Peter Kyle also says he will consider issue of visa costs for scientists, without committing to action

The UK’s science secretary, Peter Kyle, has said he prioritised a cybersecurity bill as a matter of “national security priority”, and will next work on an artificial intelligence bill.

“When I became secretary of state, within a very short period of time, and I’m talking hours not multiple days, I became very, very aware that there was a cybersecurity challenge that our country faced that I simply wasn’t aware of before becoming secretary of state,” Kyle told the Guardian today.

The new cybersecurity and resilience bill featured in the recent King’s speech, setting out the government’s legislative plans, bumping the much-anticipated AI bill.

Kyle added: “We are preparing the [AI] bill, we are consulting on the bill, and we will have the bill ready to go. We are committed to legislating for AI.”

‘Desperately exposed’

He told the paper the country is “desperately exposed” to cyber threats and that national resilience to both cyber and pandemic threats suffered “catastrophically” under the previous government.

His comment came as the National Cyber Security Centre warned last week about the rising “scale, pace and complexity” of threats to critical national infrastructure, with the nation’s capacity to repel them being outpaced by malicious actors.

Meanwhile, another recent report, from the Covid inquiry, said the UK’s pandemic planning was beset with “fatal strategic flaws” and has not improved much after the pandemic.

“We are not in the place we need to be, to be as resilient as we should be—the Covid inquiry has laid that bare,” Kyle said. “We are picking up the pieces of that, and it’s a job we take very seriously.”

Kyle also touched on the issue of visa costs for scientists, which some in the sector—including new science minister Patrick Vallance—have argued are too high and risk deterring research talent from coming to the UK.

“I am aware of this specific challenge, but as the secretary of state I see all of the challenges, and all of the potential, in the round,” Kyle said. “I have to see where that fits in alongside all of the other challenges and opportunities, and where I see a need for adjustment I’ll start making representation to the relevant departments.”

The post UK science secretary focusing on cybersecurity and AI appeared first on Research Professional News.

Free speech legislation paused, and David Behan to head the Office for Students

It took two years to pass, a year to appoint a director and six months to consult, but the Freedom of Speech (Higher Education) Act has been put on hold by the new Labour government, just days before its powers were due to come into effect. The news came in a parliamentary statement, which also saw career civil servant David Behan appointed as interim head of the Office for Students.

Behan—the former chair of Health Education England—was the author of a statutory review of the regulator for higher education in England, which was also published on Friday. The stinging report is the second critical assessment the OfS has received this academic year, following an inquiry in November by the Lords Industry and Regulators Committee.

Behan is the sort of calming interim appointment you make after an institution has been through a public trauma. Over the summer, people at the OfS (now on its third chair since its inception in 2019) will have some time to think about what has been going on at what we once dubbed the Venus de Milo of arm’s-length regulators.

In her written statement, education secretary Bridget Phillipson confirmed that the process to appoint a permanent chair has started and will conclude next year. The Behan appointment implicitly recognises the problems at what Phillipson previously has called “a politicised regulator”, and that there are few with sufficient recent knowledge of the state of play within the OfS black box to start unwinding the damage.

Some interim appointments come with the brief not to touch anything until the next guy or girl comes along; others are there to clean out the stables before a permanent successor enters the fray. We suspect that Behan’s time at the OfS may be more in the latter mode.

Phillipson’s Friday release also confirmed her decision “to stop further commencement of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 in order to consider options, including its repeal. I am aware of concerns that the act would be burdensome on providers and on the OfS, and I will confirm my long-term plans as soon as possible.”

Rather than prolong the OfS’s time in the trenches of the culture wars, the regulator will now “more sharply focus on key priorities, which include monitoring financial sustainability, ensuring quality, protecting public money and regulating in the interests of students”. However, the OfS will continue to introduce “strengthened protections for students facing harassment and sexual misconduct, including relating to the use of non-disclosure agreements in such cases by universities and colleges”.

Despite the parliamentary language, Phillipson’s statement is a clear repudiation of the legislative legacy of the previous government in higher education. The regulator is being reigned in and being tasked with sorting out the financial mess in universities—a need that ought to have been obvious since at least the Lords select committee report.

The former Conservative minister who finally dragged the bill over the line, Claire Countinho, popped up in the Sunday Telegraph to defend the legislation. The other ex-ministers associated with the passage of the act all lost their seats at the general election.

That has not stopped Tory outriders complaining about the loss of the act, which was set to take effect on 1 August in the absence of guidelines from the OfS on how it would actually work. Several voices have said that the views of gender-critical feminists would no longer be protected on campuses.

This is a red herring. The legislation contains nothing that would have altered the cases of Kathleen Stock at the University of Sussex, for example, and Jo Phoenix at the Open University, any more than it would have affected the case of David Millar, who won an industrial tribunal against the University of Bristol for wrongful dismissal over his “anti-Zionist” views.

In the case of Stock, the OfS has been conducting a three-year investigation into her resignation from Sussex and has yet to publish any findings. The primary power of the act was a legal tort that gave external speakers the course to appeal, and compensation in the event of the cancellation of a speaking engagement.

However, Phil Rosenberg, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, said the act, “while well-intentioned, risked enabling antisemitic extremists to access university campuses by severely impacting the ability of universities to block their presence”. He told the Times that scrapping it “will enable the government to consider how to ensure that freedom of speech is protected without allowing free rein to purveyors of hate speech”.

Speaking to those close to the legislation, Playbook understands that the tort was intended as a deterrent, which would nudge universities and student unions into compliance but would never be tested in a court of law. But institutions have spent significant time, money and psychic energy preparing for a confused and unenforceable act that arose from the views of splenetic opinion columns rather than a secure evidence base which identified a genuine problem in universities.

So, good riddance to bad legislation. Hopefully universities can also be free of the grifters who have made careers out of the vexatious caricatures of students and their institutions of learning, although somehow we doubt it.

Fit for the future

Speaking of grown-ups being back in charge of public bodies, David Behan’s independent report of the OfS, Fit for the Future: Higher Education Regulation Towards 2035, is a riveting read. Swap out the latest Linwood Barclay in your holiday suitcase for this regulatory roller coaster.

The TL;DR version is that political mission creep at the OfS has seen the regulator lose focus on what it is supposed to be for. Imagine if Ofwat, the body that regulates the marketised water industry, were given powers to fine wild swimmers for being woke or protesting over effluent in rivers—that is where the Office for Students has ended up with the learners whose interests it was established to protect.

However, it is not, says Sir David, all the fault of the folk at the OfS, who are there to ensure compliance with legislation even if they have been guilty of regulatory overreach. “The OfS does not regulate in a vacuum, and government needs to clearly articulate its strategy for the future of higher education, considering both the private and public good of higher education, for individuals, the economy and society,” says Behan.

The report recommends that the OfS pairs back its priorities to concentrate on “monitoring financial sustainability, ensuring quality, protecting public money and regulating in the interests of students”. This view is very much reflected in Phillipson’s parliamentary statement.

Behan is interested in students, which has been something of a rarity at the higher education regulator since it was established. He wants to see the OfS return to its roots, with a focus on its “consumer enforcement powers”. He suggests the regulator and the sector work together to come up with a model that works for student interests.

Not only that––he wants (shock, horror) the Office for Students to pay attention to said students. Behan calls on the regulator to seek “opportunities to involve students directly in its formal governance and regulatory activity, by constituting the student panel as a formal committee to the board and including students in quality assessments and investigations”.

But he does not stop at university health and paying attention to students. There are recommendations on reducing regulatory burden on institutions, working with other bodies within the higher education landscape, and on running pilot schemes before rolling out regulatory changes.

On quality, Behan recommends doing away with the need for a separate designated body and encourages the OfS to take on this role itself as part of “providing a continuous improvement feedback loop” for providers rather than beating them with a stick.

On finances, Behan suggests that the government needs to take a view on “whether the non-interventionist positioning is still the most appropriate for meeting the challenges of today”. Those challenges might become considerable on the other side of summer, when university recruitment targets are met or missed.

Rather than living in denial about university finances, Behan recommends that the OfS shares intelligence with universities and other sector bodies to “support sector planners to undertake realistic and prudent forecasting, scenario-planning and decision-making”. In other words, stop concocting university budgets on the basis of heroically optimistic recruitment forecasts.

There are also recommendations on joined-up working between the OfS and government, which sound as if they come from Behan’s own experiences of working in the NHS. However, significantly, the report says the OfS should develop “a more transparent style of communications to demonstrate to the sector its independence from government”.

There is a lot to unpack in that sentence, and a lot of work to do to reverse the damage of the past few years. Behan recommends an independent evaluation of the OfS board and a clear determination of which roles should be in the gift of the secretary of state, and which roles should be appointed by the chair.

“This will provide clear lines of accountability and avoid a dilution of the chief executive’s authority. The review recognises new legislation would be required to enact this,” reads the report. An experienced regulator like Behan is pointing out that something has gone wrong in the design of the Office for Students and is in need of urgent remedy.

The report is something of a vindication for vice-chancellors who have criticised regulatory burden and overreach. Behan is recommending a reset of the OfS and in turn wants to see “the sector reciprocate with the OfS, engaging productively and willingly with regulation”. Well, you can’t have everything, but it is certainly possible to have a much healthier relationship between universities, the regulator and government than we have had since 2019.

And finally…

In other news this weekend, the Sunday Times reports that “top universities” are to take students with lower grades in clearing in an attempt to solve their cash crisis. It is really a story about Ucas publishing the grades that universities actually accept for degree courses rather than the prospectus sticker price.

The most interesting part of the story is a quote from Higher Education Policy Institute director Nick Hillman, who says: “The [financial] crunch point for universities this year could be clearing. I expect to see more Russell Group universities in clearing because of the fall in overseas students. That will mean that lower-ranking universities have even more competition for UK students and may not meet their targets.

“If universities have a bad clearing and then a lot of their students drop out in the first few weeks of term, before they pay the first instalment of their tuition fees, that could be catastrophic. A trigger for a bankruptcy could be a bad clearing or a bank calling in a debt because it has lost faith in an institution, or for some other reason.”

Meanwhile, the Sunday Times also reports a recommendation from Grant Ritchie, the former principal of Dundee and Angus College, who served on the board of the Scottish Funding Council, that Scotland’s further and higher education institutions need to consider mergers. He is quoted as saying the Scottish sector is “in a state of financial crisis and there are really tough decisions that need to be made by individual institutions and by institutions collectively”.

He says: “It also needs the government to be serious about taking a leadership role and having ideas about how to move forward because the current structures are unaffordable. Mergers and intensive collaboration are required to make sense of the large number of institutions that we have in Scotland.”

We suspect this might be a long hot summer for higher education across the UK. Tomorrow sees the last regular edition of Playbook for this academic year—with the season finale of Ivory Tower on Wednesday—but you will be able to keep up with all the big stories on universities and research with our daily news service throughout August.

On Research Professional News today

In yesterday’s Sunday Reading, Gordon McKenzie draws on 18 years’ experience of higher education finance to predict future policy.

Chris Parr reports that the Labour government is to consider repealing last year’s legislation on freedom of speech in higher education over concerns that it is burdensome for universities, student unions and the Office for Students, and that the Office for Students’ regulatory approach provides insufficient protection for students in the event of a university exiting the market, according to a new report.

He also writes that education secretary Bridget Phillipson has confirmed that David Behan, former head of the Care Quality Commission, will be appointed interim chair of the Office for Students, the English higher education regulator, and that a government-commissioned review of the Office for Students has recommended that England’s regulator act in a “bold and confident manner” and monitor the financial sustainability of all higher education providers more closely.

Additionally, he gives us a rundown of the 32 recommendations made in the government-commissioned review of the Office for Students.

Emily Twinch tells us that the UK government has appointed a tech entrepreneur to create an action plan that will support the country’s efforts to develop an artificial intelligence sector that can compete on the world stage.

John Whitfield says the UK government has announced it will invest £106 million to create five hubs for R&D in quantum technology.

Nina Bo Wagner reveals that the German government has proposed a broad post-Brexit alternative deal between the UK and EU that would include student mobility arrangements and ameliorate high visa costs, according to reports, and that Switzerland’s main research funder has decided to raise minimum PhD salaries by 6 per cent from 2026 onwards.

John Bonner writes that five new members have been appointed to the board of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, EIT.

In the news

The BBC reports that Durham University’s choir has been invited to sing at St Peter’s Basilica in September. It writes that the University of Northampton is celebrating the 50th anniversary of its Gay Outdoor Club.

It also reports that a court has given the University of Sheffield permission to clear the Gaza protest camp outside its students’ union building, and that controversial new powers for universities and student unions to be fined for failing to uphold freedom of speech have been put on hold by the government.

The BBC also reports that Anglia Ruskin University will get a new media and TV building, despite objections.

The Guardian writes that Jonny Clothier, who was refused graduation at Bristol University for 41 years over an unpaid bill relating to his flatmate’s bird, has now graduated. The paper also reports on Labour halting the Tory’s law on freedom of speech in English universities.

The Times says Scottish universities must merge to survive, according to experts. It reports on a King’s College London donor linked to the Communist Party of China and writes that ministers are wrong to shelve legislation passed by parliament to protect free speech in universities.

The paper also suggests that Britain has too many universities and that the cash crisis resulting in a fall in the number of overseas applicants is forcing top universities to take students with lower grades. It also reports that education secretary Bridget Phillipson is to announce reforms, among which is telling the OfS it must save universities from bankruptcy without the help of the taxpayer.

The Telegraph reveals that every member of Team GB men’s rowers at the Paris Olympics are Oxford Brookes alumni. It publishes a comment accusing Labour of surrendering to the enemies free speech and publishes another comment condemning Bridget Phillipson’s decision to cancel the commencement of the Higher Education Act, saying it brings shame upon the party.

The Financial Times reports that the space industry is calling for bolder bets in the UK’s funding strategy.

The Independent writes that Labour’s decision to pause the freedom of speech law has been branded as ‘chilling’ by a former Conservative minister.

The Herald reports that research by University of Dundee professor Husam AlWaer, looking at how people in refugee camps reshape their environment, has been given a prestigious award.

The Scotsman writes that colleges have stressed they will not be ‘press-ganged’ into mergers as part of a restructure of the University of the Highlands and Islands.

The week ahead

Parliament goes into recess on Tuesday 30 July, which is also the date of the last Playbook of this academic year. 

From 11am on Tuesday, there will be a debate in the House of Lords on regulating AI technologies. 

Wednesday is the final day of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales’s existence. On Thursday, we formally welcome Medr as the tertiary body for Welsh education and research.

Also on Thursday, the Higher Education Policy Institute publishes a paper on retention, progression and promotion of early career Black academics.

The Playbook would not be possible without Donatella Montrone, Harriet Swain, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Good riddance appeared first on Research Professional News.

A report suggests how the government could prevent universities from going bust

Playbook understands that an interim chair for the Office for Students and other regulatory changes will be announced today in a written ministerial statement.

Imminent action in this area was signalled by education secretary Bridget Phillipson earlier this week when she made it clear in an interview with the BBC’s Today programme that the first response of the new government to the financial problems affecting higher education would be to focus on regulation and the OfS rather than pumping in cash through fee rises or government grants.

Meanwhile, a timely report out today from the think tank Public First—Institution Overboard: Managing the Risk of Disorderly Market Exit in English Higher Education—highlights how much attention the current regulatory regime needs.

It argues that the regime is not set up to cope with any large-scale failure of higher education institutions—either in terms of multiple institutions or one large institution.

This is not just because student protection plans have no force in insolvency law and students no more rights than creditors should an institution go bust, but because the current approach to institutional failure takes no account of the risk of “contagion”, whereby the failure of one institution could affect the behaviour of students, staff and lenders elsewhere in the system.

The report says a failure would have knock-on effects both for the region around the university concerned and for the wider ecosystem of UK teaching and research.

And it calls for the role of the OfS to be rebalanced to prioritise collaboration over competition and to take a more proactive approach towards managing and forecasting financial risk in order to help avoid it. This would also involve student protection plans being strengthened.

Restructuring scheme

The report, written by Jonathan Simons, partner and head of education practice at Public First, and Jess Lister, an associate director, also proposes a new £2.5 billion Higher Education Enhancement and Transformation Scheme to preempt market exits by making repayable loans available to institutions that can “make a compelling case for restructuring”.

This compelling case would rest on meeting six tests: offering a plan for economic growth in the region; protecting the community; having an impact on public service training; affecting the future flow of graduate labour; protecting scientific assets and the research base; and protecting academic specialisms.

Money would be offered upfront in exchange for later cost savings and improvements in productivity, such as better use of research funding. The idea is that it would be a good option for institutions that are perhaps one or two recruitment cycles (say 18 to 24 months) away from real challenges.

For institutions too close to the brink to be saved by such a scheme, the report makes the case for a Special Administration Regime, modelled on that already in place for further education colleges, which should mean that any exit from the sector is properly managed.

This would ensure minimum disruption for existing students should an institution go bust—and the report argues that it could be introduced relatively quickly, although it would require primary legislation.

The problem is that the mere passing of such legislation could knock the confidence of institutions, students and creditors, the report’s authors suggest. They say that other measures, such as the proposed transformation scheme, could be delivered more quickly and at a lower cost.

Finally, the report calls for the appointment of a higher education commissioner at the Department for Education to liaise between the sector and government.

The commissioner would be able to offer support with changes to senior leadership, financial management and health checks or restructuring, as well as being responsible for managing the transformation scheme.

Longer-term stability

In a foreword to the report, Stuart Croft, vice-chancellor and president of the University of Warwick, writes: “The potential ‘market exit’ of a higher education institution is a feature, not a bug, of the current regulatory framework. In practice, exit––orderly or otherwise––of an institution from the sector has not been adequately prepared or planned for. Action is required to both protect students and to ensure that the reputation of the higher education sector is safeguarded.”

He argues that the OfS was set up with too little emphasis on financial sustainability and that while the recommendations in the paper should help stabilise the system, there are also longer-term issues to address.

One of those is the sector’s reliance on international students.

In her BBC interview and later in a speech at King’s College London, Phillipson spoke enthusiastically about the contribution made by these students.

Her words were warmly welcomed by a sector that has blamed less positive rhetoric about international students from the previous government for recent scary falls in their numbers.

Phillipson appeared to signal that with finances stretched and the idea of raising tuition fees politically unpalatable, the government is looking to international students to fill the financial gap.

But Croft warns in today’s report: “We need to be clear-eyed about the future. Student recruitment will continue to get more competitive, and not every UK university will be able to sustain, let alone grow, current levels of international student recruitment.”

The report also warns that an institutional failure could make international students less confident about choosing to study in the UK.

Resizing and reshaping

Concerns about managing market exit have been growing for a while. Smita Jamdar, head of education at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau, told Playbook in June that there was no clear roadmap for how to handle such exits because they depend on how individual institutions have been incorporated.

In its recent annual assessment of the health of the sector, the OfS suggested that mergers could be a solution and predicted that “we might see some changes to the size and shape of the sector, for example through mergers and acquisitions or increased specialisation”.

But the Public First paper adds to warnings from many, including Jamdar, that mergers may not be an easy answer. It recognises that most UK universities are the product of a continual process of merger and integration, such as the gradual merger of art and design, teacher training and nursing schools into universities, and it rejects the idea of preserving the current system in aspic. It warns, however, that such reordering becomes a problem when it reduces students’ choice of courses and institutions, the breadth of research or institutions’ contribution to their local communities.

The paper also rejects the idea of a “backstop”, whereby local institutions are forced to take existing students if an institution closes, on the grounds that it is unreasonable to expect the system to hold enough spare capacity just on the off-chance that a failure happens, and because, unlike customers, students cannot be seamlessly switched between providers.

Controversially, it sees a case for reclassifying universities as part of the public sector should more government intervention be necessary, because, despite the dangers of a loss of autonomy, it considers the dangers of disorderly exit to be so serious.

“Government, policymakers and indeed all citizens benefit from a financially sustainable higher education system that delivers both individual benefit and wider national goals for the country,” it states. “Changes in provider shape and size are acceptable—and even to be welcomed when they come in response to student demand, but they need to be managed in a strategic way, and the systemic impact constantly monitored.”

