Forum Topic

EU Horizon science programme

I see the PM is negotiating for the UK to rejoin! I thought we had our own which was superb.

Nicholas Beard ● 612d83 Comments

Nicholas, not sure what's going on there with the farmers and talk of changes to farming.

Janice Evans ● 606d

Cameron called the referendum to pacify his own party.  It backfired - the result being five terrible PMs in six and a half years. At least Sunak has the common sense to get us back into the  Horizon programme. Hopefully, he will follow through with other reforms. As you say the deal Johnson negotiated was significantly worse than May’s but …..We had a great deal in the EU - not in the Euro,  a Veto, the Dublin Agreement…Interestingly, people who voted to leave voted for something the extreme left , the right, the Daily Mail, Putin, Farage, Trump all wanted.

Stewart Jones ● 606d

Stewart, UKIP was rapidly gaining votes in both Euro and UK national elections, so it was not just the right wing of the Conservative Party that needed pacifying by the promise of a referendum. Would you have liked to see Nigel Farage holding the balance of power in Parliament ? David Cameron was probably relying on the LibDems continuing in coalition and vetoing a referendum as a condition for doing so, but the electorate - foolishly in my opinion - decimated the LibDems representation in Parliament, so (unlike Gordon Brown) Cameron felt obliged to stick to his manifesto commitment to hold a referendum. Even then, if Brussels had given him a few concessions that he could have trumpeted it might well have gone the other way. Personally I thought Theresa May was doing her best in very difficult circumstances to make the most acceptable arrangements for Brexit, while the Labour Party - despite being led by a long-term Brexiteer in Corbyn - let Keir Starmer do his best to frustrate the will of the people at every turn. The result was that May was forced out and replaced by BoJo, who then pushed for a worse deal than the one she had been working on. Tant pis.

Richard Greenhough ● 606d

Interesting post Richard.Let’s add, Cameron called a referendum to pacify the right wing of his party as a way of pacifying them  rather than any commitment to democracy.This thread started off about the Horizon programme. Whilst people exercised their vote to leave the EU, no one realised they were also voting to leave the Single Market, the Customs Union, Horizon, Erasmus, Euratom. None of that was a given. We were told we held all the cards, that a great deal would be negotiated in an afternoon and that only a fool would leave the Single Market.

Stewart Jones ● 607d

Richard, I know this website is horrendous in terms of readability and user-friendliness, but I want to recap my position since some are being either disingenuous or deliberately obtuse.1. Main point: I have been impacted directly - and keep on being impacted - by decisions that have been made by Boris Johnson's deal to leave the EU and a number of technical EU-sponsored agencies, protocols and initiatives.2. Corollary to the main point: none of those EU-sponsored agencies, protocols and initiatives require being a EU member to be part of them, or to reap their benefits. As an example, Norway - not an EU member - is in EASA, Euratom, Horizon, Galileo and Erasmus and benefits from them.3. Leaving the aforementioned entities was a self-inflicted wound borne out of sheer stupidity. It costed the UK plc lots of money, caused us to bleed out jobs & know-how.4. Re-joining them will not bring us any step closer to re-enter the EU (and to whomever says that it would I would warmly recommend an education on how one enters the EU. The TL;DR version is that "it's not through those entities", otherwise Turkey would already be an EU member state).This is my main point as expressed earlier in the thread. On the rabbit-hole of referenda, I do think they are dangerous, especially in a world where people will happily believe a bunch of utter bollocks written on the side of a bus by a pathological liar whose main purpose was to seize power at all costs.

Francis Sheehan ● 607d

You always come back to 'not the truth or distortion of the truth' which comes Acroos as childish, why not just reply.

Janice Evans ● 607d

I forgot, Rose was also quoted as saying wages will rise if we leave the EU.What a plonker.

Adrian Irving ● 607d

Actually Cameron did try to make changes did he not.

Janice Evans ● 607d

They choose to be demeaning Richard rather  than see anything other than their tunnel vision.

Janice Evans ● 607d

What a distortion of the truth! Indeed, neglect was an important factor, but the predominant underlying cause was austerity. The EU was a convenient scapegoat for the damage done by the Cameron administration.

Robert Fish ● 607d

When we could see parts of the UK being totally neglected I think thatplayed a big part, well it did for me.  I don't see what remainers could havedone to help the general feeling of neglect and being constantly refusedany changes, it was down to the EU to keep all of us on board.

