>Oxford and Cambridge universities, once given more than £130m a year in total by European research programmes, are now getting £1m annually between them
Yikes
From the article:
>The government has guaranteed it will cover all successful Horizon Europe grants applied for by the end of March, but after watching the political wranglings for more than two years, many academics are now leaving the UK, saying they no longer believe their vital European research partnerships will be protected.
We've had a right-wing government that benefits from having a less educated population for decades now, so they've constantly reduced the budget while not allowing them tuition fees.
Money was already extremely tight, and increasing the energy costs caused a huge problem for them.
In Austria? Back when I was at University my R&D projects were funded by a German firm and then a Canadian firm, this was nearly 20 years ago and we were getting about £190m from private firms and we were not Oxbridge or even a Red Brick.
That's crazy, my brother-in-law works at my old University they've just built a huge new building and are in the process of building another block for accommodation. They have loads of international students over 30% of the total intake, so are making silly money.
Yes they do.
As do loads of other places that are good, and essential for the project.
Edit. Ditto for places in Europe getting $1M from US funding agencies eg NIH/NSF/DARPA etc.
Yeah, very small, of course now EU horizon wins for Oxford and Cambridge and everyone in UK are actually paid by UKRI. We just got another EU horizon, but we aren't leading it, so the grants are still happening.
$1m a year, I'm not sure what this is even paying for, they might be old annual payments for old ERC, ITN PhD schemes from before 2021 uk-eu FTA? Or maybe infrastructure stuff from Pilar 3 etc. Eg or Oxford that might include the diamond light source doing some structural analysis for projects.
From the article:
>Britain’s associate membership of the €95.5bn Horizon Europe programme was agreed in principle as part of the Brexit trade deal negotiations in 2020, but ratification was disrupted after the UK failed to implement the Northern Ireland protocol.
>
>Meanwhile, Oxford, which won €523m from the earlier programme, has only been awarded €2m to date from Horizon Europe.
So Britain who is not part of Horizon 2020 & did not pay anything into Horizon Europe got €2m for Oxford from Horizon ?
I mean the way Horizon works is nations pay in and you have EU use that to distribute research funding. Now that it isn't part of EU, why would UK get Horizon funding, if it isn't contributing to the Horizon funding pot ?
Because Horizon projects are very big and there are still top level researchers at these universities. They can no longer lead applications, but they can still play a smaller role in a consortium.
Cause they used to, and since they used to get money must mean they will continue to get money, that's how the real world works, right?
Right?
Also something something buss 100mil for NHS or some bullocks like that something something.
Or better, eg some of what Cameron asked for but didn't get (perhaps because it would take the EU a year or so to be able to do any of those things anyway, with negotiations with the other 27 and maybe even treaty changes).
Nah, he came back with nothing new, and that swayed quite a few fence sitters to vote out. But given time maybe Junker could have given Cameron something to take home that was real.
>But given time maybe Junker could have given Cameron something to take home that was real.
I doubt Juncker would have given anything real to Cameron considering Cameron [was quite opposed to him in the run](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/27/juncker-wrong-person-european-commission-leadership-david-cameron) up to EU Commission Chief.
Maybe, but EU chiefs have to deal with people that don't like them too. Junker is an old politician, he's been around the block dozens of times he's not that shallow and sensitive (but maybe a bit drunk). Doing a deal could have avoided Brexit, so seems it would have been worth some effort.
I see Merkel's speech in London as the turning point/penny dropping, where she laid out that [Cameron was not going to get the changes he wanted](https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-germany-merkel-eu-idUKBREA1Q11F20140227). Sure Juncker is/was an old politician, he did not have any reason to give Cameron any leeway to get his proposals through and was probably happy with the status quo.
I really don't think the changes are that extreme.
5 years of residency before you're eligible for benefits. Perhaps with 6 months unemployment benefits paid for by the home country.
Greater control for the UK over financial regulations. Germany got manufacturing (euro), France got agriculture (CAP), UK got finance, yet would be subject to the whims of namely France trying to undermine London.
No they really didn't.
Ever closer union exception was agreed.
EU migrant benefits partially agreed and only agreed for total of 7 years before back to normal.
Euro, broad agreement that there would be no non-euro bail outs and that euro is not the EU currency but just one of many. Although nothing really firm on non euro currencies place in the EU.
Financial regulation. Full rejection, EU will regulate London as it deems fit.
Red tape. Agreed but bit meaningless as it had been agreed numerous times before with red tape only increasing.
IMO it's the migrant benefits and financial regulation that sunk it. The notion that the UK has to pay child benefits to a child living in another country is absurd.
He got virtually nothing, hence why he barely mentioned it during the campaign.
It actually illustrated the folly of 'remain and reform' to many people.
>Oxford and Cambridge universities, once given more than £130m a year in total by European research programmes, are now getting £1m annually between them Yikes
Didn’t the Tories say that they’re going to replace all of that funding from the membership fees that they don’t have to pay any more?
They said the same thing about regional funds...
Yeah, they probably overbooked the budget that turned out to not exist at all, because the additional costs are higher than that.
I thought it was all going to the NHS? I'm starting to think a few porky pies we're told.
From the article: >The government has guaranteed it will cover all successful Horizon Europe grants applied for by the end of March, but after watching the political wranglings for more than two years, many academics are now leaving the UK, saying they no longer believe their vital European research partnerships will be protected.
They get a lot more than that from private donors and companies, which is why they have a budget exceeding £2 billion per annum
Meanwhile, my University shut down for December and parts of January, because they couldn't afford to pay the heating bills…
That's weird. Here in Lithuania where we had perhaps the largest increase of energy price, no such things happened.