Susan Lapworth, chief executive of the OfS, said the report “helpfully adds to the debate about how students can best be protected if their institution is no longer able to operate”.

“We are continuing our work to understand the financial position of individual institutions and the steps they are taking to respond to the risks they face. We are particularly focused on ensuring effective student protection planning is taking place where risks are greatest.”

More resources

One problem the report identifies is that the OfS is cautious about its legal and political capacity to take the action needed. It suggests the regulator is likely to need greater direction and statutory guidance, as well as more resources, especially in a case of significant market exit.

In this context, it is interesting that earlier this week, the regulator advertised “multiple roles” for legal advisers, offering “an opportunity to grow your legal expertise by working across our diverse and rapidly evolving organisation on a wide range of regulatory and corporate issues”.

Clearly, then, it anticipates doing some major evolving––and quickly––although it is a little concerning that those appointed to the roles will be expected to grow their legal expertise on the job rather than having it already. And the salary of between £51,844 and £56,662 plus £5,000 allowance and £3,566 London weighting seems on the low side for a qualified solicitor or barrister with regulatory experience, when newly qualified lawyers in London are routinely earning six-figure salaries.

It seems particularly low when their expertise is expected to cover such a wide range of issues, from knowledge of the Higher Education and Research Act to data protection, freedom of information, defamation, human rights, consumer protection, equalities legislation and the higher education regulatory framework.

The government is not short of advice from sector bodies keen to get their key messages across early on in the new regime, and it will be interesting to see how many of the ideas outlined by Public First it takes up.

University Alliance, which represents 16 professional and technical universities, also contributes a report this morning, offering cost-neutral or low-cost ideas for the government to consider in its first 100 days. These range from launching a cross-governmental healthcare education taskforce to increasing student maintenance, removing international students from long-term migration statistics and scrapping “burdensome” freedom of speech regulations.

The fact that a ministerial statement on the OfS is expected today suggests that amid all the clamouring for attention, Phillipson has recognised that help for higher education institutions in serious difficulty is needed urgently.

At the same time, this focus on regulatory support suggests she has few plans to offer the financial kind, which could have prevented the difficulty occurring in the first place.

And finally…

Readers attending degree ceremonies over the summer should be aware that anything can happen, as is made clear in a University of Manchester Magazine interview with Nancy Rothwell, who steps down next week as the university’s vice-chancellor.

“I remember, one degree ceremony, shaking hands with a student who then cartwheeled down the aisle,” she recalls.

“Then another who asked very politely: ‘May I set off a rocket?’ And I said yes, imagining it’d be a small rocket. It wasn’t––it was massive and showered the whole stage in confetti. She didn’t do it above my head, so that was alright.”

Playbook’s advice to Rothwell’s successor Duncan Ivison is that if a graduate asks to set off a rocket at a degree ceremony, just say no.

On Research Professional News today

Emily Twinch reports that the EU must invest in firms at the scale-up stage to stay at the forefront of technological change, according to the bloc’s leading financial institution.

Chris Parr writes that Brunel University London has announced it is to become part of the University of London federation from October.

John Bonner tells us that the national funder UK Research and Innovation has agreed a deal on closer collaboration with the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Australia.

John Whitfield says that a UK organisation representing early career researchers has launched a scheme to recruit and support young at-risk academics.

Frances Jones writes that the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford are part of a group that has urged the prime minister to make their cities and region the “first UK innovation supercluster”.

She adds that a group representing the European pharmaceutical industry has accepted the final agreement on the European Health Data Space regulation.

Nina Bo Wagner reveals that global crises are driving steady change in universities, according to a European University Association report.

In the news

The Financial Times reports that the science minister has pledged a cybersecurity boost for crucial data troves, and the Universities Superannuation Scheme has warned on future investments after Thames Water losses.

In the Telegraph, the Public First think tank has warned that universities ‘will collapse without a £2.5bn emergency loan pot’, and there’s a look at the best student bank accounts.

In the Times, the University of Cambridge has placated Gaza activists with the promise of an arms investment review.

The Herald covers a prestigious award for a University of Dundee paper on refugee camps, and a Scottish homeless charity is to open new cafés in a university expansion plan.

The day ahead

There will be a House of Commons debate at 9.30am on making Britain a clean energy superpower.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Making an exit appeared first on Research Professional News.

Btecs get a reprieve, UUK plans a blueprint and EDSK bows out

We had hoped that Bridget Phillipson would use the occasion of her first education questions as secretary of state to announce the appointment of an interim chair of the Office for Students. No such luck.

However, she did say that the new government would press pause on the defunding of Btec qualifications as planned by the Conservatives. Around one in six university entrants gain access to their degree programme through Btec certification.

There will now be a review of post-16 vocational routes at level 3 and below, to be completed by the end of the year. That’s separate from any wider post-16 review that will take in university funding.

Chris Parr was listening in to the session in the Commons and tells us that Phillipson said the government is unable to give a commitment to rejoining Erasmus+. That is despite her warm words on Tuesday about international exchanges and British universities being open to the world, and a King’s speech that spoke of restoring relations with the EU.

Labour is still enjoying its post-election honeymoon period and can stick to that campaign position for now. But the thing about saying you will fix the inherited problems of higher education is that at some point you will actually have to fix them, and not having a functioning international exchange programme for universities in England is one of those problems.

Pre-publicity

For those of you looking for something to sink your teeth into once your summer beach reading has been put to one side, Universities UK has announced that it will be releasing a blueprint for higher education in the autumn. An extensive paper to be published after the holidays will explore the role of universities in addressing the new government’s priorities “and some of the public’s biggest concerns”.

Given that some of the public’s biggest concerns in the autumn will include the price of school uniforms and when the new series of Strictly begins, this could be quite an exciting paper. If UUK can also help Labour understand where “the highest sustained growth in the G7” is going to come from without a large programme of public spending or rejoining the European single market, the blueprint should be a bestseller.

Universities’ role in the long-sought-after economic growth will be central to the analysis by a panel of experts from within and outside higher education. There will be contributions from former Bank of England chief economist Andy Haldane, former universities and science minister David Willetts, former almost everything Peter Mandelson and Confederation of British Industry chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.

Those who know little of the mysteries of GDP but something of the attention span of newspaper editors might be wondering why UUK is preannouncing the publication at the end of July. This is the sort of product tease usually reserved for the next Dan Brown novel.

We guess UUK knows what it is doing, given its history of successful campaign launches such as Made at Uni and the 100 Faces of first-in-family graduates, both of which sunk faster than a cheese soufflé on Celebrity Bake Off. On Tuesday morning, the panel, chaired by UUK president and University of St Andrews vice-chancellor Sally Mapstone, met “to discuss the action needed from the new government and from higher education itself to ensure universities deliver their potential”.

According to UUK, the blueprint will explore how universities can tackle the things the public cares about most, such as the NHS, the economy, climate change and who is going to replace Gareth Southgate as England manager (we may have made that last one up). Universities are of course central to the delivery of NHS services and the training of the health workforce.

Mapstone said the blueprint “sets out how universities can stimulate growth, drive innovation and open up opportunity…Universities are in an ideal position to help deliver on the government’s growth ambitions, but action is needed to ensure this great work can continue with the velocity and depth that are necessary.” That all sounds grand but hardly goes into any more detail on where the growth is coming from than Labour’s own lightweight manifesto.

We are told Mandelson will be “leading” a chapter on research and development. We assume that leading is in some way different from writing.

In a sneak peek, Mandelson says that “Britain has a world-class research base and now is the time to step up its translation into new UK industry and supply chains. Success depends on putting finance capital together with the talent in our universities. This has to be central to all the government says and does.”

That’s reassuring, because obviously former science minister George Freeman and the Conservative government never thought about that. While universities are capable of doing all sorts of things to contribute to society and the economy—from social mobility and public sector workforce training to spinout companies and supporting small businesses—none of them are going to happen while the sector is in the grip of a funding crisis, with multiple redundancy programmes cropping up from Aberdeen to Canterbury.

This week, the education secretary told universities that there is no extra money coming from Whitehall and that they should look to the recruitment of international students and better budget management. However, it is precisely the knowledge exchange, civic partnerships and industry collaboration that are falling by the wayside as universities are forced by economic circumstances to retreat into their core functions of teaching and research.

Familiar thinking

The UUK blueprint will be published this autumn with a view to influencing the new government’s first spending review. But we have been hearing for years about universities’ potential to contribute to economic growth. The reality is, as reported by the National Centre for Universities and Business, that the number of higher education and industry collaborations and the value of direct inward investment have been in reverse since Brexit and the pandemic.

It is obviously a good thing that university bosses are thinking about ways in which the sector can be visible and useful to the new government, which has many other demands on its attention right now. But based on the pre-release publicity, the autumn blueprint sounds a lot like past efforts in this space when the Conservatives were in office.

Let’s hope there is more to it than that. If the panellists are leading or writing their chapters over the summer, they could do worse than look at a report from earlier this month by the Centre for Economic Performance, based at the London School of Economics and Political Science, which argued that the economy needs more graduates, not fewer.

The report’s authors say: “If the UK economy is to grow, it is especially important that ‘strategic sectors’ (those in which the UK has a comparative advantage) are supported. These sectors—which include financial and business services, the creative and cultural sector and life sciences—employ a much higher fraction of graduates than the rest of the economy.”

A House of Lords Library analysis suggests that the creative industries are worth £126 billion to the UK economy and employ nearly 2.4 million people. Without universities, there would be little workforce training in this area and much less in the way of partnerships and original knowledge production.

In contrast, our world-class life sciences are worth about £13bn and employ less than 1 per cent of the UK workforce. Yet it is university arts provision that is taking knocks from which it may never recover during the ongoing sustainability crisis.

This is not to argue against investment in science—obviously that would be nuts. Rather, it is to hope that the UUK blueprint does not repeat the tired tropes of the past 14 years but offers some genuinely different and wider thinking about the actual economy the UK has rather than the one that think tanks and politicians would like us to have.

In the absence of a functioning trade arrangement with our nearest economic bloc, growth will not come easily through unobtainable aspirations for a global status in R&D that is beyond the resources of our struggling public finances and beleaguered research institutions. Rather, growth will come from supporting the things that we already do well, such as services and the cultural industries. These sectors of the economy require active measures such as youth mobility, fewer visa restrictions, more graduates and international exchanges.

Whether after 14 years of the service sector being beaten up, universities or the new government are actually prepared to support the priority industries that provide the UK economy with a competitive advantage remains to be seen. It is to be hoped that the appointment of Chris Bryant as a minister between the science and culture departments provides a bridge to enable an attitude towards universities and economic growth that does not merely repeat the orthodoxy and exclusions of past thinking.

And finally…

A report out this week—Augar Reviewed: Why Post-18 Education in England is Still Broken and How to Fix It—is the final contribution to the thought-o-sphere from the think tank EDSK. Director Tom Richmond announced last week that with the general election taking place and a new government coming in, the education think tank’s journey has come to an end.

Its review of life after Augar is a great way for EDSK to bid farewell to the education landscape it has graced for the past decade. In its final advice to the sector, it calls for the creation of an independent body called the National Tertiary Education Council to oversee all post-18 provision.

It also recommends that tuition fees in England be reduced to £6,000 per year and supplemented by £5bn of direct government funding. EDSK wants to see the Lifelong Learning Entitlement working across the entire tertiary portfolio, allowing movement between further and higher education.

There is much to ponder in the report, including the role of devolved mayoralties and employers in shaping tertiary offers. EDSK says: “Other countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Scotland and Wales have already set off on their journey towards a more coherent, collaborative, equitable and sustainable tertiary system, even if that means challenging the orthodoxies and legacies that dominated such conversations in the past. It is now time for England to do the same.”

Chris Parr has been reading the report for us and says the think tank is really arguing that the dominance of universities needs to be addressed for the entire tertiary ecosystem to flourish.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith could do worse than pack a copy of the EDSK report along with the factor 50 as she heads for the airport this summer. We hope that Richmond enjoys a well-deserved break after his years of service to policy formation and think-tankery.

On Research Professional News today

Chris Parr reports that there should be “no doubt” that international students are welcome in the UK, education secretary Bridget Phillipson has said, and she has announced that plans to defund some Btec qualifications have been paused pending a review.

Chris adds that the “inescapable dominance” of universities is undermining the value and availability of other post-18 qualifications, the EDSK think tank has said.

Harriet Swain ponders how Labour could reshape the university sector.

Frances Jones tells us that the Labour government is likely to “refresh” its list of candidates being considered for UK Research and Innovation’s next chief executive, and the UK’s spending watchdog has questioned whether the nation gets value for money from its membership of the European Space Agency.

Frances also covers a £16 million boost for a UK biomedical database.

Emily Twinch reveals that a collaboration involving the European Commission, working to create a platform for European researchers to share information and services, is seeking views from researchers on interest and readiness for the service.

Emily adds that UK visa costs for cancer scientists have risen by 44 per cent in a year.

Nina Bo Wagner writes that organisations representing European academic libraries and repositories are seeking input on their future role.

Marcus Munafò says that internal meta research units could help tackle challenges of resourcing and culture.

Paul Harris writes that Australian Labor’s reset of higher education policy is ambitious but incremental.

Pranesh Narayanan argues that reversing decades of decline in UK manufacturing means focusing R&D on imitation and adaptation.

In the news

The BBC reports that a Gaza protest camp is set to disband after a University of Cambridge offer, Keele University is holding a football tournament for refugees, and there’s a profile of Btecs.

In the Financial Times, business and university leaders have urged the revival of an Oxford-Cambridge high-tech growth plan.

The Telegraph says that former Pakistan prime minister Imran Khan is to run for chancellor of the University of Oxford from prison, lecturers ‘should give up generous pensions to save universities’, and a comment piece says that the University of Cambridge is in a state of moral collapse.

In the Times, the student accommodation provider Unite Group is seeking an extra £450m for expansion.

A comment piece in the Spectator says that letting the worst universities collapse would be an act of kindness.

The New Statesman has a comment piece saying that those graduating this summer should consider the generations to come.

The day ahead

At 10am, the Quality Assurance Agency has an online introduction to international programme accreditation.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Bookmarked publication appeared first on Research Professional News.

Government matches contribution from Amazon Web Services, aiming to benefit medical research

The biomedical database known as UK Biobank is to receive a boost worth around £16 million to upgrade how it stores and uses health data.

Science and technology secretary Peter Kyle announced on 25 July that the cloud computing company Amazon Web Services will provide cloud computing credits worth $10m (£7.7m), which will be matched by £8m in funding from the government.

A statement from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said that this investment will benefit research into new ways to prevent, diagnose and treat diseases such as dementia, Parkinson’s and cancer.

The Amazon Web Services investment will also give UK Biobank access to storage and other services such as artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Private sector partnership

Kyle said the investment meant that UK Biobank has “the cloud infrastructure it needs” to underpin its activities.

The announcement adds to the £32m that had already been provided for the database by the government and two philanthropists: Eric Schmidt, former chief executive of Google; and Kenneth Griffin, founder of the hedge fund Citadel.

Science minister Patrick Vallance said: “Advances in science and health succeed best when we work together—and that applies to close partnership with the private sector as well. Amazon Web Services’ contribution—recognising the unique value of UK Biobank’s work—shows the value these partnerships can unlock and precisely why we want to build even closer relationships to tackle healthcare challenges and unlock growth.”

Kyle added: “This is just the start of our plan to work hand in hand with industry and academia to harness the power of life sciences to grow our economy and boost healthcare.”

The post Dsit announces £16m boost for UK biomedical database appeared first on Research Professional News.

Education secretary announces review of level 3 qualifications

The UK’s education secretary has announced that plans to defund some Btec qualifications, committed to by the previous government, have been paused pending a review.

Speaking in the House of Commons on 24 July, Bridget Phillipson announced a “short pause and review of post-16 qualification reform at level 3 and below”. She confirmed that the defunding schedule “will be paused”.

Some Btec qualifications—those deemed to overlap with the topics covered by the new T-levels—were due to be defunded from next week, essentially making them unviable. This had been heavily criticised by experts who argued that Btecs are respected qualifications that are particularly valued by students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

In an accompanying post on the social media site X, Phillipson said the government remained committed to the rollout of T-levels and that the review of level 3 qualifications will conclude “by the end of the year”. 

Universities and Erasmus+

“Post-16 education is all about giving learners the power to make choices that are right for them,” Phillipson said. “For many, that will be university, and I am immensely proud of our world-leading universities—they are shining lights of learning.

“But their future has been left in darkness for too long—this must and will change. Under this government, universities [will be] valued as a public good, not treated as a political battleground. We will move decisively to establish certainty and sustainability, securing our universities as engines of growth, excellence and opportunity.”

Elsewhere in the debate, Phillipson was asked if the UK would be rejoining the EU’s Erasmus+ student mobility programme, but she said that this was not something to which the government could commit.  

In response

Qasim Hussain, UK vice-president, National Union of Students:

“We are so pleased to that the government has decided to pause and review the plan to scrap Btecs. Reforming vocational qualifications shouldn’t mean reducing choices. The development of T-levels does not necessitate the scrapping of Btecs; they fulfil the various learning needs of different students.

“Students who choose vocational education should have the same amount of choice as students who choose academic education. For this reason, we believe Btecs are an important part of our further education landscape.”

Jo Grady, general secretary, University and College Union:

“We are delighted Labour has heeded our call to keep Btecs, putting on hold Tory plans to close off this key route into higher education for working-class students. This decision means students will not have their post-16 options needlessly restricted. Btecs are especially important for widening participation, as Black and Asian students are more likely to use them to get to university.

“Educators will now be able to contribute fully to the review, which we hope will recommend that colleges keep their existing Btec provision and build upon it, rather than scrapping these crucial qualifications.”

The post Btec defunding paused by UK government appeared first on Research Professional News.

Report urges government to slash fees to £6,000 and redistribute resources to FE and apprenticeships

The “inescapable dominance” of universities is undermining the value and availability of other post-18 qualifications, the EDSK think tank has said in its final report before it shuts down for good. 

The report—titled ‘Augar Reviewed’—calls on the new government to cut all tuition fees in England to £6,000 a year as part of a “major rethink of how students and institutions are funded”.

It also claims there are “underlying imbalances, inconsistencies and inequities” in the way that higher education, further education and apprenticeships are funded.

“If the new Labour government wants to improve economic growth and productivity, increasing the skill levels of workers of all ages through a more effective and responsive approach to education and training will surely be a critical part of their agenda,” the report states. “Although HE will undoubtedly play an important role in such efforts, FE and apprenticeships could (and should) play a central role as well.”

It adds that “the dominance of higher in tertiary education is inescapable”, and criticises the increased investment in universities over the past 20 years. The report also criticises the fact that students in higher education are eligible for maintenance loans of up to £13,000, whereas those on higher-level further education programmes are not.

On a pedestal

EDSK concludes that student loans should be reformed so that they operate more like a graduate tax, with higher repayments from the highest-earning graduates. Such a change, it says, would free up £2 billion for a new ‘Student Support Fund’ to be distributed to universities and colleges to support disadvantaged students.

Tom Richmond, director of EDSK and co-author of the report, said: “Our post-18 education system will never reach its full potential in terms of driving economic growth and productivity if full-time university degrees continue to be placed on a pedestal above other qualifications and courses.

“Vital as universities are for delivering education and training, it is time to end the enduring bias towards higher education in the way that we fund institutions and students.”

On 18 July, Richmond announced the report would be EDSK’s last. “A big thanks also to everyone who has taken the time to read our reports, attend our events, salute the puns in our report titles or share their insights and expertise with us—it’s all been enormously appreciated,” he said.

EDSK, short for education and skills, was founded in 2019 as a non-partisan, non-profit think tank.

The post End ‘enduring bias’ towards HE in funding, says think tank appeared first on Research Professional News.

We return to a classic format to interpret the words of the education secretary

If the most-read articles on Research Professional News are anything to go by then there is a real thirst for information about what Bridget Phillipson and her team at the Department for Education are planning to do with the higher education sector.

The new education secretary delivered a speech about international students yesterday, giving us the opportunity to dust off our ‘How to read’ format and translate her words for the sector audience.

