Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ

British science faces an irreversible decline unless the government
changes course, the Royal Society warned last week. Presenting the conclusions
of an 18-month inquiry, the society’s president, Michael Atiyah, called
for a series of radical changes in government policy.

‘There is no room for complacency,’ said Atiyah. ‘If we sit back, then
in 10 years’ time we will find that we are no longer in the first rank of
scientific nations.’

The society’s report* calls for a new deal for researchers, a huge shift
of resources from military to civil research and new arrangements for large
international pro-jects such as the CERN centre for particle physics near
Geneva. At a press conference, senior fellows of the society also accused
ministers of refusing to take responsibility for the consequences of their
decisions.

The society wants the government to change the way it funds all scientists,
from PhD students to senior researchers. Atiyah said the current structure
encouraged false hopes and was ‘dishonest’.

Postgraduate students, some of whom receive less than £5000
a year, should have their income raised, either by increasing their grants
or by encouraging them to take on junior teaching duties. If students teach,
they should be given longer to complete their PhD.

Successful researchers who cannot find a tenured academic post should
be rewarded with an entirely new form of funding. The society recommends
grants which last five years, cover both salaries and research costs and
which a scientist can take from one university to another.

On careers, the society appears to be pushing at an open door. William
Waldegrave, the science minister, has promised that career issues will be
a major component of next year’s White Paper on science. But some of the
society’s other recommendations are likely to meet stiff resistance.

Spending on defence research is due to fall by £200 million in
the next two years alone. At present, the government plans to spread the
money saved across the whole of its budget. But Atiyah said it should all
go to science. ‘I want that proportion of the defence budget which is devoted
to research and development transferred to the civil sector,’ he said last
week.

The report also calls for changes to the way large international projects
are financed. Funding for projects agreed between governments should be
removed from the research councils’ budgets, because control over these
projects effectively lies with ministers, not the councils.

Arnold Wolfendale, the Astronomer Royal, explained how science could
suffer from ministerial interference. When researchers tried to pull out
of an unnamed international project, ‘the Foreign Office jumped up and down’,
he said. Researchers were forced to stay in the project while more important
work was abandoned.

Wolfendale complained that ministers never took responsibility for the
projects which were cancelled.

The issuing of a report laden with controversial advice for ministers
is a new departure for the Royal Society. It marks Atiyah’s determination
to take a more active role than his predecessors in influencing government
science policy.

*The Future of the Science Base, £11.50 from the Royal Society,
6 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AG.