[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

chickenman - Member
So the UK exchequer is going to fill the funding void [s]that is inevitable [/s]post [s]the hard [/s]Brexit ([s]EU pours money into science research in this country[/s])?? Are there people on here [s]really naïve enough to[/s] believe that?

lets not let practicality get in the way of things here, there is almost certainty that Boris will not be in that job come the time we can do a deal. Trump will (if he makes it be coming to the end of his presidency, the Conservatives could not even be in power.

So if best estimates of a couple of years are true then it's 2021/22 when it might get signed worst case somewhere around 2029 and that is if TM can actually get a commons vote to agree with her.

But just to clarify
When we talk about free trade with the EU you tell us we don't need deals
When we have the chance of one with the US you think it's important
We currently can't work with the rest of the world due to no deals
But we don't need these deals to be sucessful
Have I covered it?

I'd love to see the deal if it was done next week between to increasingly isolationist and protectionist thinking nations.

Allegedly the view of the civil service is that May is a bit of a rabbit trapped in the car headlights.

You didn't hear that from me though, OK?

Kimbers you and others keep telling us everyone is leaving, cancelling applications etc. Sounds like stropping off to me. I say to them, on your way out don't let the door hit you in the arse.

The opposition parties have no credible candidates to lead the UK at least not for another 3 terms. Then the world politics change and the oppositions with their current ideology will be in oblivion.

Your (EU and remainder) time is over. This is the beginning of the end. You need to come up with something new coz yours are no longer seen as realistic but a pain in the backside.

cancelling applications etc. Sounds like stropping off to me

Oh gosh

You really do need things explaining simply

Applying for EU funding is now a closed door to UK researchers because out of the EU we aren't eligible to get what previously was 20% of our revenue. Not to mention the damage to collaborative networks and institute like the European Bioinformatics Institute, based at the Sanger Centre.
The government has only pledged to fund existing grants that still run after A50.
Science funding is planned 3,5,10 years ahead,

The only 'stropping off' has been done by the UK with our ridiculous vote to diminish our place in Europe and the world

Your (EU and remainder) time is over. This is the beginning of the end. You need to come up with something new coz yours are no longer seen realistic but a pain in the backside.

We'll just go back to the old ways killing each other, Russia will start by annexing a few baltic states claiming that they need to secure access to Kaliningrad. It will escalate as it always does.

As for the UK, our position on the security council will be challenged and having no real armed forces anymore we don't really have much right to the place.

Spain and Portugal once had empires and now? Britain will join the list of former countries that have fallen on hard times. The world has changed.

kimbers - Member
Applying for EU funding is now a closed door to UK researchers because out of the EU we aren't eligible to what previously was 20% of our revenue.
The government has only pledged to fund existing grants that still run after A50.
Science funding is planned 3,5,10 years ahead,

The only 'stropping off' has been done by the UK with our ridiculous vote to diminish our place in Europe and the world

I am sure there will be no shortage of funding if you have credible research.

Allegedly, could, may ... just put that in front of anything you like really.

there is almost certainty that Boris will not be in that job come the time we can do a deal. Trump will (if he makes it be coming to the end of his presidency, the Conservatives could not even be in power.

Forgive me Mike but you couldn't have been more wrong on Trump. My predictions

2019 April Brexit done
2019 Dec US/UK trade deal agreed in principal probably including Canada .. amongst others inc Australia likewise
2002 May May relected with massive Tory majority, Boris still Foreign Secretary
2020 Nov Trump Relected

Of course any funding promises could just be a "mistake".
I very much doubt there will be any money left except for lawyers .

mrmo - Member
We'll just go back to the old ways killing each other, Russia will start by annexing a few baltic states claiming that they need to secure access to Kaliningrad. It will escalate as it always does.

This argument has been playing on and on for a while now ... who are Russia annexing exactly? Ukraine? Let them fight because they have been fighting with each for so long it is no longer the business of the outside world.

You want to save a few millions by sacrificing few billions with a nuclear war? Way to go I totally support that.

Russia is Not a threat. Those inept politicians from within are.

My predictions:

2019 Hoverboards for everyone
2022 Second coming of the black baby Jesus
2024 Kate Beckinsale moves in with me
2044 Elvis found on the moon

2019 April Brexit talks fall apart, hard brexit sees flight of capital and manufacturing
2019 Dec Trump impeached for conflict of intrest/nepotism/incest ?
2020 Jan May replaced in brutal Tory backstabbing by Raab, Boris gets his own chat show
2020 May David Milliband PM

ftfy

😛

2019 April Brexit done
2019 Dec US/UK trade deal agreed in principal probably including Canada .. amongst others inc Australia likewise

So Jamba and Chewy: You seriously believe a Conservative government would invest money in UK science, will subsidise the countries hard hit industries and will help the ordinary punter out with the likely 20% tariffs on the food that we eat???? 😯
You've not really being paying attention for the last 40 years have you?

and in all seriousness this detailed text book seems to explain both what is happening in Downing Street and in the extreme Brexit camp
[img] [/img]

My predictions:

2019 - The beginning of the end of EU.
2019 - Some countries see sense so follow suit to leave EU.
2002 - EU militia starts a war with the Greek people.
2020 - EU is defined as countries with less than 9 million population.