So, addressing the Embassy Education Conference yesterday, here is what Phillipson said—and what she actually meant:

In my first weeks as secretary of state in this new government, I have been resetting relationships across the length and breadth of education.

[I inherited a complete bombsite.]

I want to refresh old partnerships and grow new ones, not just at home but around the world too. By joining forces in education, we can build new bridges between our nations.

[I inherited a complete and utter bombsite.]

And I want to set the record straight on international students. I know there’s been some mixed messaging from governments in the past, from our predecessors most of all. And for too long, international students have been treated as political footballs, not valued guests. Their fees welcomed, but their presence resented.

[Hang on, this actually sounds good.]

Exploited for cheap headlines, not cherished for all they bring to our communities. This government will take a different approach and we will speak clearly. Be in no doubt: international students are welcome in the UK. This new government values their contribution—to our universities, to our communities, to our country.

[They are welcome because they are incredibly lucrative and we are not prepared to increase tuition fees or allocate more public money to universities.]

I want Britain to welcome those who want to come to these shores to study and meet the requirements to do so. Now, this is part of a wider sea change here in the UK. Under this new government, education is once again at the forefront of national life. Under this new government, universities are a public good, not a political battleground. Under this new government, opportunity is for everyone.

[Standard ‘rule of three’. Note the new soundbite, trailed previously: “Education is once again at the forefront of national life”—a bit like Claudia Winkleman.]

And our international partnerships are central to this drive to spread opportunity far and wide. The more we work together, the more progress we will see in the world—partners in the push for better. Closed systems that only look inward quickly run out of ideas. Creativity crumbles, innovation dies, the same thoughts spin round and round and collapse in on themselves. But through our international partners, we can reach out across the world and bring back a freshness of thought that breathes new life into our society. That includes our universities and it includes international students.

[Who are welcome because they are incredibly lucrative and we are not prepared to increase tuition fees or allocate more public money to universities. Nothing yet on cutting the price of visas or the NHS surcharge.]

How could it not? These people are brave. They move to a new culture, far away from their homes and their families. They take a leap of faith, hoping to develop new skills and chase new horizons. And I am enormously proud that so many want to take that leap here in the UK. And we will do everything we can to help them succeed.

[Again, this is really positive rhetoric. However, and we may have mentioned this already, international students are mainly welcome because they are incredibly lucrative. Nothing here about them being allowed to bring their families with them.]

That’s why we offer the opportunity to remain in the UK on a graduate visa for two years after their studies end—or three for PhDs—to work, to live and to contribute. While this government is committed to managing migration carefully, international students will always be welcome in this country. The UK wouldn’t be the same without them.

[It is now safe to say that the ‘review’ of the graduate route visa is over, thank goodness. Like the closure of the Bibby Stockholm, let’s hope home secretary Yvette Cooper has signed this off.]

Arts, music, culture, sport, food, language, humour—international students drive dynamism on so many levels. And of course, their contribution to the British economy is substantial. Each international student adds about £100,000 to our national prosperity. This impact is not just a national statistic. It’s felt in towns and cities right across the country.

[Phillipson is an MP from the north-east, where the income from international students really matters.]

I’ve seen it in Sunderland, where I have the privilege to serve as a member of parliament. The city is home to almost 5,000 international students. Many come from China, flying across the world to study at the University of Sunderland. I welcome their presence and I value their contribution. And students from all nations add to the city’s buzz. More footfall on our high streets. More laughter in our pubs. More conversation in our cafés. International students contribute so much to my home city, so much to our country. And they get so much in return. The UK is a fantastic place to come and study.

[International students are a bit like having a 12-month tourist season in Skegness.]

Every student who steps off the plane in Manchester or arrives on the Eurostar in London is a vote of confidence in our universities. Students come because they know they will receive a world-class education. They come because they know it sets them up for success. Many go on to positions of power. Above the desks of leaders around the world sit certificates from British universities. They, and hopefully many of you, will know the joy of living abroad, the excitement of discovering a new culture, a new perspective, perhaps even a new weather system. While students may not come to the UK for our weather system, they do come for our rich and varied culture.

[Please, let’s start acknowledging again the fact that the UK is actually a pretty nice place to study. Don’t worry so much about why foreigners are prepared to learn English while we are decimating our language infrastructure.]

They know this is a country that sparks genius, that has birthed innovation to the rest of the world. What better place to study science than the land of Charles Darwin, Ada Lovelace, Alan Turing? What better place to study English than the land of William Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Zadie Smith? And what better place to study music than the land of John Lennon, Stormzy, Adele?

[Now that’s a collaboration we would like to see. No mention for Sunderland’s Dave Stewart or Emeli Sandé.]

Students benefit from coming to the UK and we benefit from them being here. But I don’t see this as a hard-nosed transactional relationship. It’s not just about GDP, balance sheets or export receipts.

[Please don’t assume that international students are mainly welcome because they are incredibly lucrative and we are not prepared to increase tuition fees or allocate more public money to universities. We can also be nice to them while we take their cash.]

No. My passion is for an open, global Britain—one that welcomes new ideas. One that looks outward in optimism, not inward in exclusion. In my university days, I made some wonderful friends who came from around the world. They broadened my horizons, challenged my views and pushed me to be better. Students come and build bonds with their classmates—and friendships between students become friendships between countries. That’s what education is all about. A force for good in people’s lives, a force for good in our world. A generation of young people who have studied abroad and cultivated friendships with people from different cultures—those ties make the world a safer, more vibrant place. This new government is mission-led. And I am leading on the mission to break down the barriers to opportunity. I am determined to make Britain the international home of opportunity.

[Given the state the US is in, we might actually be able to make that stick. Just don’t mention the EU’s wish for a youth mobility scheme with the UK.]

So I want genuine partnerships with countries across the world in higher education and beyond. We already have deep education partnerships with countless countries around the globe, and I want to build more. From our closest neighbours, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, to major regional powers, India, Nigeria, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, important allies, the US and Australia, to world-leading systems like Singapore and Japan, and many others.

[We slightly regret what happened with the whole Brexit thing. Just don’t mention Erasmus+ or its outsourced non-exchange alternative that would have Alan Turing turning in his grave.]

Whether that’s through British international schools abroad or cross-border collaboration on skills training. School trips and scholarships, exchange programmes and language learning, policy conversations that span the early years to learners with special educational needs. And I want our universities to work with their international partners to deliver courses across borders. Education must be at the forefront of tackling the major global challenges of our time.

[OK, we are back into grand platitudes territory. It would be good to know what the government has in mind for the British Council as an important player in the soft power, global partnerships thing.]

Artificial intelligence, climate change, poverty, misinformation, polarisation, war and instability. Education puts us on the path to freedom.

[Alright, rein it in, you’re not Winston Churchill.]

Intellectual freedom. Economic freedom. Social freedom. Cultural freedom.

[Rule of four? Or the Tony Blair school of sentences without verbs?]

Through education, we can enlarge and expand those freedoms. We can show that government is a power not just for administration but for transformation.The answer is partnership. And the answer is education.

[Surely there can’t be more of this? “Love is the answer, and you know that for sure,” as the aforementioned John Lennon would say.]

This is a time of change here in Britain. A new age of hope. A new era of optimism for our country. A place where once again education and opportunity are the foundations of a better society. A place where our universities are nurseries of global friendships, as well as places of economic growth. A place where new ideas are prized.

[Rule of…five, six? “Nurseries of global friendships”? It would help if they had actual nursery places for childcare.]

I want to work with all of you to deliver opportunity for all—not just here at home but across the world too.

[“All of you”? Let’s see how long the big higher education tent lasts, with possible industrial action over pay on the horizon. End of speech, at last. OK, so it featured plenty of pleasantries and lots of big-picture ruminating about how internationally renowned the UK higher education system is. But, to put cynicism aside, perhaps we now have a government that knows what to do with that. Universities have had more than a decade of criticism from government. Phillipson’s first major address as education secretary focused on the good that they bring. This is, in the absence of detail, to be welcomed.]

And finally…

The Department for Education has at last unveiled the briefs of its various ministers. Phillipson, as we have seen, is clearly taking on a significant amount of responsibility for higher education.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith, it has now been confirmed, will oversee access to higher education, participation and lifelong learning; quality of higher education and the student experience (including oversight of the Office for Students); and student finance. You can browse all ministerial responsibilities on the department’s site.

And finally finally…

A little bird tells Playbook that the new interim chair of the Office for Students will be announced today. We covered some of the runners and riders in an article you can find on our site—any favourites?

We will cover the announcement as and when it comes. Let’s hope it’s not a Labour lord.

And finally finally finally…

We also hear that Ben Johnson, a long-serving government special adviser on science, will be leaving the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology following the arrival of the new ministerial team. Johnson will be returning to his role at the University of Strathclyde as professor of practice in research and innovation policy.

That will give him plenty of time to get his publications in order for the next Research Excellence Framework. But how long will a talent like Johnson sit in the ivory tower as the UK rushes towards science superpowerhood?

On Research Professional News today

Chris Parr looks at the names in the frame as the UK government is expected to announce the interim chair of the Office for Students.

He also writes that five universities in England have received improvement notices from the Office for Students over their performance against student outcomes thresholds in some course provision.

Nina Bo Wagner tells us that members of the European Parliament have voted in new committee chairs to lead policy discussions in areas including education and research, and Lebanon has joined the EU’s Mediterranean public-private partnership for research and innovation funding.

Nina adds that greater effort is needed to encourage researchers to become involved in science communication, and this work should be considered a stand-alone profession, according to a report by Science Europe.

In the news

A letter to the Guardian says that Ucas personal statements weren’t read by academics, and the paper wants people to send in their old personal statements.

The Financial Times says that a spending watchdog has questioned the UK’s investment in the European Space Agency.

In the Telegraph, the University of Cambridge has told protesters that it will review arms investments if they leave their tents, and a comment piece says that universities have played a cruel trick on students and deserve to go bust.

In the Times, an Oxford student who died in a river while celebrating the end of his exams has been named, college lecturers in Scotland have voted to continue a boycott of student results, and science minister Patrick Vallance quoted the philosopher Karl Popper in his maiden speech.

A letter to the National says that former prime minister Tony Blair ‘triggered the obscene dash for wealthy foreign students’.

The day ahead

The EDSK think tank publishes a report on why post-18 education in England is still broken and how to fix it.

In the afternoon, there will be a general debate in the House of Commons on education and opportunity.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post How to read Bridget Phillipson appeared first on Research Professional News.

Stopping universities going bust, shaking up research funding, Securonomics—how Labour could reshape the sector

Labour began the business of government with a King’s speech on 17 July setting out plans for 39 pieces of legislation in the coming parliament. That figure was billed as exceeding the tally introduced by Tony Blair when the party took power in 1997.

While the number of bills may be on the high side, and although the new government has a huge majority, many political observers—and some in Labour—felt the mood of the Speech was notably cautious. 

Universities and research barely got a mention. That was despite prime minister Keir Starmer’s government stating loud and clear that kickstarting significant economic growth across the whole country—an area where university and research leaders are keen to play up the sector’s contribution—was its absolute priority.

However, not everything a government does is about legislation. Plenty of sector issues are filling ministers intrays—an absence of bills on this front should not obscure the fact that the government will have to wrestle with a number of urgent issues impacting on higher education and research.

Going bust 

The first priority will be ensuring that no university goes bust. If that happens, the fallout might reach even the most intensive of research-intensive universities.

In its annual review of the financial sustainability of the sector, published in May, England’s regulator, the Office for Students (OfS), found that three in five institutions were in deficit. It said this number could rise significantly if predicted increases in international student numbers failed to materialise. The watchdog warned that an increasing number of institutions would need to make changes to their funding models to avoid facing “a material risk of closure”. 

Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute think tank, says this year’s university admissions clearing process could prove a pinch point. 

“If you’re the sort of university that typically picks up quite a high proportion of your students through clearing, but you have a bad clearing this year, that could be the thing that pushes you to the edge,” he says. 

Hillman warns that, should universities start breaking banking covenants, there is a risk of a domino effect, with lenders becoming nervous about the stability of the higher education sector and calling in debts, leading to more financial instability in the sector. 

Alistair Jarvis, now a pro vice-chancellor at the University of London, has suggested in a blog for the Association of Heads of University Administration that the OfS could provide a transformation fund that would bail out universities in trouble, similar to that made available during the pandemic under the Conservative government, which offered support to institutions, so long as they made major structural changes––an offer that most found resistible at that time. 

Another possibility, Hillman suggests, is a one-off increase in the English tuition fee cap of, for example, £500––taking fees to £9,750 in total. That has also been suggested as an option that might appeal to Labour by others, including Jonathan Simons, head of education at the Public First think tank. 

While Hillman acknowledges that a fee increase would be unpopular, he says the Labour Welsh government has recently managed it with relatively little backlash, and suggests that it could be mitigated through the provision of increased student maintenance support. 

The problem is that any changes to fees would take time to implement. Most of the 2024 cohort of students have already accepted places, on the understanding of £9,250 fees. The first deadlines for 2025 entrance will be in early autumn and potential students will already be attending open days. 

Asked by the BBC’s World at One on 17 July whether Labour would consider increasing fees or public funding for universities, the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, said: “We have no plans in that space because we want to make sure we are putting universities on a more sustainable footing overall.” She indicated that the government would focus on supporting universities’ international recruitment to ease their financial worries.

Nicholas Barr, professor of public economics at the LSE and one of the architects of the original loan system introduced by Blair’s New Labour, opposes any fee rise, instead saying that the relationship between fees and state spending needs rebalancing. But he says this too would take time and that, in the shorter term, the government would need to inject “the minimum amount of public money that will stop institutions going bankrupt” and then launch a longer-term review of the whole system. 

A review is something many in the sector now anticipate. Jarvis has previously said he expects a major tertiary education review in the first term of a Labour government, likely to be launched alongside a spending review in 2025 after possible early interventions in an autumn budget. 

R&D budget 

Spending reviews will also need to spell out details of future funding for research. Labour’s manifesto commitment to “scrap short funding cycles for key R&D institutions in favour of 10-year budgets that allow meaningful partnerships with industry to keep the UK at the forefront of global innovation” has been widely welcomed, but it is not yet clear how it will operate. 

Martin Smith, head of the Policy Lab at the Wellcome Trust, suggests a “thin interpretation” (although still a welcome one) would be to focus on giving certainty to individual institutions. A more ambitious move would be to offer ways for UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) to plan for longer cycles, giving the national funder flexibility to manage its large budget between years. 

Smith thinks it unlikely that more money for research will become available immediately, but argues “you can still be ambitious on the direction of travel”, and that if the government does succeed in its plan to generate growth, some of that would likely come science’s way. 

Daniel Rathbone, deputy executive director of advocacy group the Campaign for Science and Engineering, suggests that longer-term budgets would improve general confidence in supporting research, including encouraging the business community to invest. 

He also sees the government’s agenda of devolving more powers to the regions—as demonstrated by the prime minister meeting regional mayors just days after his election—as potentially significant. “There is an opportunity there for regional R&D and innovation investment through the mayors and the combined authorities, some of whom will have a really good grasp of what the strengths and opportunities are,” Rathbone says. 

But Hillman warns that this will depend on the size of the pot. Without extra funding, more money for regional R&D could mean less for existing research streams. Similarly, he worries that pressure for more public money to help meet the full costs of research could mean better funding for less research. 

New science thinking 

One area worth watching is what happens to the Science and Technology Framework, launched in March 2023 to “cement the UK’s place as a science and technology superpower” by embedding science and innovation across government.  

Public First’s Simons suggests that the appointment of Patrick Vallance, the former government chief scientific adviser, as science minister is significant here since the framework was “literally his creation”.  

He argues that Vallance’s appointment shows that the government will start by taking a traditional and expert-led approach to research policy, but that it could later be more creative and deploy R&D to support national priorities under the guise of Securonomics––chancellor Rachel Reeves’ idea of making Britain’s economy more self-sufficient and resistant to potential shocks. 

Simons expects the government to want to focus research on defence, (especially as this could count towards the 2.5 per cent of GDP spend on defence to which the government is committed); climate change; partnerships such as the three-way Aukus security deal between Australia, the UK and the United States; and on supply chains for key technologies, such as quantum computing and semiconductors. So, in the context of Securonomics and the potential for the US to be a less reliable partner to the UK in future, the sector could expect “lots more challenge funds and specified pots”, Simon says, “especially if Trump wins the US presidency”.

Machinery of government 

In a recent article for Research Professional News, Diana Beech, chief executive of higher education umbrella body London Higher, and a former adviser to three Conservative universities and science ministers, argued that the decision not to unite science and higher education in one department was a missed opportunity.

But Smith says the retention of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, as a powerful department with science at its core, sent the right message and showed “the kind of level of understanding of the role of science in the UK that we’re looking for”. 

He says Vallance will be a strong voice speaking up for science, and keeping the department as it is means that civil servants and ministers will be able to hit the ground running, although strong communication between government departments will be essential. 

Immigration outlook 

Vallance has already made his mark by saying that visa issues, including costs, “need to be looked at” to ensure that the UK is competitive in science, while also telling the BBC’s World at One that Brexit has been a problem for science.

A government spokesman responded at the time by stressing that the government was “determined to bring down historically high levels of legal migration”. 

But many in the sector believe that a change from the strong anti-immigration rhetoric of the previous government is likely and could make a significant difference when it comes to international student recruitment. Not that rhetoric alone will be enough.  

“Universities are in a very precarious position at the moment and research in the UK is largely done in universities,” says Smith. Protecting that “crown jewel”, he says, will be essential. 

New sector leaders to hire

The government has three key appointments to make for universities and research over the next few weeks. 

First is the chair of the Office for Students. The previous chair, James Wharton, ex-prime minister Boris Johnson’s former campaign manager and a Conservative peer who continued to take the Tory whip following his appointment, resigned five days after Labour came to power. The process to appoint his replacement is now underway. Ministers could decide on someone equally political or someone more neutral, such as a former vice-chancellor. 

Also up to new ministers—under the advice of assessment panels—will be the choice of replacements for Ottoline Leyser, who will step down as chief executive of UKRI in June 2025, and Indro Mukerjee, chief of national innovation agency Innovate UK, who will depart in September. Interviews for each of those roles were supposed to have been completed by the end of May, but the appointment process was paused after Rishi Sunak called the election.

The post What Starmer’s government means for universities and R&D appeared first on Research Professional News.

In issue 659, Labour and the next UKRI chief executive, Chi Onwurah snubbed by Starmer, how the new government could reshape the sector—from R&D budgets to Securonomics—and more

As Labour gets to grips with power, this issue of Research Fortnight looks at the emerging implications of the new government’s approach to R&D and universities.

In our lead story, we look at whether the new government might change approach on the appointment of the next UK Research and Innovation chief executive—a recruitment process that was well advanced under the Conservative government prior to the election.

Plus, we report on disappointment and confusion among researchers over the Starmer government’s decision to overlook long-serving science shadow Chi Onwurah for a ministerial job.

Meanwhile, we hear about potential lessons for the UK from Australian Labor’s approach to universities and research in government.

And in our feature, we look in depth at how the Labour government could reshape the sector across key issues, from stopping universities going bust, to R&D budgets, to Securonomics.

MUST READ Image: Keir Starmer [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0], via FlickrLabour tipped to ‘change focus’ on next UKRI leader

Recruitment process well underway before election, but new science minister may have “names up sleeve”

Full story

EDITORIAL
Labour’s tone shiftMinisters’ fresh approach welcome, but they cannot sidestep systemic problems for universities and research

Full story

BRIEFING
What’s going on in the UK: 11-24 July

Researchers criticise Labour for snubbing Chi Onwurah

Long-serving science shadow would have been a “fantastic” minister and role model, say academics

Full story

Global research centre could be ‘economic boost for UK’

Vallance plan to explore hosting major facility may meet Treasury opposition, former STFC head warns

Full story

Labour moves on graduate route visas ‘not off the cards’

RPN webinar hears from policy experts on future of university funding, REF and OfS

Full story

PICTURE OF THE WEEK
Image: Number 10 [CC BY-NC-ND 2.0], via Flickr. Click here to see full-size imageKeir Starmer had a chance to symbolise his aim to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow European leaders as the UK and its new prime minister hosted the European Political Community summit at Blenheim Palace, Oxfordshire.

