my #scipolicy news archive: october 2010 part a

8/8/2019 My #scipolicy News archive: October 2010 Part A

1/80


2/80

2 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

2010/10/11 Royal Society of Chemistry: Scientists protest against planned funding cuts.... 582010/10/11 Telegraph: Government cuts 'will trigger brain drain' ...................................... 602010/10/11 Telegraph: Spending review: Government explores business incubator growthhubs ..................................................................................................................................... 612010/10/11 S word: Hey! Osborne! Leave our geeks alone ................................................. 632010/10/11 Binocular Vision: Why Science is Vital .............................................................. 642010/10/11 Labour: Labour's New Front Bench Team ......................................................... 652010/10/12 DCs improbable science: How to save British science and improve education 67

2010/10/12 Left Foot Forward: Increased science funding would help reduce the deficit ... 692010/10/12 Times HE: Take off the cap so students and market system can shape UK highereducation, Browne recommends ......................................................................................... 712010/10/12 Guardian Martin Robbins: One climate paper, two conflicting headlines ......... 79


3/80

3 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

2010/10/01GUARDIAN SCIENCE:UKCENTREFOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN CLAIMS IT WILL FOCUS

ON SCIENCE, NOT RELIGIONThe newly opened Centre for Intelligent Design aims to start a debate in the UK that's not about religionbut about evidence

Dr Alastair Noble, director of the

Centre for Intelligent Design in Glasgow, says ID is 'consistently misrepresented as a religious position'

In 2006 Elanor Taylor wrote thatit was time for the UK to wage war on intelligent design, saying that whileit andcreationismused to be regarded like line dancing and SUVs "peculiarly American phenomena"

they were now taking root in British life. The last few years have led to more debate about creationism

and intelligent design,especially their classroom presence, due in part to Darwin's bicentenary

celebrations and the continued, sometimes acrimonious, discussion about the relationship between

science andreligion. Creationism in this country has its cheerleaders in museums, schools and zoos, but

what of intelligent design? In Glasgow, a new institution hopes to fill that gap.

The Centre for Intelligent Designfeatures a video introduction fromDr Alastair Noble, who has argued

thatID should not be excluded from the study of origins. He says, among other things, that he is part of a

network of people who are "dissatisfied with the pervading Darwinian explanation of origins and are

attracted to the much more credible position of intelligent design" and criticise the "strident strain of

science" that says the only acceptable explanations are those depending on "physical and materialistic

processes".

The small print of the website says the centre's activity "is organised under a charitable trust governed by

the laws of Guernsey, Channel Islands". The centre receives funding from individuals and organisations

who support its aims, according to the website, and its launch hasearned plaudits from the Discovery

Institutewhich says the centre returns ID to its roots: "Some of the best known pioneers of modern

science did their work in Britain and Europe in the conviction that they were exploring a universe that

really was designed."

In a telephone interview, Noble denies that the centre is a British branch of Discovery: "We are friends

with Discovery and we talk to them, but we are not formally linked. We would be interested in developing
http://www.sirc.org/articles/intelligent_design.shtmlhttp://www.sirc.org/articles/intelligent_design.shtmlhttp://www.sirc.org/articles/intelligent_design.shtmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationismhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationismhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationismhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/17/evolution-versus-creationism-sciencehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/17/evolution-versus-creationism-sciencehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/17/evolution-versus-creationism-sciencehttp://www.scienceinschool.org/2008/issue9/stevejoneshttp://www.scienceinschool.org/2008/issue9/stevejoneshttp://www.scienceinschool.org/2008/issue9/stevejoneshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religionhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religionhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religionhttp://www.c4id.org.uk/http://www.c4id.org.uk/http://www.missionscotland.org.uk/Dr-Alastair-Noblehttp://www.missionscotland.org.uk/Dr-Alastair-Noblehttp://www.missionscotland.org.uk/Dr-Alastair-Noblehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/01/evolution-curriculum-intelligent-design-schoolhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/01/evolution-curriculum-intelligent-design-schoolhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/01/evolution-curriculum-intelligent-design-schoolhttp://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/09/new_centre_for_intelligent_des038621.htmlhttp://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/09/new_centre_for_intelligent_des038621.htmlhttp://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/09/new_centre_for_intelligent_des038621.htmlhttp://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/09/new_centre_for_intelligent_des038621.htmlhttp://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/09/new_centre_for_intelligent_des038621.htmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/dec/01/evolution-curriculum-intelligent-design-schoolhttp://www.missionscotland.org.uk/Dr-Alastair-Noblehttp://www.c4id.org.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/religionhttp://www.scienceinschool.org/2008/issue9/stevejoneshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/17/evolution-versus-creationism-sciencehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/creationismhttp://www.sirc.org/articles/intelligent_design.shtml


4/80

4 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

links with Europe. We don't get money from America it is funded from Britain. We don't have huge

amounts of money. We will have a series of projects and will raise funds as and when needed."

According to Noble, what separates the Centre for Intelligent Design from other bodies engaged in

theevolutionargument is its emphasis on science: "There are various organisations that debate the faith

issue around origins, but what we will be trying to do is open a debate around the scientific issue. ID is

consistently misrepresented as a religious position. The debate about ID is quite difficult to elevate to a

civilised conversation. It's not about religion, it's about evidence."

The network of people supporting the centre's activities numbers between 50 and 100. Among them is its

presidentProfessor Norman Nevin, emeritus professor of medical genetics, Queens University, Belfast, and

its vice-presidentDr David Galloway, who is also vice president of the Royal College of Physicians and

Surgeons, Glasgow.In its FAQs, the site lists the UK scientists "who are brave enough to make their support

for intelligent design public. There are many more who are not willing to risk their careers by making their

objections to evolution known."

Blogger and anti-Creationist campaigner Naon Tiotaminotes that the support of "prominent academics"

suggests "they may stand a fighting chance at being taken seriously by the media, something that Truth in

Sciencehasn't accomplished," before adding: "All we can do at the moment is hope that this new projectcrash-lands before it even properly gets its feet off the ground."

Next month the centre hostsProfessor Mike Beheon anational lecture tour.

I askedMichael Reissprofessor of science education at the Institute of Education in London what he

thought about the Centre for Intelligent Design. He replied: "In a free society it is important that

organisations that do not accept the scientific theory of evolution are allowed to exist and to proclaim their

message. However, the overwhelming scientific consensus is that the arguments against the theory of

evolution put forward by creationists and those who advocate intelligent design (ID) are invalid.

"In a school setting this means that while teachers of science are perfectly at liberty to address creationist

and ID issues, should they so wish, students must not be given the impression that there is a scientific

controversy over whether the Earth is very old (about 4.6 billion years old) or whether all species descend

from very simple common ancestors."

For now, the Centre for Intelligent Design is nothing more than a website and an office. What it achieves

will depend on how much appetite there is in the UK for intelligent design and what resistance is mounted

to its message.

