UK science stuck in 'holding pattern' on EU funding by Brexit, says minister UK minister for science and research George Freeman has admitted that vital EU funding for research is in limbo while the nation continues to negotiate Brexit sticking points, namely Northern Ireland and fishing rights. Speaking to Parliament's Science and Technology Committee late last week, Department for Business, Energy & …
Welcome to the real world, where you don't get stuff if you don't honour the contracts you signed.
Maybe it might penetrate the thick skill of the science minister, that if you keep picking fights with people they become uninterested in cooperating with you. And all those jingoistic newspaper headlines come at a real cost.
Agreed, I suspect that is what is happening here. There is, of course, a formal level with criteria and applications. Underneath that there is a less formal level where you can stall reviewing formal applications or interpret certain criteria in a favourable/unfavourable way etc. Goodwill helps a lot.
It appears that informal level is where stuff is currently happening in Northern Ireland where the government is effectively sabotaging the operation of the Boris Border instead of using the formal process. The UK government can act slowly to get the NI government in line and honour international law whilst simultaneously claiming that they haven't triggered Article 16 so economic sanctions can't come into force.
The people who work on this for the European Commission weren't born yesterday and will have experience dealing with unreliable regimes. I suspect they are awaiting a resolution in Northern Ireland before they remember where they left the goodwill.
I disagree. The EU will have agreements with over a hundred countries that are not EU Members. From Norway and Switzerland to Argentina and Zambia. Some times only based on cold mutual interests, many times also based on goodwill.
There are many EU programmes and arrangements that are open to non-members. From the Single Market, Customs Union and Schengen to Galileo, the European Health Insurance Card and Instex.
Before Brexit the UK had access to the Schengen Information System (SIS II), despite not being a member of Schengen.
Many of those doors haven’t permanently closed.
UK companies can still be involved in Galileo, just not in the secret military part of it.
The UK could join the Customs Union again, provided it can sufficiently comfort member states that things such as this can never happen again: UK faces €2 billion EU tab for China fraud.
I think the UK could even join the Schengen Information System (but not Schengen itself) again, provided it can sufficiently comfort member states that things such as this can never happen again: UK unlawfully copying data from EU police system.
So, no, I do think the UK could join the Horizon programme without becoming an EU member state, that has already formally been confirmed as the application has been made. What I can image is that it requires a serious and sustained attempt by the UK government to repair relations. I might require a small regime change (Jeremy Hunt or Tom Tugendhat as PM) or even a major regime change (Keir Starmer as PM).
Perhaps the UK government could start a turnaround and a more constructive approach by rejoining Erasmus+, that is fairly simple and in the same domain as Horizon.
It’s not a veto on UK democracy, it’s a veto on who can join their Horizon programme, as sovereign countries working in a sovereign organisation that can, will and do set requirements.
And that’s is completely normal. Most of the world doesn’t want to work with Belarus until they’ve had a regime change. There are many concerns all across Europe around doing a trade deal with the US that includes food as long as their food standards are poor. Is that meddling in Belarusian or American ‘democracy’ or is it just exercising their freedom of association? I would argue it’s the latter.
Similarly the EU member states are free to decide who they want in their programmes and what is needed to successfully apply.
Obviously EU member states would never say, or demand, that the UK replaces the Johnson regime but from a UK perspective that may be what it takes to sort some of these obstacles out.
"UK companies can still be involved in Galileo, just not in the secret military part of it."
It's worth remembering that it was the British government that insisted that third countries could not take part in the development and implementation of the military aspects of Galileo. Petard, own, hoist; as is so often the case with this government.
in a similar way, the UK's application to join other trade groups is predicated upon it demonstrating it can stick to agreements already signed
When New Zealand's prime minister made this point, the right wing press issued howls of outrage - how DARE she demand Britain obey rules?
We might be able to hammer out the issues in the next decade or so, because we definitely didn't give anything any thought when we decided we wanted to leave.
But we've taken back control, and that's the most important. Right ?
"But we've taken back control, and that's the most important. Right ?"
Taken back control with the "oven ready deal" negotiated by someone who didn't know what a customs union is, supported by someone who didn't know why there was a port at Dover, with the assistance of someone who thinks Queen Victoria is still on the throne.
The average person in the street as no clue as to how research funding works. As for those who did vote Brexit, even if they did understand, would have been taken in by the statement from the UK Government that it would match the lost funding.
The reality is that for most people in the UK research is something that just happens, their only interaction with it is putting some money in a charity box.
I'm sure it will except for the slight problem that Brexit is costing UK PLC £800m each and every week.
That's an extra £25b each year we need to find to cover the things the EU used to do for all members.
The Tories needing £25b could a) raise the upper level of tax, b) cut funding c) borrow at ruinous rates (because we re no longer AAA rated, the best we can get is AA-)
a) will never ever happen, Brexit was entirely about not forcing the rich to pay a fair share of tax so they are not going to undo all that bad work.
Oh please, not that old canard.