The EPC was created in 2022 following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a way to bring together leaders of all 47 European states to discuss political and security issues, and specifically to keep the UK linked to such talks at European level despite having left the EU.

The UK’s new Labour government is aiming for more harmonious relations with the EU across a range of areas, with Starmer having said he wants “closer ties in relation to research and development” with the bloc.

FOCUS

Image: Grace Gay for Research Professional News. Source: Getty Images

What Starmer’s government means for universities and R&D

Stopping universities going bust, shaking up research funding, Securonomics—how Labour could reshape the sector

Full story

COMMENT
How will Labour approach England’s universities? Clues from AustraliaAustralian Labor’s reset of higher education policy is ambitious but incremental, says Paul Harris

Full story

Universities need to start experimenting on themselves

Internal meta research units could help tackle challenges of resourcing and culture, says Marcus Munafò

Full story

On manufacturing, the UK should think like a developing country

Reversing decades of decline means focusing R&D on imitation and adaptation, says Pranesh Narayanan

Full story

Loans in the long view

Nicholas Barr suggests how Labour should approach the tuition fee system he helped design

Full story

EUROPE

R&I groups welcome EU’s new political outlook

Sector hails plan for increased research and innovation spending, especially on the European Research Council

Full story

INTERNATIONAL

ARC funding ‘skewed’ against humanities, academy says

National grants programme run by Australian Research Council needs a full redesign, review told

Full story

FUNDING INSIGHT
Opportunity profile: Sharing a sense of purposeAlignment with the Nuffield Foundation’s priorities is vital for grant success

Full story

Determined to be different

Are thematic priorities worth the effort?

Full story

UK funding at a glance: 4-18 July

This week: chemistry innovation, UK-Swiss collaboration, addressing regional disparities, defence technology loans, and more

Full story

AND FINALLY
Third Degree: JD Vance’s war with academiaBack page gossip from the 24 July issue of Research Fortnight

Full story

Find the archive issues of Research Fortnight here

The post Research Fortnight – 24 July 2024 appeared first on Research Professional News.

Will the interim OfS chair be expected to lead a rationalisation programme for universities?

Yesterday morning, as your Playbook email was heading towards the torpedo tubes, education secretary Bridget Phillipson was making an appearance on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. This followed universities making front page news in the Sunday papers.

As we reported in yesterday’s edition, an announcement on an interim chair for the Office for Students is expected this week. Phillipson confirmed this in the radio interview—Chris Parr was listening in.

Phillipson promised a “sharper focus” on the work of the regulator for higher education in England. She reiterated that Labour has “no plans” to increase tuition fee levels or offer universities more public funding; instead, she concentrated on the role of the OfS and international students in stabilising university finances.

On the face of it, that’s not very change-y, given that—despite the contradictory rhetoric on student visas—this was basically the strategy of the last incumbents of Sanctuary Buildings.

Phillipson said: “The initial steps that we’ll be setting out later this week…[are] around regulation, where it comes to the OfS, because we need to see a sharper focus on the regulation of our sector to make sure that universities are on a firm footing.” She added that the new government intends to appoint an interim OfS chair to replace Tory peer James Wharton, who resigned earlier this month.

If you rule out an increase in tuition fees and any additional grant funding, that does not leave many options to inject much-needed extra funds into the higher education sector. Effectively, it leaves a growth in international students as the only other income stream available to universities.

Phillipson told Radio 4 that the new government wants to ensure that international students are made to feel welcome following the Conservative administration’s “rapid review” of the graduate route visa. However, there is likely to be a decline in the number of international applicants for universities this September because of the ban on dependants for taught master’s students.

In a clear signal that prime minister Keir Starmer’s government will not be in the business of taxpayer bailouts, Phillipson also said: “Universities are independent institutions that have responsibilities in terms of how they manage their budgets.” Yesterday, Labour ruled out a £200 million state-backed loan to rescue Belfast shipyard Harland & Wolff, which is a good indication of how the new government will deal with such requests.

The education secretary said that international students “have an important role to play in our country. They drive opportunities in terms of the contribution [they make] to the economy…and under this Labour government, we want to welcome international students to our country [because of] the soft power [they give to the UK and] the reach they give us around the world as they return home after their studies, and ensure that the graduate route is maintained so that students can come here and study with certainty and with confidence.”

That’s all well and good, but unless the graduate route visa is competitive with offers from competitors such as Australia, Canada and the US, warm words will only go so far. Besides, students have already made decisions about which country they will be studying in come September; there is very little that can be done to assist university budgets in the next academic year.

Vivienne Stern, chief executive of the vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK, also appeared on the Today programme. She said: “The obvious thing is that you have to restore the link between the tuition fee and inflation; if you don’t, the value of it just goes down year after year after year.

“Inflation affects all of us…If you linked the undergraduate fee to inflation on current inflation figures, it would add a couple of hundred pounds to it. It’s not going to fix the whole problem…I personally also believe the government needs to, over time, put more public funding in.”

Stern is correct on both points. During our Research Professional News Live webinar last week, Playbook suggested that Labour’s refusal to raise tuition fees or come up with additional block funding was a position that would not survive contact with reality.

Diana Beech, chief executive of London Higher and a former adviser to three universities ministers, pointed out, by way of response, that Labour does not want to be seen at the moment to be punishing the very people who put it in government (students and young graduates) by raising fees to fix a mess left by the Conservative administration. There is also Labour’s commitment to stick with the Conservative spending envelope for the next two years to consider.

Fees cannot be raised for September and if they were to be raised for the 2025 undergraduate intake then a decision would have to be made before universities publish their prospectuses this autumn. Any raise in tuition fees in England would require a vote in the Commons.

That all means that it could be 2026 before Labour would be in a position to move on the headline rate of tuition fees. That leaves plenty of time for university lobbyists to make the case, but it also leaves plenty of time for the higher education sustainability crisis to get a lot worse.

Office politics

The “crisis”, to use the term deployed by Labour in its election manifesto, is making strange bedfellows. The Universities and Colleges Employers Association has come out in support of a University and College Union analysis of institutions on the brink, which made the papers over the weekend.

Chief executive Raj Jethwa said: “Ucea welcomes national coverage of the UCU’s new independent report findings, confirming and further highlighting the very serious financial challenges facing both the sector and its higher education institutions. The reported restructuring is a last resort as employers are forced to respond to such challenges.

“Employers have been publicly raising concerns about these financial challenges, and with the trade unions, consistently over recent years. While the UCU report highlights this crisis, it also reinforces the need for a more thorough joint review, to gain updated data, as called for by Ucea and its member institutions for well over a year now.”

That final sentence is a less-than-oblique reference to negotiations over the annual pay offer in universities, which the union rejected this month on the way to preparing for a further round of industrial action. Logic might suggest that it is hard to argue simultaneously for an inflation-busting wage rise and that universities are at risk of bankruptcy.

Meanwhile, an interim chair at the OfS will be expected to sort out the financial chaos. That basically means taking an interventionist approach to institutional budgets.

Last year, a House of Lords industry and regulators committee inquiry was excoriating about the lack of grip the regulator had over the finances of the higher education sector—the OfS having previously given a rosy assessment of university budgets. In response, the OfS said that it had in fact warned about imagining international students were a silver bullet to the woes of university finances.

“We have consistently highlighted the risks of overly ambitious international recruitment plans and have issued warnings about the need to manage the risk of volatility in this area and the potential impact on institutional-level financial sustainability,” an OfS spokesperson said at the time.

In May 2023, the OfS wrote to 23 higher education providers with the highest levels of student recruitment from China, asking those most at risk to share their plans to help the regulator understand and mitigate the impact of any unexpected reduction in student registrations. That is kind of where we are now, the specific China security issue aside.

So it is not clear what can be reasonably expected of an interim chair of the OfS. If international students are not the answer—even if Yvette Cooper’s Home Office moves on the competitiveness of the graduate route visa—that only leaves managed restructuring led by the regulator.

The Higher Education Funding Council for England was a master of facilitated mergers, bailing out failing institutions with gentlemanly takeovers that did not spook the money lenders or start a run on student recruitment. Larger universities were usually incentivised to swallow smaller, weaker providers through the promise of additional students at a time when numbers were capped.

OfS chief executive Susan Lapworth—who has been noticeably quiet since Wharton’s resignation—is an old hand of the Hefce merger scene. Back when the values of the regulatory body were truly arm’s length from the Department for Education and did not change with a change of government.

Is Labour’s talk of placing university finances on a firm footing code for a rationalisation across the sector? And what institutional reforms will Labour ask for in return as part of such a programme?

You might have noticed that in February, Essex’s Writtle University College joined with Anglia Ruskin University. If that is a sign of things to come then it is not just universities that may be subject to regulatory ‘stabilisation’—there are over 400 providers of higher education on the OfS register, with some notably less sustainable than others and not easily able to recruit international students as an exit route.

Time and the interim OfS chair will tell. Despite warnings for years (and long before Covid) that a major university was about to go bust, higher education institutions have remained remarkably resilient. It looks as if, this side of a structured review of tertiary provision, universities can expect tough love rather than a bailout from the new government.

And finally…

The world of politics is gripped by a shock resignation from the top job and a seeming coronation that could lead to the first female leader in the country’s history. We are not talking about Joe Biden and Kamala Harris but the Labour Party in Wales.

It looks as if health secretary Eluned Morgan will be the only candidate for Labour leader in Wales following the resignation of Vaughan Gething as first minister last week. Gething’s previous leadership rival Jeremy Miles, architect of Welsh higher education reform, has endorsed Morgan’s candidacy.

If Morgan remains unopposed by noon tomorrow, she will become Labour leader and first minister, subject to an endorsement by the now shuttered Senedd in Cardiff. As an MEP, the University of Hull graduate and life peer was Labour’s spokesperson on energy, industry and science in the European Parliament.

Meanwhile, over in the US, Harris chose a White House celebration of college sports—that’s what Americans call university games—for her first public appearance after president Biden announced he would withdraw from the 2024 election. If you are wondering what is at stake in the presidential race for universities and research, we point you to this account from Scientific American of what the Republican Project 2025 has in store for science—to call it a culture war would be to venture an understatement.

On Research Professional News today

Chris Parr reports that education secretary Bridget Phillipson has promised a “sharper focus” on the work of the Office for Students as the Department for Education prepares to announce an interim chair for England’s higher education regulator.

Frances Jones reveals that research policy experts have welcomed the continuity in the briefs issued by the new government for Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ministers.

John Whitfield writes that the British Academy has appointed a Cambridge-based geographer as its next president.

Emily Twinch tells us that the number of animals used in research and testing in the EU fell by 10.9 per cent between 2021 and 2022, official statistics have shown.

Nina Bo Wagner says that four research projects on semiconductors are set to receive €6m (£5.1m) in funding from Horizon Europe as part of a strategic collaboration between the EU and South Korea, and the EU and Serbia have agreed a strategic partnership in research and innovation, sustainable raw materials, batteries and electric vehicles.

In the news

The BBC reports that universities have been told to manage their own budgets after a call for bailouts.

In the Guardian, the education secretary has said that English universities should not expect a government bailout, a physicist has been honoured with a doctorate 75 years after her groundbreaking discovery, and a Chinese university has sacked a professor after a social media accusation of sexual harassment.

The Financial Times says that the prime minister has pledged to ‘fire up’ the training of UK workers to boost growth.

In the Telegraph, top universities are preparing to take over failing former polytechnics.

The Herald says that a study from the University of St Andrews suggests chimpanzees converse like humans.

The Belfast Telegraph says that a record number of Queen’s University Belfast students are to compete at the Paris Olympics.

Sky News reports on the possibility of some universities closing due to the higher education funding crisis.

The day ahead

At 2pm, the Centre for Global Higher Education has a webinar on the implications of opening higher education to displaced students in Italy.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Tough love appeared first on Research Professional News.

Tweaks to ministerial responsibilities position government to “crack on quickly”, with Vallance leading on science

Research policy experts have welcomed the continuity in the briefs issued by the new government for Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ministers, seeing Patrick Vallance as taking the lead on science.

The list of responsibilities for ministers, published on 19 July, was seen as indicating that, despite being a junior minister, science minister Vallance will lead on science and innovation with a focus on emerging technologies, international collaboration and the effective translation of research into practical innovations.

Vallance’s brief also saw him given responsibility for areas including life sciences; quantum, engineering biology, and semiconductors; and the regulatory innovation office.

‘Helpful continuity’

Martin Smith, head of the policy lab at Wellcome, told Research Professional News that the list suggests there will be some “helpful continuity” in the technologies that Dsit will focus on.

He went on to highlight that quantum, engineering biology, semiconductors (in Vallance’s brief), AI (in Feryal Clark’s brief), and telecoms (in Chris Bryant’s brief) were the five ‘critical technologies’ in the science and technology framework, which the last government published in March 2023.

Clark and Bryant are junior ministers in Dsit, whose portfolios were published on the same day. Peter Kyle, the secretary of state for Dsit, has overall responsibility for the whole department.

Considering the benefits of this continuity, Smith explained: “Science requires long-term strategies, so it’s good not to have more churn here.”

He added: “It’s good that ministerial responsibilities have been confirmed swiftly—reflecting the relatively small changes in the machinery of government that allow the new administration to crack on quickly.

Like Smith, Kieron Flanagan, professor of science and technology policy at the University of Manchester, told RPN that he thought the brief was “broadly consistent” with previous minister of state for science briefs.

“It seems clear from this that Vallance will effectively lead on science and innovation while Kyle, with Bryant as the other minister of state, [focus] on the digital aspects.”

Linda Bedenik, senior policy and public affairs manager at the BioIndustry Association (BIA), was also pleased to see continuity, saying: “We are delighted to see engineering biology named as a core responsibility of the new minister… It provides welcome continuity from the previous government, [which] also prioritised this technology area as critical to the UK’s economic future.

On Vallance’s portfolio, she said: “Vallance has also put early focus on access to scale-up finance and regulatory innovation, showing that he wants to ensure innovative UK deep biotech companies can realise the power of engineering biology to address some of our biggest health, environmental and climate challenges, driving a sustainable bioeconomy with biosolutions firmly at its core.”

Policy experts on social media also pointed out that regulation being put under Vallance’s jurisdiction has the potential to translate into more tech innovation in the UK.

Some change

Smith told RPN that he saw an opportunity for the new government to “revisit and reinvigorate” a people and culture strategy agenda, which featured on the previous list of ministerial responsibilities. “[But] it always seemed to be on the verge of falling into abeyance,” he said.

He pointed out on social media that there was no reference to a P&C strategy in the science briefs anymore. “I hope that in due course we will see a meaningful focus here. Dsit will know already that supporting and growing the research workforce is an essential part of meeting R&D ambitions, and that the UK has the chance to be a strong international example in its approach to research culture,” he said.

While consensus among the research community was that the briefs were fairly predictable, Flanagan said he was a “little surprised” by the allocation of the economic security and national security and resilience aspects of technology adoption and diffusion to junior minister Margaret Jones, given Vallance’s experience in setting up the previous government’s machinery around these issues.

The post Policy experts welcome continuity in roles of Dsit ministers appeared first on Research Professional News.

Bridget Phillipson emphasises importance of regulation and again rules out income boost for universities

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson has promised a “sharper focus” on the work of the Office for Students as the Department for Education prepares to announce an interim chair for England’s higher education regulator.

Speaking to the BBC’s Today programme on 22 July, Phillipson reiterated that the Labour government currently has “no plans” to increase tuition fee levels or offer universities more public funding, instead focusing on the role of the OfS and international students in securing higher education’s finances.

“The initial steps that we’ll be setting out later this week…[are] around regulation, where it comes to the OfS, because we need to see a sharper focus on the regulation of our sector to make sure that universities are on a firm footing,” she said, adding that the government intends to appoint an interim OfS chair imminently.

Tory peer James Wharton resigned as OfS chair earlier this month after Labour came to power.

International students and fees

Phillipson also said that the new government wants to ensure that international students—an increasingly essential source of significant income for universities—are made to feel welcome. Under the Conservative government, the graduate route visa allowing students to remain in the UK after their studies for a limited time was placed under review, and reforms to restrict students’ dependants from accessing visas were also introduced, leading to a steep decline in the number of international applicants.

“Universities are independent institutions that have responsibilities in terms of how they manage their budgets,” Phillipson said.

“In terms of international students, they have an important role to play in our country. They drive opportunities in terms of the contribution [they make] to the economy…and under this Labour government, we want to welcome international students to our country [because of] the soft power [they give to the UK and] the reach they give us around the world as they return home after their studies, and ensure that the graduate route is maintained so that students can come here and study with certainty and with confidence.”

Vivienne Stern, chief executive of the vice-chancellors’ group Universities UK, also appeared on the programme to appeal for an increase in tuition fee levels in order to boost university income.

She said: “The obvious thing is that you have to restore the link between the tuition fee and inflation; if you don’t, the value of it just goes down year after year after year. Inflation affects all of us…If you linked the undergraduate fee to inflation on current inflation figures, it would add a couple of hundred pounds to it.

“It’s not going to fix the whole problem…I personally also believe the government needs to, over time, put more public funding in.”

Skills England

The comments were made as the government announced the launch of Skills England, a new body being established to oversee skills education in England.

A Skills England bill is to be introduced to parliament this week, with the new body set to be established in phases over the next 9 to 12 months.

Richard Pennycook, former chief executive of the Co-operative Group and current lead non-executive director at the Department for Education, has been named as its interim chair.

The post Education secretary set to unveil new Office for Students chair appeared first on Research Professional News.

Universities are front page news again, but not because Skills England has launched

The last time universities were on the front page of the Sunday Times, it was when the newspaper “exposed” the use of agents to recruit international students. There was also an attempt to claim that these students were being recruited at the expense of domestic students by using a false equivalence—comparing pathway programme recruitment to full degree offers.

Since then, Universities UK has confirmed that although the money gleaned from overseas students actually helps universities to expand provision to students at home and from abroad, there is some evidence that universities have been practising favouritism towards the more lucrative international applicants.

The Conservative government promised a crackdown on recruitment agents as part of its response to the Migration Advisory Committee’s review of the graduate route visa, but it decided to retain the current post-study visa offer to international graduates. The new Labour government has not spoken much about its intended direction of travel on visas, but initial comments from the Department for Education appear to hint that a friendlier line on international student recruitment will be taken—mainly to stop ministers from actually having to come up with a solution to the funding crisis currently faced by UK universities.

Yesterday, it was the funding crisis that made the lead story in the Sunday Times. It will have offered nothing new to Playbook readers, covering as it did the grim situation for institutions such as Goldsmiths and Kent and the fact that 40 per cent of providers will run deficits this year—all stuff that has been covered and re-covered by Research Professional News in recent months. It is notable, however, that this is now considered front page news for the paper of record.

As we have covered previously, the university funding crisis is one of the main problems that the new government has inherited following 14 years of Tory-led rule. The Sunday Times says that the situation has led new ministers in the education department to consider merging one “medium-sized university” with another as part of their plans to tackle the issue.

It also states that a new Office for Students chair is expected to be appointed on an interim basis this week. That is one to watch closely, particularly given the debacle of the last appointment—something that we do not need to revisit just now, but you can refresh your memory here.

As an aside, Playbook’s conversations over the past few weeks have thrown up a few suggestions for who might take the post. Some want a former vice-chancellor to step in (Steve Smith, Chris Husbands) and bring real sector perspective to the role. Others are still leaning towards political figures, with Justine Greening and Chris Skidmore among those mentioned. They are both Tories, on paper at least, which may not go down overly well following the last guy.

Back to the Sunday Times, though. In short, the mainstream press is catching up with what we have seen coming for a year at least. Interestingly, the report does not refer to its previous exposé on international student recruitment, even though the two stories are interconnected. There is no more public money for universities and no sign of tuition fees going up, so universities are trying to get more money in using the only lever that they have left.

Launch time

The big news this morning (though it is unlikely to trouble those front pages) is the Department for Education’s formal launch of Skills England, a new body being established to oversee skills education in England.

