UK scientists throw weight behind EU membership

Science and industry groups have laid out detailed arguments in favour of the UK staying in the European Union, citing the ability to attract billions in research grants, the importance of collaborative research and access to overseas talent, as key benefits of membership, in submissions to an ongoing House of Lords enquiry into the potential impact on UK science of a vote to leave the EU.

Among 71 written submissions and two sessions of oral evidence, only one contribution, from the campaign group Vote Leave, contends that UK science would benefit from a British exit, or Brexit. Vote Leave says that outside the EU, the UK could spend more on research, whilst continuing to participate in the EU’s R&D programmes and attracting more researchers from beyond Europe.

The date of the referendum hinges on when Prime Minister David Cameron completes the renegotiation of the terms of UK membership, but there is a pledge the vote will take place before the end of 2017.

Funding potential

UK science is one of the leading beneficiaries of grant money from Brussels. Of 27 other member states, only the Netherlands receives a greater proportion of funding in relation to population and size of the economy, writes Universities UK, which represents 133 higher education institutes, in its submission.

In the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7), which ran from 2007-14, the UK had 17,379 participants, second only to Germany with 17,950. It was a close second in money received, with €6.9 billion, behind Germany’s €7 billion. The UK has already won grants worth €1.26 billion from FP7’s successor, the €77 billion Horizon 2020 research programme, says Universities UK.

The UK has won 571 European Research Council grants to date, roughly 20 per cent of the total awarded since 2007, notes Heiko Balzter, professor of geography at the University of Leicester.

However, Vote Leave points out that the UK is a net contributor to the EU budget. If the UK leaves the EU, the surplus money gained from the transition could be channelled into research and innovation. “Because the UK is a member of the European Union, UK taxpayers have to make large budget contributions to fund the things the EU deems … priorities – reducing the monies available to invest in our own priorities such as scientific research,” Vote Leave says.

EU research opportunities

Universities UK says opportunities for collaboration, both bilateral and multilateral, and researcher mobility, are facilitated by membership of the EU.

Horizon 2020’s Marie Skłodowska Curie researcher mobility scheme is of particular significance for the European Society for Evolutionary Biology. “There are very few other opportunities for UK-based evolutionary biologists to attract and fund graduate students from the large pool of high-quality graduates produced in European Union countries other than the UK,” it says.

EU policies, such as building the Galileo and Copernicus systems to rival the American GPS satellite navigation system, create new research opportunities, according to the submission by Leicester University, where one of the UK leading space research groups is based.

Brexit could see UK’s booming space industry locked out of lucrative EU programmes, says the industry body UKspace. “The UK space industry’s competitiveness vis-à-vis other European member states could…be significantly affected if the UK were to be absent from EU space policy formulation and procurements such as Galileo and Copernicus,” its submission reads.

“It is doubtful that EU member states would permit the UK to have such a central influence on Galileo security matters if the UK were not an EU member, with consequences (mostly negative) for UK security and business.”

Meanwhile in life sciences, the EU-backed Innovative Medicines Initiative, a public-private partnership, leads to funded, near-market links with major pharmaceutical companies, “on a scale that is unlikely to be achievable through national funding”, says Oxford University.

Negative notes

If there is overwhelming support and recognition of the value of EU membership for UK science, there are some complaints that EU rules in a handful of sectors currently dampen innovation potential. 

Many EU countries have set themselves against genetically modified crops, for example. But a few countries — including the UK — declare themselves open to cultivation of GMOs.

Were the UK not a member of the EU, the regulatory prohibitions surrounding the genetic modification of food crops could be reformed to the benefit of research, argues the John Innes plant science research centre.

Similarly, while the Centre for the Advancement of Sustainable Medical Innovation at Oxford University has a positive view overall, it says that in the case of advanced cell and gene therapies, “innovation is probably being impeded by [a] multiplicity of sources of advice and regulation.”

Association status unattractive

If it left the EU, the UK could in theory still participate in EU research projects, but first it would have to ‘buy back’ into the science programme. That is, if the EU is holding the door ajar. “At the moment there is no clear indication that the rest of the EU would be favourably disposed to enabling the UK to have full associated status,” warns Oxford University in its submission.

In practice, there are several different forms of entry ticket into the EU research club, writes the market research group Technopolis. If the UK found itself in an arrangement like that of Norway, it would still have all the costs of EU membership but lose early access to, and influence over, the shaping of its research programmes. 

A looser arrangement, like that of Switzerland, would mean regular renegotiations of the terms of association, Technopolis adds. 

As a number of submissions point out, such a loose agreement cannot be guaranteed to last long term. Following a row in 2014 with the EU over a referendum vote to restrict immigration, Switzerland lost its full privileges with regard to science funding.

Potential for harmful knock-ons

Brexit could lead to the closure of several EU-related research sites in the UK, as several groups point out.  

Of particular significance and prestige is the European Medicines Agency (EMA), which is based in London. ELIXIR, the European infrastructure for biological information, which brings together life science organisations across Europe to manage and safeguard enormous amounts of data, is based in Cambridge. Imperial College London is one of the six co-location centres of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology’s Climate KIC.

Similarly, the UK is one of the most attractive countries in the world for foreign direct investment but a Brexit could see companies setting up their bases in other EU countries.