French researchers up in arms over CNRS plan

by Laura Hood

It is not just railway workers who are exercising their traditional French right to protest today, researchers across the country were also due to take to the streets this morning to fight the government’s attempts to “dismantle” the public research system.

Plans to restructure the CNRS, France’s main research agency, have been trundling along for months now, but bubbling concerns from the academic community have boiled over into sheer rage this week as it emerged that Nicolas Sarkozy and Valérie Pécresse have shut them out entirely from the decision making process.

As part of a wider shake up of the higher education system, the government plans to put universities at the centre of the research system. This, it would appear, means stripping the CNRS of its decision making powers and using it only as a body through which government funds can be channelled in specific directions.

Researchers have already registered their discontent with this idea, but they were dealt a huge blow last Tuesday which seemed to seal the organisation’s fate. When members of the CNRS scientific board gathered together to discuss the changes, they were told by Arnold Migus, the CNRS president, that the government was no longer willing to hear their views. Instead it would finalise the reforms on its own.

Shocked by the news, CNRS national committee president Yves Langevin sent letters to 1,000 members, warning them that their organisation was in jeopardy. He also gave an interview to Humanité, saying giving the government too much control would have disastrous consequences for blue-skies research. How could scientists explore new avenues, he asked, if they can only work on projects deemed to be important by politicians?

The researchers’ message seems to have been somewhat eclipsed by media coverage of the railway strike in France. But if Langevin and protest group Sauvons La Recherche are to be believed, Sarkozy won’t have his way without a struggle. SNCS calls for mass protest over CNRS plans - on Research Day: Europe.

ERA: itchy industry feet

by Laura Hood

This morning it was the turn of industry to air their views on the future of the European Research Area. Three speakers from the pharmaceutical industry, the chemical industry and Philips research all gave a similar message: industry is ready to invest in R&D in Europe and is beginning to get fed up with waiting for the political arguments to be ironed out.

As everyone suspected, they are less than entuisiastic about waiting until January for the European Parliament to finalise its views on JTIs.

 
Several people have also mentioned this year’s Nobel prize winners. It seems particularly appropriate to discussions that prizes were awarded to two European-born scientists who now work in America.

 

In today’s baffling metaphor news:

*public interest in research is, apparently, a “three legged chair”

*the ERA is a jazz band, waiting to find its rhythm.

Elvis in Lisbon

by Laura Hood

With the first day of the European Research Area conference under way here in Lisbon, two major themes seem to be emerging: breaking down bureaucracy and the wisdom of Elvis Presley.

The two may not be naturally linked but several of the day's speakers seemed to think we would do well to heed the advice of the King. Early in the day we were told that "a little less conversation a bit more action" is needed to bring the aspirations of the ERA to fruition and in the afternoon Luke Georgiou reminded us that "it's now or never" for Europe if we aim to keep up with the US and our mysterious new rival "Chindia".

However, as much as everyone seems keen to cut the red tape and take the ERA to the next phase, each new objection to the current direction seems to open a new can of worms. We want to more coordination in our research efforts but fear homogenisation. We want to compete but can't agree on whether our main competitor should be the US or each other. We want to find someone to blame for the slow progress being made on the ERA but can't decide between the commission and the member states.

One person who found no difficulty in choosing his scapegoat on this last point was Enric Banda of Euroscience. “Stop blaming the commission every time something goes wrong” he told us. Instead, we should urge the member states to take a more “mature” view of the ERA and accept that compromise is inevitable at some stage.

Despite the intricacies, the sense of urgency seems to be shared by all. Janez Potočnik warned the conference that we simply could not be having these same arguments in five year’s time and there was very little dissent amongst his audience on this point. Most seem agreed on one or two major issues such as supporting researcher mobility within Europe, attracting talent from outside the community and pushing for greater private investment in R&D (although how this last goal is to be achieved is another sore spot).

Tomorrow we hear from the French Minister for Higher Education and Research and get told not to step on her blue suede shoes.