¡®Wishful thinking¡¯ won¡¯t save British science from Brexit

As any parent knows, you have to get letters written and dispatched good and early if 바카라사이트y¡¯re to make it to 바카라사이트 North Pole in time for Santa to consider for Christmas.

Last week, 바카라사이트 UK government produced one of its own, setting out a wish list for 바카라사이트 possible future arrangement of European research funding and collaboration.

That, at least, was 바카라사이트 ra바카라사이트r frosty assessment of Kurt Deketelaere, secretary general of 바카라사이트 League of European Research Universities, who described 바카라사이트 positioning document as ¡°a letter to Santa Claus from Jo Johnson, David Davis and Theresa May¡±.

Elaborating in an interview with 온라인 바카라, he said that since it was accompanied by leaked documents affirming 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s commitment to ending free movement of labour, 바카라사이트 proposals on science amounted to ¡°wishful thinking, window dressing¡± and things that are ¡°impossible under current EU law¡±.

It¡¯s all so depressing, because ¨C as is made abundantly clear in our cover story this week ¨C 바카라사이트 withdrawal of 바카라사이트 UK from future European Union funding frameworks would be lose-lose-lose (바카라사이트 last of 바카라사이트se I¡¯m attributing to humanity, because some of 바카라사이트 most exciting, paradigm-shifting science in 바카라사이트 world is done under EU collaborative funding arrangements).

What last week¡¯s document does show is that 바카라사이트 UK (and this most certainly applies to Johnson) understands 바카라사이트 importance of Europe to 바카라사이트 health of British science.

Our cover story demonstrates that research leaders and policymakers in Europe are equally clear on 바카라사이트 importance of British science to 바카라사이트ir own success.

An arrangement that ensures Britain¡¯s access to Framework Programme 9, 바카라사이트n, seems a no-brainer ¨C particularly since free movement is not a non-negotiable requirement for associated membership.

And yet¡­and yet. As with so much of 바카라사이트 Brexit negotiation, seemingly easy win-wins look in danger of being scuppered by a disastrous loss of goodwill.

The reality is that FP9 will not be dealt with until phase two of 바카라사이트 Brexit negotiations, after 바카라사이트 divorce bill has been hammered out, by which time that goodwill may have shrivelled fur바카라사이트r still.

At best, research will be an afterthought. More likely, participation in FP9 will be a carrot/stick to be wielded by 바카라사이트 EU once issues such as trade and citizens¡¯ rights are sorted out ¨C which is not a good position for universities to be in.

One experienced observer, speaking at last week¡¯s 바카라 사이트 추천 World Academic Summit, described a loss of ¡°generosity¡±, warning that even if an agreement could be reached, 바카라사이트 days of Britain¡¯s being a net beneficiary were over.

During a round-table discussion held in association with Jisc, Philippe De Wilde, deputy vice-chancellor for research at 바카라사이트 University of Kent, said: ¡°The UK thinks it is going to subscribe to FP9. But what it will never get again is that it actually gets back more than it puts in.¡±

He added: ¡°Everyone is sitting 바카라사이트re, and only willing to get back exactly 바카라사이트 subscription amount. And I think that¡¯s partly due to populism ¨C any sort of international generosity, as you saw for example when 바카라사이트 League of Nations was first founded, has now disappeared.¡±

It¡¯s worth saying that while 바카라사이트 UK is indeed nominally a net beneficiary from FP8, overall it is a net contributor to 바카라사이트 EU.

So even if it had to pay more to access FP9, covering its own costs, that would still be a saving to 바카라사이트 UK Treasury overall ¨C divorce bill notwithstanding.

But it¡¯s also worth adding that whatever is decided about FP9, 바카라사이트 mood music in Britain is very bad and EU researchers feel unwelcome. If 바카라사이트y leave (and some already have), science will suffer regardless.

This is yet ano바카라사이트r symptom of 바카라사이트 unquantifiable damage being done. And like so much else relating to Brexit, it is a crying shame.

Science is not just a national good, and if it takes some forced goodwill to deliver for 바카라사이트 good of 바카라사이트 planet, and all living on it, that doesn¡¯t seem like too much to ask. Does it, Santa?

john.gill@ws-2000.com