2010/10/01GUARDIAN SCIENCE:SCIENCEFUNDING CUTS COULD LEAD TO LOST

GENERATION OF SCIENTISTS, WARNS KREBSIt will take years to restore the scientific talent lost abroad as a result of cuts in UK science funding, says

John Krebs, chair of the House of Lords science and technology committee

Alok Jha
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolutionhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolutionhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolutionhttp://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/217/63/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/217/63/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/217/63/http://www.davidgalloway.co.uk/Index2.htmlhttp://www.davidgalloway.co.uk/Index2.htmlhttp://www.davidgalloway.co.uk/Index2.htmlhttp://www.c4id.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167&Itemid=31http://www.c4id.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167&Itemid=31http://www.c4id.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167&Itemid=31http://www.naontiotami.com/?p=2117http://www.naontiotami.com/?p=2117http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.htmlhttp://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.htmlhttp://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.htmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.darwinordesign.org.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.darwinordesign.org.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.darwinordesign.org.uk/http://www.ioe.ac.uk/staff/GEMS/GEMS_71.htmlhttp://www.ioe.ac.uk/staff/GEMS/GEMS_71.htmlhttp://www.ioe.ac.uk/staff/GEMS/GEMS_71.htmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/alokjhahttp://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/alokjhahttp://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/alokjhahttp://www.ioe.ac.uk/staff/GEMS/GEMS_71.htmlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/oct/01/%20http:/www.darwinordesign.org.uk/http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.htmlhttp://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/http://www.naontiotami.com/?p=2117http://www.c4id.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=167&Itemid=31http://www.davidgalloway.co.uk/Index2.htmlhttp://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/217/63/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/evolution


5/80

5 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

'If we do end up haemorrhaging

talent, it will take a very long time to restore that,' said Krebs. Photograph: Linda Nylind/Guardian

The "brain drain" that could result from a deep cut to the UK's science funding would leave the country

with a missing generation of scientists, according to John Krebs, chair of the House of Lords science andtechnology committee.

Responding toreports in the Guardian today that scientists were already planning to leave the UK ahead of

proposed budget cuts that could see government funding of research cut by around 25%, Krebs said: "The

message is loud and clear, namely that talent is highly mobile and talent goes where the resources for

research are best supplied. This is not about people wanting to earn more money, it's about people

wanting to have better equipment, better facilities, more research support to carry out their science."

He added: "If we do end up haemorrhaging talent, it will take a very long time to restore that. Many

universities will tell you that, as a result of cuts implemented during the Thatcher period, there is a gap in

the age profile of academics in many subjects. Those people who would now be in their mid-50s, there arejust fewer of them. That gap persisted for a whole generation. This is not something where you turn the

tap on and off."

Scientists in particle physics, stem cells, cancer research and ophthalmology at some of the UK's leading

universitiestold the Guardian this weekthat they saw better opportunities overseas as countries such as

the US, Canada, China and Australia planned to invest increased sums in science as part of their long-term

strategy to reduce their budget deficits.

Imran Khan, director of theCampaign for Science and Engineering, said: "Once our researchers go abroad,

that's it we're not going to be getting them back anytime soon. And if we lose our hard-won reputation

as a global research hub, we're not going to attract foreign researchers either. A brain drain on this scalecould take decades to fully recover from, especially when our competitor nations are actually increasing

their own investment."

All government departments in the UK have been asked toprepare for deep cuts in their budgetsas part of

the government's austerity drive. Scientists have spent monthswarning that such deep cutsto the UK's

science infrastructure would have devastating long-term effects, forcing the country out of the "premier

league" in many fields of research. Last week,Krebs wrote to science minister David Willetts,to give

examples of several leading universities that had already lost scientists to other countries and other cases

where universities had found it difficult to recruit the best talent from overseas.

David King, former government chief scientist and now director of theSmith School of Enterprise and theEnvironmentat Oxford University, said the coalition government's proposed cuts to science were ironic,
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/30/scientists-threaten-leave-britain-fundinghttp://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/30/scientists-threaten-leave-britain-fundinghttp://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/30/scientists-threaten-leave-britain-fundinghttp://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vince-cable-scientists-spending-reviewhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vince-cable-scientists-spending-reviewhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vince-cable-scientists-spending-reviewhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vincent-cable-science-budget-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vincent-cable-science-budget-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vincent-cable-science-budget-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/23/science-funding-cuts-brain-drainhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/23/science-funding-cuts-brain-drainhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/23/science-funding-cuts-brain-drainhttp://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/http://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/23/science-funding-cuts-brain-drainhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vincent-cable-science-budget-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/08/vince-cable-scientists-spending-reviewhttp://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/30/scientists-threaten-leave-britain-fundinghttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-archive/lords-s-t-select/


6/80

6 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

given how often he was asked by the governments of countries including Italy, Japan, Germany and France

to explain how the UK had risen to such a high level in science.

"[They asked] how did we create this amazingly efficient science base that produced more science

outcomes whether you measure by citations or prizes per pound invested in the science base than any

other country in the world? We are the envy of many countries. The French have tried, with successive

governments, very hard to imitate what we did and they just haven't come up with a way to do it. We have

this remarkable efficient science base producing excellent work from a relatively small percentage of our

GDP. That is the prize that we have, and all of that is now potentially at risk."

Simon Denegri, chief executive of theAssociation of Medical Research Charities said that it was "extremely

worrying" to hear so many of Britain's leading scientists talk so despondently about the prospects for UK

science. "But who can blame them? There is no doubt that their loss will have a significant impact on

important work across many fields. A great deal of this activity is supported by funding from medical

research charities. And I am sure the public will be concerned that it is going to be ever harder for their

donations to make a difference if we allow our international standing in science to drift away like this.

"I hope this early sign that belief is beginning to seep from the system will be seen as a wake-up call by the

coalition government. They have much to do to build confidence and demonstrate that the future ofscience is safe in their hands."

Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, echoed concerns that funding of basic science research was

crucial to maintaining UK industry. Some of the best biomedical science in the world was going on in the

UK, he said, but "it would be a tragedy if government didn't continue to be a good partner to industry and

charities, with the resulting benefits to the health and wealth of the nation."

2010/10/02GUARDIAN LETTERS:LOSS OFSCIENCE BASE WILL HURT ECONOMY

The spectre of scientists abandoning the UK for better-funded jobs abroad (Scientists quitBritain in new brain drain, 1 October) should be of huge concern to everyone. Success startswith talent, and an exodus of researchers would jeopardise both scientific endeavour and thechance to create a sustainable economic recovery driven by knowledge-based industries suchas bioscience.James Dysonhas outlined a viable way forward, focused on improving the waywe commercialise research through measures such as extending R&D tax credits. This is thetype of strategy we need from the government one that invests intelligently in our talentbase, together with initiatives such as the "patent box" tax incentive, which would show thatBritain can still be a world leader in science, despite the challenging times, by encouragingcompanies to exploit intellectual property in the UK.Britain boasts four out of 10 of the top universities in the world a huge feat given our relativesize as a country. Indeed, there are so many reasons to be optimistic about the future ofscience in the UK. Ultimately, it is people that are our greatest asset, and that means bothindustry collaboration, such as the upcoming BIA andABPIjoint conference on the UK's R&Dstrengths, and government support for sustained investment, which ensures the UK continuesto shine on the world stage.Nigel GaymondChief executive,BioIndustry Association

People living with severe and progressive muscle disease fear cuts will bring research intothese conditions to a near standstill. Since it was founded in 1959, we have has invested more
http://www.amrc.org.uk/homehttp://www.amrc.org.uk/homehttp://www.amrc.org.uk/homehttp://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Organisation/Governance/Executive-Board/index.htmhttp://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Organisation/Governance/Executive-Board/index.htmhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.dyson.com/about/story/http://www.dyson.com/about/story/http://www.dyson.com/about/story/http://lexicon.ft.com/term.asp?t=patent-boxhttp://lexicon.ft.com/term.asp?t=patent-boxhttp://lexicon.ft.com/term.asp?t=patent-boxhttp://www.abpi.org.uk/http://www.abpi.org.uk/http://www.abpi.org.uk/http://www.bioindustry.org/http://www.bioindustry.org/http://www.bioindustry.org/http://www.bioindustry.org/http://www.abpi.org.uk/http://lexicon.ft.com/term.asp?t=patent-boxhttp://www.dyson.com/about/story/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/30/science-research-spending-cutshttp://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Organisation/Governance/Executive-Board/index.htmhttp://www.amrc.org.uk/home


7/80

7 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

than 50m into research and it is only in the last few years that scientists have expressedcautious optimism that the first treatments will be available in the near future. But the transferof promising technology from the laboratory into the clinic is costly and cannot be achievedwithout government support. This is a crucial time. The conditions we support are rare andonly a small number of scientists dedicate their work to research in this field. We are in dangerof losing the benefit of all the investment made so far, if world renowned scientists moveabroad.

