Pro-EU scientists bring their campaign to Brussels

Science campaigners making the positive case for Britain remaining in the EU in the upcoming in/out referendum have warned researchers their messages need wider appeal.

With polls showing the majority of scientists want the UK to remain in the EU, the task of campaigners such as Universities UK and Scientists for EU, is to preach beyond the converted, according to campaigners presenting their arguments and tactics in Brussels this week.

Alistair Jarvis, deputy chief executive of Universities UK, preaches a gospel of caution and consistency saying, “Don’t use 10 arguments, keep it tight at two or three main ones.”  For him the broad message can be boiled down to: international researchers and students coming to the UK help create jobs.

“We’re picking the arguments that matter to people,” said Jarvis. “We link everything we say to jobs, which is what people really care about. We’re saying: Universities are often the biggest employers in their cities and we’re using data which shows how many jobs are dependent on international students.”

While the campaign is getting attention – Jarvis points to three front page stories in national newspapers and an open letter by leading scientists in The Times – finding traction at local and regional level remains the biggest challenge.

Julia Goodfellow, vice-chancellor of the University of Kent and Universities UK president was blunt about what she sees as one of the campaign’s main failings. “We’re not getting our message through to impoverished areas,” she said.

Risk planning

Universities UK has a worst-case scenario folder entitled ‘Brexit risk planning’. In it are the three big unknowns associated with an exit, said Jarvis.

“The first involves freedom of movement. Will all foreign researchers get visas to remain in the UK? If you’re a part of a big European project or network, can you stay involved? Then there’s the effect Brexit would have on the regulatory environment of the university. Human resources, procurement, financial management – they all use useful EU frameworks.”

Goodfellow said foreign researchers face an uncertain future. “Fifteen per cent of all academic staff in the UK are from elsewhere. In Kent, the figure is 22 per cent,” she said.

The uncertainty is deterring people from moving to the UK, “We’ve already encountered some people who tell us they won’t risk coming, so I don’t think it’s a slam dunk argument that we’ll keep getting the same high number of international students,” Goodfellow said.

Fighting for hearts and minds online

Another group researchers are focusing a lot of attention on is young people – a cohort that is more likely to be pro-Europe, but is traditionally least likely to vote.

If 18-34s shake off their apathy, they could swing the election. “On the basis of the latest data I saw, if turnout is 50 per cent across the UK, the leave side will win; 60 per cent, remain win,” said Jarvis.

Researcher and activist Mike Galsworthy is running a grassroots social media campaign with his group, Scientists for EU. He’s learned that campaigning through Facebook is quite effective. “Twitter is a bit of an echo chamber. You reach the undecideds better on Facebook,” he said.

His message is that there’s national pride associated with science. “We’re fantastic at science and so is the EU. [Together] we’ve pretty much stolen the crown of big science from the US.”

Galsworthy has also set up a spin out campaign called Healthier in the EU to counteract stories which say the EU threatens the UK’s National Health Service and to use health arguments to get closer to a core concern of the electorate. (He wanted to do run a third campaign on the subject of technology but does not have the personal capacity).

Along the way, Galsworthy  has encountered a lot of hostility. “Sometimes you do have to delete trolls and ban people who are saying horrendous things. I’ve learned that you shouldn’t get involved in long one-on-one battles. You can burn yourself out,” he said.

Not everyone has welcomed the sight of vocal, campaigning researchers. “Some MPs told me I wasn’t entitled to a view – that shocked me,” said Goodfellow.

Supporters of a British exit, or Brexit, have argued that as a registered charity receiving some government funding, Universities UK should not be allowed to campaign.

“I’ve had 60 pages of legal advice from our lawyers on this issue,” said Jarvis. “Charities can’t support a political party but they can support a campaign so long as it links with their charitable goal.”

Do blame the messengers

The campaign is careful about the messengers it uses. For instance, supportive voices from other EU countries are not necessarily a good thing, said Jarvis. “It depends on who you’re speaking to. International voices are heard by the well-educated but considered interfering by others.”

While the private advice to European officials from Downing Street has been not to comment, EU Research Commissioner Carlos Moedas spoke in favour of the UK remaining in Europe at a recent meeting at Cambridge University saying the UK is an “essential and valued partner” in EU research and UK science is “strengthened by its relationships with the EU.”

The In campaign is most practiced at presenting the success rate of UK scientists in EU research competitions. While it contributes nearly 12 per cent of the overall EU budget, the UK extracts some 16 per cent of the competitively-awarded science funding. Five of its universities, Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, University College London and Imperial College London, are among the top ten recipients

Jarvis said this amounts to around £1 billion a year, or £1 in every £7 of public research money in the UK. In absolute figures, the UK’s success in attracting EU research money is second only to Germany’s, in terms of its population it is the best.

Brexit would leave a big funding crater, said Jarvis. “We score the lowest among the G8 countries for investment in R&D,” he noted.

That the amount of EU research funding the UK attracts sometimes requires defending at home is an affront, said Goodfellow. “We’re not given the money, we’re competing for it. You don’t want us to be successful?” she said.

Two thirds of academic papers written by UK scientists are co-authored with colleagues in Europe and leaving the EU would mean collaborative research projects across Europe would become difficult to arrange. 

“There’s less bureaucracy involved – and I never thought I’d say that about the EU. By comparison, it’s almost impossible to get a jointly-funded project under the US National Institutes of Health, or the National Science Foundation,” said Goodfellow.

Some scientists, however, counter that British science will not suffer. Scientists for Britain says UK science is not reliant on EU money, the best researchers will still be able to move freely between countries, and membership of research groups like CERN would be unaffected by the UK leaving the EU.