Comments on: Short Sighted Science Cuts http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/ MP for Wantage and Didcot Tue, 2 Dec 2008 13:54:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Claire Morris http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-24900 Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:43:01 +0000 http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-24900 Dear Mr Vaizey, As a student of Physics in my second undergraduate year at Durham and a resident of Abingdon (with contacts at RAL), I would like to express my gratitude at your ongoing work on this issue. As it turns out, my department (as well as many others across the country) is likely to be severely affected by the funding cuts, and I only plea that you will take this to the next level, and tackle the problem at its root. I would really appreciate it if you could make known your opinion on who is to blame: is it really the case that STFC seriously overbudgeted in the hope that the money would be provided, or was the government funding shortfall a genuine surprise, horrific as it is? Also, do you believe that Science Minister Ian Pearson is really doing his best to bring about a review on this matter, or has he given up, believing it is futile? I can't rest, knowing that after all the money and effort this country has put into fantastic projects such as GEMINI and the ILC, and all the support in promoting the study of Physics, that they are going to let the international science community down by withdrawing the necessary financial support. I look forward to hearing your opinions and learning about your current work to turn this crisis around. I know I am only one person, but I genuinely believe that if enough people can be mobilised to fight for this, the hope of a bright future in Physics for this country can be renewed. Thank you for your time to read what I have to say, Best wishes, Claire Morris (aged 19) Dear Mr Vaizey,
As a student of Physics in my second undergraduate year at Durham and a resident of Abingdon (with contacts at RAL), I would like to express my gratitude at your ongoing work on this issue. As it turns out, my department (as well as many others across the country) is likely to be severely affected by the funding cuts, and I only plea that you will take this to the next level, and tackle the problem at its root. I would really appreciate it if you could make known your opinion on who is to blame: is it really the case that STFC seriously overbudgeted in the hope that the money would be provided, or was the government funding shortfall a genuine surprise, horrific as it is? Also, do you believe that Science Minister Ian Pearson is really doing his best to bring about a review on this matter, or has he given up, believing it is futile? I can’t rest, knowing that after all the money and effort this country has put into fantastic projects such as GEMINI and the ILC, and all the support in promoting the study of Physics, that they are going to let the international science community down by withdrawing the necessary financial support. I look forward to hearing your opinions and learning about your current work to turn this crisis around. I know I am only one person, but I genuinely believe that if enough people can be mobilised to fight for this, the hope of a bright future in Physics for this country can be renewed. Thank you for your time to read what I have to say,
Best wishes,
Claire Morris (aged 19)

]]> by: Ed Vaizey http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23493 Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:41:19 +0000 http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23493 Well, I mention the NDA in the first sentence of the post! Suggest you do a bot more homework. Where have I suggested Diamond is to blame - I haven't and it isn't! And yes I am also a vocal supporter of nuclear power. PLEASE do not post again until you have done some proper research, Well, I mention the NDA in the first sentence of the post! Suggest you do a bot more homework. Where have I suggested Diamond is to blame - I haven’t and it isn’t! And yes I am also a vocal supporter of nuclear power. PLEASE do not post again until you have done some proper research,

]]> by: J.King http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23492 Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:40:11 +0000 http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23492 Your reply is very disappointing. There is a lot of misinformation and noise circulating about the STFC budget shortfall and your "political" comments do not help. You clearly state above "THIS TIME, there is no one to blame except the Government" - what has that got to with the NDA?? As you should well know, it was only back in November when Edward Leigh (a fellow Conservative I believe) was claiming "alarming" cost over-runs on 10 UK science facilities (principally Diamond and ISIS). This has recently been refuted. Diamond issued a press release on 21 December clarifying that Phase I was delivered within the approed budget of £263.2M. Running costs in the first year are also expected to be below the forecats made in 2003 (£29.9M). Rather than tabloid comments, I have on the contrary left informed ones rather than your references to "welk stalls". Indeed, much of what I have said can be found at... http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/32271 which I suggest other people read if they wish to be properly informed. Perhaps you can be helpful and report back on what is really going on. As for UKAE, the best way of supporting them will be to support the announcement on nuclear power expected this Thursday from the Govt. I wonder what you will choose to say about that... Your reply is very disappointing. There is a lot of misinformation and noise circulating about the STFC budget shortfall and your “political” comments do not help. You clearly state above “THIS TIME, there is no one to blame except the Government” - what has that got to with the NDA??

