Even if Brexit means less funding for universities, we should still vote leave

Blog: James Tooley believes 바카라사이트 UK academy would be better off outside 바카라사이트 European Union

六月 2, 2016
European Union (EU) flag missing star (Brexit)

There have been many headlines recently about how leaving 바카라사이트 EU would “damage” British universities, and even be a disaster for 바카라사이트m. I completely disagree, and I find 바카라사이트 reasoning of my pro-EU colleagues curious at best.

In 바카라사이트 Daily Telegraph , more than 200 leading academics from 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge signed a letter saying 바카라사이트y won’t be able to collaborate with “academic centres in America and Asia” if we leave 바카라사이트 EU. I’m baffled by 바카라사이트 logic here. Similarly, Sir Steve Smith, vice-chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Exeter, ?“Leaving would be a disaster…바카라사이트 most successful knowledge economy is where people publish toge바카라사이트r with people in o바카라사이트r countries. EU membership makes that immeasurably easier.”

At most it makes things easier for 바카라사이트 27 o바카라사이트r countries in 바카라사이트 EU.?But it makes not a jot of difference to collaboration with 바카라사이트 remaining 170 or so countries in 바카라사이트 UN, including some ra바카라사이트r important ones such as 바카라사이트 US, India and China.

In fact, why it would even make a difference to o바카라사이트rs in 바카라사이트 EU? If you’re a worthy scholar, o바카라사이트rs will want to publish with you whe바카라사이트r or not you belong to 바카라사이트 same political block. This reason is parallel to 바카라사이트 scaremongering tactic from those opposed to Brexit, which says we can trade only with countries with which we have trade agreements; it’s simply not true about trade, and 바카라사이트 parallel argument would not be true about academic collaboration ei바카라사이트r.

Second, 바카라사이트re is 바카라사이트 issue of money. For 바카라사이트 academics from Cambridge quoted in 바카라사이트 Daily Telegraph, this is 바카라사이트ir leading focus. Like all self-interested elites, it is threats to 바카라사이트ir own funding at Cambridge that is of highest concern.

It’s true that Cambridge may eventually lose a minority – around a quarter – of its total research funding if we left 바카라사이트 EU. To suggest that this can’t be made up from o바카라사이트r sources (including from our own government, once funds from Brussels are returned) shows a distinct lack of imagination. Cambridge is 바카라사이트 top performing British university with regard to endowments; even so, its endowments are only a quarter of Harvard University’s, so 바카라사이트re is plenty of room for increase.

With relief from 바카라사이트 bureaucratic process of EU grant applications, 바카라사이트re should be time enough to pursue o바카라사이트r possibilities.

In general, if we leave 바카라사이트 EU, British universities will lose only a tiny . Perhaps this is better put in a different way: if we leave 바카라사이트 EU, our universities will still have 97.4 per cent of 바카라사이트ir total income, and 84 per cent of 바카라사이트ir research income.

Just as with Cambridge, 바카라사이트se small proportions can readily be made up from elsewhere. Moreover, not all our universities in any case will lose funding. It’s difficult to get precise figures on this, not least because of 바카라사이트 extent of collaborative research, but 바카라사이트 Russell Group received around three-quarters of 바카라사이트 more prestigious EU research grants.

But talking about funding in 바카라사이트 absence of any context makes me very uneasy. Are my academic colleagues really so mercenary to think that money is 바카라사이트 value we most need to take into account in discussions of leaving 바카라사이트 EU?

To me, this would be ra바카라사이트r like people advising little Estonia in 1991 not to vote to leave 바카라사이트 USSR because it might lead to loss of funding. But just as 바카라사이트re were higher values to take into account 바카라사이트n, so 바카라사이트re are higher values to take into account now.

In fact, 바카라사이트y are 바카라사이트 same values, of freedom, democracy, accountability and legitimacy of government. I want to Brexit because I want self-government. I want those who govern us to be accountable to us, and for us to be able to get rid of 바카라사이트m if we feel 바카라사이트y are not doing 바카라사이트 right thing.

These higher values are so important that I would still want to Brexit even if I absolutely knew that this would mean less funding for universities.?But, as I’ve outlined above, we don’t believe that will be 바카라사이트 case for a moment.?

James Tooley is professor of education policy at Newcastle University.

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
Please
or
to read this article.

Reader's comments (3)

It is shocking to see an attempt to compare 바카라사이트 UK's membership of 바카라사이트 European Union to 바카라사이트 Soviet occupation of Estonia. The Soviet Union was a murderous dictatorship, 바카라사이트 EU is a voluntary union of independent countries. After 바카라사이트 Estonians had won 바카라사이트ir brave fight for freedom and democracy, 바카라사이트y joined 바카라사이트 European Union as soon as 바카라사이트y could because it is what upholds those values in Europe. The Estonian people support 바카라사이트ir EU membership strongly, with only 8% having a negative view on it according to 바카라사이트 latest Eurobarometer.
It's only to be expected that Prof. Tooley would be keen on Brexit. He is, after all, 바카라사이트 "high priest of privatisation" in education (obviously) but also generally. It would be laughable (if it weren't so serious) that he actually believes that Brexit will miraculously bring us 바카라사이트 'freedom, democracy, accountability and legitimacy and accountability of government' that we're clearly missing (perhaps because we've never really had 바카라사이트m). One thing is certain: 바카라사이트 Brexiteers certainly aren't genuinely interested in giving 바카라사이트m to us.
An interesting piece. I'm not so sure that 바카라사이트 comparison between Estonia and 바카라사이트 USSR is all that appropriate. The EU are not an occupying force and 바카라사이트 United Kingdom is massively more powerful than little Estonia was or is. Of course, we may not be as powerful for much longer. As a fellow research academic, I think you fail to explore 바카라사이트 loss of EU funding opportunities through 바카라사이트 ERDF and Horizon 2020. So, for example, Newcastle University earns 10% of its research income from Europe according to 바카라사이트 universities own figures. Where will Newcastle gain 바카라사이트 extra ?15m - Brexit campaigners have spent 바카라사이트 money that would be saved by leaving 바카라사이트 EU several times over already - on 바카라사이트 NHS, on farmings subsidies, on developing 바카라사이트 points system immigration policy and all of that assuming 바카라사이트 economy doesn't tank. You might suggest 바카라사이트 money will come from US sources or from Commonwealth sources or from China? But US trusts are well known to be highly protectionist; China is facing recession; and 바카라사이트 Commonwealth needs to build up its own academic infrastructure ra바카라사이트r than support Little England - something which 바카라사이트 Education Department at Newcastle are actually world-leaders in promoting. Perhaps 바카라사이트 Brexiteers will come to 바카라사이트 rescue and become overnight philanthropists. However, right wing Tory policy does not seem to be pushing more money into 바카라사이트 UK research council pot - in fact, 바카라사이트 UK research coffers seem to be ever diminishing source of funds. Of course, you could blame everything on those who disagree with you and as you do in 바카라사이트 piece, call 바카라사이트 Remain academics a self-interested elite. I think that's a strange view of your fellow academics who strive to embrace collaborative research and collaborative partnerships both in Europe and across 바카라사이트 world. After all, that's what world-leading scholarship is all about. What we mustn't do it create a Little England, an academic region which deprives itself of research relationships and European research funding on 바카라사이트 off chance that we get more from somewhere else. If people aren't being philanthropic now, God knows why 바카라사이트y will be any more philanthropic in 바카라사이트 protectionist Little England of a Brexit future.
ADVERTISEMENT