The suggested cuts will bring the budget down to less than 2.6bn. In 2007-08 the totalscience budget was 3.5bn, which is less than 0.25% of the UK's total output. Research intorare conditions only represents a tiny fraction of this budget. We urge the government not tomake short-term expenditure reductions that could jeopardise the longer-term development oflife-saving treatments for the 70,000 children and adults with muscle disease, who have a rightto have the same quality of life as everybody else.

Dr Marita PohlschmidtDirector of research,Muscular Dystrophy Campaign

2010/10/04GUARDIAN MARTIN ROBBINS:ITBEATS LIVING IN CAVES

Why science is vital, and why scientists will be demonstrating this Saturday. Guest post by Jenny Rohn

When I was a 14-year old student back in Ohio, my classmates and teachers voted me "most likely to

become a scientist". I'm still not convinced this was meant as a compliment. My parents two artists

generously supported me through my biology degree at university, but seemed baffled when I expressed

my wish to attend graduate school to continue my scientific training.

I cannot tell you now what drove me to become a scientist. All I know is that the desire was always there,

long before I can remember making any concrete decisions. My father used to point his telescope at the

moons of Jupiter, and drill holes in peanut-butter jars so I could capture fireflies on sultry summer nights.

Many moths felt the youthful wrath of my net, and billions of protozoa and amoebae flinched under the

light of my flimsy child's microscope. The test tubes of my chemistry set were perpetually scarred with

black gunk; I polished rocks, pressed flowers, sketched trees, tracked animal prints in the snow.

Where did this come from? I knew no real-life scientists, had no role models that I can recall unless you

count Danny Dunn, a fictional child who went on exploits with his boffin friend Professor Bullfinch inthe

series of books by Raymond Abrashkin and Jay Williams. The impetus was just there, pushing me forward

on a path that seemed inevitable.

But inevitability is for children. Thirty-odd years on, I know that there is no Santa Claus, and that wanting to

be a scientist is not enough to make it last forever. For the profession I love is not any more secure than

that of my artist parents. "You don't go into science to get rich," one mentor in university confided early
http://www.muscular-dystrophy.org/http://www.muscular-dystrophy.org/http://www.muscular-dystrophy.org/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Dunnhttp://www.muscular-dystrophy.org/


8/80

8 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

on; later, during my first postdoctoral position, it became clear that you don't go into science for job

security either. Along the way, most of my colleagues have sacrificed their dreams and bailed out, unable

to land permanent positions as the funding landscape grew tighter and tighter.

With only one year left on my own fellowship, and nearly 15 years after earning a PhD, I too am staring

into the abyss. And yet something is preventing me from leaving research, no matter how much sense it

makes to flee the sinking ship before the water actually starts slopping onto the deck.

It may sound corny, but I am in love with science. I love the physical manipulations; I love the intellectualatmosphere; I love the mind-bending problems, the euphoria of seeing something that no one else in the

world ever has before. I love the thought that, despite the bad pay and the poor prospects, the work that I

do might actually help people. I am fiercely proud of one of my patents, an invention aimed at curing some

cancers. I am intensely aware that the trappings of civilisation that hold us together the energy, the

medicines, the vehicles, the machines, the computers, the internet are the products of science,

technology, engineering and mathematics.

When you deal with science on a daily basis, it is difficult to take its fruits for granted. Science gives most

people the luxury to forget, at least for a while, that the world can be a brutal and dangerous place. On a

planet fraught with dwindling resources, burgeoning population, emerging disease and uncertain climate,we abandon science at our peril.

It is with this backdrop that a new chapter in my life began:Science Is Vital, a grassroots campaign to

support UK research. I'd like to tell you that I thought long and hard about it, but the truth is that it was an

almost instantaneous reaction: I readVince Cable's now infamous speechsignalling crippling cuts to science

funding,dashed off an angry blog post, and proposed marching in the streets on Twitter all in the space of

about 15 minutes.

I honestly did not expect it to take off. Scientists, grappling as they are with the mysteries of the universe,

don't always pay attention to what is going on outside of their labs, offices and field stations. We are

notoriously resistant to extraneous demands on our time. There will be the occasional chiding essay in ascholarly journal, berating us to take an interest inscience policy, to speak out to defend what it is that we

do. Perhaps we have ignored these pleas once too often. But this time I could sense that it was serious.

Organising this campaignhas been hard work, and frankly, an ill-advised distraction from producing the

research data that will help me land that elusive position. But this is a sacrifice I am willing to make.

What really drives me and probably the many thousands of scientists who have now signed our petition

goes beyond the mere threat to our jobs. The UK economy is still precarious: there is strong evidencethat

decreasing science funding will backfire and lead to far more long-term harm than any short-term savings

that will result. Sir Patrick Moore says it best, in an endorsement onour website: "If we cut funds for

science we'll be shooting ourselves in the foot."

Science is vital. And it's not just scientists who think so: our petition, which has more than ten thousand

contributors and rising, has been signed by awonderfully diverse array of people, from artists, social

workers and builders to ministers, legal secretaries, and fire fighters, even a self-professed "house hubby".

Our campaign, in partnership withthe Campaign for Science and Engineering, has been endorsed by groups

such as the British Heart Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, Cancer Research UK and many scientific

societies.

If you agree, pleasesign our petition,write to your MP , consider joining us on ourParliamentary Lobbyon

Tuesday 12 October, and above all,come to our rallythis Saturday 9 October in central London we're

expecting thousands.
http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-timehttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-timehttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-timehttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-timehttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://www.bis.gov.uk/news/speeches/vince-cable-science-research-and-innovation-speechhttp://www.bis.gov.uk/news/speeches/vince-cable-science-research-and-innovation-speechhttp://www.bis.gov.uk/news/speeches/vince-cable-science-research-and-innovation-speechhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/08/in-which-the-great-slumbering-scientific-beast-awakenshttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/08/in-which-the-great-slumbering-scientific-beast-awakenshttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/08/in-which-the-great-slumbering-scientific-beast-awakenshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/science-policyhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/science-policyhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/science-policyhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/sign-the-petition/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/sign-the-petition/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/sign-the-petition/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mp/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mp/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mp/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/lobby-parliament/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/lobby-parliament/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/lobby-parliament/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demohttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demohttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demohttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demohttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/lobby-parliament/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mp/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/sign-the-petition/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/science-policyhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/08/in-which-the-great-slumbering-scientific-beast-awakenshttp://www.bis.gov.uk/news/speeches/vince-cable-science-research-and-innovation-speechhttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-timehttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/08/16/in-which-i-face-up-to-crunch-time


9/80

9 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Think of it: scientists and their supporters, massing in the streets! We'd like as many people as possible

visibly displaying their pride in science, whether it is by wearing their white coat, T-shirts with their favorite

scientific image or wielding scientific objects and placards.

