Politics has become a strange place. In this week鈥檚 European parliament elections, many right-wing parties, some of them extreme, are . It is likely that, for the first time, the elected body of the European Union will be stuffed to the gunnels with people who would rather it didn鈥檛 exist at all.
Prominent among them is Nigel Farage, leader of the (UKIP). Already a member of the European Parliament, Farage鈥檚 main aim is to get Britain out of the EU. Its freedom of movement rules have caused an influx of migrant workers, which has served as the backdrop to UKIP鈥檚 rise鈥�. While Britain remains within the EU, it is impossible to stem this 鈥渢ide鈥�, Farage says, and withdrawal is the only solution.
While political scientists watch this narrative unfold with fascination, natural scientists in the UK should do so with alarm; Farage could be a disaster for them.
Advertisement
That鈥檚 because we have a lot to lose. In global terms, the UK punches above its weight in science. Although our population makes up just 1 per cent of the 鈥榞lobal total, scientists here . EU policy is to 鈥渆ncourage the highest quality research in Europe through competitive funding鈥� on the basis of scientific excellence鈥�. This means that British scientists get a disproportionate amount of money. For every 拢1 we contribute to the research pot, we get approximately 拢1.40 back.
If we were to withdraw from the EU, we would lose access to the source of much of this funding: the European Research Council. British scientists would also lose influence over the research agenda and would be unable to control the distribution of funding across research areas. Just as importantly, they would haemorrhage collaborators.
The days of the lone scientist are largely gone. Collaboration is now vital and near-ubiquitous. More than a third of the papers published in high quality journals are the result of such links. EU-funded science projects require the involvement of at least three different EU member or associate states. Ousted from Europe, British scientists would be out in the cold. We know this because it has already happened to scientists in Switzerland, a non-EU state that until recently enjoyed access to EU research funding.
At the end of February, Swiss voters that would allow Croatians free movement across the country鈥檚 borders. It was a result of campaigning by the , which is Eurosceptic and wants strict limits on immigration, just like UKIP. Limiting the movement of people from the EU鈥檚 newest member state didn鈥檛 comply with EU principles, so Switzerland was stripped of its 鈥渁ssociate member鈥� status.
Associate members benefit from almost full participation in EU programmes, including research projects funded from the EU pot.
The latest set of EU-funded projects is known as Horizon 2020, which has about 拢65 billion to allocate over the next six years. Swiss researchers are now excluded from receiving any of its grants. Before February, Swiss students could get grants to work in labs anywhere in Europe under the EU鈥檚 Erasmus programme 鈥� not any more. Switzerland is now a 鈥渢hird country鈥�, on a par with the US and Japan.
Researchers report that, as a result, Switzerland has lost international competitiveness. There is a brain drain as senior researchers head to countries where they can access EU funds. Young researchers are also leaving 鈥� many of them rely on the kudos of prestigious EU grants to advance their careers. Swiss scientists are being shed as collaborators. Christian Sengstag, head of research at the University of Basel, that the top candidates for research jobs 鈥渨ill think twice before accepting a position in Switzerland鈥�.
Could the same thing happen in the UK? It is entirely possible.
The UKIP surge is widely seen as a protest against traditional politics. It looks likely that it will win more seats in the European Parliament than any other British party. Much of UKIP鈥檚 support has come from those who usually vote Conservative, a situation that caused UK prime minister David Cameron, leader of the Conservatives, to commit to a referendum on EU membership should he be re-elected in 2015.
The Conservatives鈥� main rival Labour has offered no such sop should they win power. However, there is always a danger that politicians will yield in the face of a popular movement. And, if UK voters can push UKIP onto the European scene, there is no reason to believe they won鈥檛 win a national referendum to quit the EU.
The full process of withdrawal would take years, but the impact on science would be near-immediate. British science would find itself in a similar position to Switzerland, assuming a similar stand over migration. It would have third-country status, and its researchers would be unable to apply for EU grants. We wouldn鈥檛 be completely without funds 鈥� the UK鈥檚 seven research councils invest around 拢3 billion every year. But on the European stage, British scientists would suddenly find that they count for nothing.
There are fears that voter apathy will result in a low turnout for tomorrow鈥檚 poll. But we can be sure that the UKIP vote is not apathetic, and the result could be disastrous. The mainstream parties are unlikely to have much to celebrate; but for British researchers the result could be even gloomier if it becomes the first step to making UK science the biggest loser of all.
Leader: 鈥�Don鈥檛 let new boundaries cut off UK science鈥