Rishi Sunak’s confirmation that nearly £7 billion allocated for the UK’s Horizon Europe membership could be spent on domestic research presents a “stark choice” for the British science community – with the latter option likely to become more enticing as talks over association drag on, research policy experts have said.
While UK universities have continually insisted that their preference is to remain part of the European Union’s flagship research and development framework, the chancellor’s decision to state explicitly in the autumn spending review that funding allocated to Horizon can be spent on “UK government R&D programmes, including those to support new international partnerships”, may cause some sector leaders to think again about the merits of association, said Graeme Reid, chair of science and research policy at UCL.
“A huge element of uncertainty has been removed by the budget – until now, there was a £2 billion a year axe hanging over the head of UK research,” said Professor Reid, who explained that it had always made sense for UK science to favour “the formality of Horizon Europe” and the funds it delivered rather than a “big unknown”.
“Now we have a different choice to make between spending money through Brussels or the UK system – the choice has changed completely,” added Professor Reid.
While most researchers would persist in arguing for Horizon Europe membership, this position might become less attractive if ongoing wrangles over the Northern Ireland protocol continue to hold up UK association, said Professor Reid, after Mariya Gabriel, the European commissioner for research, told ScienceBusiness that the UK cannot join until “transversal issues” on Brexit are settled.
“How long we can keep £6 billion to £7 billion in our back pocket before the Treasury says, ‘Spend it now or lose it?’” asked Professor Reid about the four-year commitment worth £6.9 billion in total, which is not far off UK Research and Innovation’s £8.7 billion budget for 2021-22.
“If we are still arguing over Northern Ireland or fishing in a year, they may simply take that year’s money [£1.3 billion in 2021-22] back, but if we were to go for UK programmes it could be spent straight away,” he added.
James Wilsdon, professor of research policy at the University of Sheffield, agreed that the Budget announcement “did change the calculations of the situation” regarding Horizon Europe association, which would become less attractive “the longer we are in this political limbo”.
“Researchers are being told to continue applying for grants as normal, but the reality is that research colleagues in France and Germany notice these challenging circumstances and assume we are not as reliable a partner to have,” said Professor Wilsdon, who explained that this became a “vicious downwards spiral”, with the UK increasingly less successful in winning money from Horizon Europe.
“As we get less money back from Horizon Europe, the pro-Brexit arguments that we should go it alone on research become more persuasive and more accurate as you are not recouping the money you’re putting in,” he said.
Professor Wilsdon said his Treasury sources were insisting that many UK scientists were now coming around to the idea of a “Plan B” instead of Horizon Europe, although he predicted that it would be very difficult for the British science community to reverse its adamant support for Horizon Europe. “It’s not as if the British science community has one voice, so the process is unclear about how it would switch from Plan A to Plan B if that’s what the consensus had become,” he said.