Science. Yes absolutely.
Subsidising industries ? Matching EU grants, investing in skills, encouraging global exporters yes
20% tariffs on foods, hardly. EU will be bending over backwards to allow tariff free trade on food to the UK

20% tariffs on foods, hardly. EU will be bending over backwards to allow tariff free trade on food to the UK

chickenman - Member
So Jamba and Chewy: You seriously believe a Conservative government would invest money in UK science, will subsidise the countries hard hit industries and will help the ordinary punter out with the likely 20% tariffs on the food that we eat????

Yes. You seen the opposition parties? How much worst can you get? One glace you know they are all clowns.

You've not really being paying attention for the last 40 years have you?

2019 April chewkw is revealed to be a chatbot created by a teenage boy
2019 Dec something jamba claims to be a fact is actually true
2020 May ninfan is elected PM as the Green party sweeps to power
2020 Nov Trump reelected as the Democrat Party's candidate, as he's got bored with being a Republican

aracer - Member
2019 April chewkw is revealed to be a chatbot created by a teenage boy
2019 Dec something jamba claims to be a fact is actually true
2020 May ninfan is elected PM as the Green party sweeps to power
2020 Nov Trump reelected as the Democrat Party's candidate, as he's got bored with being a Republican

Those are good predictions. You are goooood.

Kimbers the UK is already one of the best places in the world for Science and Education. Just look at the global University rankings. Why not make it better ? If all the EU academics strop off I predict there will be a very long queue from the rest of the world keen to take their place.

The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU. Most of my European colleagues are pan-european in outlook and don't subscribe to the rather parochial and closed "nation state" mentality being espoused at the moment (not just in the UK). To them Britain is saying "we don't want you any more", and Britain is now no more part of their European society than China or the US. The problem if they "strop off" is that, much like our deal with the EU, our present deal couldn't get much sweeter. We are (were) choc-a-bloc full of top flight academics from the UK and EU. We pretty much had all of the top researchers in the whole of the EU wanting to work here. Saying we can recruit from elsewhere in the world is somewhat naive. The source of research group leaders is largely EU, with some US/Canada followed a long way behind by China, India, ****stan and South America. The situation for PhD and PostDocs is almost the exact opposite. And why? Because B[s]R[/s]ICS nations and their scientists want to be trained up and then go home to establish their research groups, largely as a result of wanting to go back home to families, etc. and from national pride. There is little desire to stay on even though many of them are eligible for fellowships or tenure-track positions and would have no problem securing a visa. EU researchers felt at home already in pre-23/6 Britain, generally integrated better with the research environment and were largely more talented and creative research scientists. There may be many reasons behind this but at the end of the day saying that EU scientists can be replaced wholesale with no impact on the quality of UK science just shows a staggering lack of understanding of how the whole process works.

EDIT: too much if the higher education argument from Remainers is based on the EU funding, which is just our own money back less a 60% haircut. Whilst I appreciate people don't trust our Governments (inc Labour ?) to keep funding research using that as a reason to vote IN is very strange

The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artifical targets, goals or constraints. Much government funding requires alignment to strategic priorities, etc. and is designed to capitalise on existing discoveries with as much governmental oversight and researcher accountability as possible. This means that the direction of science is pre-determined whereas pretty much all of the major breakthroughs in science have originated from curiosity driven research. The EU funded much more of this kind of research, which still fuels the economy and provides the platform for future development, but without the heavy handed approach of central government. With EU funding now going where is this academic freedom to make the initial discoveries going to come from? Are we going to rely on others to kick start our research that will have been reduced to R&D for industy? I find it hard to believe that the current Tory or Labour front benches value intellectual advancement very much given what they say and do so yes, I am genuinely worried about what will happen to UK science once the creative V8 engine is reduced to a 2-stroke. The same arguments apply to EU funding of deprived area, etc.

The bottom line on this is that the EU does what needs to be done in this case, the UK govt does what it needs to do to get reelected. The H2020 framework doesn't have any of that political crap attached.

