select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
Fiona fox's blog
Scientists comment on the Science & Technology Facilities Council (STFC) detailing outcomes for future physics projects.
Paul Howarth, President of the Institute of Physics, said:
“Today’s news on the reduction or ending of funding for projects is yet more bad news for physics following a series of cuts over this year and the last to UK science. These cuts will come as a terrible blow to the scientific community and do real damage to the UK’s reputation as a place to research and innovate.
“Despite reassurances, physics has not been protected, crucial facilities remain under threat and jobs are being lost. Scientific capability that has taken years to build up is being put at risk by these decisions. They also threaten the future of one of the greatest symbols of physics in the UK – the iconic radio telescope at Manchester University’s Jodrell Bank.
“This package of cuts hits areas of research where the UK has a hard won international reputation and creates damaging uncertainty in UK science as well as regional job losses. It undermines a number of our most important international collaborations and could put a whole generation of young people off a career in science.
“Strong foundations in physics across the country underpin new sources of growth, and new well paid jobs: from artificial intelligence to quantum technology; from medical devices to the green economy – Cutting these foundations puts future growth at risk.
“For the sake of UK physics and our national reputation as a place to do science, conduct research and innovate we would urge the new government to review this ruinous set of decisions.”
Prof James Naismith FRS FMedSci, Professor of Structural Biology, Division of Structural Biology, University of Oxford, said:
“The details of the STFC outcome for future projects do not make happy reading. The government has prioritised innovation, mission-led and QR funding within a largely flat budget at the UKRI level. Such strategic decisions are for elected politicians not for the science community. We have enjoyed, in difficult financial circumstances, strong government support.
“STFC budget, was as a consequence of the UKRI outcome, largely flat over the future spending review period. STFC expenditure grew from £877M from 23-24 to £1,031 M in 25-26. The cost pressures on STFC over the coming spending review period are particularly acute, for example international subscriptions which total nearly 40 % of all STFC expenditure, will increase by 19 %. The large UK facilities consume significant amounts of electricity that has increased in price. Finally, there is a backlog of critical repairs and maintenance across the STFC estate. The other Research Councils have contributed in the future an additional £135M in funding over three years to support STFC. However, absent either additional government money or shift in government priorities then choices have to made by STFC.
“STFC, led by Michele Dougherty has widely consulted the physics community. It was clear the priority of much of the physics community was PPAN discovery research and international projects; the outcome largely reflects this evidence that the choices remain shaped by consultations with science community. As the explainer document spells out, there are some PPAN projects where funding is cut and I don’t doubt the settlement will be hard for the PPAN community.
“The details for other STFC activities go beyond hard, they are bleak but, to the credit of STFC, spelt out. Despite the transfer of resources from other research councils, there are very large cuts to central UK national lab infrastructure, reductions in operations at UK central facilities and reductions in national lab operations together these represent a damaging outcome for UK science. I have huge sympathy for the teams doing brilliant work that are affected by this outcome.
“As individuals or different science communities, we may have made different choices; but there were only bad choices and this can’t be wished away.
“The Government has clearly indicated it sees science as important to the UK and not only to economic growth, it continues to support funding of science and science of course enjoys public trust. We have to build on that, help to grow the economy and deliver the benefits of our wonderful science to our fellow citizens.”
Prof Brian Cox, Professor of Particle Physics, University of Manchester, said:
“These devastating and irreversible cuts are a legacy from a series of hasty and ill-considered decisions taken by UKRI, overseen by a government department that no longer exists. The damage to the UK’s science base has already been substantial, and I am sure the new ministers responsible will want some time to review the situation. I am astonished that UKRI are still ploughing ahead, and not working with the Burnham government to find a solution.”
https://www.ukri.org/news/stfc-details-outcomes-for-future-physics-projects/
Declared interests
The nature of this story means everyone quoted above could be perceived to have a stake in it. As such, our policy is not to ask for interests to be declared – instead, they are implicit in each person’s affiliation.