This was very much expected, given it was trailed in the King’s speech last week (and for some time before that), but the speed of this announcement will hearten those who want the education department to kick into action after a quiet couple of weeks.

The press announcement says that Skills England is to be tasked with “identifying current and future skills gaps and driving forward plans to enable young people and adults to develop skills they need to seize opportunity”. It will aim to “drive growth and break down barriers to opportunity”. A load of pleasantries, basically.

​​Richard Pennycook, former chief executive of the Co-operative Group and current lead non-executive director at the education department, has been named interim chair (so no Office for Students-style sweepstake on that one).

The department says that skills shortages doubled to more than half a million between 2017 and 2022 and now account for 36 per cent of job vacancies.

“Skills England will bring together central and local government, businesses, training providers and unions to meet the skills needs of the next decade across all regions, providing strategic oversight of the post-16 skills system aligned to the government’s industrial strategy,” the department says.

That the words ‘industrial’ and ‘strategy’ are back in parlance at the education department will be music to many ears. Less welcome might be the fact that the department also says the new body will be working with the Migration Advisory Committee to “help reduce reliance on overseas workers”. Universities have had quite enough of negative messaging to those from overseas.

Prime minister Keir Starmer said the skills system “is in a mess, which is why we are transforming our approach to meet skills needs over the coming decades”.

“[Skills England] will help to deliver our number one mission as a government, to kick-start economic growth, by opening up new opportunities for young people and enabling British businesses to recruit more homegrown talent,” he said. “From construction to IT, healthcare to engineering, our success as a country depends on delivering highly skilled workforces for the long term.”

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “Our first mission in government is to grow the economy, and for that we need to harness the talents of all our people to unlock growth and break down the barriers to opportunity.”

Regardless of the optimism, there is parliamentary process to be adhered to. As such, the education department says that a Skills England bill is to be introduced this week, with Skills England to be established in phases over the next 9 to 12 months.

“The government will also bring forward a comprehensive strategy for post-16 education,” the department says. Most are expecting a similarly comprehensive review of higher education to be announced at some point too.

“It’s good to see such rapid progress on this commitment,” Higher Education Policy Institute director Nick Hillman told Playbook, after news of the Skills England bill broke. “Of course, there’s been no shortage of reforms to skills in past years. If this new body is to make a real difference, the interim chair and the department need to tread carefully and act collegiately. But it would be churlish to do anything other than welcome such quick and clear action on a specific and important manifesto commitment.”

Diana Beech, chief executive of London Higher and a former adviser to three universities ministers, told us that the establishment of Skills England shows the Labour government “means business when it comes to addressing skills shortages across the regions”.

A spokesperson for Universities UK said: “Skills England will clearly be a critical part of the education landscape under the new government. Universities will be essential to meeting national skills challenges, especially at higher levels. We look forward to working closely with the new body as it establishes itself.”

And finally…

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has confirmed the full list of portfolios for its ministerial team.

The Department for Education? Not so much. If you want to know expected higher education minister Jacqui Smith’s brief, you can see all the publicly available details here. You’ll need to set five seconds aside to take in all the info.

On Research Professional News today

In yesterday’s Sunday Reading, Nicholas Barr suggests how Labour should approach the tuition fee system he helped design.

Chris Parr reports that the new education secretary’s suggestion that the Labour government is not planning to increase tuition fees or public funding for universities could lead to allegations of complacency, a senior sector figure has warned.

Harriet Swain hears from policy experts on the future of university funding, the Research Excellence Framework and the Office for Students.

Frances Jones and Mićo Tatalović write that academics have expressed disappointment and confusion at the Labour government’s decision to overlook Chi Onwurah for a ministerial role in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, given her extensive experience of the brief while in opposition.

Frances adds that the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre has launched an initiative to promote the sharing of methodologies by researchers in life sciences, and a study has found that “significant efforts” are needed in R&D to ensure the EU has a safe supply of critical raw materials.

Emily Twinch tells us that UK Research and Innovation has awarded £104 million to 68 early career researchers, and influential German MEP Christian Ehler has been made a member of the European Parliament’s research committee again, following previous stints in which he helped shape the design of EU research and innovation programmes.

Nina Bo Wagner says that research and innovation groups have welcomed the new political direction of the European Commission, after Ursula von der Leyen was re-elected as president and set out her plans for her second term.

In the news

The BBC reports on the prime minister’s planned skills shake-up, two teachers have received an unexpected honorary degree upgrade, a dancer has overcome surgery to shine at university, plans have been revealed for a Newcastle University accommodation site, engineering students ‘are in pole position at Silverstone’, and Bristol Rovers is consulting residents over student flats.

A comment piece in the Guardian bids farewell to the ‘hackneyed, cliché-ridden prose’ of Ucas personal statements.

In the Observer, Britain is behind Europe in arts funding and education, and a biologist says that evolution happens much quicker than Darwin thought.

The Financial Times reports that US graduates face a cut-throat job market as companies scrap internships.

i News says that students face a fee increase or closures in the university cash crunch, and Labour has described the university funding crisis as a problem inherited from the Tories.

The Telegraph reports on two Oxford academics at war, and a comment piece says that too many young people have worthless degrees.

In the Sunday Times, universities face a cash ‘catastrophe’ with the threat of mergers and course cuts, and there’s a poll on whether Britain has too many universities.

The Herald reports on a fall in young Scots from remote small towns entering higher education.

The Belfast Telegraph says that more school leavers in Northern Ireland are staying home for university.

The week ahead

Monday

The Quality Assurance Agency will publish a resource exploring and promoting issues of sustainable development in transnational education, authored by academics from De Montfort University.

The House of Lords has a debate after 2.30pm on economic growth, infrastructure and employment.

Tuesday

At 2pm, the Centre for Global Higher Education has a webinar on the implications of opening higher education to displaced students in Italy.

Wednesday

In the afternoon, there will be a general debate in the House of Commons on education and opportunity.

Thursday

At 10am, the Quality Assurance Agency has an online introduction to international programme accreditation.

Friday

The Office for National Statistics publishes a report on understanding skill and qualification suitability in the labour market.

There will be a House of Commons debate on making Britain a clean energy superpower.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Skills set appeared first on Research Professional News.

Long-serving science shadow would have been a “fantastic” minister and role model, say academics

Academics have expressed disappointment and confusion at the Labour government’s decision to overlook Chi Onwurah for a ministerial role in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, given her extensive experience of the brief while in opposition.

Research Professional News understands that, rather than declining an offer, Onwurah was not offered a role in Keir Starmer’s government.

Onwurah was first appointed to shadow innovation and science in 2010, and served for Labour in shadow roles for 14 years, mainly on science.

Rachel Oliver, a professor of materials science at the University of Cambridge, told RPN that she was “disappointed” to see Onwurah left out.

“I think she could be a great asset to the government due to her undoubted engineering expertise,” she said.

‘Puzzling’ decision

Dibyesh Anand, a professor of international relations at the University of Westminster and chair of London Higher’s Equality, Diversity and Inclusion network, told RPN that he found the omission “puzzling”. Onwurah would have done a “fantastic” job as minister, he said.

Onwurah has an engineering degree, an MBA, and was head of telecoms technology at regulator Ofcom before becoming the MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West in 2010. Her shadow roles include her most recent one for science, research and innovation, which lasted from 2020 until the general election earlier this month.

Paul Dorfman, a visiting fellow in the Science Policy Research Unit at the University of Sussex, said: “Chi Onwurah’s engineering experience and her impact on science and technology policy during her time as shadow minister has been significantly beneficial.”

During that time, “she championed constructive science and technology interdisciplinary collaboration, and her approach to AI regulation was carefully thought through”, he said.

Dsit has recently announced an AI bill.

Achievements in Stem

Another role Onwurah held before parliament disbanded for the election was chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Diversity and Inclusion in Stem (science, technology, engineering and mathematics). The group, which plans to resume activities in the new parliament, aims to promote the inclusion and progression of people from diverse backgrounds in Stem, as well as to encourage the government and other stakeholders to work towards building a Stem sector that is representative of the population.

Praising Onwurah’s achievements in this capacity, Dorfman said she “has been a prominent figure not only for her technical skills but also as a Black woman in a high-profile science role. Her visibility in promoting diversity and inclusion in Stem fields is key, and her absence from a ministerial position will be felt within and beyond Westminster.”

Oliver said: “Providing visible role models for young women and also for Black and other ethnic minority students is an important strand in efforts to bring a greater diversity of people into science and technology careers, and Chi could have been a fantastic role model.”

Meanwhile, Anand added: “Onwurah’s appointment would have been good for both expertise and representation and given a strong message to those in Stem areas that women—including those from ethnic minority backgrounds—can not only join but lead the field.”

RPN has approached Labour for comment.

The post Researchers criticise Labour for snubbing Chi Onwurah appeared first on Research Professional News.

Bridget Phillipson’s initial comments on fees, public spending and international students draw mixed response

The new education secretary’s suggestion that the Labour government is not planning to increase tuition fees or public funding for universities could lead to allegations of complacency, a senior sector figure has warned.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4 on Wednesday, Bridget Phillipson acknowledged that universities were “facing significant financial challenges”, but said there were “no plans” to put up the cost of university for students or to give universities more money from the public purse. She did, however, back international student recruitment to help put institutions “on a more sustainable footing”.

Nick Hillman, director of think tank the Higher Education Policy Institute, told Research Professional News that the comments could come back to haunt the education secretary if an institution found itself in serious financial trouble in the coming weeks.

“I do recognise that the secretary of state was perhaps caught off guard in the interview and also that her higher education minister [Jacqui Smith] is still getting her feet under the table,” he said. “But these remarks were still disappointing, given the stark contrast with the messaging before the election.”

Speaking before the general election, Phillipson said universities would be a “day-one priority” for Labour in power. 

Hillman said: “If a university falls over after a bad clearing period, say, the words will be endlessly replayed as evidence of complacency.”

Paul Ashwin, professor of higher education at Lancaster University and deputy director of the Centre for Global Higher Education, was also concerned—although not surprised—by the comments. 

“This is in line with what I thought would happen before the election—that the incoming government were likely to initially try to avoid dealing with the funding issue in higher education whilst they focus on other educational priorities, such as early years and the teacher-recruitment crisis in schools,” he said.

“I still think that events are likely to force their hand in the form of institutional closures, given their very negative impact on students and local economies. At that point, higher education will suddenly become an urgent policy priority and we are then likely to get an interim settlement followed by a review of higher education funding.”

International rescue

There was a more positive response to Phillipson’s words on international recruitment, with Rachel Hewitt, chief executive of the MillionPlus group of universities, among those voicing optimism.

“A change in government rhetoric towards both international students and to universities and higher education more generally is long overdue, so for the new education secretary to back international recruitment so early in her tenure is hugely positive,” Hewitt said.

However, while recruiting more students from overseas might help to stabilise finances, it would not be “a magic bullet for an unsustainable funding model”, she added, in light of frozen tuition fees, rising costs and a fall in international recruitment hitting universities’ pockets hard this year.

The post Education secretary ‘at risk of complacency’ on HE funding appeared first on Research Professional News.

Yesterday’s RPN Live webinar discussed what the new government could mean for universities and research

There has been a manifesto, a King’s speech and a key interview with education secretary Bridget Phillipson, who said before the election that university stability would be a “day one priority”. But despite all this, anyone trying to discern what the government is planning to do about higher education remains mostly in the dark.

To try to shed some light, Research Professional News held a webinar yesterday, called After the Vote, to discuss what the change of regime could mean for the future direction of research policy and for research communities on the ground.

A better university atmosphere was the one outcome of the change in government that everyone felt sure about. Kieron Flanagan, professor of science and technology policy at the University of Manchester, said an end to the rollercoaster ride of the past few years of research policy would be a plus in itself.

Diana Beech, chief executive of London Higher and a former adviser to three university ministers, said that the change should mark an end to the culture wars and to negative rhetoric about “Mickey Mouse courses”, which would make working in universities easier, although she warned that it was easier to say nice things in opposition than in government and that it would be wrong to be complacent.

She also welcomed a return to the appreciation of experts, signalled by the appointment of former chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance as science minister and Jacqui Smith as higher education minister, even if Smith seemed to have been appointed for her expertise in government rather than any particular knowledge of the higher education brief.

But Beech remains angry that the sector has gone from having a minister with a seat at the cabinet table (Jo Johnson) and a university brief to now “just being a fraction of a skills portfolio at the Department for Education”, although it must be noted that Johnson’s position may have had rather more to do with a commitment by then prime minister Boris Johnson to the Johnson brand than a commitment to the ivory tower.

Beech, who went into this in more depth in an article for RPN, said it suggested that the new government sees universities as “providers of functional skills” and would be more likely to expend political capital on creating pathways between further and higher education than on bringing parts of higher education closer to science.

Funding questions

While the machinery of government remains the same, so does uncertainty over how the government plans to pay for higher education.

Phillipson’s interview with the BBC’s World at One earlier this week sparked much debate after she appeared to rule out raising tuition fees. “We have no plans in that space because we want to make sure we are putting universities on a more sustainable footing overall,” she said, appearing to suggest that international student recruitment could come to the rescue. The graduate route visa had worked very successfully for universities, she said.

But at yesterday’s webinar, Playbook’s Martin McQuillan questioned whether this would stand up to reality.

Beech said that ministers would be reluctant to raise fees because of the risk of upsetting the young people who had voted for the party, although it could be possible if linked to maintenance loan rises.

She warned that Phillipson’s views on the graduate route visa could differ from those of the home secretary and that changes to the route may therefore not be completely off the cards.

Flanagan said that the dependence for research funding on international students needed to be examined anyway, along with the decision to concentrate research activity on the “golden triangle” of Oxford, Cambridge and London and an aversion to large-scale public spending on applied technological development as opposed to basic science.

Science budgets

The idea of 10-year R&D budgets generated some excitement in the sector before the election, as a way of achieving much-needed stability.

But Flanagan pointed out that the idea had been tried by ministers in the past and that details of how it would work this time remained unclear. He was nevertheless intrigued by the suggestion that it could apply to individual research institutes.

Graeme Reid, chair of science and research policy at University College London, warned the webinar that a 10-year budget was not necessarily a good thing. “Presented differently, it sounds like a 10-year budget freeze,” he said, although he suggested it could be a way of giving a sense of direction for science.

In terms of direction, he predicted a greater emphasis on defence and on R&D carried out through the defence department, as well as a continued emphasis on economic impact, “but I’d like to think that it’s a more sophisticated interpretation of economic impact that recognises a much broader range of ways in which a strong and powerful research base contributes to a vibrant economy and a sustainable society”.

This would be partly because of the appointment of Vallance and his first-hand knowledge of how science works.

McQuillan suggested that having Vallance as science minister also made it more likely that the 2029 Research Excellence Framework would go ahead. There has been talk of scrapping the exercise because it is too expensive and bureaucratic. Asked at an in-person RPN Live event in March whether the REF would continue under a Labour government, then shadow science minister Chi Onwurah stopped short of saying yes.

Regulation and advice

But if the REF looks safe, the Office for Students looks less so. Phillipson said in her interview that the government had already started making changes to the regulator “because the system we have had hasn’t delivered”.

Smita Jamdar, relationship partner for education clients at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau, told the webinar that the government needs to decide quickly whether it truly believes in the independence of the OfS—and that its decision will be reflected in whether it makes a political appointment to replace former chair James Wharton, a Conservative peer, who resigned shortly after the election.

While the OfS was set up with a mission to transform things, it now needs a stabilising mission, she said. Its relationship with the national funder UK Research and Innovation also needs attention, she said, as does the question of how regulation could work in a more overarching tertiary system.

She then raised questions about whether 1 August was still a viable date for new freedom of speech duties to come in, since it is still unclear what the complaints system will look like or how the OfS will make decisions.

Finally, the webinar discussed who would be advising the new government on tackling all this. Former Labour prime minister Tony Blair drew on thinkers such as former London School of Economics and Political Science director Anthony Giddens, while Conservative leaders were influenced by free market think tanks based at Tufton Street, Westminster. In contrast, new prime minister Keir Starmer has not been associated with any particular political philosophy.

Speakers at the webinar speculated that this leaves room for special political advisers who are likely––because of salary limits––to be young and ambitious. Whether whoever is appointed is ambitious about further education and skills or about higher education and research will be a good indication of future government direction.

International applicants

Meanwhile, admissions figures released yesterday suggest that if Phillipson is relying on international students to pick up the university financial slack, she could be disappointed.

Amid all the publicity about scrapping personal statements from student application forms (in fact, just transforming them into three direct questions), the admissions service Ucas released data on applications to the end of June.

The figures include applications not made by the main deadlines of October (for Oxbridge and courses including medicine) and January. They mop up late-applying home students and some mature and international students (although for most international students, Ucas is not the main point of entry).

The data show that numbers of both home and international applicants are down.

The government may have “no plans in this space” at the moment when it comes to raising fees—but it will need to have some kind of plan soon.

And finally…

Donald Trump’s choice of running mate for his US presidential bid will be of interest to universities on both sides of the pond.

Ohio senator and best-selling author JD Vance formally accepted the Republican nomination to run for vice-president on day three of the Republican National Convention this week, making a speech that pledged unwavering allegiance to Trump despite previously having described him as “cultural heroin”.

Vance has long stated his antipathy to universities. At a National Conservatism Conference in 2021, he gave a speech called The Universities are the Enemy, which he opened by saying: “If any of us want to do the things that we want to do for our country and for the people who live in it, we have to honestly and aggressively attack the universities.”

He has praised Viktor Orbán’s approach to higher education (Orbán placed universities under foundations loyal to his regime) and criticised higher education institutions for encouraging students to take on unaffordable debts.

In an interview with The European Conservative earlier this year, Vance said: “Universities are not so much after the pursuit of truth as they are about enforcing dogma and doctrine.”

That doesn’t mean giving up on them, he said. “We should be really aggressively reforming them in a way to where they’re much more open to conservative ideas.”

One way, he suggested, would be “to really go after the university bureaucracy focused on diversity, equity and inclusion”.

For many prospective international students weighing up study in the US or the UK, the UK may just have become more appealing.

On Research Professional News today

Frances Jones writes that the UK could reap big economic benefits by hosting a major new international research facility.

Emily Twinch tells us that scientific advice to the UK government in the lead-up to the pandemic was not broad enough and ministers failed to challenge it, according to the Covid-19 inquiry’s damning first report.

Nina Bo Wagner writes that improving the innovation performance of lagging European countries will require long-term investment in higher education, research infrastructures and knowledge transfer skills, and Ursula von der Leyen has been approved for a second term as president of the European Commission, having promised to prioritise competitiveness and environmental sustainability.

Craig Nicholson reveals that political guidelines presented by von der Leyen call for increased EU investment in research.

Craig also interviewed Marc Lemaître, the EU’s top research and innovation official, who said that there is a need for a “very significant simplification” of the EU’s R&I funding landscape.

John Whitfield argues that the EU’s embrace of science must not serve up a half-baked Framework Programme 10.

Marco Seeber says that two-stage grant applications are proving their worth.

Jan Palmowski, Andrew Morris, Melanie Smallman and Jim McDonald reflect on the UK’s new government and what it means for Europe.

In the news

The BBC reports that the admissions service Ucas is to reform university personal statements, non-students can live in university blocks in Coventry during term, and a student and grandma have marked a dual celebration at Loughborough University.

The Guardian wants to hear from graduates about their job hunt, and Ucas plans to drop personal statements for UK university applicants.

In the Financial Times, even a PhD isn’t enough to erase the effects of class.

The Telegraph looks at how universities spot artificial intelligence cheats.

A comment piece in the Times calls for an end to the predicted grade system to make universities fairer, Ucas is axing personal statements to boost equality, and an Oxford scientist has accused his boss of stealing peanut allergy research.

The day ahead

The International Conference on Innovation in Teaching and Education runs until Sunday in London.

The Senedd in Wales closes for summer recess.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Mood changes appeared first on Research Professional News.

RPN webinar hears from policy experts on future of university funding, REF and OfS

Labour could still act to restrict the graduate route visa, despite signals of support for it from the education secretary, a former government adviser has warned.