As for chants on the rally, let's see if we can do better than how Colin Blakemorelampooned us in a recent

Times piece: "What do we want?" "Thorough consideration of the evidence that public expenditure on

research is causally linked to economic benefits!" "When do we want it?" "As soon as the Government is

able to gather full, peer-reviewed data!"

I prefer something punchier, like "Science: it beats living in caves."

I'd love to hear your own suggestions.

Jenny Rohn is a cell biologist at University College London. In her spare time, she is also a science writer,

broadcaster, novelist and editor ofLabLit.com. She blogs atMind The Gap, and her second novel, The

Honest Look, is published in November

2010/10/05GUARDIAN MARTIN ROBBINS:WHY I SPOOFED SCIENCE JOURNALISM, AND HOWTO FIX IT

Last week I posted a spoof of science journalism that to my complete surprise went viral. Since then, I've

been trying to find answers. What's wrong with science journalism, and how do we fix it?

Comments (128)

Bizarrely, the most read article on the Guardian website last week wasn't about Ed Miliband or the Labour

party conference, but aquirky special-interest piece spoofing science journalismwhich I assumed only

about three people would get. Apparently I hit a nerve, but why? What's wrong with science journalism?How did it become so dull and predictable? And how do we fix it?

My point was really about predictability and stagnation. The formula I outlined using a few randomly

pickedBBCscience articles as a guide isn't necessarily an example of bad journalism; but

science reporting is predictable enough that you can write a formula for it that everyone recognises, and

once the formula has been seen it's very hard to un-see, like a faint watermark at the edge of your vision.

Journalism Analysis = RSS Feed

To see what I mean about predictability, take a look at theBBC Science & Environmentnews page. At the

time of writing I can see the following headlines. Spot the recurring theme:
http://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ecehttp://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ecehttp://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ecehttp://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ecehttp://www.lablit.com/http://www.lablit.com/http://www.lablit.com/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/28/science-journalism-spoof#start-of-commentshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/28/science-journalism-spoof#start-of-commentshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbchttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbchttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbchttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment/http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientisthttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/bbchttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/24/1http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/28/science-journalism-spoof#start-of-commentshttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/http://www.lablit.com/http://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ecehttp://www.timesplus.co.uk/tto/news/?login=false&url=http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/thunderer/article2740539.ece


10/80

10 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

UK 'needs domestic wind industry'

Painless laser 'can spot disease'

City life 'boosts bug resistance'

'Ghost particle'

Neanderthals were 'keen on tech'

Fossil flower 'clue to daisies'

Winds 'may have parted Red Sea'

Malaria 'caught from gorillas'

LHC finds 'interesting effects'

I could go on, but you can see 'the pattern'. They're called'Scare quotes' and they are used by writers to

distance themselves from the words inside, or to indicate paraphrasing unless you're a cynic, in which

case scare quotes are a get-out-of-jail-free card that allows journalists to absolve themselves of anyresponsibility for the words mentioned.

This habit is so deeply ingrained at the BBC that even the question of whether 'effects' are 'interesting' is

deemed too thorny an issue for the headline writer to give an opinion on. God forbid that in calling a piece

of research 'interesting' the BBC should sully its reputation for robotic impartiality.

The defence from some corners is that reporters should be neutral, that their job is simply to report what

has been said without passing judgement on it or challenging it in any way.

Cobblers.Ed Yong recently explainedhow daft this is:

If you are not actually providing any analysis, if you're not effectively 'taking a side', then you are just amessenger, a middleman, a megaphone with ears. If that's your idea of journalism, then my RSS reader is a

journalist.

A science journalist should be capable of, at a minimum, reading a scientific paper and being able to

venture a decent opinion. A more reasonable excuse is lack of time. Full-time reporters are expected to

cover breaking stories quickly, and churn out several articles a day. Under that sort of pressure, even if the

journalist wants to delve deeper into the murky depths of a story they may simply not have the time to do

it justice.

Ultimately, though, if all you're doing is repeating press releases, and not providing your own insight,

analysis or criticism, then what exactly is the point of paying you? What are you for? What value do you

add for me? What right do you have to complain if you're going out of business?

Death by a thousand restrictions

Many of the problems in science reporting come not from the journalists or editors themselves, but as a

result of the pressures and constraints they're under, and journalists at the BBC are under more

constraints than most.

The Curse of the Undead (Ceefax)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quoteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quoteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quoteshttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/jeremy-laurance-dr-goldacre-doesnt-make-everything-better-1994017.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/jeremy-laurance-dr-goldacre-doesnt-make-everything-better-1994017.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/jeremy-laurance-dr-goldacre-doesnt-make-everything-better-1994017.htmlhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/09/23/should-science-journalists-take-sides/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/09/23/should-science-journalists-take-sides/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/09/23/should-science-journalists-take-sides/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/09/23/should-science-journalists-take-sides/http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/jeremy-laurance-dr-goldacre-doesnt-make-everything-better-1994017.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/jeremy-laurance-dr-goldacre-doesnt-make-everything-better-1994017.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scare_quotes


11/80

11 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Have you ever wondered why the first few lines of any BBC website article are often particularly stilted and

awkward? It's because thanks to the BBC's multi-platform publishing guidelines, the first few paragraphs of

any news story need to be written in such a way that they can be cut and pasted into a Ceefax page.

To see an example of this in action, take a look atthis articleand thenthis Ceefax page.

It also means that there's a pressure for things like the journal, university, and so on to be mentioned by a

certain point so that everyone gets proper credit in all versions of the article. In 2010, news stories on a

website are actually being optimised, and reorganised for Teletext. Seriously.

Science for All

Another issue affecting style is the need to reach a diverse audience. This puts pressure on commercial

media groups who need to secure page views to generate advertising revenue, but also on the BBC which

has a mandate not only to provide news accessible to as many people as possible, but to represent the UK,

its regions and communities to an international audience.

At the Daily Mail, that pressure manifests itself in the form of acres of female flesh and breathless,

lascivious descriptions of barely contained breasts, toned tummies and voluptuous, sun-kissed thighs. At

the BBC, it means expressing things as plainly and simply as possible, avoiding any slang, culturalreferences or colourful language that might obscure things for those with poor literacy, or who speak

English as a second language.

The cynics among you might use the pejorative phrase 'dumbing-down', while others might talk

approvingly of 'plain English'. It seems pretty fair to me, but does the same formula have to be relentlessly

applied toevery article? Could the BBC not, amid the vast sea of simple, clear reporting find space for a

modest island of meatier, spicier prose for those of us hungry for something a little richer?

Arbitrary Word Limits

As a writer, word limits are both a blessing and a curse. Many bloggers would have their writingimmeasurably improved if they stuck to a word limit doing that forces you to plan, to organise your

thoughts, and to avoid redundancy and repetition. On the other hand, some stories need more time to tell,

and sticking dogmatically to an arbitrary 800-word limit for stuff that's published on theinternetdoesn't

make a lot of sense. The internet is not running out of space.

