go to our scientists, and ask them to risk talking about animal research, when there now appears to be evidence that in secret the government disapproves it, even though in public they've strongly encouraged it? A parliamentary inquiry investigating the matter implicated the Honours Committee's subcommittee for science and technology chaired by Sir Richard Mottram. After expressions of support for animal experimentation from then Prime Minister Tony Blair; Chief Scientific Adviser David King; Minister for Science Lord Sainsbury; and the wider scientific community, Blakemore withdrew his threat to resign. Until 2014, he was the only MRC chief executive unrecognised by the British honours system. He was knighted in the 2014 Birthday Honours for services to scientific research, policy, and outreach. National Institute for Medical Research taskforce In 2003 the MRC announced plans to consider moving the National Institute for Medical Research, its largest research facility, from its current location in Mill Hill to a new site in central London. As part of the consultation process a taskforce was convened, with Blakemore as chairman, to consider options for the size and location of the new NIMR. During the process a number of senior staff at NIMR, including the then director, Sir John Skehel, opposed a move being proposed as the only option believing "staying at Mill Hill should be considered." Robin Lovell-Badge, a scientist at NIMR who was a member of the taskforce, proposed this option be included in the official publication of the taskforce, something that Blakemore and the majority of other members were opposed to. After disagreeing on the issue, Lovell-Badge alleged Blakemore had twice attempted to "coerce" him into agreement by threatening his job. Blakemore denied the allegations, describing them as "pure invention". A House of Commons select committee investigated the claims. They found "no specific credible evidence" to support the complaint, reporting the allegation "would have carried more weight had it been made at the time rather than in public during the final stages of the decision making process when relations between NIMR and MRC management had fallen into mutual animosity." The committee criticised Blakemore for "heavy-handed" lobbying of other taskforce members and reported that a "more independent" figure than Blakemore should have chaired the taskforce. The report also criticised unnamed senior NIMR staff for an attempt at "undermining Blakemore's position." The MRC has maintained its commitment to relocate NIMR and has entered into partnership with the