Speaking at a webinar, After the Vote, held on 18 July by Research Professional News to discuss what the new government means for UK research, Diana Beech, chief executive of higher education umbrella body London Higher and a former adviser to three Conservative universities and science ministers, said “any further moves [on] immigration and the graduate route are not off the cards”.

She was speaking after education secretary Bridget Phillipson told the BBC’s World at One on 17 July that the government had no plans to ease the university funding crisis by raising tuition fees or increasing public funding, but that it backed international student recruitment to help put institutions “on a more sustainable footing”.

“We have the graduate route that has worked very successfully for universities,” Phillipson said.

But Beech pointed out that Phillipson is not the home secretary and that “the education secretary under the last government was batting our corner [while] the home secretary wasn’t”.

She said: “I think we should rehearse our arguments for the importance of the graduate route. I don’t think anything is off the table.”

Beech said the new government would not want to raise fees for home students because it would look like they were punishing the very people––younger age groups––who had just voted for them. Raising the amount of maintenance funding that students could borrow might be more likely, “but that’s going to take a couple of years”, she added.

Fostering ‘empathy’ between departments

Graeme Reid, chair of science and research policy at University College London, said at the webinar that he would like to see more efforts to address tensions between immigration and research policy, to “see if we can get more empathy between the Home Office and those departments that are invested in the science agenda”.

Martin McQuillan, editor of RPN’s 8am Playbook, suggested that if Phillipson was saying the government had no plans for an increase in funding, relying on international students was the only other option. However, “it is not going to be an easy thing for Labour to say that we are just going to take the lid off the graduate-visa route”, he added.

Labour’s opposition to raising tuition fees and its insistence that it did not want to be part of the Erasmus+ student exchange scheme were likely to be “positions that won’t bear contact with reality”, he argued.

Ten-year budgets

The webinar also discussed the new government’s proposal to extend R&D budgets to 10 years.

Kieron Flanagan, professor of science and technology policy at the University of Manchester, said this was not a new idea and that no government could bind the hands of its successor, but that it made sense to give a clear indication of the direction of travel.

“The intriguing thing is that there have been hints that it might apply to individual research institutes,” he said. “That might be a little bit newer in terms of the idea of, for instance, major research institutes having more certainty.”

Reid said it would be a mistake to view a 10-year budget settlement as necessarily an attractive option. “Presented differently, it sounds like a 10-year budget freeze,” he said.

In the lead up to the election, questions had been raised about the future of the Research Excellence Framework. Asked about this at RPN’s in-person event, RPN Live, in March, then shadow science secretary Chi Onwurah stopped short of committing to retain it in its current form and said she was concerned about some of the bureaucracy involved.

But Flanagan said the REF fulfilled an important need to generate a figure for quality-related funding, while Reid said it was valuable in providing different incentives for researchers, such as in terms of impact or research culture, and was an asset to the UK internationally.

McQuillan said the appointment of former government chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance as science minister made it more likely that the REF would be retained.

Improving regulation

Also under discussion was the future of higher education regulator the Office for Students. Phillipson said in her interview that the government had already started work on improving regulation. “The Office for Students, for example, we’ve begun to make changes there because the system we have had hasn’t delivered,” she said.

Smita Jamdar, relationship partner for education clients at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau, said there were questions around whether the OfS had suitable expertise on its board.

Questions also remained about new statutory duties around academic freedom, due to come into force on 1 August, and whether that was a viable date, she added.

Universities still had no idea what the complaints committee would look like or how the OfS would make its judgments, according to Jamdar.

“Something has to happen about that start date,” she said. “Otherwise we’ll just have chaos for a few weeks, and that is not a great way to start a new system.”

The post Labour moves on graduate route visas ‘not off the cards’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Vallance plan to explore hosting major facility may meet Treasury opposition, former STFC head warns

The UK could reap big economic benefits by hosting a major new international research facility, according to a former chief executive of the UK’s Science and Technology Facilities Council, after new science minister Patrick Vallance floated the idea.

John Womersley, who is also a special adviser at the University of Edinburgh, spoke to Research Professional News after comments made by Vallance, the former government chief scientific adviser appointed as science minister in Keir Starmer’s Labour government, at a recent meeting of G7 research ministers.

Vallance “suggested the UK will continue to review the possibility to host a new international research facility as part of the global effort to drive innovation through international collaboration in science and technology”, according to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology.

Examples of such a facility include Cern, Iter and Ska (for which the UK already hosts science astronomy megaproject, the Square Kilometre Array).

“The reasons to host such a facility would be to bring economic benefits to the UK and attract excellent human capital,” Womersley told RPN. “The running costs of a facility tend to end up in the local economy,” he added. This “fits in well with attracting the best minds to the UK economy, as well as with the idea of levelling up”, he continued.

Womersley explained that Vallance’s idea was not a new one and many previous science ministers had proposed it, but that its implementation is a case of convincing the Treasury. Yet it is an idea that’s “not always in good favour” with the Treasury, he continued, partly as it is “easy to make the case that it’s cheaper for the taxpayer to be part of somebody else’s hosted project”.

Building a major global research facility has a “slower payoff than simply, for example, building infrastructure, building roads and houses and schools”, Womersley pointed out. “It’s a more sustainable investment because it attracts R&D-intensive, higher-paid jobs, and it attracts a cluster of high-tech companies around it”, which are all “very good things”, he said.

Biomedical and physical sciences

Areas of science that the UK has a strong background in, and could potentially host such a facility in, are biomedical sciences and the physical sciences, Womersley said.

He thought Vallance may end up pursuing something like the European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Europe’s life science laboratory—an international governmental organisation headquartered in Heidelberg, Germany, and with five other sites including Cambridge, UK.

Although, currently, Womersley pointed out, “there aren’t a lot of global initiatives looking for someone to put a lot of money on the line to secure a headquarters”. But, he said, there is one exception: the possibly of hosting a large next-generation search for dark matter in an underground lab.

“The STFC are interested in the possibility of the UK hosting a large generation search for dark matter underground as it is physics research that won’t require a particle accelerator,” explained Womersley. A particle accelerator is a hugely expensive piece of scientific kit, in which Cern, the Switzerland-headquartered European organisation for nuclear research, has invested.

Another potential option, Womersley suggested, is that there could be scope for international collaboration on an existing UK project such as the UK Atomic Energy Authority’s Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production, a programme aiming to demonstrate the ability to create net energy from fusion. “This could bring in additional intellectual capacity and resources to an existing UK initiative,” he added.

Location, location, location

When deciding a location for a facility of this type, there are tensions between levelling up economically, alongside the good skills and transport links needed for research, Womersley explained.

“The scientific community want good schools for their children. They want good transport links. They want connectivity with good universities,” said Womersley. 

One recent example that the government could look to, he added, is why the Ska project ended up in Manchester. “It ended up there because Manchester is a sort of a reasonable compromise, a workable compromise within the UK geography… outside London while still badged as the North. But it is a place with a globally recognised university, with international transport links, and with good schools and housing and good education.”

Patience is key

Womersley explained that the idea of hosting a major international research facility had been “hindered in the past by short four-year political cycles”. But he remains sure, despite hurdles, that this still is an idea worth pursuing, though, “as with all international projects you must go through a lot of scientific diplomacy”.

Womersley is convinced Vallance is “an extremely good person” to deal with this, though he warned that it “gets frustrating for the government that wants to be able to demonstrate progress on an electorally relevant timescale to be going what seems like endlessly around the loops of trying to get international agreement on hosting a facility”.

The post Global research centre could be ‘economic boost for UK’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Advisers to UK government “did not have sufficient freedom to express dissenting views”, says report

Scientific advice to the UK government in the lead up to the pandemic was not broad enough and ministers failed to challenge it, according to the Covid inquiry’s damning first report.

The report, following an inquiry commissioned by the government and led by Baroness Hallett, was published on 18 July. It concluded that in the years leading up to the Covid pandemic, ministers did not have the variety of scientific advice needed.

“The UK prepared for the wrong pandemic,” said the report, highlighting that planning had focused on a potential influenza pandemic.

The report also said there were “fatal strategic flaws underpinning the assessment of the risks faced by the UK, how those risks and their consequences could be managed and prevented from worsening, and how they could be responded to”; that the UK government’s “sole pandemic strategy, from 2011, was outdated and lacked adaptability”; that there was “a damaging absence of focus on the measures, interventions and infrastructure required in the event of a pandemic—in particular, a system that could be scaled up to test, trace and isolate in the event of a pandemic”.

“Ministers, who are frequently untrained in the specialist field of civil contingencies, were not presented with a broad enough range of scientific opinion and policy options, and failed to challenge sufficiently the advice they did receive from officials and advisers,” the report continued.

“Advisers and advisory groups did not have sufficient freedom and autonomy to express dissenting views and suffered from a lack of significant external oversight and challenge,” it also said. “The advice was often undermined by ‘groupthink’.”

The report concluded: “The UK government and devolved administrations’ systems of emergency preparedness, resilience and response failed. The ways in which risk was assessed, strategy designed and advice provided were flawed.”

‘Radical reform’ is needed

Hallett, chair of the inquiry, wrote in her introduction: “There must be radical reform. Never again can a disease be allowed to lead to so many deaths and so much suffering.”

However, she also recognised that scientists were among the individuals who ensured the pandemic’s impact was not even more severe.

“Ultimately, the UK was spared worse by the individual efforts and dedication of health and social care workers and the civil and public servants who battled the pandemic; by the scientists, medics and commercial companies who researched valiantly to produce lifesaving treatments and ultimately vaccines,” Hallett wrote.

The report also noted that because most emergencies involved more than one single department across government, technical information could rapidly be transmitted to other departments that needed it.

“Each scientific adviser [within a government department] could call on the specialist capabilities from within their own department,” it added.

Chris Whitty, chief medical officer for England from October 2019, is quoted as telling the inquiry that the UK’s science advisory system “is complex and not perfect but is considered to be one of the stronger ones internationally”.

The post Covid scientific advice ‘not broad enough’, finds inquiry appeared first on Research Professional News.

Were sector organisations all waiting for parliament to open before issuing reports?

The state opening of parliament yesterday appears to have opened the floodgates for higher education announcements, with Ucas, the Higher Education Policy Institute, the National Centre for Universities and Business, GuildHE and the UK Arts and Design Institutions Association all publishing reports this morning.

Frances Jones was on hand to report on the King’s speech yesterday as it was delivered, with the main headlines for universities concerning a series of confirmations rather than anything too surprising. Skills England is to be established to oversee post-16 education, an Industrial Strategy Council is on the way and, on artificial intelligence, the government “will seek to establish the appropriate legislation to place requirements on those working to develop the most powerful AI models”.

As Frances reports, a Digital Information and Smart Data bill has been promised to “help scientists and researchers make more life-enhancing discoveries”. The legislation—which will be led by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology—will help scientists to “make better use of data for world-class research by reflecting the realities of modern interdisciplinary science research in our data laws”.

“Scientists will be able to ask for broad consent for areas of scientific research and [the bill will] allow legitimate researchers doing scientific research in commercial settings to make equal use of our data regime,” the documents accompanying the King’s speech state.

Admissions reform

While we will of course bring you all the developments as the Labour government’s plans take shape, there are some rather more immediate things to which we now turn our attention.

Readers would be forgiven for forgetting that the admissions body Ucas last year committed to abolishing the personal statement. The plans were announced some 18 months ago and today we find out what the new application form will look like.

As we report on our website this morning, Ucas has now confirmed that the lengthy statement will be replaced by three questions: Why do you want to study this course or subject? How have your qualifications and studies helped you to prepare for this course or subject? And what else have you done to prepare outside of education, and why are these experiences helpful?

The changes are part of Ucas’s attempts to close the gap between application rates for the most and least disadvantaged students in the UK, which have remained stubbornly in place. Earlier this year, the admissions body announced that application fees for students on free school meals were to be scrapped, and Ucas research suggests that the abolition of the personal statement will help encourage those from more challenging backgrounds to make an application.

“My aim at Ucas is to make sure that the doors of opportunity stay open for as many students as possible so that they can benefit from a university education and find the right course that they will succeed in,” said Ucas chief executive Jo Saxton.

No doubt some will conclude that the scrapping of the personal statement is an example of universities ‘dumbing down’. But Ucas says that the three-question format will not only encourage more applicants but will also give universities more information of the type that they desire.

Speaking of more applications, education secretary Bridget Phillipson appeared on BBC Radio 4 yesterday with mixed messages for the sector. Labour is not planning to ease universities’ funding fears with an increase in tuition fees or public funding, she said, but it will back international student recruitment to help put institutions “on a more sustainable footing”.

Care and care alike

Elsewhere this morning, the Higher Education Policy Institute publishes its latest paper, written in collaboration with the GW4 group of universities in western England and Wales. It’s on a topic Research Professional News has followed closely in recent years—postgraduate students’ eligibility for childcare support.

While undergraduate parents can access grants, master’s and doctoral students with children cannot. Nor are they eligible for the free childcare hours offered to other workers. Given that most research students work pretty much full time on their studies, it hardly seems fair.

As we report on our news pages, the paper concludes that access to UK student Childcare Grants should be expanded to include taught and research postgraduates who have been “forgotten” by recent Conservative governments. Their exemption from child support has created “a lack of equitable provision” that “disproportionately affects women and those from lower-income communities, hampering efforts to increase the diversity of the higher education and high-skilled workforce”.

The current Childcare Grants for undergraduates are available to students whose household income is below £19,795.

The paper includes a number of case studies of postgraduates battling against the cost of parenthood. Melissa Barlow, a parent and a biomedical PhD student at the University of Exeter, said that paying two lots of nursery fees put an “overwhelming financial strain on us as a family” and that she had to take out loans and accrued nearly £15,000 of credit card debt.

“The only way I could continue studying was by going part time and taking on a part-time job to help financially,” she said. “Given that the average age of a postgraduate researcher coincides with the average age of starting a family, preventing postgraduate students from accessing financial support for childcare that is available for undergraduates or workers feels inequitable.”

Extending the current undergraduate Childcare Grant to postgraduate students would be “a welcome first step to improving access for the most economically disadvantaged”, the paper says.

Arts and minds

Another of Playbook’s passions gets the report treatment this morning, with GuildHE and the UK Arts and Design Institutions Association joining forces to publish a paper called The Value of Creative Graduates.

It has long been clear that in certain parts of Westminster, it is felt that a degree can’t possibly be of any value if the holder is not earning a six-figure salary. The paper aims to fly the flag for both creative graduates and the institutions that produce them, highlighting the contributions that graduates can make to the modern workforce and the impact that providers have in their regions, both culturally and economically.

In 2022, the government estimated that the creative industries provided over 2.4 million jobs and generated £126 billion in gross value added to the economy, the report states.

Lisa Mann, executive director for academic innovation at Arts University Bournemouth, said higher education providers, employers and policymakers needed to collaborate to “support the future pipeline of creative skills”.

“Creative education has been eroded by austerity and policy change that has impacted access and participation, industry collaboration with education providers and the role of culture in regional development,” she said.

“With the new Labour government, we must come together to address these issues and barriers for the better. Championing the incredible value creative graduates bring to our society, recognising the subsequent economic contribution of the creative industries and ensuring we collectively commit to improving diversity in the sector will be the first steps to a fairer and more dynamic creative skills system.”

And finally…

Our report roundup this morning concludes at the National Centre for Universities and Business, which publishes a paper on the “varied and impactful university and business partnerships that address the urgent challenges of conservation, restoration and the sustainable use of nature”.

The case study topics cover a lot of ground—from using artificial intelligence to help Ghanaian farmers monitor crops in real time to an innovative aquaculture system that “turns waste wood into nutritious seafood”. Yum.

Perhaps our favourite title in the collection is: “Exploring how the ‘untapped kingdom’ of fungi can change our world.” Sounds like a cracking computer game.

On Research Professional News today

Chris Parr reports that the “significant financial pressure” under which universities are operating is jeopardising their role in boosting local and national economies, the Campaign for Science and Engineering has said.

Chris also reveals the questions that will replace Ucas personal statements, and a paper says that postgraduates were ‘forgotten’ by Tory childcare policies.

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson has signalled that the Labour government is not planning to ease universities’ funding fears with an increase in tuition fees or public funding but will back international student recruitment to help put institutions “on a more sustainable footing”.

Mićo Tatalović tells us that the Biochemical Society has announced the appointment of Phil Morgan, head of the Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, as its incoming chief executive.

Frances Jones says that the Labour government has set out plans in the King’s speech to create an Industrial Strategy Council and introduce legislation on artificial intelligence, and the European Space Agency is to begin preparatory work for a mission to help defend the Earth from collisions with asteroids.

Emily Twinch tells us that science minister Patrick Vallance has reaffirmed the UK government’s support for the Ukrainian science community, and Roberta Metsola has been re-elected as president of the European Parliament and used her first speech to say the EU needs to invest in research.

Nina Bo Wagner writes that the European Research Council would lose more than €73 million (£61.4m) from its proposed 2025 budget under cuts sought by the Council of the EU member state governments.

In the news

The BBC looks at five big problems the new government has to fix, including university finances. Actor Glen Powell is to finish his degree while making a new film, and axing a free University of Wolverhampton bus ‘will limit disabled students’.

An opinion piece in the Guardian says that graduation is a significant moment and we never realise it at the time.

In the Telegraph, the University of Cambridge has made an about-turn on fossil fuel donations, and Extinction Rebellion-supporting scientists have compared their actions to those of Gandhi and the suffragettes.

In the Times, a student who created malware that was used to attack state websites has been jailed, and University College London graduates have sold a home-office startup for millions.

The Belfast Telegraph says that a trainee electrician is urging more women to take apprenticeships.

The day ahead

Ucas will publish June deadline application data.

The Higher Education Policy Institute publishes a report on childcare for postgraduate students.

The National Centre for Universities and Business publishes a report on partnerships that address conservation, restoration and the sustainable use of nature.

At 9.30am, the final ever council meeting of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales will take place. Fare thee well.

University College London’s Institute of Education has a webinar at 10am on theoretical approaches to early career academia.

At 2pm, our latest Research Professional News Live webinar will look at what a new government means for UK research.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Paper mountain appeared first on Research Professional News.

Science minister confirms commitment to Ukrainian academics at London meeting

UK science minister Patrick Vallance reaffirmed the UK government’s support for the Ukrainian science community today, saying international collaboration was integral to scientific success.

The minister also mentioned a previous funding package from the UK government for Ukrainian researchers, at a seminar at the Royal Society.

“International collaboration is integral to success in science, driving growth and our shared security,” Vallance said.

“The seminar today is part of our plan to open up the UK science sector with meaningful partnerships, and stand in solidarity with Ukraine against Russia’s illegal invasion.”

Formalising research collaboration

The seminar was for the Ukraine ministry of education and science, and Vallance was joined by the deputy minister of that department. It cemented an agreement between the two countries to collaborate on research.

Vallance said: “We are committed to working with Ukrainian experts as they rebuild and reform their research and development ecosystem.

“Sharing our best practices with overseas neighbours and supporting Ukrainian researchers will speed up innovation that can’t be developed in isolation, ultimately resulting in a more prosperous and safer world.”

The UK has given nearly £13m via the ‘Researchers at Risk’ scheme, which has given about 180 Ukraine-based researchers academic posts in the UK since Russia’s full invasion of the country over two years ago. Julian Lewis, chair of the joint Intelligence and Security Committee, had called for the scheme to be expanded to include academics at risk in other countries.

At the seminar, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the Royal Society, and the Ukrainian Ministry of Education and Science also shared key information on the Research Excellence Framework.

In May, the UK government announced that it was investing £16m in innovations to support the recovery of Ukraine’s energy system.

UPDATE 18/07 — Clarified the UK investment.

The post UK pledges more help for researchers in Ukraine appeared first on Research Professional News.

Bridget Phillipson indicates government will support international student recruitment to put universities on “sustainable footing”

Bridget Phillipson has signalled that the Labour government is not planning to ease universities’ funding fears with an increase in tuition fees or public funding, but will back international student recruitment to help put institutions “on a more sustainable footing”.