Conventional wisdom says that after a few hundred words, people start to lose attention. Conventional

wisdom is a load of bollocks, asonline magazine Slate neatly demonstrated with their experiments in long-

form writing. Detailed, investigative pieces running to tens of thousands of words netted millions of page

views, and proved that audiences aren't quite the infantile content-junkies they're often made out to be.

Fundamental Units of Science

Another set of problems spring from the attitude journalists seem to have towards science or at least

those who aren't still describing researchers with the faintly bigoted and dehumanising term "boffins".

Science is all about process, context and community, but reporting concentrates on single people, projects

and events.

The Race to Mediocrity

A couple of months ago I happened to be in a meeting at The Guardian's headquarters in King's Cross as

news ofthe most massive star ever foundbroke. It's no exaggeration to say that half the newspaper's staff

were involved in covering the story for various sections.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8357537.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8357537.stmhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8357537.stmhttp://ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=154&subpage=5&channel=bbc1&search_string=science&fontsize=2http://ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=154&subpage=5&channel=bbc1&search_string=science&fontsize=2http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internethttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internethttp://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internethttp://www.niemanlab.org/2010/07/smart-editorial-smart-readers-and-smart-ad-solutions-slate-makes-a-case-for-long-form-on-the-web/http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/07/smart-editorial-smart-readers-and-smart-ad-solutions-slate-makes-a-case-for-long-form-on-the-web/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10707416http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10707416http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10707416http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-10707416http://www.niemanlab.org/2010/07/smart-editorial-smart-readers-and-smart-ad-solutions-slate-makes-a-case-for-long-form-on-the-web/http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internethttp://ceefax.tv/txtmaster.php?page=154&subpage=5&channel=bbc1&search_string=science&fontsize=2http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8357537.stm


12/80

12 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Well okay, it's a big exaggeration, but it's true that the media went into a sort of bizarre mass hysteria as

newspapers, TV, radio and magazines raced to cover a slightly-larger-than-normal ball of gas with feature

articles, diagrams showing small circles next to bigger circles, video packages showing small circles moving

next to bigger circles, and interactive fact panels. Probably someone somewhere was staging a re-

enactment with two appropriately rotund celebrities.

The result was a self-propelling explosion of journalistic effort that resulted in hundreds of virtually

identical articles scattered across the face of the internet like some sort of fast-growing weed. What did all

this effort and expense achieve? Hundreds of interesting things happen in science every week, and yet

journalists from all over the media seem driven by a herd mentality that ensures only a handful of stories

are covered. And they're not even the most interesting stories in many cases.

In the Shadow of The Event

Members of the public could be forgiven for believing that science involves occasional discoveries

interspersed with long periods of 'not very much happening right now'. The reality of science is almost the

complete opposite of this. We spend centuries incrementally building little piles of knowledge, and it's

extremely rare that an individual paper or piece of work is really that profoundly important.

One of the biggest failures of science reporting is the media's belief that a scientific paper or research

finding represents a conclusion of some kind. Scientists know that this simply isn't true. A new paper is the

start or continuance of a discussion or debate that will often rumble on for years or even decades.

Often we can only assess the importance of research with hindsight. It was several decades before the full

significance of the 1896 observation by Svante Arrhenius that increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere

would lead to an increase in global temperature became obvious. Or at least obvious to all but a minority

of ideologically driven morons.

Trying to report science by picking out random interesting papers to look at is like a food critic attending

the opening of an Indian restaurant and deciding to sample a bit of cumin, then a splash of ghee, and

maybe a few grains of rice. All sense of meaning, of context, of the whole dish, is lost.

Disconnection from the World Wide Web

The world wide web is built from links. That's why it's a web, and not just a library of pages like, well,

Ceefax. Bloggers have understood this since even before anyone had made up the word 'blog', but for

some reason links especially links to the research itself have remained mostly alien to online media.

Why?

Journals Behaving Badly

No discussion of science journalism would be complete without a mention of The Dreaded Embargo. Itworks something like this:

The Journal of Something or Other is about to publish an interesting paper, so it decides to issue a press

release and a preview copy of the paper to journalists.

The press release is embargoed until a certain date. This gives journalists time to write about the story

without worrying about being scooped, and ensures plenty of coverage on the day.

On the day the embargo lifts, the story is published on umpteen million websites.

And that's sort of okay, except for two snags. Firstly, with tedious regularity it turns out that many journals

don't publish the paper when the embargo ends, some waiting days or even weeks to get it online.


13/80

13 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Secondly, many of the papers are pay-walled in any case, and organisations (like the BBC until recently)

decide there's no real benefit from linking to a pay-walled site.

This matters for two reasons: firstly, it means that the journalist can't provide a link to the study, which is

annoying for people who want to see more; secondly, it destroys accountability by preventing other

journalists, bloggers, scientists or interested people from seeing the source for themselves and judging the

merits of the claims made by researchers, university departments or reporters.

The Blue Revolution

AsI said recently, links are beautiful. They take us beyond whatever we happened to be looking for, on

journeys to places we never even imagined existed. Every minute of every day, millions of curious apes

click billions of links, each tracing their own miniature voyages of discovery.

By providing links to sources, journalists can show that they're honest, open and trustworthy and allow the

reader to judge whether the interpretation they've presented of someone else's work or words is the

correct one. They can also open up avenues for exploration and discovery to their audience, providing the

reader with far more value than one journalist could provide on their own.

It's taken a long time, and aconsiderable amount of lobbyingto get the BBC to take links seriously, butthey have begun to move in the right direction, and for that they should be praised. It would be brilliant if

other news media could do the same, and bring traditional media up to the standard set by bloggers.

Five Ways to Improve Science Journalism

A number of people responding to my spoof set me a challenge. Could I write an example of a good piece

of science journalism? At the risk of ducking the challenge (which I'd be lousy at, since I tend not to do

much reporting on research anyway), that misses the point, because I don't think there should be a set way

of doing things.

But what does that mean in practice? What should, say, the BBC do to improve their coverage? I can thinkof a few things that would make an impact right away.

Stop racing the pack. It's undignified, seriously. Commercial companies at least have the excuse

that they need the page views to survive, but the BBC is unique in being paid for by the licence fee.

That should allow it some flexibility to sit outside of the free market rat race. Let the tabloid

schmucks race to produce three hundred near identical pieces on whatever giant star they found

this week. Repeating what other people are already doing isn't adding any value for customers or

for licence fee payers.

Challenge and analyse. If you can free some of your journalists from the rat race of inane reporting

on stuff that everyone else has already covered, then maybe you can use those people to do

something more worthwhile, something that adds real value: proper analysis and insight. Let those

people cover less, in more depth.

Experiment with rule-breaking. The internet is very new, and new technologies take generations to

figure out. It took centuries to get from the printing press to newspapers. It took 35 years to get

from the first modern e-mail system to Twitter. It took 10 years to get from the first blogs to a

collective like Science blogs. This change is ongoing, and it could be decades, or even generations

before the situation stabilises. We are basically like the cave men at the start of "2001", bashing

bits of PHP together and wondering why everything's on fire.

