Pallab Ghosh@BBCPallab

Jul 28

Ben Johnson

@ersatzben

Jul 27

Yesterday I had £100 to spend on widgets that cost £10 each. Today I still have £100 to spend, but the cost is now £20 each so I can only afford half the number of widgets. Whether this a 50% “cut” depends entirely on your perspective.

Pallab Ghosh@BBCPallab

Jul 27

Conor Fitzpatrick@Fitzparticle

Jul 27

Of course, we could ask STFC council if blue skies research is being cut or not. They would say 'a major shift of funding from curiosity-driven research to priority areas and targeted programmes' as @BBCPallab reported on this previously.

Pallab Ghosh@BBCPallab

Jul 27

Stian Westlake

@stianwestlake

Jul 27

To be clear about what’s happening here:

The budget of @STFC_Matters, which funds astronomy, particle physics and large research facilities *hasn’t* been cut: it’s staying the same in nominal terms - which is a good settlement given how constrained public finances are.

But… the costs of doing this sort of science have risen significantly: in particular, staff costs (wage growth, NI), energy costs (big science = big leccy bill) and FX costs (our subscription fees to CERN are payable in Swiss Francs - rates have not been kind recently).

All this means the same amount of money buys less science.

STFC did what I’d do in the circumstances: looked at their funding and made very tough prioritisation decisions.

By all means argue with the prioritisation, if you have the expertise to do so (though STFC have not done this without considerable thought). Or make the case for spending more on science altogether (though that’s a hard sell right now). But either way, important to recognise there are trade-offs.