Comments on: Newsnight and STFC

By: Chris Lintott’s Universe » Select committee report

Chris Lintott’s Universe » Select committee report — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:35:45 +0000

[...] 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. [...]

By: Michael Merrifield

Michael Merrifield — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:50:27 +0000

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.

By: peteshmm

peteshmm — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:07:36 +0000

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.

By: Robin

Robin — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:03:47 +0000

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?”

By: chrislintott

chrislintott — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:01:48 +0000

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.

By: peteshmm

peteshmm — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:09:05 +0000

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.