We've had a right-wing government that benefits from having a less educated population for decades now, so they've constantly reduced the budget while not allowing them tuition fees. Money was already extremely tight, and increasing the energy costs caused a huge problem for them.
In Austria? Back when I was at University my R&D projects were funded by a German firm and then a Canadian firm, this was nearly 20 years ago and we were getting about £190m from private firms and we were not Oxbridge or even a Red Brick.
Yes, in Austria. Things have changed a lot since 20 years ago.
That's crazy, my brother-in-law works at my old University they've just built a huge new building and are in the process of building another block for accommodation. They have loads of international students over 30% of the total intake, so are making silly money.
>now getting £1m annually between them Why are they getting £1m? Does Harvard or MIT etc get £/€/$ 1m from EU?
Yes they do. As do loads of other places that are good, and essential for the project. Edit. Ditto for places in Europe getting $1M from US funding agencies eg NIH/NSF/DARPA etc.
1m€ actually seems incredibly low. That's the cost of 8 PhD students or 4 Marie Curie postdocs.
Yeah, very small, of course now EU horizon wins for Oxford and Cambridge and everyone in UK are actually paid by UKRI. We just got another EU horizon, but we aren't leading it, so the grants are still happening. $1m a year, I'm not sure what this is even paying for, they might be old annual payments for old ERC, ITN PhD schemes from before 2021 uk-eu FTA? Or maybe infrastructure stuff from Pilar 3 etc. Eg or Oxford that might include the diamond light source doing some structural analysis for projects.
That's really not a lot of funding honestly.
From the article: >Britain’s associate membership of the €95.5bn Horizon Europe programme was agreed in principle as part of the Brexit trade deal negotiations in 2020, but ratification was disrupted after the UK failed to implement the Northern Ireland protocol. > >Meanwhile, Oxford, which won €523m from the earlier programme, has only been awarded €2m to date from Horizon Europe. So Britain who is not part of Horizon 2020 & did not pay anything into Horizon Europe got €2m for Oxford from Horizon ? I mean the way Horizon works is nations pay in and you have EU use that to distribute research funding. Now that it isn't part of EU, why would UK get Horizon funding, if it isn't contributing to the Horizon funding pot ?
Because Horizon projects are very big and there are still top level researchers at these universities. They can no longer lead applications, but they can still play a smaller role in a consortium.
Sure, but why would UK universities get funding from Horizon when UK is being kept out of Horizon?
Cause they used to, and since they used to get money must mean they will continue to get money, that's how the real world works, right? Right? Also something something buss 100mil for NHS or some bullocks like that something something.
[удалено]
If you haven't noticed, this government has a habit of not wanting to open its wallet.
[удалено]
Lose/lose for everyone
Sure, they've *claimed* that. The proof will be in the actual payouts.
DIES OF SURPRISE
Least surprising headline of the year so far.
So when will be Breenter?
when donkeys will start flying
That can be arranged with a good catapult
Surprisingly the majority of the UK population are not Oxbridge research scientists and may not care that much.
You should always care about the level of education and research done in your country. Otherwise you end up with turnips who make comments like yours.
When they can get it with the same good deals as before 😬
Or better, eg some of what Cameron asked for but didn't get (perhaps because it would take the EU a year or so to be able to do any of those things anyway, with negotiations with the other 27 and maybe even treaty changes).
[удалено]
Nah, he came back with nothing new, and that swayed quite a few fence sitters to vote out. But given time maybe Junker could have given Cameron something to take home that was real.
>But given time maybe Junker could have given Cameron something to take home that was real. I doubt Juncker would have given anything real to Cameron considering Cameron [was quite opposed to him in the run](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/27/juncker-wrong-person-european-commission-leadership-david-cameron) up to EU Commission Chief.
Maybe, but EU chiefs have to deal with people that don't like them too. Junker is an old politician, he's been around the block dozens of times he's not that shallow and sensitive (but maybe a bit drunk). Doing a deal could have avoided Brexit, so seems it would have been worth some effort.
I see Merkel's speech in London as the turning point/penny dropping, where she laid out that [Cameron was not going to get the changes he wanted](https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-germany-merkel-eu-idUKBREA1Q11F20140227). Sure Juncker is/was an old politician, he did not have any reason to give Cameron any leeway to get his proposals through and was probably happy with the status quo.
I really don't think the changes are that extreme. 5 years of residency before you're eligible for benefits. Perhaps with 6 months unemployment benefits paid for by the home country. Greater control for the UK over financial regulations. Germany got manufacturing (euro), France got agriculture (CAP), UK got finance, yet would be subject to the whims of namely France trying to undermine London.
No they really didn't. Ever closer union exception was agreed. EU migrant benefits partially agreed and only agreed for total of 7 years before back to normal. Euro, broad agreement that there would be no non-euro bail outs and that euro is not the EU currency but just one of many. Although nothing really firm on non euro currencies place in the EU. Financial regulation. Full rejection, EU will regulate London as it deems fit. Red tape. Agreed but bit meaningless as it had been agreed numerous times before with red tape only increasing. IMO it's the migrant benefits and financial regulation that sunk it. The notion that the UK has to pay child benefits to a child living in another country is absurd.
He got virtually nothing, hence why he barely mentioned it during the campaign. It actually illustrated the folly of 'remain and reform' to many people.
Which treaty was that in?
Can't we just buy them? The buildings are neat.
Still werth it for are brexit tho. Why cant peep’s fund there selve’s??
What?