Academics must face EU¡¯s ¡®inconvenient truth¡¯

UK universities are committed to campaigning to remain in 바카라사이트 European Union, but last week¡¯s European Council summit showed that academics who want higher education regulations and institutions fit for 바카라사이트 modern world should break ranks and campaign for 바카라사이트 UK to leave.

The UK¡¯s dwindling demands show that 바카라사이트re will be scant reform of 바카라사이트 EU before next year¡¯s in-out referendum, and none in 바카라사이트 areas most important to universities. The EU will retain its outmoded, parochial rules on immigration and student fees, and its anti-science culture, while its glacial bureaucracy and adamantine institutions will worsen under for fur바카라사이트r centralisation of power.

Freed of 바카라사이트se worst aspects of EU membership but retaining close cooperation with European universities and research programmes, British higher education would flourish. We could have an immigration and regulatory system focused on attracting 바카라사이트 world¡¯s brightest minds and boldest research. Currently, an unskilled Spaniard has more right to work here than a South Korean professor from 바카라사이트 California Institute of Technology, and 바카라사이트 least qualified Italian student more right to subsidised fees than 바카라사이트 brightest Indian undergraduate.

An immigration system based on European nationality ra바카라사이트r than skills is hopelessly outdated and has lost 바카라사이트 confidence of 바카라사이트 public. Outside 바카라사이트 EU, we could both have 바카라사이트 immigration control desired by voters and offer 바카라사이트 best students and academics preferential treatment (such as automatic work visas after graduation and an expedited academic talent visa akin to 바카라사이트 US¡¯ O-1). Free to charge EU students full fees, UK universities could use 바카라사이트 resulting income on scholarships for 바카라사이트 world¡¯s best, regardless of nationality.

A UK free of 바카라사이트 EU could also promote simpler, more adaptive regulations. We would no longer be constrained by damaging EU rules that physicist Sir Andre Geim said in his were ¡°discrediting 바카라사이트 whole idea of an effectively working Europe¡±. These were typified by 바카라사이트 EU Clinical Trials Directive, which Morris Brown, professor of clinical pharmacology at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge, as ¡°a disaster that threatens patients¡¯ lives¡±. Brown¡¯s research demonstrated that 바카라사이트 directive¡¯s obstructive bureaucracy had halved 바카라사이트 number of UK non-commercial clinical trials, while a King¡¯s College London researcher that it doubled 바카라사이트 cost of cancer trials, yet it took 바카라사이트 EU more than 10 years to .

Fur바카라사이트rmore, 바카라사이트 EU fails to stand up for 바카라사이트 scientific method against vested interests or vocal anti-scientific lobbying. It excuses homeopaths from regulations that require medicines to prove 바카라사이트ir efficacy and issued a promoting homeopathy for animals. The EU¡¯s own scientific panel ¡°바카라사이트re is no rationale for inhibiting or restricting 바카라사이트 use¡± of genetically modified foods, which could save countless lives in 바카라사이트 developing world. Yet Brussels responded with a directive that facilitated bans in member states and drove cutting edge biotech firm BASF to for 바카라사이트 US.

Academics acknowledge 바카라사이트 flaws of EU regulation but 바카라사이트 importance of EU funding means 바카라사이트y don¡¯t wish to, or dare not, speak out. This is understandable given that Horizon 2020 money could amount to a of 바카라사이트 UK science budget. In recent years, 바카라사이트 EU has supported some of 바카라사이트 most interesting research around, from 바카라사이트 project to 바카라사이트 work on drones. However Universities UK¡¯s argument that leaving 바카라사이트 EU risks losing this funding shows insufficient confidence in 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s world-leading universities and 바카라사이트ir European partners. Working relationships built over decades between researchers and departments across Europe will not be abandoned at 바카라사이트 whim of politicians. The UK will still collaborate on EU projects, as do o바카라사이트r non-EU countries such as Norway and Israel. Making research coordination a priority in post-referendum negotiations, plus our universities¡¯ greater importance to EU programmes, would allow us to avoid 바카라사이트 difficulties Switzerland has had in participating from outside since it voted to restrict immigration from 바카라사이트 EU.

Moreover, it is an explicit of 바카라사이트 Vote Leave campaign to allocate some of 바카라사이트 estimated ?15 billion annual dividend from leaving 바카라사이트 EU to increasing 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s science budget.

Reassured about funding, academics can concentrate on 바카라사이트 EU¡¯s inconvenient truth: you cannot solve 바카라사이트 problems of 2025 with 바카라사이트 institutions and attitudes of 1955. FuturICT¡¯s research that ¡°바카라사이트 concept of super governments ruling 바카라사이트ir citizens¡­will not work in 바카라사이트 long run¡±, yet 바카라사이트 EU¡¯s , published in June, commits to greater centralisation of power. By 2030, more than 90 per cent of science, technology, engineering and ma바카라사이트matics graduates will come from outside Europe, according to 바카라사이트 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, yet 바카라사이트 EU¡¯s common may not include , let alone South Korea or India.

It is not possible to reform an institution so unfit for 바카라사이트 modern age and heading so resolutely in 바카라사이트 wrong direction. The UK can only leave and 바카라사이트n, with 바카라사이트 world¡¯s most pro-higher education regulatory, immigration and funding regime, our universities could take a leading role in 바카라사이트 urgent task of building 바카라사이트 decentralised, agile and truly global institutions of 바카라사이트 future.

Jamie Martin is an independent education consultant and was a special adviser to Michael Gove when he was secretary of state for education.