate cancer, yields a 30 per cent false negative rate as the resolution of the ultrasound systems is insufficient to differentiate suspicious regions. As such, the prostate biopsies are usually delivered in a systematic, ‘blind pattern.

Exact Imaging’s ExactVu™ micro-ultrasound platform is a significant new imaging tool to allow urologists to harness micro ultrasound’s near microscopic resolution to visualise suspicious regions and actually target their biopsies to those regions. 

Operating at 29 MHz, the micro-ultrasound provides a 300 per cent improvement in resolution over conventional ultrasound.

Cambridge Consultants aims to harness higher resolution micro-ultrasound images from the ExactVu™ platform, in combination with decades of medical technology expertise and cutting-edge machine learning techniques, to provide new information to urologists to help them to improve their targeting of prostate biopsies. 

In recent years Cambridge Consultants has been at the forefront of advances in machine learning and deep learning, applying this transformative technology to a wide range of industries and disciplines.

With its AI tools able to interrogate the full ultrasound data set correlated to pathology, the analysis should deliver improved accuracy and better characterisation of suspicious regions. 

The machine learning approach being applied is faster and less computationally intensive than traditional statistical approaches and may ultimately form the backbone of a commercially-viable software application. 
Early results from proof of concept testing show significant promise, even with relatively limited data sets.

Shweta Gupta, head of Urology and Women’s Health at Cambridge Consultants said: “The need for effective management of prostate cancer is as pressing as ever. We are proud to have the opportunity to try and improve the detection pathway and excited by the opportunity to apply deep learning to this significant clinical problem.”

The current work on prostate cancer is the latest output from Cambridge Consultants’ Digital Greenhouse  – a unique experimental environment where data scientists and engineers explore and develop cutting edge machine learning and deep learning techniques. 

Recent work has focused on applying deep learning in areas where massive datasets are unavailable. In this case, data was available on hundreds of patients – aiming to ensure that deep learning is potent beyond the huge online datasets that have powered advances to date.