One of the UK's leading research councils, the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), announced today that it is to drastically cut funding for physics despite an earlier promise by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown in February that "the downturn is no time to slow down our investment in science but to build more vigorously for the future."
The cuts, designed to save at least £115 million ($200 million), include the UK withdrawing from a number of international projects, including the A Large Ion Collider Experiment (ALICE) at the Large Hadron Collider, UK Infrared Telescope (UKIRT), the New Light Source (NLS), and the Gemini telescopes, (the complete list can be found at the end of this article). They also include cutting PhD fellowships and student grants by 25% next year.
Nuclear physics, as expected from leaks earlier this year, is hit particularly bad with a 52% cut in funding and withdrawal scheduled for the Advanced Gamma Tracking Array (AGATA), a European project to build a powerful spectrometer to look at the structure of atomic nuclei, and the Pan-Andromeda Archaeological Survey (PANDA), a project linked to the Facility for Antiproton and Ion Research (FAIR), a particle accelerator in Germany.
All of the UK's nuclear physics professors have signed up to a letter sent today to the Science Minister Paul Drayson alerting him to the implications of the cuts to the government's proposed push to build 10 new nuclear power plants.
"These out-of-proportion cuts have the potential to kill off the UK skills base in nuclear physics," said Paddy Regan at the University of Surrey.
"How this can be happening at a time of discussions of building new nuclear power plants is incredible. Where does the STFC think the trained manpower that the UK produces from nuclear physics and associated instrumentation and measurement is going to come from?" he added.
A measured retreat
The cuts were announced as the STFC published its funding roadmap for spending £2.4 billion ($4.08 billion) over the next five years. "The council of STFC has approved an affordable, robust and sustainable program," said Michael Sterling, the STFC chairman. "This has involved tough choices affecting the entire program including a managed withdrawal from some areas."
The withdrawal could take up to three years to complete, said STFC CEO Keith Mason, and the STFC may have to conduct another round of funding cuts going forward. "We will ensure a managed withdrawal from those activities that we will no longer support," he said, "taking into account the fact that the academic and research community of scientists is a national resource."
Mason continued, "The program adopted by [the STFC] is extensive and will require both external and internal re-alignment and change. The managed withdrawal from identified projects will allow members of our scientific communities to redirect their efforts, or where possible to seek other sources of funding for their projects.
We have already initiated this process with our staff, universities; partner Research Councils, the Institute of Physics and Royal Astronomical Society, project leaders, international partners and others."
Mason blames the cuts on the devaluation of the pound, caused by "the impact of the international financial situation," which led to a 15.1% rise in its subscriptions to CERN and other international facilities from £214.9 million ($365.3 million) last year to £247.3million ($420 million) in 2009–10. The SCFC also gets £20 million ($34 million) less funding next year.
A bad birth?
The STFC has been plagued with controversy since it was formed from the merger of two research councils the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC) and and the Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC), in 2007 and immediately found an £80 million ($137 million) shortfall. To balance its budget for next year, the other funding councils are chipping in £14 million ($24 million).
Mark Lancaster, head of particle physics at University College London, called the cuts "being nothing less than disastrous in terms of the shameful waste of a decade's investment in new facilities across STFC science."
"A lost generation of students will be created who are denied the opportunity to do a PhD and cutting-edge science," he added.
The behavior of the UK is viewed with disbelief by countries that can now see that the UK is no longer to be trusted as an international partner in major scientific programs. In several cases, the projects targeted for major cuts or cancellation had elected UK spokespersons whose positions must now look distinctly untenable with a direct loss of UK leadership. The situation for scientists in the UK is made particularly bitter by the knowledge that competitor countries are making investment in science a strategic priority as their economies emerge from recession, while the UK, which used to boast of its desire to build a "knowledge economy" cuts science again and again.
The funding squeeze within the STFC is particularly acute because it failed to secure an adequate settlement when it was formed from the merger of PPARC and CCLRC and has underperformed in attracting funding ever since due to its well-documented failures of leadership.
Brian Foster, head of particle physics at Oxford University, said that the cuts "give the lie to" the promise that science funding was protected from cuts. "This is a sad day for British science: the prime minister should hang his head in shame."
Ian Leslie, pro-vice-chancellor for research at the University of Cambridge, said, "The funding of international subscriptions and major domestic research facilities clearly needs to be rethought.
While it is evident that there will be substantial cuts, this [STFC] statement at least now gives some reassurance to those involved in priority programs.
...Nonetheless, the loss of good science that will result from this announcement is highly regrettable.