What happens in the next five or ten years is anybody's guess, but the point is that while some

rules are useful, trying to stick religiously to them now would be like someone in the 16th century
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/01/bbc-links-scientific-researchhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/01/bbc-links-scientific-researchhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/01/bbc-links-scientific-researchhttp://bengoldacre.posterous.com/no-movement-on-the-bbcs-bizarre-links-policyhttp://bengoldacre.posterous.com/no-movement-on-the-bbcs-bizarre-links-policyhttp://bengoldacre.posterous.com/no-movement-on-the-bbcs-bizarre-links-policyhttp://bengoldacre.posterous.com/no-movement-on-the-bbcs-bizarre-links-policyhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2010/sep/01/bbc-links-scientific-research


14/80

14 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

declaring that they'd found the best way to write a print article. Rules can be useful, but don't be

dogmatic about them, let people break them not every day, but from time to time.

Nurture talent. If you have talented writers, then nurture them and allow them to experiment with

the form. If you're lacking a decent and diverse pool of talent, then leverage the community of

fantastic science writers working in the blogosphere. It's shocking that the BBC, which has a

mandate to represent all the UK's various communities and is central in developing talent in TV and

radio, shows no interest in working with the growing British blogosphere to develop writers and

showcase talent. It's very much their loss.

Write for the web. This should go without saying, but articles on a website should be written for the

website. Transcribing TV or radio spots, or optimising text for Ceefax, is inexcusable. Different

forms of media require different styles of writing.

Fading Out

Science is crazy. The things that we can do are absolutely ridiculous; whether it's peering trillions of miles

into the void of space in the search for new life, deciphering our own genetic code, pulling apart the stuff

that the universe is made of, or halting the spread of disease, or just enabling this article to be sent

through light beams and thin air to your computer.

And there are hundreds of beautiful, amazing writers who can take this craziness and put it in a way that

we can all cope with, whether it's Dawkins bringing evolution to bloody life, the genius of Feynman

bringing particle physics to the masses, David Quammen's heart-wrenching descriptions of the death of the

last dodo, or Ed Yong and his life-long obsession with writing about animal sex.

And yet, somehow we're left with mainstream media coverage that's often sterile, formulaic,

unimaginative. Writing covered with the stench of the intellectual decay that inevitably comes from the

meek acceptance of often-arbitrary rules. Science deserves better, and as science blogs rack up ever

increasing millions of readers every month, traditional media companies still dragging their feet will need

to respond, sooner or later. That, or face irrelevance.

Anyway, that's my opinion. Tell me yours in the comments.

2010/10/05S WORD:RISE UP TO DEFEND UKSCIENCE

Hilary Leevers, Assistant Director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering

People are rallying round to defend science from the feared UK spending cuts of October 20th - both

figuratively and literally.

A group of concerned scientistsformed Science Is Vitalas a pre-emptive movement to try to convey the

huge importance that science has for the people of the UK.

If cuts are made to public investment in research and development, they will impact upon everyone: they

will hamper the economic growth needed for public investments; they will slow the advancement on life-
http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluffhttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/thesword/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/28/key-messages/http://blogs.nature.com/ue19877e8/2010/09/23/in-which-i-call-my-own-bluff


15/80

15 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

saving discoveries; and they could turn the UK's history and current strength in science and innovation into

a distant memory.

TheCampaign for Science and Engineering(CaSE) grew from a grass-roots campaignstarted in the 1980s.

We work to influence policy makers directly or through the media. But we are lending our support

toScience Is Vitalbecause we believe that it can have real political impact, both up until the spending

review announcements on October 20th, and also in shaping the environment for spending thereafter.

A problem with petitions and rallies can be that they come across as special pleading by self-interestedorganisations. But what drives the passion behind our collaborators at Science Is Vital is not fear of

unemployment - it's fear of a future in which the UK loses its international excellence in science and

engineering.

And science is vital in a broad sense: engineers, technologists and mathematicians have all signed the

petition in their hundreds. Looking through the first 11,000 signatories of the petition, students, graduates

and academics appear in their thousands, but it is the names of non-scientists that are most inspiring.

Artists, musicians, farmers, firefighters, priests, poets, policemen and soldiers have all signed.

There are those who might particularly appreciate the economic value science and engineering can bring,

including accountants, bankers and the leaders of over 50 small businesses. There are those who may hope

to build the scientific future, including school children and teachers. There are also those on the front line

working with science and engineering, from doctors and nurses, to air traffic controllers. And those waiting

for science to bring the answers, like the 16 signatories with motor neurone disease, or the people who

care for them.

We thank the22 organisationsalready putting their names behind the campaign, including research

charities, like Cancer Research UK and the Wellcome Trust, Universities and trade unions. Over 50 fellows

of the Royal Society or the Royal Academy of Engineering have signed, along with many notable

individuals, from Patrick Moore and Brian Cox, to Ben Goldacre and Simon Singh.

We are eagerly awaiting the next 11,000 signatures, and expect to see a broader circle of support as word

ripples out from those it is easy for us to reach. Please, play your part. Come and rally with uson October

9th. Exert your right toask your MP to meet with youat the lobby of parliament on October 12th. Ask your

MP to represent your views by signing the petition (several already have) andParliamentary motionin

support of it.

And please, please spread the word.

2010/10/05IN VERBA:PICKING (NOBEL PRIZE)WINNERS

ByJack Stilgoeon 5 October 2010

Its as though the Nobel Prize committee were running a Save British Science campaign. In the last two

days,two Noble Prizes have been announced, both to UK scientists. Test-tube baby pioneerRobert

Edwards FRSwas awarded the prize for medicine.Andre Geim FRSandKonstantin Novoselovwon the prize

for physics for their work on the wunder-material Graphene (the thinnest and strongest stuff in the

universe).
http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/http://sciencecampaign.org.uk/about/history/index.htmhttp://sciencecampaign.org.uk/about/history/index.htmhttp://sciencecampaign.org.uk/about/history/index.htmhttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/partners/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/partners/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/partners/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demo/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demo/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demo/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mphttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mphttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mphttp://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=41727http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=41727http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=41727http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/author/jackstilgoe/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/author/jackstilgoe/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/author/jackstilgoe/http://royalsociety.org/Nobel-Prize-wins-for-Royal-Society-Fellows/http://royalsociety.org/Nobel-Prize-wins-for-Royal-Society-Fellows/http://royalsociety.org/Nobel-Prize-wins-for-Royal-Society-Fellows/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Novoselovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Novoselovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Novoselovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konstantin_Novoselovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geimhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Geoffrey_Edwardshttp://royalsociety.org/Nobel-Prize-wins-for-Royal-Society-Fellows/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/author/jackstilgoe/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://blogs.royalsociety.org/in-verba/2010/10/05/picking-nobel-prize-winners/http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=41727http://scienceisvital.org.uk/write-to-your-mphttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/attend-the-demo/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/signatureshttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/2010/09/30/partners/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/who-has-signed/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://sciencecampaign.org.uk/about/history/index.htmhttp://www.sciencecampaign.org.uk/


16/80

16 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

The announcements show two sides of science policy. Geim and Novoselov are both supported by grants

from the Royal Society. Geim is a Research Professor and Novoselov is a University Research Fellow, both

at the University of Manchester. Geim argues that the Royal Societys long -term support has allowed him

to take conceptual and disciplinary leaps that would otherwise have been impossible. Novoselov, at 36,

becomes the youngest physics Nobel laureate for more than 30 years. As well as Graphene, his research

funding has allowed him (with Geim) to work on what they call Gecko tape, a superglue that mimics the

feet of a Gecko. Novoselov also represented the UK at theRoyal Societys 2008 Frontiers of Science

meeting in Germany, organised to build collaboration between outstanding young scientists in bothnations.

