BRITISH universities were last week offered the prospect of 拢36 million for new research equipment. Announcing the government鈥檚 initiative, Ian Taylor, junior science minister, said the cash should help to make up the deficit left by cuts of 拢107 million in last autumn鈥檚 Budget.
However, there will be no new government cash, and not all the money is the government鈥檚 to promise. Half of the funds for the 鈥渢argeted research equipment initiative鈥� announced by Taylor will come from the existing budgets of four research councils and two higher education funding councils. And universities competing for a share of this pot must find matching funds from industry, charities or government departments.
Two of the research councils, the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council and the Economic and Social Research Council, have declined to take part in the initiative. 鈥淐learly, industrialists don鈥檛 fund particle physics and astronomy,鈥� says a source at PPARC. And while the other councils welcomed the initiative, Tom Blundell, the chief executive of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, warned that the real crisis is in trying to find the money for everyday expenditure, rather than large new pieces of equipment. Researchers 鈥渄on鈥檛 have the money for chemicals and basic facilities鈥�, he says.
Advertisement
Companies were surprised by the government鈥檚 offer on their behalf. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think you鈥檒l find industry stepping forward to take over government responsibility,鈥� says Peter Doyle, chief executive of the biotechnology company Zeneca. 鈥淚f you are talking about mass spectrometers and crystallography equipment, the government collects tax and that鈥檚 something they should be putting it towards.鈥�
Charities were similarly taken aback. 鈥淲e were surprised by the use of the term 鈥榤atched funding鈥�, which usually means a shared initiative with discussion in advance,鈥� says Diana Garnham, general secretary of the Association of Medical Research Charities. 鈥淲e were not consulted.鈥�
Indeed, charities have already made it clear that they cannot bridge the spending gap. Following the drastic cuts last autumn, the Wellcome Trust, the biggest medical charity in the country, warned that it would not make up any shortfall.
The Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals says that while it welcomes any extra funding the scheme might bring in, winning private money is never easy. 鈥淓xperience shows that it鈥檚 very difficult to get industry to co-fund without specific linkage into the project,鈥� says Michael Powell, the committee鈥檚 science policy officer.
Derek Roberts, Provost of University College London, says the initiative simply disguises cuts in funding. 鈥淚 am very conscious of the fact that if the Higher Education Funding Council for England puts money into it, it鈥檚 at the expense of background funding.鈥�
Gareth Roberts, chairman of the CVCP, accuses the government of being 鈥渃owardly in refusing to address this issue鈥�. The CVCP will meet in emergency session next week to discuss ways of coping with the cuts. Among other options, the committee will consider charging fees starting next academic year and limiting the number of students to reduce costs.