Brakes are on for R&D

An energetic rearguard action is being fought over the budget proposed for the EU's next research programme, Framework 7 (FP7), due to run from 2007 to 2013.

Critics say that the money set aside for research in the financial perspectives agreed by EU leaders in December is insufficient to fund the proposed programme and does not reflect the importance which the governments themselves accord to research. The protests, led by the European Parliament, have drawn support from industry, universities and research organisations.

Research is covered by the section of the financial perspectives dealing with competitiveness for growth and employment, along with activities promoting the single market, Trans-European Networks, education and training, social policy and nuclear decommissioning. The Commission proposed awarding the whole of this area a budget of just less than EUR 133 billion (in 2004 prices) for 2007-13, with research receiving a little over EUR 68bn. The Council of Ministers cut the whole budget for this area to EUR 72bn. While it said that "particular priority should be given to delivering a substantial and progressive enhancement of the EU's research effort" under this budget heading, it gave no overall figure to back this up. As an indicator, it said that research spending in 2013 should rise by 75% in real-terms relative to 2006.

While this may seem like a substantial increase, critics of the financial perspectives think it does not live up to the ambitions of FP7, which is expected to do significantly more than its predecessor. For instance, it will create a European Research Council (ERC), supporting a substantial amount of basic research, it will provide new funds for security research, and it will channel funds previously provided directly by EU states for space research.

The Parliament rejected the financial perspectives on 18 January, deploring "the unacceptable reduction in commitments in respect of competitiveness, growth and employment". It called for negotiation over the spending plans and, in the case of the FP7 proposals, is continuing its scrutiny of the legislation with the Commission's budget figures rather than those agreed by the Council.

This resistance has been endorsed by all of the sectors with an interest in the research programme. A petition calling for a reconsideration of the budget was handed to the Austrian presidency of the EU on 31 January, signed by more than 75 high-level personalities from politics, industry and academia.

The European University Association also voiced concerns about the budget and expressed a lack of confidence in the Council's commitment to research. "While stating that the resources available for research in 2013 should be 75% higher than in 2006, the European Council made no firm commitment to ensure that there will be a sustainable growth in resources over the whole period," said an EUA statement.

"The tasks of the ERC can only be properly fulfilled if the funding level is such that the necessary European dimension of research can be ensured," the EUA added.

Fotis Kafatos, chair of the committee set up to oversee the scientific activities of the ERC, said: "To succeed, [the ERC] must have the resources to make a real difference in promoting excellent, frontier research and in attracting excellent new researchers." He added: "The Commission's proposal was in the right range and I know that the ERC remains a high priority item for the commissioner. As chairman of the scientific committee of the ERC, I would find major cuts extremely problematical for the impact of the ERC and therefore unacceptable."

UNICE, the employers' federation, has more confidence in the Council of Ministers' commitment to research, although it too expressed disappointment that research was not better served in the financial perspectives. "We would have preferred a doubling of the research budget," explained Jean-Paul Mingasson, UNICE adviser on economic strategy, "but we are pleased to see, in a tight budget, that 1A [the line for competitiveness for growth] is the most dynamic, and within that research has been earmarked for a 75% increase".

MEPs are already under pressure from the Commission to start discussing how the reduced budget can be accommodated. According to Research Commissioner Janez Potoc

nik, the calendar for the adoption of FP7 was extremely tight. Appearing before the Parliament's industry and research committee on 26 January, he outlined some options for making ends meet. He said that the programme's smaller budget lines could not be reduced as much as bigger ones without losing their raison d'�e, while others would have to be protected because of international or other commitments. They include the ITER nuclear fusion project and support for the Commission's Joint Research Centre. Stricter prioritisation would be required within the themes of the programme, he said, and changes to the timing for the introduction of new initiatives should be given "careful thought".

• Ian Mundell is a freelance journalist based in Brussels.

Major feature. An energetic rearguard action is being fought over the budget proposed for the EU's 7th Framework Programme due to run from 2007 to 2013.

Article is part of a European Voice Special Report, 'New Technologies'.

• Primary Source

European Commission: DG Research: Future European Union research policy http://ec.europa.eu/comm/research/future/index_en.cfm

---