The Edwards story is more complicated. In 1971, seven years before Louise Brown became the first IVF

baby, Edwards wasturned down for funding by the Medical Research Council on the grounds that the

research following concerns about ethics and safety. His work was privately supported until 1978 (see this

for an exhaustive account).

Edwardss clinical research had a clear and immediate impact, and has since transformed the lives of many

parents who would have previously resigned themselves to childlessness. Geim and Novoselovs work is

largely curiosity-driven, but isalready revolutionising the way that electronics firms are imagining the next

generation of transistors, touchscreens and batteries.

It is a mistake to read too much into the histories of Nobel laureates. They are prizeworthy precisely

because they are exceptional. Nor should policy be skewed towards (literally) picking winners. But Nobels

do tell us something about the environment from which they emerge and, in the UK, this environment is

currently under threat.

2010/10/05TIMES HE:NOBEL WINSEXEMPLARS OF UK EXCELLENCE THREATENED BYCUTS, SCIENTISTS CLAIM

ByPaul Jump

The UKs second Nobel award in two days attests to the research excellence that will be endangered if the

research budget is slashed in the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review, scientists have warned.

Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov, based at the University of Manchester, were named today as

winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics for 2010. Their win follows yesterdays honour in the physiology ormedicine category for Robert Edwards, who pioneered in-vitro fertilisation at the University of Cambridge

in the 1970s.

Professor Geim and Professor Novoselov, who are Russian-born, won the prize for the discovery of

graphene, a one-atom-thick sheet of carbon with numerous potential applications in electronics.

Scientists have been quick to seize on the successes as evidence of the world-leading standard of UK

research and the need for continued funding if it is to be maintained.

Responding to the announcement of the physics prize, Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society, said it

was hard to envisage better exemplars of the value of enabling outstanding individuals to pursue open -ended research projects whose outcome is unpredictable.
http://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.htmlhttp://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.htmlhttp://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.htmlhttp://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v7/n10/full/nm1001-1091.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v7/n10/full/nm1001-1091.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v7/n10/full/nm1001-1091.htmlhttp://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/biography.asp?contact=74http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/biography.asp?contact=74http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/biography.asp?contact=74http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/biography.asp?contact=74http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/news/2009/090325/full/458390a.htmlhttp://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/content/25/9/2157.full?sid=205b2c3c-e260-40ad-9e9d-d72b1065d834http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v7/n10/full/nm1001-1091.htmlhttp://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.htmlhttp://www.humboldt-foundation.de/web/6469.html


17/80

17 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

These two brilliant scientists were attracted to the UK by the promise of adequate funding and a

supportive environment in a first-rate university. There are surely important lessons to be drawn by the

government from the Nobel Committees decisions, Lord Rees added.

The UK must sustain its science at a competitive level in a world where talent is mobile and other

countries are advancing fast and eliminate immigration restrictions that would impede the in-flow of

talent. The UKs investment in the physical sciences is paying off and needs to be sustained.

Mark Miodownik, head of the Materials Research Group at Kings College London, said todays award forphysics would bring a smile to the face of every scientist because it shows you can still get a Nobel prize

by mucking about in a lab.

This is another reason to recognise that British science is a special culture, admired throughout the world

for its originality and genius, and needs to be nurtured not cut by the government if it wants to foster

future technology and wealth in the UK, he said.

Imran Khan, director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, described Professor Geim and Professor

Novoselov as brilliant examples of foreign scientists who had been attracted to the UK by its reputation as

a global research hub. But they could be the last of their kind if the government presses ahead with its

plans to slash investment in science and block talented non-European Union migrants from coming here.

Peter Main, director of science and education at the Institute of Physics, said the prizes showed how the

UK punches above its weight in science.

The UK has become a magnet for the best young researchers from around the world. These timely awards

should give pause for thought as worrying signals emanate from the governments funding decisions, he

said.

Details of any cuts to the science budget will be unveiled in the CSR on 20 October.

[email protected]

Readers' commentsCheerleader 5 October, 20102,4,6,8, who do we appreciate? British science!R P Grant 5 October, 2010The http://scienceisvital.org.uk/ campaign, working with the Campaign for Science and Engineering, is holding arally in London at 2 pm this Saturday to show support for continued science funding in the UK. Please do comealong--and sign the petition at the website (>13,000 signatures so far).valiant for truth 5 October, 2010That would be the King's College London which has closed its Engineering and Chemistry Departments and madeitself internationally famous for its support for the Humanities?

Howard 5 October, 2010This idiot Imran Khan is talking crap. These Russian scientists were known for their excellence when they werein the U of Nijmegen. Last year Molecular Biology Lab in Cambridge had its recent Nobel Prize winner who isAmerican of Indian extraction. He was known for his work in America.

Any govt of any colour will welcome such distinguished scientists. What is happening is Britain is recruiting runof the mill IT graduates and engineers from outside rhe EU because the CBI and City want them as they can bepaid less. We need our IT graduates to be trained and we want to increase the out put of our engineeringgraduates.from universities. We also invite hundred of thousands of very mediocre students to fill places in our50 new universities and we can do without them. The answer is to strengthen the excellence of Russell Groupuniversities by putting more funds there.DrGrumbles 5 October, 2010

"The answer is to strengthen the excellence of Russell Group universities by putting more funds there"


18/80

18 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

You do know that the Russel Group is merely a lobby group, and not a divinely inspired classification of the'quality' universities.

It's difficult to make the case that some Russell Group members, such as Cardiff, Sheffield, Birmingham,Glasgow, King's or Nottingham should receive preference when it comes to funding over largely equivalent non-Russell Grop institutions like York, Lancaster, Queen Mary, St Andrews, Durham, UEA or Exeter, to name just afew.To DrGrumbles 5 October, 2010

Stupid comments I should say. Russell Group are research intensive and this Nobel prize shows that. Oxford,Cambridge, UCL, Imperial and Manchester can boast of a few Nobel Prize winners in their history. The others,well ..Grow up.To To DrGrumbles 6 October, 2010An asinine comment. Grumbles is quite correct. Russell group is just a gang of rather good research universities.And there are other very good research universities in the UK. It would be silly to allocate funding on the basisof precisely which gang a university belongs to. Please (a) stop talking rot,and (b) stop trying to give childishoffence to others. Are you 12?mmmm 6 October, 2010And we all know the best "teachers" are the best researchers.@To To DrGrumbles 6 October, 2010

You seem 12 not recognising there are no other research universities. You are saying that becuase you are 8 andis in one ofthem . Must be rather mediocre.

2010/10/06S WORD:DAVID CAMERON:SCIENCE ISN'T EVEN ON HIS RADAR

Roger Highfield, magazine editor

It is such a simple way for a UK Prime Minister to curry a little goodwill among the nation's scientists:

congratulate the latest person to join Britain's long and illustrious roll call of Nobel prizewinners.

This week has given David Cameron plenty of opportunity to celebrate the success of British science, which

puncheswell above its weightin terms of international impact and quality.

Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov, Russian born physicists based at the University of Manchester,

were named as winners of theNobel prizein physics, the day after the physiology and medicine category

was won by Robert Edwards, who pioneered in-vitro fertilisation at the University of Cambridge in the1970s.

Mr Cameron's predecessors have always been quick to ride on the coattails of British success.

In this case, we have extraordinary examples of how very basic research can change the world: in the case

of the physics prize for graphene, we are talking aboutfaster electronics; and when it comes to the

medicine prize,more than four million IVF babies.