As you should well know, it was only back in November when Edward Leigh (a fellow Conservative I believe) was claiming “alarming” cost over-runs on 10 UK science facilities (principally Diamond and ISIS). This has recently been refuted. Diamond issued a press release on 21 December clarifying that Phase I was delivered within the approed budget of £263.2M. Running costs in the first year are also expected to be below the forecats made in 2003 (£29.9M).

Rather than tabloid comments, I have on the contrary left informed ones rather than your references to “welk stalls”. Indeed, much of what I have said can be found at…
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/32271
which I suggest other people read if they wish to be properly informed.
Perhaps you can be helpful and report back on what is really going on.

As for UKAE, the best way of supporting them will be to support the announcement on nuclear power expected this Thursday from the Govt. I wonder what you will choose to say about that…

]]> by: Ed Vaizey http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23487 Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:24:51 +0000 http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23487 Dear Mr King I am afraid it is you who are the opportunist, not me. For example, I never blamed the Government for the cuts to UKAEA - I firmly blamed the NDA. However, from everything I have learned from speaking to scientists in the last three weeks, it is quite clear that the STFC did not get a good settlement under the CSR and that is why the cuts are being made. Please try and leave sensible comments in future, rather than tabloid ones Dear Mr King

I am afraid it is you who are the opportunist, not me. For example, I never blamed the Government for the cuts to UKAEA - I firmly blamed the NDA. However, from everything I have learned from speaking to scientists in the last three weeks, it is quite clear that the STFC did not get a good settlement under the CSR and that is why the cuts are being made. Please try and leave sensible comments in future, rather than tabloid ones

]]> by: J.King http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23486 Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:13:21 +0000 http://edvaizey.mpblogs.com/2008/01/07/short-sighted-science-cuts/#comment-23486 It is a pity that you are doing your constituents such a great disservice by reducing the problem of STFC science funding to "punch and judy" politics. Other MPs in the country are making positive efforts to resolve a confused situation - e.g. the NW MPS are meeting scientists at DL, others are helping to prepare for the IUS Select Commitee on 21 January. The facts of the matter are that the overall science budget increase by 17.4% over the CSR period to reach almost £4 billion. At one end of the scale, the Medical Research Council budget increases by 30.1% over the CSR period (upto 2011). At the other end, even the STFC budget has a 13.6% increase over the same period (averaging 4.5%/year). The problem for STFC is that there are a lot of costs which they have to cover (Full Economic Costing, international subscriptions, operating costs of facilities, etc) and they find they end up with a shortfall despite the 13.6% increase. By claiming that "there is no one to blame except the Government" you show your opportunist. PR seeking colours. Many scientists are totally unhappy with the STFC management and the way they have arbitrarily tried to force cuts through under the pretext of the CSR settlement. There has been little consultation with the scoientific community and we are even told that rather than £80 million of cuts which covers the immediate shortfall they want to acheive more like £120 million of cuts! It is a pity that you are doing your constituents such a great disservice by reducing the problem of STFC science funding to “punch and judy” politics. Other MPs in the country are making positive efforts to resolve a confused situation - e.g. the NW MPS are meeting scientists at DL, others are helping to prepare for the IUS Select Commitee on 21 January.

The facts of the matter are that the overall science budget increase by 17.4% over the CSR period to reach almost £4 billion. At one end of the scale, the Medical Research Council budget increases by 30.1% over the CSR period (upto 2011). At the other end, even the STFC budget has a 13.6% increase over the same period (averaging 4.5%/year). The problem for STFC is that there are a lot of costs which they have to cover (Full Economic Costing, international subscriptions, operating costs of facilities, etc) and they find they end up with a shortfall despite the 13.6% increase.

By claiming that “there is no one to blame except the Government” you show your opportunist. PR seeking colours. Many scientists are totally unhappy with the STFC management and the way they have arbitrarily tried to force cuts through under the pretext of the CSR settlement. There has been little consultation with the scoientific community and we are even told that rather than £80 million of cuts which covers the immediate shortfall they want to acheive more like £120 million of cuts!

]]>