Janice Evans ● 607d

Francis, we signed up to the Treaty of Rome in 1973 - and despite Ted Heath saying that he would not do so without the full and whole-hearted consent of the British people, he decided that his election victory in 1970 was sufficient for him to go ahead. Harold Wilson subsequently called a referendum on whether to continue membership more as a means of pacifying the Labour Party's left wing than from any real commitment to democracy. The development of the EEC into the EU in 1993 under the Maastricht Treaty went by without any further referendum, the Labour Party's manifesto promise in 2005 not to sign up to the Treaty of Lisbon without a referendum was discarded, and so in 2016 after 43 years the electorate was finally given the opportunity to decide whether or not to continue membership. Perhaps had Maastricht and Lisbon been properly explained and put to a vote at the time the result might have been different in 2016, or indeed if David Cameron had been given some of the opt-outs he was seeking from Brussels which would have given him the chance to claim a success, it might have gone the other way. You claim that referenda are dangerous things - perhaps the lesson to be learnt is that not having them in a timely fashion on issues on which the public feels strongly will eventually result in them going against the establishment.

Richard Greenhough ● 607d

It was all heading in the same direction Robert, I'm more interested in thechanges to businesses during th 70s leading up to becoming a full member,Everything was to EU specification and businesses had the cost of adapting I know this is correct.  Others are more interested in free movement and I understand that.

Janice Evans ● 607d

What has BS5750 got to do with increases in business costs consequent on EEC accession? It was adopted nearly a decade later, it wasn't mandatory, and it was a UK, not an EEC, initiative.

Robert Fish ● 607d

And Francis you keep on about when the treaty was signed, we were a member of the European Community since 1.1.73

Janice Evans ● 607d

HA, I do forget that none of you are interested in businesses or the cost to them.

Janice Evans ● 607d

Let's be honest, the Remain Campaign was catastrophic.It completely misjudged the groundswell of resentment on unrelated issues and was no match for the likes of Johnson/Farage.When I heard that Stuart Rose, now Lord Rose, was appointed to lead the Remain camp my heart sunk.Rose, who crashed the Marks and Spencer share price, was chairman of woeful Woolworths was entirely the wrong person for the job.Hearts and minds had to be won.

Adrian Irving ● 607d

What I think Janice is proving is how little is known about Europe in the, shall we say, mainstream.The EU has been construed as some sort of super-state, an all-seeing-eye, a cabal of hidden powers governing our daily lives. Whereas, in truth, is mostly a bunch of technical bureaucrats integrating economies and doing things that are eminently non-political.People like Janice have been sold a complete lie based on nothing, which they keep on parroting - see the point of "damage done by joining the EU" when, and I write it for the third or fourth time, WE ESTABLISHED THE EUROPEAN UNION AS A MEMBER STATE IN 1993 - ever since.I guess the key point for me is that referenda are a very dangerous thing when the subject is highly technical and the public alas, isn't.

Francis Sheehan ● 607d

There was no equivalent European standard when BS5750 was first adopted. I suggest you read the following, in the hope it will inform your confusion: https://www.iso9001help.co.uk/ISO-9000-history.html#:~:text=BS%205750%3A1979&text=By%20the%20late%2070's%20it,(MoD)%20requirements%20and%20terminology.

Robert Fish ● 607d

No, there really is no point.

Stewart Jones ● 607d

BS5750 was the equivalent of European Standards, I was about to list Them but there is no point.

Janice Evans ● 607d

It's not a question of not liking anything. The problem is making sense of your garbled stream of consciousness, and the confusion you create. Is it just muddled thinking, or a deliberate attempt to befuddle anyone who tries to parse your contributions?Just to be clear: what was in the 70s? I think we can all agree that the UK joined the EEC on 1st January 1973, but you seem to be suggesting that a British Standard which was only adopted in 1979, and was at that stage not obligatory for anyone, was responsible for an EU-induced increase in administrative costs. If so, you've got your facts hopelessly muddled.

Robert Fish ● 607d

I said it was in the 70s oh dear don't like hearing it do you.

Janice Evans ● 607d

Sorry Stewart do apologise it was not you, the post seem to go where they want, Francis said it was not true that businesses suffered hardship.

Janice Evans ● 607d

Francis, I said businesses suffered and should have said as a result of the EU by trying to be specific that will not prove me wrong.

Janice Evans ● 607d

You said "the burden of proof lies with you". Could it be that Janice is really an AI-powered chatbot? Has the AI picked up on the word "lies", and interpreted it out of context?

Robert Fish ● 607d

Janice, it's difficult to comment on some of your posts, because of the tortuous twists of your thinking. What has BS 5750 got to do with an increase in bureaucratic and administrative costs for small companies when we joined the EEC on 1st January 1973? BS5750 wasn't published until 1979, and even then it was only optional in Europe until the European equivalent standard (EN29000) was adopted in the European Medical Devices Directive in 1993. The facts don't agree with your chronology.

Robert Fish ● 607d

When did I call you a liar. I asked you to back up your assertion . That is not accusing anyone of lying How about answering questions rather than just taking offence?

