VIDEO: Researchers, speak up!

Mention the word “lobbying” to scientists and a typical reaction might well be discomfort. They are more likely to be found in their labs than in the political fray.

But with new cuts to EU science proposed in Brussels, scientists should clear their throats and speak out, urged Claude Turmes, a Green member of the European Parliament.

At the start of the year, Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission President, announced plans to divert €2.7 billion from Horizon 2020, the EU’s science programme, to his new investment stimulus package.

Tapping into science money was a political calculation, said Turmes. “[Juncker] expected [the research] community would be less vocal in defending their budget.”

But with the investment package still subject to approval by the European Parliament, the battle to ensure an even spread of budget pain across EU programmes is there to fight, Turmes said.

Researchers should not shy away. “My message would be, ‘Hey researchers, students, help us fight back, make sure there is less money taken [from research]’.”

Along with Horizon 2020, the Connecting Europe Facility, a programme to enhance infrastructure across the EU, is being tapped for €3.3 billion, and is the only other EU programme to have its money diverted.

The new investment facility, the European Fund for Strategic Investment, was announced by Juncker November last year. It will put up €21 billion of EU money that will in theory leverage in almost €315 billion of venture capital and private funds for infrastructure projects, such as expanded energy grids, research facilities and broadband networks.

The cash being diverted to the Fund means the European Institute of Innovation and Technology will see cuts of €350 million from its budget between 2015 and 2020. The European Research Council (ERC), the EU’s frontier science funder, faces cuts of €221 million between 2016 and 2020.

Prioritise innovation investment

Beyond the cuts for research, the idea of an investment stimulus is laudable, according to the Luxembourgish politician. “Austerity alone cannot solve Europe’s job crisis,” he said. 

Turmes called for investment in innovation to be the centre piece of the package. “We don’t need more money going to highways or ports – we need investment in brains and the possibility of [creating] more start-ups and small businesses,” he said.

The new Commission? A mixed feeling

While he has mixed feelings about the new set of Commissioners in the Berlaymont, Turmes welcomed the appointment of Carlos Moedas as Research Commissioner. “He’s an engineer and really understands that the future of the economy is being efficient and that green innovation and jobs is where Europe should excel,” he said.

On the other hand, Turmes detects little appetite on green issues from Juncker. When it was announced in December that the Commission would be ditching the “Circular Economy” package, which was intended to increase recycling levels and tighten rules on incineration and landfill, Turmes and his colleagues were not pleased.

“[The Commission] has killed…one of the most promising bridges between the environment and the economy,” he said. Six bills on waste, packaging, landfill, end of life vehicles, batteries and accumulators, and waste electronic equipment were scrapped.

A battle to save the package from the axe is underway, with Turmes and his colleagues as the main activists.

Trade talks

Turmes also urges more transparency in the sprawling Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations with the US.

The talks have drawn the ire of people left and right of the political aisle across Europe. It is a de-regulation battle that puts multinational companies in the driving seat, according to Turmes. New diktats on genetically modified crops and lower standards on air pollution and energy are the hidden agenda of the talks, he believes.

TTIP’s goal is to open up markets by reducing tariffs and regulatory barriers to trade. Negotiations were first launched in 2013 but a perceived lack of transparency means they have attracted controversy.

The new Commission has made an attempt to be more open, by releasing negotiation texts for instance, but it is a hollow effort, said Turmes.

“TTIP [has tried] to do a charm offensive but it’s cynical,” he said. The investor-state dispute settlement mechanism, a common feature in international trade treaties that grants foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal for compensation whenever a government passes a law that may harm its interests, is opposed by “hundreds of thousands of citizens”, said Turmes. However, there is no sign that it will be taken off the table.

Recently it was announced that MEPs on the Parliament’s TTIP steering committee would have access to additional TTIP documents in special reading rooms. This was a concession won from the US, which is against making its negotiating documents public.

“Restricting [this activity] to a reading room is fooling parliamentary democracy,” Turmes said. If he had his way, he would bring a USB pen with him to the room and download documents and share them with everyone on the Internet.