Tag Archives: Letters
CaSE has organised a letter (£, or see below), published in today’s Times, which warns that Government proposals to drastically limit the settlement rights of migrants coming into the UK could seriously damage the country’s science and engineering base.
It comes a year after CaSE organised a first letter to the Times, signed by eight Nobel laureates, protesting against the government’s initial proposals for an immigration cap. For more details about CaSE’s work on this issue see here.
The new letter is signed by twenty individuals from across the science and engineering sector, ranging from industry to higher education, and includes two former Presidents of the Royal Society and the current Director of the country’s biggest research charity, the Wellcome Trust.
The following letter was published in Eureka – the monthly science magazine from The Times, 3rd November 2011:
You ask “is science funding more important than the national debt?” – as if the former can’t help us to address the latter! Unless we want to try to compete on labour costs with the developing world, we have to deal with the national debt by basing economic growth on science and engineering. That requires investment.
Director, Campaign for Science and Engineering
CaSE Director Imran Khan had a letter published in the Times Higher Education Supplement on 21st June 2011:
Simon Marginson states that “subsidising just science-based areas fosters a lopsided ‘idea of the university'” (“Liberal thinking”, 14 July). His article is the latest to suggest that the arts and humanities took the brunt of the higher education cuts in the UK, with science and engineering escaping unscathed. The reality is that Hefce teaching grants have been cut comparably across all disciplines – science simply required more funding to begin with.
CaSE has sent a letter and analysis regarding the Government’s Education proposals to Michael Gove.
The letter is supported by eminent figures in science and engineering, including Lord May and Lord Rees (former Presidents of the Royal Society), Ian Taylor (former Conservative Science Minister), Sir Harry Kroto (Nobel prize-winner), and Dame Bridget Ogilvie (former Director of the Wellcome Trust).
An article by Times science editor Mark Henderson focused on our argument that funding for teacher training should not be restricted to graduates with a 2:2 or above, but you can read the full details, below.
CaSE Director Imran Khan wrote to The Times, in response to a leading article published on 10th August in which the newspaper argued that businesses must do more to invest in research and development.
“Public investment has a multiplier effect on private investment. You argue that the principal aim of a modern industrial policy should be to increase investment in R&D; the first plank of that policy must be to safeguard public investment in science and engineering”
CaSE Director Imran Khan wrote an article in yesterday’s Guardian newspaper, calling on the government to throw its weight behind sectors that deliver economic growth in order to reduce the budget deficit, particularly science and engineering.
As Khan argues, research and development (R&D) in Britain’s private sector relies heavily on public support for education, research and industry. To make the most of the UK’s scientific and engineering potential, and to use that potential to fight the deficit, the government needs to set out a clear, long-term plan for investment in this sector. Efficiency savings can be made, just as in other sectors, but it is vital that any savings are reinvested back into science and engineering.
Business leaders from some of Britain’s biggest high-tech companies – whose total R&D spend is more than twice the government’s science budget – came together this week to underline this point in a letter coordinated by CaSE.
CaSE has also published a pre-budget briefing arguing that if your aim is to cut the budget deficit, you need to spend more on education, research and development – and certainly not less.
In a letter to The Times newspaper, published today, senior figures from some of the UK’s top science and engineering firms made the case for continued public support for science and engineering. Between them, the companies account for almost a third of all corporate spending on R&D in the UK – more than twice the Government’s science budget.
The letter was instigated and coordinated by the Campaign for Science and Engineering. It is available on the The Times website, and reads:
Sir, The UK’s private sector invests £16 billion in research and development and employs 150,000 people. Our companies are careful about where they invest. We value the scientific and engineering talent that flows from the UK’s world-class universities and publicly funded research base, and how the tax regime supports research and development investment.
Below is the SNP response to the CaSE letter asking them to set out their policies for science and engineering
30 April 2010
Dear Mr Dusic
Many thanks for your letter.
The SNP Scottish Government recognises the importance of developing science within Scotland across a range of portfolios. The SNP has, for example, invested record amounts in innovation and the industries of the future, in particular green energy. This includes the launch of the £10 million Saltire Prize to provide the largest innovation prize for marine renewables.
Below is the Labour response from Gordon Brown to the CaSE letter to the leaders.
27 April 2010
Dear Prof Griffiths and Mr Dusic
I warmly welcome this opportunity to respond to the Campaign’s invitation to set out my Party’s recognition of the importance of science to Britain and our commitment to world-class scientific excellence in this country.
Let me start by thanking the Campaign for its powerful advocacy for science since it started back in 1986 as “Save British Science”. It is a mark of the progress we have made that today’s challenge is improving and developing science in Britain from the secure foundations built since 1997. Read More
Below is the Conservative response from David Cameron to the CaSE letter to the leaders.
Monday, 5th April 2010
It is good of you to get in touch on what is an absolutely critical issue. Your belief in the importance of science and engineering is one that I share, and I am delighted to be given this opportunity to set out some of our ideas in this area. Read More
Below is the Liberal Democrat response from Nick Clegg to the CaSE letter to the leaders.
14th April 2010
Dear Prof Griffiths and Mr Dusic,
Thank you for your letter of 5th of March, which asked for an articulation of my party’s policies on science and engineering. Following the launch of our manifesto today, it gives me pleasure to enclose a full written response. I hope this will prove useful to you, your members, and to the wider public, in judging which of the political parties is best placed to secure the scientific and engineering future of our nation. Read More
This morning has seen the publishing of two letters in national newspapers on the importance of science and the general election. In a letter to the Times, 28 fellows of the Royal Society have urged the next government to retain Britain’s competitive advantage in science and engineering, with greater emphasis given to education, training and strong investment in research. Meanwhile, in a second letter to the Independent, members of Scientists for Labour have called on the Conservative Party to properly articulate their science policy in the run-up to the general election.
CaSE published its Letter to the Leaders today, which asks them to set out their science and engineering policies covering education & skills; research funding; innovation and science and engineering in government. CaSE has sent similar letters to the main political parties in advance of previous UK, devolved and European elections. We will publish the responses from the parties in advance of the General Election. The Letter was also published in The Times.