Stewart Jones ● 607d

Janice, I don't know if you're trolling or not, but in case you aren't, we DID NOT join the EU in 1973.Mainly because the EU did not exist then. We joined the EEC, which was a completely different entity - for instance there was no certified freedom of movement, and no single market. We joined the single market in 1993 and, as a member state, the UK was instrumental (and had veto power) in its setup. It also took a few decades to be setup.I'd like to say that it's worrying that this is the level of ignorance on EU matters, but considering that there's people out there whose main "knowledge" of the European integration comes from Boris's old columns, that's hardly a surprise.

Francis Sheehan ● 607d

I'm afraid if you start calling people liars you have lost any argument.

Janice Evans ● 608d

What was said at the time ....this has placed a considerable bureaucratic and admisitrative burden on Companies many of which are small.

Janice Evans ● 608d

It was during the 70s BS5750

Janice Evans ● 608d

Janice, as is often the case you have made an assertion - the burden of proof lies with you to back up that assertion with factsAnd the ‘were you there’ question is really not a tenable position in any argument .

Stewart Jones ● 608d

1st January 1973

Janice Evans ● 608d

Francis, I don't know how you can say that isn't true, were you there ?

Janice Evans ● 608d

"Likewise when we joined the EU Companies were not warned of the extraexpenses it would involve for them all the changes involved was at great cost to them,"Janice that's not true.We "didn't join" the EU. We joined the European Economic Community in 1973, we were already 'in' when the EU and the single market were born in the 1990s.

Francis Sheehan ● 608d

You’ve rather proved my point Janice.

Stewart Jones ● 608d

Rural funding. The farmers have still not been given the new rules. They are not happy.

Nicholas Beard ● 608d

Francis, I never quite understood the path campaigners took for Brexit, many people had different reasons but as with all camapaigns you don't go into details if asked questions you answer with what will attract voters so you was never going to get details from anyone you asked, as with juststop oil do you ever get any sensible explanation from protesters if you getany answer at all. That's how it is.

Janice Evans ● 608d

Likewise when we joined the EU Companies were not warned of the extraexpenses it would involve for them all the changes involved was at great cost to them, there are always situations like this with any changes, and Stewart we left with a deal which is not what voters wanted by their reactionso maybe originally we should have joined the EU with a deal and thatpossibly would have avoided a lot of unrest.  I was not making light the situation with musicians I do know some who are neighbour's they said themain problem was the extra expense which I fully understand makes itless worthwhile to travel which greatly reduces their income.

Janice Evans ● 608d

I totally agree with your post, Stewart.Let us be VERY clear: there was NO DISCUSSION about SM, Euratom, Customs, Horizon, Erasmus, EASA prior to the vote (there also was very little if no discussion about the Northern Irish border by the way).Vote Leave had NO detail on any of the above and the campaigners that had their little stall near Waitrose in the days leading up to the vote were exceptionally ill-informed. I had some very interesting conversations with them, where it emerged that they knew next to nothing about the EU - there were some amazing doozies on asylum laws or Turkey/Morocco (!) joining - and in more than one occasion I was asked by them to leave as I was making them look bad. I will admit that it was all extremely civil.Anyway, they won the referendum and that was that. I made my peace with it. What I haven't made my peace with is that Boris Johnson, with his wretched deal, pulled us out of specific agencies and programmes - again, Horizon/Euratom/Erasmus/EASA, even the Customs Union - that are exceedingly technical, gave us a great deal of benefit and, frankly, posed no risk of us "coming back in". We'll never, ever, ever, ever return.The worst bit was that the industries were given zero advance warning. My colleagues in the aviation industry begged that moron Grant Schapps for some more information prior to the announcement. They got some scant guidance a month before it was all signed off. If you know anyone in agriculture, ask them how much notice they got of the end of rural funding.

Francis Sheehan ● 608d

It’s not insulting at all. It was never explained that voting to leave the EU would necessarily mean leaving the Single Market (only a fool would leave the SM -Johnson), the Customs Union, Horizon, Erasmus, Euratom etc.. None of that was necessary but unfortunately the country was led by a lying charlatan. Yes. Some MPs obviously  opted for Brexit, , some MPs lied. Some MPs were chucked out of their party because they would not join in the Brexit cult. Truss had a Damscene conversion to Brexit after the referendum to futher her career. You say we never ‘fully left’  - we are no longer in the EU so how do you come to that conclusion?

Stewart Jones ● 608d

I wouldn't be so insulting to say people were not aware of what they were voting for after all MPs voted Brexit also,  the deal was brought about by others possibly with the hope of rejoining but in reality we never fully left, no one said it was going to be easy it was hard for many when we joinedthe EU apparently so to expect a magic wand is a little nieve.

