The
U.K. referendum taking place on June 23, on whether to remain or to leave the European Union, is being discussed on many levels, from the economic to the nationalistic. Another
important area is science: will British science be better or worse in or out?
On
this subject, Pharmaceutical Microbiology Resources website is supporting
the vote for the U.K. to remain part of the European Union.
Looking
at the scientific argument, a U.K. science base outside of the European Union would
not access the funding it needs. For instance, one main route of funding is the
Horizon 2020 initiative. Horizon 2020 is the financial instrument implementing
the Innovation Union, a Europe 2020 flagship initiative aimed at securing
Europe's global competitiveness.
Further
arguments are centred on access to funding and uncertainty about future research
collaboration. The EU produces over a third of the world’s scientific output.
In addition, networking is crucial to being a world-leading science nation and U.K.
scientists need to interact with European colleagues.
Another
complication, should the U.K. pull out, is the issue of the recognition of
professional qualifications.
This
opinion is supported by a British government science policy committee, which
recently concluded an inquiry by stating that European Union membership has
been a crucial factor in shaping U.K. environmental policy on air and water
pollution, and biodiversity.
To
withdraw would lead to other adverse impacts – social, political, economic and
cultural.
I
believe that it benefits the U.K., the European Union, and global science for the U.K. to
remain a strong committed member of the European Union.
Tim
Sandle
No comments:
Post a Comment
Pharmaceutical Microbiology Resources