Which party is best for science?

5 Jun 2017 by Evoluted New Media

With an election looming and manifestos published, it’s time to ask which of the parties would be best for science. Naomi Weir gives us her take…

The 8th June is fast approaching and parties have published their manifestos. A lot has changed in the two years since the last UK General Election, including who is leading UK-wide parties. And, of course, manifesto commitments are set in the new context of the UK leaving the EU. With that in mind, here we try to digest the main UK-wide parties’ manifestos focusing on four priorities for the next government.

STEM education and training – sustainably funded, high quality, and open to all

Developing a larger pool of people with relevant STEM knowledge and skills is a long-running challenge reflected in the many STEM occupations listed on the government’s shortage occupation list. In the run up to the election education experts have repeatedly said that if the next government wants to make any progress in education and skills policies, from primary through to further education, they must focus on teachers. Not only are there shortfalls in the number of entries to teacher training in these subjects but science and maths teachers are leaving the profession at a higher rate than teachers of other subjects.

It’s therefore encouraging to see both Labour and Liberal Democrat education policies broadly focusing on teacher recruitment and retention. Both propose getting rid of the public sector pay cap and tackling concerns over workload. Labour proposes allowing teachers to have greater involvement in the curriculum, and Lib Dems state support for entitlement and funding for CPD as well as long-term planning of initial teacher training places, specifically mentioning shortage areas such as science, technology, engineering, the arts and maths. Conservative policies do include some measures to support teachers but there is more of a focus on changes to institutions, facilities and what is being taught, such as a maths school in every major English city and expecting 90 per cent of pupils studying the EBacc combination of academic GCSEs by 2025.

There is a mixed picture on further education. Liberal Democrats propose creating national colleges with expertise in key sectors, Conservatives will build Institutes of Technology that will be linked to leading universities in every major city in England. Labour prioritise investment in increasing teacher numbers rather than new institutions and support the implementation of the Sainsbury Review recommendations. There is more agreement on the apprenticeship levy with support in all three manifestos. With such cross-party support the new government should take the opportunity to make sure the levy delivers for science and engineering.

A migration system that supports science and engineering

Immigration has been one of the highest profile features of public debate in recent years. In contrast to many media headlines, in a poll following the vote for Brexit, 4 out 5 of the public said they want to maintain or increase the number of students and skilled migrants coming to the UK. Conservative narrative is positive, saying they “will increase the number of scientists working in the UK and enable leading scientists from around the world to work here”. And yet they commit to “bear down on immigration from outside the EU” and propose a suite of policies to make it more difficult and less attractive for international scientists, engineers and students alike.

Labour and Lib Dems support high-skilled immigration for key sectors of our economy, removing students from immigration numbers and immediately guarantee existing rights for all EU nationals in the UK. They differ in support for freedom of movement, with Lib Dem support and Labour saying it will end when we leave the EU and they would offer fair rules and reasonable management on migration instead.

UK leadership and collaboration in research and innovation

The importance of international collaboration has been a consistent message from the sector following the vote to leave the EU. Again the high level narrative is positive from the Conservatives who state “we want to work together in the fight against crime and terrorism, collaborate in science and innovation – and secure a smooth, orderly Brexit”. The question is how their policies work together to support that, and along with immigration policy, access to facilities and EU programmes will all have an effect.

The Conservatives leave the door open saying there “may be specific European programmes in which we might want to participate and if so, it will be reasonable that we make a contribution”. Labour and Lib Dems are more explicit about seeking to remain part Horizon 2020 and its successor and also involvement in organisations such as Euratom.

Enhancing the UK’s research and innovation environment

In November, CaSE and a coalition of other organisations began a fresh campaign for the government to commit to a target of investing 3% of GDP in R&D by 2025. Currently public and private investment combined is around 1.7% of GDP. With the uncertainty from Brexit and a new industrial strategy on the way, there is both the impetus and perhaps the means to deliver it. Remarkably all three parties have made a similar commitment. The Conservatives have set a target of reaching 2.4% (OECD average) by 2027 with a long-term aim of reaching 3%; Labour have stated 3% by 2030; and the Liberal Democrats set a long-term goal to double innovation and research spending across the economy – which would get you to 3.4% of GDP. Public and private combined investment of 1.7% of GDP represents just under £32bn a year. Reaching 3% would require an additional £24bn a year. The public portion is generally about one-third, so in addition to the £2bn a year announced in November (which all parties agree to deliver) we’d expect Government to invest a further £6bn a year with private and charitable sources making up the rest.

Specific numbers and timelines aside, any or all of these represent significant investment. To reach these targets will require increasing public investment and creating an environment that supports and attracts private investment. And reaping the full benefits will require not only strategic use of the funds but for all areas of policy to work together to create a thriving environment for science and engineering.