I can't even be bothered to correct your phallacious comments about getting our own money back when even the most optimistic post-Brexit predictions say we'll have less of it anyway. If post-Brexit we have the same levels of funding for curiosity driven research in the UK I will humbly apologise to you. If we don't I expect you to return the courtesy. Given that the UK govt hasn't said anything about EU levels of funding with application deadlines post 2019, and the hardly secret knowlege that funding applications take 2 or more years to develop to the point of submission, I'm feeling pretty certain what the outcome will be and which way the apology will be going.

Science. Yes absolutely.
Subsidising industries ? Matching EU grants, investing in skills, encouraging global exporters yes

But the 'cambridge study' you kept quoting

promised a 2% loss to GDP and then only if we managed a trade deal

but now you say we will have more money ?
[img] [/img]

Shackleton - Member
The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU.

The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artifical targets, goals or constraints.

2002 May May relected with massive Tory majority

Probably 2020. And yes, there will be a huge Tory majority at next GE. You'd be crazy to bet against it.

Is that a one way traffic?

Of course not, but that is the point. Don't stop people moving, it limits what is possible. It limits mankind's development.

Big projects happen across countries, not within a single one. Think bigger, please.

kelvin - Member
Of course not, but that is the point. Don't stop people moving, it limits what is possible. It limits mankind's development.

Question you need to ask yourself is if you are a world class highly qualified scientist that is in high demand globally, do you think you have problems moving? Your contribution to science in other countries that benefit mankind is that not the same?

Big projects happen across countries, not within a single one. Think bigger, please.

Absolutely non-issue if it benefits countries participating in big projects and I am sure the govts will come to some sort of agreement.

Probably 2020. And yes, there will be a huge Tory majority at next GE. You'd be crazy to bet against it.

Jez 2.0 is finally getting "on message", now I am worried 8)

Jeremy Corbyn will claim on Tuesday that [b]“Britain can be better off after Brexit”[/b], in his first major intervention of the year which will include a toughening of his line on immigration.

Link etc in the Jezza thread

May only has to deliver on putting measures in place to reduce immigration (she doesn't even have to bring numbers down, just "take back control") and the Tory win is guaranteed at the next election. That is her only real plan, and, for her party, it is a good one. Devastating for the country though, in my opinion.

Corbyn has never been pro EU, so I fully expected him to get behind Brexit over the next two years, as he drifts towards the lowest share of the vote for his party in my lifetime at the next GE (he'll still have loads of seats though, FPTP and all that, keeping Labour on a front bench).

mikewsmith - Member
Perhaps even the Labour/Momentum lot will manage to see the JC is in no way a politcal leader and call back Milliband, maybe Clegg will fancy another go.

Crikey, if you are so desperate at being in EU at least make an effort to find credible candidates to support your arguments.

Those so called "leaders" you have suggested are such a poor choice even pigs (animal) will volunteer to enter slaughter house.

Look at Milliband, look at Clegg ... look at their faces ... do you think they are credible? Even themselves consider themselves not qualified to be politicians with meaning.

Look at Milliband, look at Clegg ... look at their faces ... do you think they are credible? Even themselves consider themselves not qualified to be politicians with meaning.

Wiff Waff baby

chewkw - Member

Shackleton - Member
The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU.

Is that a one way traffic? i.e. only EU researcher come to UK but not the other way around. Are you saying British scientists are incapable of competing in research? If British scientists are incapable then you have not managed to cultivate home grown scientists for a very long time. Your soul searching starts here ...

It isn't a case of Brits can't compete. The top Brits can compete [u]and[/u] we attract the top researchers from other countries. We have enough British researchers to fill UK universities who are good, but we currently have the pick of the best from across Europe rather than just the UK. Many "good" UK researchers lead research groups overseas precisely because they couldn't compete in the UK. Remember that the number of research group leaders across the UK is measured in the low 1000's, so there aren't huge numbers of jobs, but the impact they have on research is orders of magnitude greater in terms of knock on effects on the economy, etc. So in my view it is worth having the best you can get rather than Brits only.

The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artificial targets, goals or constraints.

If your research is valuable there will be funding. If you cannot convince others of your "discovery science" you have no research regardless of how good it looks for you.

How do you know research is valuable before you do it? That is the main problem with UK funding at the moment - you can get funded to expand upon XYZ but it is nigh on impossible to get funding to test an idea. Basically the first step of discovery isn't funded very well by UK govt. It is very easy to convince other scientists of the value of discovery science because they know what it [u]can[/u] bring, it is hard to get money because you can't guarantee what it [u]will[/u] bring.

As for major breakthrough is there a hurry because that sounds like being directed?

I don't understand.....but I meant funding is currently directed largely by government policy rather than having the freedom to follow scientific results wherever they lead to.