The new education secretary was speaking in an interview with the BBC’s World at One after Keir Starmer’s government set out its legislative agenda in the King’s speech to parliament—in which measures on university funding did not feature.

But there will be warm welcomes from university leaders for her messages on backing the graduate-route visa, which Labour was silent on in opposition despite government moves, eventually abandoned, to scrap the route; on reform of the English sector regulator; and on increasing opportunities for young people to go to university.

Asked whether universities were entitled to ask “what is there in this for us” in the speech, given “the challenges on their financing”, Phillipson said: “Partly, what we’ve set out around Skills England…Universities are an important part of how we need to transform our landscape where it comes to skills, training and educational opportunities.

“Alongside that, I do know that the legacy the Labour government has inherited is one where universities are facing significant financial challenges.

“There is a lot I believe we can and will do to ensure there is good regulation and oversight of what has gone on. We’ve started that work already. The Office for Students, for example, we’ve begun to make changes there because the system we have had hasn’t delivered.”

‘More opportunities’

Challenged on the point that “you’re not going to put up the cost of university for students and you’re not going to give universities more money”, Phillipson replied: “We have no plans in that space because we want to make sure we are putting universities on a more sustainable footing overall.

“And part of that is what we see, for example, around international students, who are an important part of our system—not just in economic terms, what they contribute, but also in our reach around the world and our soft power.

“And the approach that we’ll take, unlike the Conservatives, is that we won’t make our universities and the people who study there the subject of headlines, a political battleground. This is about opportunities across our country.”

Asked whether Labour was content to allow international student numbers to rise, and relaxed about the number of student visas being granted, Phillipson said: “We have the graduate route that has worked very successfully for universities, has delivered massive benefits to communities like mine in Sunderland, where it has furthered investment opportunities—an important part of the system.

“But I also want to make sure that we’ve got more opportunities for people to go to university if that’s what they want to do.  

“Increasingly, I’m concerned about the impact that we’re seeing on opportunities for young people, whether that’s apprenticeships or universities—I want really strong, good pathways for all of our young people, so that where you come from doesn’t determine what you can go on to achieve.”

The post Labour has ‘no plans’ to raise university fees or funding appeared first on Research Professional News.

UK government agenda for legislation focuses on skills and technology

The Labour government has set out plans in the King’s speech to create an Industrial Strategy Council and introduce legislation on artificial intelligence.

The speech sets out the government’s agenda for legislation in the coming Parliament.

Ministers “will establish an Industrial Strategy Council,” part of an aim to ensure “rising living standards in all nations and regions in the UK”, the speech said. The new body is likely to oversee the implementation of bills on AI and tech.

While acknowledging the challenge presented by climate change, the speech added that “ministers will also pursue sustainable growth by encouraging investment in industry, skills and new technologies”.

The government “recognises the urgency of the global climate challenge and the new job opportunities that can come from leading the development of the tech of the future”.

Josh Burke, senior policy fellow at Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change, said: “Redesigning the UK economy to capitalise on the benefits of sustainable growth requires the government to be ambitious, and today’s King’s speech has policies that are examples of the change we need.

“But the government needs to be bolder,” he added. “There was also scant attention paid to climate adaptation and resilience in the speech.”

AI requirements

On artificial intelligence, the speech said the government “will seek to establish the appropriate legislation to place requirements on those working to develop the most powerful AI models”.

Proposals for an industrial skills and tech strategy have been welcomed.

Trades Union Congress general secretary Paul Nowak commented: “The UK has been crying out for a proper skills strategy for years.

“With AI, automation and climate change transforming the world of work, we must ensure people have the skills they need to do the jobs our economy needs.”

Also key to the legislative agenda outlined in the speech was that power would be devolved to local regions to enable economic growth in the UK.

Ministers “will enhance Britain’s position as a leading industrial nation and enable the country to take advantage of new opportunities that can promote growth and wealth creation,” the speech said.

Aiming to ‘help scientists’

A new Digital Information and Smart Data Bill was also promised to “help scientists and researchers make more life-enhancing discoveries by improving our data laws”.

According to a government background briefing published alongside the speech, through the bill researchers will be able to “make better use of data for world-class research by reflecting the realities of modern interdisciplinary science research in our data laws”.

“Scientists will be able to ask for broad consent for areas of scientific research and allow legitimate researchers doing scientific research in commercial settings to make equal use of our data regime,” the notes add.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (Dsit) will lead on the bill, which aims to legislate on various uses of data that people can employ. It will look to “accelerate innovation”, according to the speech briefing.

“These measures start delivering on the government’s commitment to better serve the British public through science and technology,” the briefing adds.

Dsit will also lead on the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill.

Raising educational standards

Elsewhere, the speech confirmed that a bill to establish Skills England—to oversee English skills provision—would be introduced. The King said it would have a “new partnership with employers at its heart, and my ministers will reform the apprenticeship Levy”.

The speech also confirmed that measures would be brought forward to remove private school fees’ exemption from value added tax, to “enable the funding of 6,500 new teachers”. 

Joe Marshall, chief executive of the National Centre for Universities and Business, said: “We warmly welcome the news, revealed in the King’s speech, that the government will introduce Skills England, which will bring together business and training providers.”

Meanwhile, University and College Union general secretary Jo Grady said: “The government needs to make sure workers are at the heart of Skills England, the Industrial Strategy Council and reforms to the apprenticeship levy.

“The college teachers entrusted to deliver these plans earn £9k less than their counterparts in schools. Reskilling England cannot be done on the cheap, and these crucial workers need a pay rise. 

“Now is the time to reset these relationships to one of collaboration rather than one where initiatives are foisted onto education staff at the whim of government.”

The post King’s speech pledges Industrial Strategy Council and AI bill appeared first on Research Professional News.

An early test for Labour and higher education in Wales ahead of today’s King’s speech

In September 1998, Ron Davies defeated Rhodri Morgan to become Labour’s candidate for first secretary of the inaugural Welsh Assembly; five weeks later, Davies had to resign from the post over a “moment of madness” on Clapham Common. History does not always repeat itself but sometimes it rhymes.

Yesterday saw the resignation of Vaughan Gething as Wales’s first minister after four members of his cabinet quit in protest over a donations row related to the leadership campaign that had seen Gething succeed the long-serving Mark Drakeford. We always suspected that Drakeford was standing down to get his social science papers in order for the next Research Excellence Framework.

Davies had called his infamous walk across the south London park “an error of judgment”. Yesterday’s events seem something more than that.

The timing could not have been more precise in order to do least harm to Labour’s general election campaign but to fatally wound Gething’s political career. Gething’s time as first minister makes Humza Yousaf’s tenure in Scotland seem like Robert Walpole’s premiership.

The ringleader of the resigning cabinet members was none other than Jeremy Miles, Gething’s leadership rival from earlier this year and a former education minister. Between them, Miles and former economy minister Gething have had responsibility for Wales’s universities since 2021.

In March, Gething defeated Miles by the cursed ratio of 52 to 48 per cent of the Welsh Labour membership vote. Gething may have thought he was being smart by holding his enemies close when he appointed Miles to the top job of economy secretary.

Now, a new Labour prime minister in Westminster faces the first test of his own whiter-than-white approach to politics. Back in 1998, Tony Blair opted for Alun Michael as the least bad option. Keir Starmer will probably bow to the inevitable and accept that Miles is best placed to fill the gap left by the resignation.

Will this have much impact on higher education in Wales? The Cardiff Senedd goes into summer recess on Friday, while the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales is due to pull down its shutters at the end of the month, to be replaced by the curiously postponed Medr, also known as the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research.

The body had been due to start in April, but then education minister [checks notes] Miles announced in January that it would be deferred until this summer. The idea behind Medr is to bring Wales’s universities, further education institutions, sixth form colleges, adult education providers and apprenticeship programmes under one unified regulatory and funding system—Medr in Welsh means ‘skill’.

The skill or otherwise with which the body has been introduced in Wales aside, some have thought that the Welsh experience might provide a model for what Labour wants to do with tertiary education in England. After all, the election manifesto promised both a post-16 review and a new quango called Skills England.

However, in Wales, the new commission will have responsibility for university research. There is little prospect of that model being repeated in England, where the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has a £20 billion budget and Research England sits within the umbrella funding council UK Research and Innovation.

King’s speech

Starmer would have been hoping that yesterday’s resignations and claims of impropriety were restricted to Gareth Southgate and the cast of Strictly Come Dancing. Events in Wales have rather marred today’s state opening of parliament, where the new Labour government will outline its first legislative programme.

There are reported to be 35 bills included in this King’s speech. Let’s hope this effort is kinder to universities than the last time the monarch did the job, when in November 2023 he told us that the government would be clamping down on “poor-quality university degrees”.

That being King Charles’s first ever speech to open a parliament, the wording took place under the full glare of the world’s media. No doubt it did wonders for educational exports.

This time round, we are not expecting a similar broadside. But nor are we necessarily looking for a bill on universities.

The creation of Skills England will need primary legislation, but it would be to get ahead of ourselves to expect any news on a post-16 review, which would only require a ministerial announcement. Any rise in tuition fees would equally merely require a vote in parliament, where Labour now holds an eye-watering majority.

However, science secretary Peter Kyle will be getting his legislative hands dirty this parliamentary term with a proposed artificial intelligence bill. It follows on from the Conservative government’s own positioning of the UK at the forefront of AI regulation.

Kyle will hopefully not be off to Bletchley Park to cosplay Alan Turing like his predecessor Michelle Donelan. The bill is said to deal with legal safeguards around cutting-edge technologies and focus on the large language models such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT as the general technology that underpins AI products.

Rishi Sunak had been reluctant to introduce legislation when he was prime minister, thinking that such a move would stymie the development of AI models and make the UK a less appealing place for developers to do business. That did not stop the Conservatives making noises about agile regulation and safety guards, which in the end never saw the light of day.

The EU passed an AI Act through the Brussels parliament in March, with some of the strictest rules on the use of AI yet seen. The EU’s approach was in sharp contrast to the voluntary agreements between companies and governments preferred by the Sunak administration.

On the other hand, with no money about to pay for doctors and nurses, Labour has been making its own noises about AI as a game changer in the delivery of public services. Last week, the Tony Blair Institute devoted an entire conference to the topic.

The Labour manifesto pledged to “ensure the safe development and use of AI models by introducing binding regulation on the handful of companies developing the most powerful AI models”. The science department might be quite busy if it is going to start chasing AI development in Silicon Valley.

Earlier this year, while relatively new to the science brief, Kyle spoke of wanting to introduce a statutory code that would compel companies to release their test data so that we could all see what they were up to. Let’s hope new science minister Patrick Vallance does not become a slave to the algorithm as he finds an ever greater percentage of his time taken up with trying to keep ahead of AI developers.

Maybe someone else in the science department will have that job. We will let you know if they ever publish the responsibilities of the new ministers.

And finally…

In other appointments, Fiona Hill, Durham University chancellor and a former Russia adviser to Donald Trump’s White House, has been asked by prime minister Keir Starmer to co-lead a major strategic defence review of the UK’s armed forces.

Former Conservative universities and science minister Greg Clark, ex-chair of the House of Commons science, innovation and technology committee, has been appointed executive chair of the University of Warwick’s Innovation District.

And former Labour home secretary Jacqui Smith said goodbye to her podcasting career—for now—at a live recording of her For the Many show in Broadstairs at the weekend. She is heading to Sanctuary Buildings as the new minister for further education, higher education and skills.

There’s a joke in here somewhere about her podcast co-host and cursed parliamentary candidate Iain Dale, former MP Clark and disgusted of Tunbridge Wells writing to the Department for Education to complain, but we have been advised not to make it.

On Research Professional News today

Frances Jones reports that UK Research and Innovation’s Funding Service website went down on the night of 15 to 16 July, causing researchers stress ahead of multiple grant application deadlines.

Chris Parr writes that the Quality Assurance Agency has identified “broad equivalence” between international and domestic pathway courses, plus areas for “swift action”, and research has suggested that while people with a higher education qualification tend to earn more money and are more likely to be employed, those from more advantaged backgrounds still do better on average than their less advantaged peers.

He adds that former Conservative minister Greg Clark has been appointed inaugural executive chair of Warwick Innovation District—a company established by the University of Warwick that aims to boost research collaboration in the region.

Mićo Tatalović tells us that a report examining UK health research funded by the international development budget has said that while such work is “largely relevant and effective”, there is a need for “more focus on achieving impact”, and a study has found that the UK must take “urgent action” to develop skills and retrain pharmaceutical staff if it is to take advantage of a predicted boom in RNA-based medicines and treatments.

Nina Bo Wagner says that the Council of the EU member state governments wants to cut €400 million (£336m) from the European Commission’s proposed 2025 budget for the bloc’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme, and the latest round of European Innovation Council funding for technology-based startup companies yielded a 7 per cent success rate for applicants.

In the news

The BBC reports that the University of Wolverhampton is scrapping a bus service.

Public sector workers write in the Guardian about how more cuts would wreck universities, and an opinion piece says that academic journals are a lucrative scam.

A column in the Times says that we need to recruit teachers who can inspire, and letters deal with education challenges.

The day ahead

The state opening of parliament takes place, with the King’s speech outlining priorities for the government.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post Things can only get Medr appeared first on Research Professional News.

Quality Assurance Agency research lends some credence to allegations of favouritism towards international students

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, it is fair to say, does not top the news agenda too often. There was that squabble a couple of years ago, when it stood aside as the designated quality body for England during a pretty unsavoury row with the Office for Students, but other than that it has generally just got on with its work.

This morning, though, the QAA has published a report on international pathway programmes that seems to have got the sector talking. Readers will recall that the Sunday Times published a series of articles earlier this year alleging that such courses (which support the entry of international students into UK higher education) enable less qualified international students to get university places ahead of their domestic counterparts. The articles conveniently overlooked the extent to which international students have facilitated the expansion of higher education for all students, regardless of domicile.

Nonetheless, the general public was concerned. So the QAA has been looking into it, investigating international foundation programmes and international year one programmes between 28 February and 3 July this year. Some 34 providers took part in the evaluation exercise, and 185 programmes in 20 different subject areas were looked at. So, are pathway programmes favouring international students?

Well, sort of. Out of 32 providers that delivered international foundation programmes, 18 declared they had equivalent programmes for domestic students. Of the 20 providers that delivered international year one programmes, 10 declared they had equivalent domestic programmes.

“As not all international pathway programmes had equivalent domestic programmes, there appear to be a greater number of programmes across the sector to facilitate entry for international students,” the QAA states.

Using these domestic equivalent programmes as a comparison, the QAA found that there was “broad equivalence between the entry requirements for both the international foundation programmes and their domestic equivalents, and international year one programmes and their domestic equivalents”.

“We found that the academic standards of international foundation programmes were being set in line with the expectations of a course at that level in the vast majority of cases,” the QAA says. It “also found that students on international foundation programmes were achieving at an appropriate level and that marking and assessment were effective in the vast majority of cases”.

Playbook can predict that the mainstream press will be more than happy to focus on those cases that are not among the vast majority.

The QAA “also considered whether students were offered similar opportunities to complete and achieve the intended outcome of the courses, compared with domestic students that had studied A-level or Scottish Higher qualifications”. It “found that international foundation programme students generally had more opportunities under more varied conditions to achieve successful progression through, for example, having multiple attempts at assessments, than the opportunities available to A-level or Scottish Higher students”.

This will not sit well in middle England—or middle Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

And while a number of providers were applying the same academic regulations to both international year one programmes and their other programmes at level 4, this was not happening in all cases.

“In some cases where the international year one programme was offered through a partner, there were differences in the regulations,” the QAA found. “This was evidenced in particular in varying approaches to the opportunities provided to students to attempt assessments multiple times.”

It will be awkward reading for the sector, but the QAA report points to “notable differences in the rates of progression to the next level of study between international foundation programmes and international year one programmes and their identified domestic equivalent programmes”.

There were no observable patterns within these differences, and—in true academic style—the QAA says more research in this area is required. It does, however, make a number of recommendations.

These include urging higher education providers to seek “greater standardisation of approach towards assessment practice and regulations on international foundation programmes”; to regularly assess progression rates for international and domestic students; and to have a more consistent approach to naming international pathway programmes.

Vivienne Stern, chief executive of Universities UK, said UUK had commissioned the report “as we want students, their families and the wider public to have confidence that university admissions processes are fair for domestic and international students”.

“Although the number of students entering undergraduate study via an international pathway programme represents a small proportion of the two million undergraduates studying in our universities, it was important to examine questions around these pathways,” she said.

“The review found that providers are following their published entry requirements and that entry requirements are broadly equivalent. It also confirms academic standards on international pathway courses are of an expected standard in the vast majority of cases.”

There’s that phrase again—“vast majority”. Thankfully, Stern’s statement continues. “While there are no systemic issues, the review has found some areas where more consistent application of best practice is needed, and this needs swift action,” she said.

“We will be discussing with our members the steps we must take as a sector to further strengthen the robustness and transparency of admissions. UUK has been updating our Fair Admissions Code of Practice and will address relevant issues identified by the QAA as part of this work. We will now prioritise this and publish the updated code shortly.”

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the Russell Group said its universities were “committed to fair admissions and delivering high-quality courses and successful outcomes for all students”.

“While the QAA found no systemic issues with international pathway programmes being delivered in the UK, it made several recommendations to strengthen practice in the sector,” the spokesperson said. “Our universities will be working with delivery partners to consider these recommendations to ensure best practice and that students, staff, government and sector partners remain confident in the standards of these courses.”

And finally…

The Centre for Transforming Access and Student Outcomes in Higher Education publishes research this morning on educational returns for students from different underrepresented and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups in terms of economic and employment outcomes.

The Taso research finds that students who pursue higher education qualifications earn more money and are more likely to be employed than peers with no qualifications beyond GCSEs. Who knew?

Omar Khan, chief executive of Taso, said: “Higher education qualifications are clearly linked to better earnings and likelihood of employment. This is good news for students and policymakers alike looking to reap dividends from investing in university or college qualifications.”

In other news, the pope has not changed religion.

Nonetheless, the Taso research is well worth a moment of your time for its findings on equality gaps, with “key underrepresented groups of students facing persistent barriers to an equitable education pathway”.

On Research Professional News today

Mićo Tatalović reports that the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has declined to clarify the government’s ambitions on boosting student exchange with the EU, and UK Research and Innovation has announced a new head for its UK Astronomy Technology Centre.

Frances Jones writes that the Research Excellence Framework has named the 40 institutions it has selected for the pilot of the people, culture and environment section of its 2029 assessment exercise, and the EU’s Space Programme and its dedicated delivery agency are performing well, according to a European Commission analysis.

Nina Bo Wagner tells us that students should be given the chance to directly participate in the governance of European Education Area initiatives, the European Students’ Union has said, and EU officials met with counterparts in the US last week to discuss best practice, risks and shared ambitions around artificial intelligence.

In the news

The BBC covers the Quality Assurance Agency’s evaluation of international pathway programmes, and a University of Oxford festival is aiming to inspire pupils.

In the Guardian, former prime minister Gordon Brown has called on ministers not to scrap T-levels.

The Financial Times reports that the prime minister plans to introduce an artificial intelligence bill in the King’s speech.

In the Times, Labour veterans have attacked the party’s ‘calamitous’ plan to review post-16 skills training, scientists have said that Olympic ‘green’ cars are no such thing, and Eric Liddell has won an honorary degree 100 years after Paris Olympics gold.

The Belfast Telegraph says that the average Northern Irish student loan debt has topped £25,000 for the first time.

The day ahead

The Higher Education Policy Institute publishes a report on post-graduation job prospects.

At 11.30am, Jisc has a webinar on research management systems.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post A fair cop appeared first on Research Professional News.

Aid watchdog praises UK development achievements but also finds room for improvement

A report examining UK health research funded by the international development budget has said that while such work is “largely relevant and effective”, there is a need for “more focus on achieving impact”.

The Independent Commission for Aid Impact’s report, published on 16 July, said that UK aid “contributes positively” to global health, with results such as the Oxford Covid-19 vaccine.

But it also said there is a need for “enhancing and tracking the impact of research projects”.

