Newsnight and STFC
The knowledge economy: it’s our future. It must be so because the Prime Minister says it is
That was Paxman’s introduction to a report carried on the BBC’s Newsnight on the STFC funding crisis last night; you can watch the latest programme here, at least in the UK. Scroll forward to 32 minutes in to find the beginning of the report.
It’s excellent, and should be required viewing for anyone involved. What struck me is that when we needed STFC to stand up for blue sky research what’s happened is that they’ve taken the position of denying that there is even a problem. Astronomers are used to dealing with complicated subjects; why isn’t it possible for STFC to say that there is a problem even while dealing with it? Instead, the attitude seems to be that admitting that there is any real pain involved at all would instantly blow things apart. This was clear in the comments made in the meeting in Belfast last week when we were told that troublemakers don’t get more government funding, and it’s evident in the comments made in last night’s program.
In the newsnight piece, Keith Mason gives the impression that we’re turning off old projects (even though they’re still working) in order to do new exciting things. Yet the list of projects - as Michael Rowan-Robinson says - contains many on the real frontline of research, and that’s what hurts.
on April 11th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
As far as I can work things out from the sidelines the problem arises from increased costs
of subscriptions to bodies like CERN and ESA. Does this mean your Haldane principle is
subservient to Foreign Office concerns about meeting treaties? Moreover it seems that as
Sterling has weakened against the Euro, things can only get worse. It seems the media is
carefully avoiding making this clear.
on April 12th, 2008 at 11:01 am
That’s part of the problem, but it’s not the major factor. The increase in costs is mostly due to something called full economic costing, which means that university departments get paid for the researchers they host. This is a good thing for under-supported university departments, put it does mean that it’s more expensive to support staff and that wasn’t allowed for in the budget.
on April 13th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I was also impressed, particularly by the time devoted to it, which gave a chance to develop the arguments to some extent. It would have been nice though if they had set “Rotweiler” Paxman on Pearson, who’s only response seems to be “crisis, what crisis?”
on April 13th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
OK thanks. So it is mainly a new accounting procedure. That is why some Pension
schemes are said to be in the red overnight! These new projects should have clear
funding for a few years surely. Also one wonders if what has happened was planned
by some party.
on April 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Although STFC seem keen to pin the blame for all our current problems on full economic costs (FEC), they are not the whole story by a long way. The research councils received new money to cover the costs of FEC, which is why the Government is able to point to a 13.6% increase in STFC funding. However, those of us who had grants funded in the last round are only too aware that this new money is not going to support FEC. Our rolling grant was in for renewal last round, and we put in a request for FEC funding at the appropriate audited level (using a thing called the TRAC protocol, if you are really interested in the gory details). This request was duly approved by the STFC grants panel — given its audited nature, it would have been hard to turn down — and recommended for funding. However, then the word came down from on high that grants were to be cut, and the level of FEC support we were awarded was arbitarily reduced by more than a factor of two, although everything else was still funded, so presumably we are expected to carry out the same volume of research. So, our grant is no longer funded at the sustainable level that FEC was intended to produce. Enquiries around other astronomy groups in the country reveal a similar level of arbitrary swingeing cuts in FEC. Wherever STFC’s money is going, it is not being used to make research sustainable through FEC, as these funds were intended.
on April 30th, 2008 at 1:35 am
[…] which echoes what I’ve said before. Those of us in the UK astronomical community are big enough and, god knows, ugly enough to deal with the situation as is if only someone would tell us what was going on. […]