BRITAIN鈥檚 scientists are to survive another year without the budget cuts and upheavals that are hitting many other recipients of government funds. That is the good news from last week鈥檚 Science Budget. David Hunt, who became science minister in May last year, did well to keep the Treasury wolves from his door when the Conservative government is anxious to reduce spending.
Of course, it would have been nice to have seen some real increases. As research grows ever more expensive, budgets that just about hold face with inflation are likely to produce a slow decline in Britain鈥檚 scientific standing.
Ironically, the Science Budget was released in the same week that a Korean company announced it was to invest in a British electronics plant. Michael Heseltine, the President of the Board of Trade, is certainly right to repeat endlessly that multinationals wield the real power in the world and that the job of government is to attract them to your nation before some other country does. But this is no excuse for allowing Britains鈥檚 science base to decline 鈥� the presence of highly trained researchers is a key factor in attracting companies to Britain.
Advertisement
One feature of Hunt鈥檚 budget leaves room for concern. For the first time, a part of the budget 鈥� 5 per cent or 拢67 million 鈥� has been taken from the research councils to create a 鈥減riority initiatives鈥� fund for the government to spend as it sees fit. There are many worthy programmes among the new initiatives. And 拢8 million has also been set aside to cover the fluctuations in exchange rate that affect Britain鈥檚 contribution to the European particle physics centre. These fluctuations have caused much pain and a fund to 鈥渟mooth鈥� their impact on the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council is very welcome.
That said, the arithmetic behind this kindness to PPARC looks a little suspect. Its budget rose by 拢9 million for 1995-96, but 拢8.3 million had to be donated to the priority fund 鈥� 拢8 million then came back as the international subscriptions reserve.
More important, however, is that the creation of the priority fund sets a precedent. Although the 拢67 million appears to have been allocated wisely this year, it would be wrong to let the government take control of larger and larger parts of the budget for its own pet schemes. In other nations where this has happened, money has ended up going to effective lobbyists rather than goods scientists.