The aid watchdog report, which examined Department of Health and Social Care aid funding, also called for more focus on strengthening research capacity in target countries, as well as giving researchers there more freedom to pick their collaborators.

“DHSC needs to untie its aid, giving researchers in low- and middle-income countries the choice of partners from around the world, not only the UK,” it said. “DHSC should also take a more strategic approach to strengthening research capacity in low- and middle-income countries.”

Impact issues

The report said that between 2018-19 and 2024-25, the DHSC will have spent almost £1 billion of UK aid on global health research and innovation.

While case studies from Malawi, India and Brazil indicated that UK-funded research projects are “generally relevant to the health challenges experienced in low- and middle-income countries”, the watchdog also found that the DHSC was “not always focusing on research which could drive the greatest impact, such as evidence synthesis”.

Reporting of results to ensure accountability for research impact was described as “weak” considering the scale of the department’s Official Development Assistance spending. In 2023, the report said, the department’s ODA spending was the third largest of all government departments, after the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and the Home Office.

Limitations

Until recently, most of the DHSC’s global health research programmes required projects to be led by UK institutions. While research institutions from low- and middle-income countries are now generally able to apply to lead aid-funded projects, few have been selected, even for projects that need no science and innovation infrastructure, the report said.

In most cases, researchers from those countries had to choose partners in the UK rather than wherever the best scientific expertise was to be found, going against the principle of ‘aid untying’.

“If its aid is to be most effective,” the watchdog said, the DHSC needs to remove “limitations to the countries in which aid can be spent so that researchers in low- and middle-income countries can choose the best partners rather than only those from the UK”.

Tamsyn Barton, who led the review and is a former chief commissioner at the watchdog, said: “We were pleased to see the positive difference UK aid is making to global health research and innovation, especially in areas that have been underfunded or subject to stigma such as mental health.

“We recommend that the DHSC should now focus on increasing the impact of its work, embedding the principle of equitable partnership between high- and lower-income countries and untying its aid to get the best science and value for money so people around the world can benefit.”

The post UK aid-funded health R&D ‘needs stronger focus on impact’ appeared first on Research Professional News.

Ahead of European political summit, Labour ministers have suggested closer ties on R&D and students

The UK’s Foreign Office has declined to clarify the government’s ambitions on boosting student exchange with the EU ahead of the country hosting a European political leaders’ summit this week.

More than 45 leaders will meet with UK prime minister Keir Starmer on Thursday at Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire to discuss migration, energy and connectivity, and defence at a meeting of the European Political Community.

The European Political Community was set up in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine to provide a forum for discussions among politicians at a wider level than the EU. Although the meeting was scheduled to take place in the UK before Starmer won power, the prime minister wants it to assist him in his quest to improve UK relations with Europe.

Starmer said: “I said I would change the way the UK engages with our European partners, working collaboratively to drive forward progress on these generational challenges, and that work starts at the European Political Community meeting on Thursday.”

The meeting follows comments made on 7 July by David Lammy, the foreign secretary, who has called for a championing of student exchanges with the EU.

Lammy said the UK was “absolutely committed to a close partnership with our European neighbours” and that the new government “will reset relations with Europe as a reliable partner, a dependable ally and a good neighbour”.

Among the key areas of shared concerns, such as security and defence, Lammy also mentioned the climate emergency and energy networks.

“We must do more to champion the ties between our people and our culture,” he said. “Holidays, family ties, school and student exchanges, the arts and sport…Thanks to this, our citizens benefit from the rich diversity of our continent.”

But Labour has rejected an EU offer to reconsider its position on rejoining the Erasmus+ student exchange programme, and has repeatedly ruled out freedom of movement between the UK and EU—even if it were only for youth mobility programmes.

The Foreign Office declined to comment on the issue when asked for clarification on its stance to student mobility.

R&D ties 

Starmer has said his intended improved relationship with the EU includes “closer ties in relation to research and development”, among other things.

This, he added, would be subject to “many discussions to be had”.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has confirmed it is already working to boost cooperation with the EU.

“We are working on improving our collaborations with European partners on R&D, including in key technology areas,” a Dsit spokesperson told Research Professional News.

They declined to give any specifics about what that involves at this stage.

The new science minister, Patrick Vallance, suggested last week that closer ties with the EU on science are needed, in addition to lower visa costs for scientists to move to work in the UK.

Responding to Vallance, a government spokesperson said: “As we have said, we are not reversing Brexit and there will be no return to freedom of movement.”

On immigration, they said: “We are determined to bring down historically high levels of legal migration and tackle the root causes behind it.

“The scale of international recruitment for work reflects the need to tackle skills shortages here at home.”

Resetting relations

Also this week, the UK’s new minister for European Union Relations, Nick Thomas-Symonds, will travel to Brussels to meet European Commission executive vice-president Maroš Šefčovič.

Thomas-Symonds was appointed by Starmer to “lead future UK discussions with the EU and to reset the UK-EU relationship”.

The government has said the meeting aims to “set the ground for further discussions between the UK and EU as the UK seeks to reset its relationship with the bloc and build closer cooperation on shared issues”.

Thomas-Symonds said: “With war in Europe, and shared global challenges in areas such as climate change and illegal migration, a strong UK-EU alliance is vital.

“I expect to be engaging with [Šefčovič] and EU colleagues much more in the coming months, as we work together to help make our continent safer and more prosperous.”

Šefčovič said he was looking forward to receiving Thomas-Symonds to “discuss ways to strengthen our cooperation, while making the most of our existing agreements that form the cornerstone of our partnership”.

The post UK Foreign Office stays quiet on EU student exchange plans appeared first on Research Professional News.

Ahead of the King’s speech this week, Labour has been reaching out to traditional allies

On Thursday, new education secretary Bridget Phillipson held a reception for members of the education workforce. It followed her open letter earlier last week in which she reached out to educators promising that the new government would respect them and their unions, working in partnership.

The tone could not be more different from that of her predecessor Gillian Keegan, who had latterly pledged to introduce minimum service levels to universities. Keegan’s cabinet colleague Michelle Donelan, meanwhile, picked fights with academics that ended in a libel settlement.

The first sector figure to pay public court to Phillipson on Thursday was not the president of Universities UK or the chair of the Office for Students but rather Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union. People in universities should take note.

There was a time, under Jeremy Corbyn, when Labour outsourced its higher education policy to the UCU, from the abolition of tuition fees in England to the cancellation of the Research Excellence Framework. That cosy relationship no longer exists.

While Labour was in opposition, the UCU hierarchy was critical of Keir Starmer, notably around the party’s positioning over Gaza. The UCU is not affiliated with Labour, but its members do contribute to a political fund that is used, in theory, to lobby on issues relevant to the union’s interests.

The Conservative government made little effort to hide its disdain for the UCU. It also made clear its contempt for the National Union of Students, which it considered a breeding ground for sedition and wokery—at one point, the government refused to engage with the NUS following claims of antisemitism.

Neither Phillipson nor Starmer is about to declare an open house for trade unions at the Department for Education, but you can expect the UCU—at least in the early days of this administration—to be restored to a position of dignity and respect in the higher education conversation. After the new intake of Labour MPs, we would put money on there being more past and present members of the UCU in the House of Commons than there are members of Reform UK.

The first test of this new equilibrium looks like being the 2024-25 annual pay award, which the UCU has rejected, with the union’s Higher Education Committee declaring that it is now preparing the way for industrial action and a resumption of the “four fights” on pay, equality, workloads and precarity. The union will first have to secure a legal mandate for strike action, before any new legislation rolls back that particular imposition.

The start of the academic year saw UCU members refuse to give their union a continued free hand to call strikes, after years of disputes over pensions and the marking boycott over pay and conditions. There was a sense then that members had had enough of losing days of pay as part of an increasingly ineffective plan of industrial action.

It is not clear, despite the ambition of the Higher Education Committee, that the membership is any closer to wanting to hand that lever back to union bosses. With university staff in scores of institutions witnessing budget squeezes and redundancy programmes first-hand, it is uncertain how keen they would be to strike over wages.

However, incoming Downing Street chief of staff Sue Gray has identified public sector pay as one of the priority issues for the new government. The first test of its approach to pay disputes will be in how health secretary Wes Streeting handles the ongoing strike action by junior doctors.

In the case of the junior doctors, the government has a direct say over discussions. This is not the case in autonomous universities.

Playbook is old enough to remember when a quiet word from Ed Miliband’s office was sufficient to make the leaders in Carlow Street wind their necks in when it came to pay demands. Miliband’s Labour did not want to have to take sides over wages at a time when austerity cuts to public services were being presented as fixing the mess the party had left behind.

Grady is not the sort of general secretary to take such counsel from Labour frontbenchers. But it also seems unlikely that the new government would think about involving itself in a higher education pay dispute outside a funding package that addresses the sector’s sustainability issues.

Labour does not need new legislation in the King’s speech on Wednesday to address that problem. All the levers should already be at its disposal, with or without taking soundings from the union.

Quick wins

The UCU was a visible organiser of events at Labour Party conferences during the years of opposition, while other lobbyists fell away. Another group that was a presence on the floor at Labour gigs throughout this time was MillionPlus.

In recent years, the mission group for modern universities has been making the case to a possible Labour government that its members are the ones who train the public sector workforce, from initial teacher training and nursing education to social work and the care sector. This morning, MillionPlus publishes a list of “six quick wins the government could take to support students and boost universities”.

The list runs from the nebulous—“recognise universities as a national asset and engage them as allies, not adversaries, and respect the importance of international students”—to the very specific: “Maintain funding for Btecs and other established qualifications pending a review.” Undoing the damage of the Conservatives’ ideological promotion of T-levels at the expense of Btecs must certainly be high on Phillipson’s to-do list.

MillionPlus also wants the new government to “recognise that delivering the future public sector workforce requires greater joined-up working between government departments and universities”, which is easier said than done, while its demand for the government to “recommit to widening participation” will be easier for Labour to do than to “reintroduce maintenance grants”.

It then wants the Labour government to “work with universities and the Office for Students to deliver genuinely risk-based regulation”. The OfS would need a functioning board first, after James Wharton resigned as chair days after Phillipson took possession of the keys of Sanctuary Buildings.

Wharton will not be the only senior figure at the OfS who thinks a career change may be in the offing. Phillipson has already put the “politicised regulator” on notice.

MillionPlus complains about the growth and cost of the “regulatory burden” and wants Labour to make sure “actions taken [by the OfS] are targeted, effective and efficient and focus on regulating universities’ core missions”. Labour may not be minded to make crowd-pleasing changes to the regulatory architecture the first thing it does in office, but it will almost certainly use the occasion of its planned post-16 review to bring down the curtain on the OfS in its current form.

Of course, just as it was with the Higher Education Funding Council for England, it would be the same civil servants who transferred from the OfS to whatever future entity might await. The principle of market regulation might be shown the door but the institutional knowledge that has guided higher education for decades cannot so easily be dispersed.

Yesterday, the Observer speculated that Chris Skidmore, two-time former Conservative universities and science minister turned net zero champion and 2024 Labour voter, could be in line to succeed Wharton. That would be a twist that universities would probably welcome, but there will also be plenty of more obviously Labour-friendly appointees wanting to throw their hats in the ring.

However, the more pressing issue before regulatory reform, as MillionPlus will be acutely aware, is university financing. The mission group states: “A sustainable funding model is imperative, and we call on the new government to urgently establish a taskforce to support this. The taskforce should pay particular attention to how a future funding system can preserve the pipeline of skills our economy and public services need.”

Labour may be inheriting a funding crisis in universities, but it is unlikely to miss the opportunity to reshape the sector according to its own priorities. With public money so tight, universities should not be expecting something for nothing, regardless of the colour of the government.

MillionPlus wants Labour “to ease pressure in the shorter term” by implementing “changes to the timing and profile of Student Finance England payments to support university cash flow management”. This was an old trick learned during the pandemic, when campus closures deprived universities of other funding streams such as accommodation and catering.

The pandemic years also saw a universities taskforce chew the fat on a regular basis, without an acceptable bailout package emerging. The darkly named Higher Education Restructuring Regime was an offer from the Conservative government that vice-chancellors felt comfortable refusing.

It would be a mistake to confuse the optics of a new Labour education secretary meeting with a union general secretary, or a Monday morning press release from MillionPlus, with what is actually going on behind the scenes with the incoming government. During the opposition years, for every programmed UCU or MillionPlus fringe event at the Labour Party conference, there were private dinners with Universities UK and the Russell Group.

It is reported this morning that the Taskforce behind Labour’s new £7.3billion National Wealth Fund includes the chief executive of the Universities Superannuation Scheme.

New science secretary Peter Kyle is certainly taking soundings from vice-chancellors of large research-intensive institutions and will be gathering his information from Universities UK rather than the UCU. There is a difference between being invited back to a seat at the top table and being given the run of the castle.

Phillipson and Kyle are the new sheriffs in town, promising to act in the interests of all and showing respect to everyone. It makes a change from the years of culture war barrages, but it does not mean that Labour has any better or more obvious answers to the underlying fundamentals that have troubled the sector for so long.

And finally…

Talking of what Labour does next, join us on Thursday 18 July for a Research Professional News Live webinar called After the Vote, where we will ask what a new government means for UK research.

Speakers at the webinar, addressing everything from the financial health of the sector to research and innovation priorities and the policy direction of the new government, will include: Diana Beech, chief executive of London Higher; Kieron Flanagan, professor of science and technology policy at the University of Manchester; Smita Jamdar, relationship partner for education clients at the law firm Shakespeare Martineau; Daniel Rathbone, deputy executive director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering; Graeme Reid, chair of science and research policy at University College London; and Playbook’s own Martin McQuillan.

Full details are available here.

On Research Professional News today

In yesterday’s Sunday Reading, Diana Beech suggests how Whitehall could be reshaped in the interest of universities.

John Bonner reports that the UK is failing to take advantage of its strength in biomedical research and innovation, according to a pharma industry association.

Chris Parr writes that the new secretary of state for defence has spoken critically about students who campaign against the presence of army recruiters at university careers fairs, and the University of Sheffield is “actively working to reduce the need for redundancies” at its Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre.

Fabio Turone tells us that science ministers from the G7 group of leading global economies have agreed on the need for stronger collaboration on a range of research matters.

Nina Bo Wagner says that Science Europe, a group of research funding and performing organisations, has adopted a “renewed focus” on research integrity.

Craig Nicholson writes that the EU should ease the administrative burden on its next research and innovation programme by allowing applicants to opt for longer projects than are currently funded, a body that advises the Austrian government has said, and the European University Association is anxious about the likely budget for the programme.

In the news

In the Observer, UK universities are said to need a rescue package to stop a ‘domino effect’ in which a number of institutions go under.

The Standard reports that a man has been jailed after false ‘Chernobyl radiation test’ assaults on students, and UK universities are struggling to recruit international students.

In the Telegraph, ‘feminist witches will cast spells at a taxpayer-funded academic conference’.

The Spectator asks why antisemitism is ‘such a problem at elite universities’.

The week ahead

Monday

The Research Excellence Framework team will announce the institutions selected to participate in the people, culture and environment pilot.

At 2pm, the Quality Assurance Agency hosts a webinar exploring the management of due diligence processes in international partnerships.

Tuesday

The Higher Education Policy Institute publishes a report on childcare for postgraduate students.

At 11.30am, Jisc has a webinar on research management systems.

Wednesday

The state opening of parliament takes place, with the King’s speech outlining priorities for the government.

Thursday

Ucas will publish June deadline application data.

At 9.30am, the final ever council meeting of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales will take place. Fare thee well.

University College London’s Institute of Education has a webinar at 10am on theoretical approaches to early career academia.

At 2pm, our latest Research Professional News Live webinar will look at what a new government means for UK research.

Friday

The International Conference on Innovation in Teaching and Education runs from Friday to Sunday in London.

The Senedd in Wales closes for summer recess.

The Playbook would not be possible without Martyn Jones, Harriet Swain, Chris Parr, Orlen Crawford and Fiona McIntyre.

Thanks for reading. Have a great day.

You are welcome to forward this message to a colleague but setting up an automatic instruction to circulate it outside your institution would violate the terms and conditions of use. If you received the 8am Playbook via a colleague and now wish to sign up for a personal copy, please fill in this form and add 8am Playbook as the subject. You can unsubscribe at any time.

The post New sheriffs in town appeared first on Research Professional News.

Group representing leading global economies agrees closer ties on infrastructures and advanced technologies

Science ministers from the G7 group of leading global economies have agreed on the need for stronger collaboration among themselves and more broadly, on a range of research matters.

Ministers from the member nations of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US met in Bologna and Forlì in Italy on 9-11 July with the aim of increasing collaboration.

“To face our current challenges, we need to foster stronger collaboration among like-minded countries. This meeting reaffirmed our shared commitment to promote progress in research and innovation, aligned with the principles of openness, security, freedom and integrity,” the EU R&I commissioner Iliana Ivanova (pictured right), who also attended the event, said in a statement.

The meeting culminated in the adoption of a joint communique covering issues including research security, infrastructures, nuclear research, space and collaboration with Africa, and which opened with a condemnation of the Russian war against Ukraine.

At the meeting, Italy’s science minister Anna Maria Bernini (pictured left) announced that, in 2025, her country will host an international conference focused on supporting research in Ukraine and rebuilding the country’s R&I ecosystem.

Security and infrastructures

In keeping with their invitation to Maria Leptin, the president of the European Research Council, to give a keynote speech on research security, the ministers said in the communique that greater awareness is needed of the risks of foreign interference in research and innovation.

“G7 members are united in the implementation and enhancement of effective, proportionate and appropriate risk mitigation measures within our domestic systems to promote trusted research collaboration,” the communique says.

Researchers must be able to independently choose their questions and methods, it asserts, adding that the G7 supports collaboration among its members and more broadly on the open dissemination of research results.

The communique also says that the G7 intends to continue strengthening collaboration on large research infrastructures and building on existing international research initiatives.

“We acknowledge the value of facilitating the pooling of experiences and sharing of best practices, while also fostering networking and relationship-building among G7 research infrastructure managers,” the communique says.

“In light of this, we propose to pilot an initiative aimed at facilitating a dialogue among managers of large research infrastructures across G7 members…This initiative has the potential to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency and collaboration capabilities of large research infrastructures, thereby contributing to advancements in scientific research.”

New technologies, nuclear power and space

The communique says there is a need to foster advancements in new technologies, to help tackle pressing challenges including climate change. It singles out artificial intelligence, high-performance computing, quantum technology, advanced materials, biotechnologies, nanotechnologies and robotics.

Part of the meeting took place at the Bologna Technopole, which hosts the largest computing centre in Italy and one of the largest in Europe: the high-performance computing department of the Cineca research consortium. This is home to the supercomputer Leonardo, which is focused on AI and funded in equal parts by Italy and the EU.

Leonardo is currently available to the Italian and European research community, but agreements are being developed to grant access to researchers and students from less developed countries, the president of Cineca Francesco Ubertini told Research Professional News.

More research on nuclear fission is needed to help roll out advanced reactors with increased flexibility and safety, according to the communique, which also calls for more collaboration on the less-developed efforts to harness nuclear fusion as an energy source.

Space also presents opportunities for collaboration, it says, including talks on the impact of large constellations of satellites on astronomy.

Africa, waters and upcoming conferences

The communique devotes considerable space to collaboration with Africa, an area in which Italy has been a driving force.

Bernini welcomed the positive reception given to an Italian plan for science diplomacy in Africa. This Piano Mattei per l’Africa plan covers health, education, agriculture, water, energy and infrastructures.

Finally, the communique also stresses the importance of seas, oceans and their biodiversity, and the need for international partnerships in these areas.

Soon after the ministers’ meeting, the first of four high-level conferences promoted by the Italian G7 presidency discussed Mediterranean and Atlantic ocean health and coastal resilience.

On 2 October, a conference on research and capacity building with Africa will be held in Trieste, while on 29-30 October a conference on large research infrastructures will be held in Sardinia.

On 5 December, a conference on the security and integrity of global research is planned at the Politecnico di Bari.

The post G7 science ministers seek to build collaboration appeared first on Research Professional News.