Cuts “inconsistent” with authorities plan for development, says open letter urging science minister to behave
Planned cuts to Science and Technology Facilities Council funding are “inconsistent” with the federal government’s financial development ambitions, the leaders of college physics departments have advised the science minister.
On 2 March, a bunch of 57 heads of division, representing 44 universities throughout the UK, together with 23 of the 24 Russell Group of research-intensive universities, signed an open letter to Patrick Vallance (pictured). The letter outlined their response to information, first reported by Research Professional News, that the STFC, which operates main science amenities in addition to offering physics and astronomy grants, is planning to make £162 million in cost savings by 2029‑30.
The signatories to the letter, first reported by the Financial Times, expressed “deep concern” over reductions to the STFC’s analysis grants funding and stated chopping foundational analysis funding would “damage the UK’s capacity for long-term, disruptive innovation”.
They stated proposed reductions to analysis assist would result in a contraction of analysis teams—that are largely primarily based at universities or nationwide laboratories—and “greatly diminish” the UK’s capability to conduct, and profit from, basic analysis.
“This would materially reduce the sector’s ability to support national missions in clean energy, advanced manufacturing and security, and would directly counter the objective of strengthening the UK’s domestic R&D base,” they wrote. “It would be inconsistent with the ambition set out in the science and technology framework and the government’s plan for growth.”
Minister urged to behave
In specific, the signatories criticised the latest “abrupt pause” in funding for several key physics infrastructure collaborations, which included the withdrawal of pledged funding for a significant experiment on the Large Hadron Collider at Cern, the globally vital particle physics laboratory.
“Impact depends on strong and stable university research groups, postdoctoral researchers, technicians and software, and instrumentation teams capable of exploiting these facilities,” they wrote. “If these capabilities contract, the UK will be unable to realise the scientific, economic and geopolitical benefits that these long-term investments were intended to secure.”
The signatories requested Vallance to work with UK Research and Innovation, which is mounting wider, main reforms to analysis funding, to “stabilise the curiosity‑driven grants line” on the STFC by defending it from actual‑phrases cuts and from being squeezed by rising amenities prices. They urged that the latter also needs to be addressed by way of mechanisms that guarantee exterior shocks don’t “singularly erode the UK’s research base in STFC-funded research areas”.
The signatories additionally referred to as for a “long-term infrastructure and exploitation strategy” that ensures the UK stays a trusted associate in globally main science tasks, and for the safety of key analysis roles which are “essential” to delivering financial impact.
“As heads of physics departments, we are already experiencing reputational risk in an intensely competitive global talent market,” they wrote. “Strategic clarity and stability are essential to ensure that a thriving university physics sector can help the UK retain and attract the students and researchers who will deliver future growth, resilience and technological leadership.”
‘No decisions yet taken’
A spokesperson for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology stated: “Our dedication to the UK’s scientific analysis group is unparalleled, with a file £38 billion in funding for UKRI over the approaching years, together with £14.5 billion particularly for curiosity-driven analysis.
“Protecting this analysis is central to the UK’s scientific excellence and long-term financial development. As half of an ongoing course of, UKRI is actively participating with the analysis group to make sure STFC’s long run sustainability, and no choices have but been taken.
“We will continue to work closely with UKRI, STFC, and the wider research community to ensure the UK remains a world-leading destination for science and innovation.”
The STFC has been contacted for remark.