The NHS is receiving funding substantially in excess of £350m/week more - even in real terms - than it did in 2016. It's had the £350m and a lot lot more besides.
Not that I can see any benefits from it. Tried seeing a GP recently?
I've just been in for a few days with an infection and they may get the property cheap but pretty much any medical staff is going to cost the new owners a fortune or they will be off to foreign places. Only on of 7 doctors I spoke to was from the UK. Seems training here is good as in you are so in demand you get to chose where you work and when you've dont the basics you are welcome home with open arms and a big wedge. I think the idea was to take over the NHS with its relatively low staff costs and like all brexit ideas it's vapourware.
Actually, he’s closer to the truth than the Horizon website is. UK institutes are effectively in limbo - neither allowed to nor prevented from joining research calls under Horizon.
UK access to Horizon was one of the many things the EU and UK agreed to in the Withdrawal Agreement. However, the UK has been slow to follow through on its other commitments under that treaty (particularly around small-vessel fishing and the whole NI Protocol), and has threatened more than once to scrap the agreement entirely. In that environment, the EU is not comfortable with committing funds to UK educational institutes that it may never receive matching contributions for. A typical Horizon project runs for three years, so decisions have knock-on implications in future budgets.
A home-grown fund isn’t really a replacement: Horizon is not so much about the money as the way it bringS together universities and industrial R&D operations from across the EU. You can throw money at the problem domestically, but if your leading experts in a field are all working in Leuven, Padua or Lund, having a stack of Pounds Sterling sitting in Oxford won’t really help your research. There is of course the same issue for EU participants if your leading experts happen to be in Glasgow, Manchester or Cambridge, which is why everyone across Europe wanted the UK partners to remain in Horizon...
... well, everyone except the UK government, it would seem, based on the scant attention they’ve been giving the matter. But I guess everything is low-priority for Boris Johnson compared to keeping Boris Johnson in his job.
the UK has been slow to follow through on its other commitments under that treaty (particularly around small-vessel fishing and the whole NI Protocol),
The UK has fully met its commitments for small-vessel fishing, and has gone out of its way to help some vessels that were unable to provide the required evidence. The issues with the NI protocol are largely due to the over-zealous enforcement of checks by EU officials. If they applied the same level of checking to all the EU external borders world trade would seize up.
why everyone across Europe wanted the UK partners to remain in Horizon...
and which is why it's even explicitly agreed in the TCA, except that the EU (not the UK) keeps delaying it.
The issues with the NI protocol are largely due to the over-zealous enforcement of checks by EU officials.
I'm afraid you've inadvertently mislead (as they say) the commentariat, it's actually done in NI territory by NI port officials following UK's legal framework and backed up by NI courts. It's the UK which is tying itself up in knots over this - civil servants and courts following the law and ministers rattling sabres and giving illegal instructions:
Edwin Poots’ order to halt NI Protocol checks at ports suspended by High Court judge
UK organisations can (currently) apply for Horizon Europe funding. They can't sign agreements until after the association process is concluded.
This means that we are not only mucking up (anyone think of a better leading consonant?) UK research but also that of other partners in the EU. If we do agree an association deal in 6 months, we'll have right royally annoyed any potential partners who'll say "non", "nein", "nee", "nu", "nej", etc. At this point we get to pay in (cos of the association agreement commitment) and won't get anything out (cos we've narked everyone off).
The advantage of having 2 feet is that after having shot yourself in one, you can have a go at the other too.
'However, it's pretty clear that on day one, M Barnier peeled the bottom page off a very large stack of paper, turned it round to face David Davies, and said "sign here". Precious little changed until the last minute.'
Might that be because the EU sighed, and, although sad that the UK voted to leave, then rolled up its sleeves and did indeed start busily working on drawing up that inevitably necessary draft withdrawal agreement, while the UK's "government" was still in jolly japes and cake-eating mode (including some very literal occasions where the Chief Clown was caught on camera seemingly more focused on stuffing his face than actually having discussions with the EU counterparts whom he was there to meet)?
As you say, I'm not very sure that the UK's 'negotiators' really contributed very much at all to the drafting process until practically the very last minute. Lions "led by donkeys" (as some might say), indeed.
And an Almighty Enigmatic AWEsome Dilemma particularly for Blighty, whose Ministry of Defence cannot realistically and successfully deny and argue they were not dutifully well warned about such rapidly unfolding matters practically ages ago. .... [ well .... in these sorts of things 28 months is certainly ages for so much more is able to be done]
Some novel developments doing incredibly searching work and certainly worthy of considerable government funding can be easily ignored for any number of very bad and sad and selfish subjective status quo controlling reasons, ranging from being too radically effective for existing systems remote command, so there be a new form of leadership at the helm drivering the direction and destinations of future travel, and thus be existing legacy administrative bodies relegated to just sightseeing passengers which they be determined to fight and not to accept, ..... if they understand the greater scope of the novel developments research ..... or they don't realise the importance and implications of the ongoing works, for it is always constantly progressing privately and in secure safe haven pirate circles, whether funded by government or not, and thus will the cost of being outside of the information and intelligence loop be a catastrophically expensive surprise to them whenever it crashes and crushes their totally unprepared for a novel radically different system with Virtually Advanced IntelAIgent Operating Systems in Future Control with Global Command Head Quarters. ..... Conveniently Spaced Administering Nodes easily Contactable for Mentoring and Monitoring Unfolding Daily Oday Events on Earth.