But, so far, we have heard nothing from this Prime Minister which, to be uncharitable, could well be a tacit

acknowledgement that science is on the chopping block.

It can only fuel fears that he is about to damage the UK's Nobel prospects in years to come in the

forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR).
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727782.900-dont-let-britains-politicians-ruin-science.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727782.900-dont-let-britains-politicians-ruin-science.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727782.900-dont-let-britains-politicians-ruin-science.htmlhttp://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19418-zeros-to-heroes-11-unlikely-ideas-that-changed-the-world.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19418-zeros-to-heroes-11-unlikely-ideas-that-changed-the-world.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19418-zeros-to-heroes-11-unlikely-ideas-that-changed-the-world.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/10/amazing-graphene-awarded-physi.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/10/amazing-graphene-awarded-physi.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/10/amazing-graphene-awarded-physi.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19537-test-tube-baby-pioneer-wins-medicine-nobel.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19537-test-tube-baby-pioneer-wins-medicine-nobel.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19537-test-tube-baby-pioneer-wins-medicine-nobel.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/blogs/thesword/http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19537-test-tube-baby-pioneer-wins-medicine-nobel.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2010/10/amazing-graphene-awarded-physi.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19418-zeros-to-heroes-11-unlikely-ideas-that-changed-the-world.htmlhttp://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727782.900-dont-let-britains-politicians-ruin-science.html


19/80

19 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Combined with the proposed cap on economic migrants from outside the EU, the effects on UK research

would be chilling.

Imran Khan, director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, was among those who warned that

Geim and Novoselov could be the last of their kind if the government presses ahead with its plans to slash

investment in science and block talented non-European Union migrants from coming here.

"The Nobel prizes are a fantastic endorsement of British science - Geim and Novoselov are brilliant

examples of foreign scientists who came to the UK because we're a global research hub," said Khan.

"But Geim and Novoselov could be the last of their kind if the government presses ahead with its plans to

slash investment in science and block talented non-EU migrants from coming here."

Martin Rees, president of the Royal Society, London, pointed out how the Russians were attracted to the

UK by the promise of a supportive environment in a first-rate university. "The UK must sustain its science

at a competitive level in a world where talent is mobile and other countries are advancing," he explained.

Meanwhile, the Royal Society of Chemistry and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

have released a report commissioned to estimate the value of chemistry research to the UK economy.

The report, by consultants Oxford Economics, pins a value on the contribution made by industries

"upstream" and "downstream" of chemistry research, and comes up with a figure of258 billion for the

year 2007- equivalent to 21% of GDP.

A protest against the possible funding cuts is planned for this Saturday in London, organised by Science is

Vital. Details of any cuts to the science budget will be unveiled on 20 October.

2010/10/06MIRE GEOGHEGAN-QUINN"INNOVATION UNION",LAUNCH OF THEINNOVATION UNION,BRUSSELS

Mire Geoghegan-Quinn

Commissioner for Research, Innovation and Science

The "Innovation Union" turning ideas into jobs, green growth and social progress

Good afternoon and thank you for coming.

The Innovation Union is just as much an economic policy as, for example, the eurozone governance

framework the Commission proposed last week.

We need a pro-growth, anti-crisis micro-economic environment.

So the Innovation Union is a cornerstone of the Europe 2020 Strategy.

It aims to back innovators all the way - instead of putting barriers in their way.
http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspxhttp://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspxhttp://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspxhttp://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspxhttp://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://scienceisvital.org.uk/http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspxhttp://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2010/Pages/chemistryimpact.aspx


20/80

20 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

Not just business innovators but also public service and social innovators, in increasingly crucial areas like

the care for the elderly sector, for example. We will also talk to the social partners on how we can boost

employee-led innovation.

Here are just two statistics from our memo today.

Business R&D in the EU is 66% lower than the US and 122% lower than Japan, as a share of GDP.

And venture capital funds in Europe were in 2008 at a quarter of the level in the US.

So we face an innovation emergency.

We need an Innovation Union to help get our 23 million unemployed people back to work and keep them

there.

We need an Innovation Union to tackle society's biggest challenges: climate change, energy and food

security, healthy living and an ageing society.

We need an Innovation Union because Europe does not yet have an innovation culture like the US and

China and India are catching up.

The Innovation Union has three main characteristics. First, a world class science base; second, coherent,

Europe-wide use of public sector intervention to stimulate the private sector; third, a concerted and

determined effort to remove bottlenecks which stop ideas reaching the market.

A world class science base requires sufficient - and efficient - investment from both public and private

sector.

Research alone cannot create an Innovation Union but you cannot have an Innovation Union without

boosting research.

Another statistic, from a new study, shows that achieving our target of investing 3% of EU GDP in R&D by2020 could create 3.7 million jobs and increase annual GDP by up to 795 billion by 2025.

Of course, that can be much higher if we also take all of the rest of the measures the Commission is

proposing today.

On the research side these include completing the European Research Area a legal requirement under

the Lisbon Treaty - by 2014.

Meanwhile, the Eighth Research Framework programme will be designed as a spearhead of the Europe

2020 strategy with sustainable jobs and growth and tangible environmental and health benefits as the

overarching aim. And less red tape than ever before.

We want to build on the success of the European Research Council frontier research is not academic

indulgence.

To give just two examples, ERC funded scientists are working on reproducing volcanic explosions in the

laboratory so that the interaction of ash with the atmosphere can be better understood.

They are also working on microscopic chemical robots that could both deliver medicines in the human

body and help neutralise toxic spills.

You may remember recent news stories that point to the importance of such research!


21/80

21 | P a g e

VOLUME 12

You may have seen that yesterday, Professor Konstantin Novoselov, an ERC grant-holder, became one of

the youngest ever Nobel Prize winners, for physics.

The promising start of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology will also be further developed.

The Commission will reinforce its own scientific base for policy making through its Joint Research Centre.

The second characteristic of the Innovation Union is public and private sectors working together in ways

that reflect 21st century realities.

The old models of laissez-faire and dirigisme are both obsolete.

The key word today is partnership. We have seen the potential of using public money to lever in private

contributions.

Our Risk-Sharing Finance facility, co-funded and managed with the European Investment Bank to promote

riskier R&D and innovation, has leveraged in 15 times the combined Commission and EIB contribution of

over a billion euro.

The Innovative Medicines Initiative and the Joint Technology Initiatives like Green Cars and Clean Skies are

also beginning to deliver.

But we need to go much further.

So we are announcing today European Innovation Partnerships. They are different from anything before.

First, the Innovation Partnerships will each focus on a specific societal challenge where, by taking a lead,

Europe can improve the lives of its people and become a commercial world leader. They will have concrete

and measurable goals.

Second, they will be co-driven by political, industrial and scientific stakeholders. We envisage a Steering

Board chaired by a European Commissioner not always Vice-President Tajani or I we are not going to

hog the limelight but the Commissioner or Commissioners whose portfolio corresponds to the subjectmatter. I can tell you there is already plenty of interest among our colleagues..

The Board will include national Ministers, MEPs and key stakeholders. Funding will be European, national

and private.

Third, the Partnerships will act on the regulatory and demand sides as well as the supply side. They will, for

example, help fast-track regulation and standards and deploy co-ordinated public procurement to create

lead markets.

The first pilot Partnership to be launched in early 2011 will be on active and healthy ageing. The aim will be

to increase the average number of healthy life years by two by 2020. That would reduce

my #scipolicy news archive: october 2010 part a

Documents