At a time when the United States is investing heavily, we believe British withdrawal from international collaborations and proposed cuts to fellowship and PhD funding will prove extremely damaging."
The outcry has not gone unnoticed by the government. Drayson released a statement in which he said:
"It has become clear to me that there are real tensions in having international science projects, large scientific facilities and UK grant giving roles within a single Research Council. It leads to grants being squeezed by increases in costs of the large international projects which are not solely within their control. I will work urgently with Professor Sterling, the STFC and the wider research community to find a better solution by the end of February 2010."
Along with the pullout from Gemini and UKIRT, UK involvement in five space missions will also be phased out— Cassini , Cluster, the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory , Venus Express and XMM-Newton .
Andy Fabian, president of the Royal Astronomical Society, said:"With these cuts UK-based researchers will struggle to retain their leading position in astronomy and space science.
Astronomers in the UK are highly productive and deliver this excellence for a relatively low investment compared with their counterparts elsewhere. Research in astronomy is not an area where large 'efficiency savings' can be made without a detrimental impact on the quality of that work.
Given the difficult economic times we live in, we recognize that public sector budgets are all under pressure. But these cuts are a result of the structural and financial problems that have beset STFC since its creation in 2007, rather than being a consequence of the current recession. These problems have led to an ongoing funding gap that now has to be plugged by cuts in the research base, particularly in the budgets for astronomy and particle physics.
We also welcome today's commitment by the Science Minister Drayson, to examine the tensioning that arises from funding international science projects, large scientific facilities, and UK grants within a single research council, and the negative impact this has on the funds available for facilities and researchers."
Fabian continued, "Despite this, we are now seriously concerned at the effect the loss of so many smaller projects will have on the health and morale of physics groups in British universities. The Government has rightly recognized the strategic importance of science for a healthy and more diverse economy. Blue-skies research in subjects like astronomy is an essential component of that scientific base and cutting it now will make it harder for the UK to recover its international position once the economy recovers.
We call on the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) to take the opportunity to back blue-skies research, including astronomy, in the same way that it has increased its support for the life sciences. UK scientists are world leaders in this area and in recent years have attracted the brightest talent from across the globe to share our success. We urge the Government to plan for the long term and recognize that realizing our shared goals depends at least in part on a sustained investment in a diverse science portfolio.
The savings from cutting astronomy research are, in the scale of public expenditure, trivial. By contrast, the potential damage to one of the UK's leading activities could be huge."
Budget cut
Facilities that the STFC funds that will also see some reductions over the next five years include the Diamond Light Source, the ISIS neutron source, the Central Laser Facility, the Cambridge Astronomical Survey Unit (CASU), and the Wide Field Astronomy Unit (WAFU) at Edinburgh.
A generic particle-physics detector called SPIDER and the upgrade to the vulcan laser at the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory will now both be delayed by a year.
Looking to the future
The move to cut funding from NLS "was a regrettable outcome," said Jon Marangos, NLS project leader, who also looks to the future. "If it is true that the UK cannot at the present time afford to build a free electron laser (FEL) of her own it has also become abundantly clear to me over the last two years that she cannot afford not to play a major part in FEL science."
Jocelyn Bell Burnell, president of the UK Institute of Physics, said, "The greatest shame about today's announcement is the reduced investment in people. With all of the challenges we face, from climate change and energy security to a rapidly aging population, we urgently need individuals well-trained in physics. Today's announcement...runs counter to this need.
"The amount needed to avoid this unfortunate cut is minor in comparison to the huge sums of money spent saving the financial sector, surely money can be found to avoid it."
Paul Guinnessy
List of facilities, projects, and programs that the UK is withdrawing from.
Astronomy Auger, Inverse Square Law, ROSA, ALMA regional centre, JIVE, Liverpool Telescope, UKIRT. Additional reduction imposed on ongoing projects of £16m. Total savings of £29m over 5 years
Particle Physics Boulby, CDF, D0, eEDM, Low Mass, MINOS, Particle Calorimeter, Spider, UK Neutrino Factory. Additional reduction imposed on ongoing projects of £25m. Total Savings of £32m over 5 years
Nuclear Physics AGATA, ALICE at CERN, PANDA. Additional reduction imposed on ongoing projects of £2m. Total Savings of £12m over 5 years
Space Cassini, Cluster, SOHO, Venus Express, XMM. Additional reduction imposed on ongoing projects of £28m. Total Savings of £42m over 5 years
Centers to withdraw from NLS, Photon Science Institute, European X-Ray Laser Project (XFEL).
