5 Comments

  1. Martin Yuille

    The anti-EU argument that the UK should leave the EU but can then buy back into the EU science programme is ridiculous.

    It’s like justifying a divorce on the grounds that the two people can always marry each other again.

    It’s also a confession that EU membership has real benefits.

  2. Andrew Platt

    So it was wrong to allow the Swiss people to say how their country should be run, was it? They should have just done what the EU dictators told them. How very anti-democratic!

    Brexit is about regaining control of our country, not necessarily adopting any specific policy. Raising concerns about potential future immigration policy is therefore nothing more than scaremongering. It is highly unlikely immigration policy will change after Brexit, given the enthusiasm shown for it by both the government and the opposition.

    Political union should not be a requirement for scientific collaboration. In fact it is not, for if it were the UK would be unable to collaborate with the USA, Canada and Japan. If the EU have made it a requirement then it can only be for use as a big stick with which to beat its member states into submission, another example of its dictatorial character. The system needs reform and Brexit may provide the catalyst for that reform.

  3. Sheila Peacock

    I do not think it is scaremongering to point out that the Government’s consultation body the Migration Advisory Committee has just published recommendations on the restriction of Tier 2 migrants, which is the route by which most non-EU scientists and engineers gain the right to work in the UK, and to point out that in the event of the UK leaving the EU, there would be no legal reason for the proposed restrictions not to apply to EU citizens as well.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-mac-review-tier-2-migration

    The resulting additional expense to private and public sector establishments wishing to hire the best scientist for the job if that scientist happens not to be a UK citizen is likely to play to the detriment of UK science. Also, any extra money coming to the UK education system from the “Skills levy” proposed on the employers of non-UK/EU citizens will take about seven years to make itself felt in greater PhD-level graduation of UK citizens with the necessary skills.

  4. Paul C

    I’ve wanted to be a scientist since I was eight. I live and breathe this wonderful, startling profession. I’d never want to do anything else. I’m amazed I got to be a professor. I come in to work each day and love it.

    Now my daughter is eight :-)

    Then I think, do I want her to grow up and live in the UK, or part of an EU governed state. Unfortunately the question for June 23rd is not just one of whether to pool research funding – its a question of who we permit to govern us. Frankly, if the outcome is Brexit I don’t think research will be impacted much (recall the folk who said coming out of the ERM in the early 1990s would be an economic disaster – we had an economic boom instead!). Even if it were (which I don’t think it will be) I’d rather do a different job and see her grow up in the UK.

  5. sarah

    Is there any way to get a proper transcript to this video? Not everyone can hear and the closed captions seem to be automatic so we’re getting thinks like “no brain” instead of “no brainer” and, more weirdly, “preferentially gave jobs to the Swiss over my boobs” (1.26) instead of “preferentially gave jobs to the Swiss over EU migrants”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *