Pharma industry hits out at Horizon 2020 cut

The pharma industry has hit out at the €2.2 billion cut to the Horizon 2020 programme, saying it will have a negative impact on patient health outcomes, the EU economy and the overall sustainability of healthcare systems.

Although the industry recognises the value in attracting private funding for Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s new investment fund, it says this should not be achieved through a, “misguided reduction in resourcing the science budget and, with this, scientific projects across Europe. Such a move clearly undermines the Commission’s major effort in setting up Horizon 2020,” said the industry bodies EuropaBio, the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations and the European Generic and Biosimilar Medicines Association, in joint statement.

Meanwhile, researchers were more sanguine, reflecting that it could have been worse. Instead of trimming the Horizon 2020 budget by €2.7 billion, a late-night compromise between the European Parliament, the Commission and European Council, rolled the figure back to €2.2 billion.

There was a lifeline for three budget lines, the European Research Council, the Marie Curie Actions and the widening participation programme, which were all been ring-fenced. 

The League of European Research Universities (LERU), a Brussels-based association said, “[we are] relieved that no money originally earmarked for [these programmes], will have to contribute to the [investment fund]. This really was the bottom-line.”

However, “It is a bad and wrong signal, one year after the launch of Horizon 2020, that €2.2 billion euro is plundered from its budget. The daily rhetoric about investments in research and innovation has a very cynical ring to it,” LERU said.

The €2.2 billion will now constitute a major part of the guarantee supplied by the EU to its European Fund for Strategic Investments.

Much like LERU, the European University Association (EUA) viewed the outcome as a “mixed bag”.

“EUA is particularly concerned by the signal that this development sends to public authorities in Europe in relation to the importance of funding research,” it said.

Unsurprisingly, the ERC president Jean-Pierre Bourguignon was upbeat. “This compromise concerning the budget gives a clear sign that frontier research has an important role to play in Europe and that the support for it will always be given proper consideration. I see this decision as a vote of confidence for the ERC.”

Peter Tindemans, Euroscience secretary-general, gave credit to the lobbyists who secured a reduction in the cut. He hailed a “steadfast” European Parliament and a “flexible” Commission.

Vicky Ford, a British centre-right MEP, fired off a slew of tweets last Thursday to UK institutes such as Cambridge University and the Royal Society, announcing she was “pleased to hear no cuts to ERC.”

Another British MEP, Catherine Bearder, said Juncker, the ringmaster for the new fund, needed to provide a stronger defence to the claim the cut will not impact future research discovery. "The Commission must explain how it will ensure that these cuts do not undermine the EU's competitiveness and long-term economic future,” she said.