Memorandum 30
Submission from Dr Mark Thompson, Centre
for Astrophysics Research, University of Hertfordshire
I was fortunate enough to hear your comments
on last weeks Today programme and very glad to hear that your
Select Committee would be looking into the issue of the catastrophic
settlement for Physics & Astronomy from DIUS.
I am writing to bring your attention to a number
of issues resulting from the funding cuts to Physics and Astronomy
and to urge the Select Committee to consider these issues in the
New Year. I am a recently appointed lecturer in Astrophysics at
the University of Hertfordshire, a practising research scientist
and also the Admissions Tutor for Physics for the University.
Firstly, as I understand it, the settlements
in the Spending Review for scientific research seem to have been
made on a very short-term economic potential basis. This basis
will cause significant damage to UK Science all for the short-term
good of UK plc. The cuts of 25% to the grants line at the Science
& Technologies Facility Council (STFC) will result in the
loss of many of our youngest and best scientific minds at the
precise time when our country is becoming the best place in Europe
to perform scientific research.
I would draw your attention to the recent funding
announcement by the European Research Council for their Starting
Grant Scheme. Along with many other European researchers I took
part in this competition this year, which is designed to reward
scientific excellence by giving young researchers the funds to
set up their own research teams.
Unfortunately I was not successful, but UK-based
researchers were the clear winners in this very competitive process:
the UK has both the largest fraction of awarded grants and is
the country of residence of the largest fraction of successful
applicants. In monetary terms the strong success of the UK's researchers
has resulted in somewhere in the region of ð€ñ120
million being brought into the country. Whilst not all of this
benefit is due to researchers working within the purview of STFC,
it is clear that this success is entirely due to the strong research
culture of the UK and the support given to postdoctoral researchers
through the grants line. These postdoctoral researchers (of whom
I was one just three years ago) contain the next generation of
scientific leaders. With a 25% cut to the astronomy and particle
physics grants line many of our best researchers will be lost,
the research environment will be weakened and it is very unlikely
that the UK will be able to compete as significantly as it has
in the European (or worldwide) funding arena.
Secondly, the UK has long enjoyed a very strong
astronomy and astrophysics research base. Indeed we are the preeminent
astronomy research country within Europe and second only to the
US. In a number of fields, my own of sub-mm astronomy included,
we are the clear world-leaders. This is in no small part due to
the researchers supported by the grants line, who compete in one
of the most darwinian research cultures in the world. These researchers
put their personal lives and careers on the line to answer some
of the most fundamental questions in the Universe and have truly
given the UK its preeminent position. This position makes the
UK a very attractive place for the researchers of all nationalities
to come and work in.
My own university department has recently recruited
astronomical researchers from Germany, the US, Spain, France,
Mexico, all of whom were keen to come to the UK to take part in
its strong research base.
For the UK to withdraw in large part from astronomy
and particle physics will not only mean the loss of top foreign
researchers wanting to come here, but will also give rise to the
most savage brain drain yet experienced in astronomy or particle
physics.
Finally, I must stress the effect of this terrible
announcement upon undergraduate applications to study Physics.
The nation's sixth form and college students are currently choosing
their subjects and universities for UCAS applications. These students
do not choose to study Physics because of an innovation-driven
culture, nor to study applied science, nor because of immediate
economic benefit to themselves or the nation. They are attracted
to study Physics because of the headline fundamental research
that goes on in our Universities - particle physics, the Higgs
boson, astrophysics, astronomy and cosmology. Indeed, many University
Physics departments have been recruiting astrophysics lecturers
because of the perceived attraction that astrophysics has in encouraging
students to study Physics. In my own experience, I am receiving
increasing numbers of applications to study astrophysics and moreover
these applications are not just from the UK, but coming from across
Europe and the rest of the world.
Physics, as I'm sure that you know, is one of
the strategically important and vulnerable subjects identified
by HEFCE for priority support of £75 million over the 2007-2010
period. The Government has identified STEM subjects as critical
to the success of the UK's economy and has pledged to increase
the number of scientists and engineers in the UK's workforce.
So for DIUS to carry out a raid on the very research funding that
keeps Physics departments in existence and that crucially inspires
the next generation of physicists to study Physics is both criminally
irresponsible and in direct counter to the national strategy as
pursued by HEFCE. Physics departments will close as a result of
this funding decision by DIUS and the competitiveness of the UK
will be decreased yet further.
I hope that the committee will be able to take
my points on board and I earnestly hope that this terrible decision
by DIUS can be reversed or mitigated before the UK's strong science
leadership is irretrievably damaged. At the moment I am very despondent
about the future of my own research career, which I have fought
hard to achieve over the last ten years, and which our nation's
leaders have recently seen fit to inform me how little it is valued.
February 2008
| 