What is that lions say is true ........”You can take a horse and leading donkeys to water, but you can’t make them think to drink the kool aid."
not brexit... but the idiots who decided to re-negociate it after dumping their former leader... and then protraying themselves as 'we did brexit' after they were the ones stuffing it up for as long as it took to get bozo the clown into downing street*
To be honest 1/2 the tories run around believing they're in god's own country of the 1950's and the other 1/2 think its still 1940 and time to jump in the spitfire and give the hun a jolly good spanking before crumpets and tea before cursing the french for surrendering.
meanwhile the adults on both sides shake their heads and wish that our glorious leaders on both sides would actually do something positive for a change instead of standing at the edge of their respective playpens and throwing soiled nappies at each other.
"the tories run around believing they're in god's own country of the 1950's"
Before the referendum Brexiters were shouting at me that they wanted to go back to the 1970s "before we joined the EU(sic)". I warned them that having lived through the 1970s they would not like the experience. However to them it was a mythical far off land full of friendly coppers, thatched cottages, long summer days, lashings of ginger beer, Butlins, golden beaches, donkey rides and no money worries. The fact that if they were old enough to remember the 1970s that they would have been children, therefore unaware of politics or economics and feather bedded by their parents didn't penetrate their thinking.
I warned them that in truth the 1970s were awful with rapidly declining manufacturing, coal mines running out of coal, education starting a long downhill slide, runaway inflation which was in fact "stagflation" with rising wages, rising unemployment, declining manufacturing output, hyperinflation, declining living standards, profound social unrest, and regular shortages of power and fuel.
And here we are just over a year from "Brexit" and the 1970s are coming home to roost.
@Lotaresco
"Before the referendum Brexiters were shouting at me that they wanted to go back to the 1970s"
Before the referendum remainers were shouting at me that we wanted to go back to the 1970's. I asked why then they wanted to remain in a protectionist trade block designed for the time of the soviets and protectionist blocks instead of the modern world.
"I warned them that in truth the 1970s were awful with rapidly declining "
Reading the description it could almost be the EU. Except Germany is burning more coal.
Speaking as someone who was a a child in the 1970s on the other side of the world, "Made in Britain" for anything except textiles and crockery was generally regarded as a warning label by the end of the 1960s
Classic examples: When Australia opened up the market to Japanese imports, Landrover went from 98% of the 4wd market to 2% in 12 months. The standard joke was "landrover gets you there - eventually. Landcruiser gets you there and back - today".
Similarly in New Zealand, British cars went from 40% to 3% of the entire market in 18 months when Japanese cars were given the same import tariff as them. Memories were so bad that when GM attempted to revive the Vauxhall brand with a shipment of 1000 Vectras in 1998 they only sold 2 of the things in 18 months - not even sales reps would be seen dead in a Vauxhall. The cars all had to be rebadged to Opel before anyone would buy them. (Ford had similar issues selling Mondeos and Kas after many years selling rebadged mazdas)
It wasn't JUST that things were badly made. It was also that customer support from British companies usually consisted of "We've got your money. Sucks to be you"
""Made in Britain" for anything except textiles and crockery was generally regarded as a warning label by the end of the 1960s"
Have a '65 Vauxhall Velox. Can confirm.
But it's definitely *different* than anything made in Germany at the same time. Not a daily driver so lower requirements, too.
Very narrow anecdotal evidence below...
I know 5 academics across some southern UK Universities that had EU grants that are now gone. 2 of them remain in University but lost their PhD students and equipment funding (big problem for one of them, less so for the other).
1 was entirely EU funded, so was made redundant.
1 had a massive grant from the EU just before Brexit but couldn't keep it if they stayed in the UK (the University claimed the grant was awarded to the University to pressure them to stay), they moved to Vienna and kept the grant.
The last had a joint tenure with the University of Berlin, which was cancelled (unless they moved to Berlin) and the UK University couldn't afford to take them on as a full lecturer. They've manage to "survive" in academia but considering they're one of 4 people on the planet who know what they know and they're keen not to have that knowledge "swallowed up by corporate IP".
I suppose that's one of the problems with academia, many of the academics are unreplaceable experts.
Anonymous as my funding as a "visiting research fellow" was EU and it's gone. I'm still doing research part time while the University put up with me but can't afford to attend face-to-face conferences or pay for journal access. Before Brexit there was talk of my dropping to 4 days a week at my day job and doing lecturing/supervision 1 day. That would have been EU funded. Personally, not a disaster compared to friends losing their jobs.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