For examples of curiosity driven research where the initial discovery would almost certainly never have been funded under current UK scientific policy or was found by accident see the laser, CD/DVD, velcro, superglue, graphene, CRISPR-Cas9, TALEN editing, viagra, saccharin, the microwave oven, bakelite, vulkanised rubber, Teflon, Mauve dye, glue on post-it notes. All from the top of my head so there maybe some duff ones in there (but no more than a Jamby post 😉 )

Question you need to ask yourself is if you are a world class highly qualified scientist that is in high demand globally, do you think you have problems moving? Your contribution to science in other countries that benefit mankind is that not the same?

It isn't that there would be a problem, it is why on earth would they want to move? They would go where the research funding and ability to do good science was. Like the UK at the moment. You can be the best scientist in the world but unless you are in an environment capable of providing the funds, collaborations and infrastructure to support you and easy access to the best people to come and work for you then you aren't going to succeed.

mikewsmith - Member
and yet you support the orange babboon in the US and by the sounds of it Vald the bear impailer.

Yes, I support him so long as he supports PM May. He might look out of place but he definitely speaks his mind.

By Milliband I obviously meant David though just in case there was any confusion.

They had their moments and they are completely out of their political depth now. Everything has changed.

and just in case remember this is our current Foreign Secratary

Teflon, Velcro and Post-It Notes were all commercial discoveries - not academic ones.

Theresa will delay the Brexit process just enough to win the 2020 GE she has no other objective. She has demonstrated a complete inability to cope and its obvious to the other EU leaders.
No serious poltical competition will be available in opposition for many years so there is little reason for Mrs May to actually deliver anything and simply borrow money to prop the s**t house up.

No pont arguing over investment/research/banking/manufacturing etc it will gradually erode and the govt will borrow money to prop farmers and bribe overseas mnufacturing to stay in the UK - the welfare cost will explode as the younger tax paying demographic falls due to lack of young immigrants. None of the above is an opinion by the way its just what happens when confidence is removed and restrictions (immigration and investment) arrive.

Teflon, Velcro and Post-It Notes were all commercial discoveries - not academic ones

And? I'm talking about how they are discovered not where. They are examples of things that probably wouldn't have been funded at discovery stage by UK Govt (or industry). Their value was only recognized after the fact.

oldmanmtb - you should get to bed earlier, might be less grumpy.

But that is a pretty rubbish argument, if you are worried about lack replacement of existing funding you need to point to things that funding created, not any old discoveries that happened by chance, we all know things happen by chance the important thing is whether and how they are developed. There is a huge amount of blue sky research in the commercial sector.

Shackleton - Member
It isn't a case of Brits can't compete. ...

How do you know research is valuable before you do it? That is the main problem with UK funding at the moment - you can get funded to expand upon XYZ but it is nigh on impossible to get funding to test an idea.

It isn't that there would be a problem, it is why on earth would they want to move?

Mefty that was my positive take on it! Might do a grumpy response now.

Glad to see your expertise in Research Funding chewkw, where did you gain your experience. When people at the front line and involved in this as their occupation are telling you something perhaps you should listen to them, you might actually learn something. Like the points raised by the Canadian Trade Negotiator - you know somebody who knows better than you and Jamby how these things actually work.

As one of my first bosses advised me as a younger man, you have 2 ears and one mouth - try and use in those proportions.

Mefty and chewkw - you are confusing chance with following results and testable ideas.

Science funding shouldn't be gambling but it should provide the freedom to investigate ideas broadly free from top down restraint (within ethical and moral reason).

I'll see if I can dig up some papers tomorrow that put it better than my sleep deprived brain can.

I think science needs to rethink ways of testing ideas

There is really only one correct way. What science really needs to do is educate people as to what that means and what it requires.

mikewsmith - Member

Glad to see your expertise in Research Funding chewkw, where did you gain your experience. When people at the front line and involved in this as their occupation are telling you something perhaps you should listen to them, you might actually learn something. Like the points raised by the Canadian Trade Negotiator - you know somebody who knows better than you and Jamby how these things actually work.

Some of me mates are so boring they keep bombarding me with their works about funding this and that in the far east so I get to know what they say. Yes, some also work for British institution in research ...

Shackleton - Member
Science funding shouldn't be gambling but it should provide the freedom to investigate ideas broadly free from top down restraint (within ethical and moral reason).

Yes, but how many research have you seen not currently part of other research or continuation from other research?

If the research is a "hot topic" then surely you know the value in them hence worth "investing" or funding.

You sound like saying you have suddenly come up with some new ideas that have not been done before so you should have the freedom to investigate.

Surely if this is the case the reason might simply be that your idea is not so hot or dated, therefore there is no value in funding them unless you have superb justification to turn things around.