Janice Evans ● 608d

I knew exactly why I voted remain having done business in Europe for decades, so I made a very informed decision and didn’t listen to any politicians. Anyone with knowledge of working within Europe knew leaving would be a disaster for the UK. Sadly people are given a vote about subjects they don’t understand! It is a disaster…..I still consider myself a European.

Jayne Thorburn ● 608d

Jayne,As I'm sure you know all too well ... there was little if any detail. There were plenty of wooly statements of course, we'll take back control, regain our sovreignty, be able to make the easiest trade deal in history.I believe that those who voted to remain had a much better idea of the reality of what they were voting for than those who voted to leave. No one could have predicted all the twists and turns after the vote to leave. At best, they could have predicted it was going to be a mess, and sure enough it was.The easy get out for some people is to say that it's too early to tell. It will take years to know, but the initial signs aren't all that good.In my opinion anyway. There are still those who say they 'knew' what they were voting for and that somehow it was 'sabotaged'. Sadly, that 'sabotage' was also a possibility that you were voting for, even if you didn't realise it.

Andrew Jones ● 608d

Thank's Susan.I was dimly aware of the issue but failed to put two and two together.

Adrian Irving ● 608d

Please stop trying to deny the problems, Janice.  Read this.https://www.classicfm.com/music-news/almost-half-musicians-less-work-brexit/

Alastair Banton ● 608d

Janice, you have absolutely no idea of the difficulties faced by UK musicians working in the EU, or the problems of engaging EU musicians for gigs in the UK. This will impoverish our cultural life down the line, as young talented artists discover they can no longer make a living from UK gigs alone.See: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/aug/22/music-industry-workers-no-work-in-eu-since-brexit

Robert Fish ● 608d

Nearly all member states offer visa and work permit free routes formusicians and creative performers.

Janice Evans ● 609d

That’s absolutely right, Jennifer.  Britain has had a long history of producing outstanding musicians in all fields of music but because of Brexit travelling to Europe to perform has incurred hugely increased costs and paperwork.  There’s nothing unpatriotic in drawing attention to this so I’m sure that the performers and large numbers of the audience and general public were delighted to see the E.U. flags while singing Rule Britannia.

Alastair Banton ● 609d

The main reason there were so many EU flags at the Last Night of the Proms is that musicians, above all, have been totally screwed by Brexit. Many young singers and orchestral players began their careers in Europe, something which has now been made extremely difficult with visas and a limit of 90 days in 180 in EU  countries. It is not only classical musicians. Pop and Jazz musicians have endless problems in getting their equipment and instruments in and out of Europe. It is a complete nightmare!  It was in support of all these musicians that EU flags were so evident last night.

Susan Jennifer Thackray ● 609d

The EU continues to be very popular among member states and support for national  campaigns to leave have plummeted since people have seen the state of Britain since Brexit.  And now a majority of Brits also see Brexit as a mistake. The EU flags at the Prom are a welcome sign of the shifting mood.

Alastair Banton ● 609d

Watching The Last Night of the Proms I was struck by the considerable number of EU flags being waved alongside The Jack.What to make of it I'm not sure. Were the majority of people from the EU, if so great or were most from the UK?For me, either way, it was a reminder of what we have lost but at the same time hope, hope that people would rather just get along with one another in peace and harmony and not be driven apart by political factions.

Adrian Irving ● 609d

Francis, I do remember the protests when there was talk of a deal so prettyobvious it was not wanted.

Janice Evans ● 609d

Alas, poor Boris! I knew him ..... a fellow of infinite jest. Also a complete charlatan!

Robert Fish ● 609d

"Francis, if people voted to leave it was to leave and not expecting any deals.  From my point of view."So you extrapolated your personal point of view as the view of the 'majority of leave voters'.

Francis Sheehan ● 609d

Anyhow the deal was brought about by others not voters, and when was Boris ever allowed to make decisions or do exactly as he wanted it justnever happened did it.

Janice Evans ● 610d

No I think you are wrong my thinking is they knew a deal would cause no end of problems and a way to creep back.

Janice Evans ● 610d

There’s a saying ‘the devil is in the detail’ clearly the majority of people who voted leave didn’t look into the detail’ there were so many positives of the EU the key question did they outweigh the negatives? Those who voted remain at least understood this. Sadly people didn’t look at the whole and based their decision to leave on 1 or 2 aspects.

Jayne Thorburn ● 610d

Stewart, you are actually correct when you say leavers never got what they wanted concerning a deal that is.

Janice Evans ● 610d

Stewart, you have forgot the protesters saying leave means leave.  Leaving without a deal was voted against if you remember.

Janice Evans ● 610d

A point of view is not a fact Janice,is it? Why were people told during the referendum that a deal would be the easiest thing because we held all the cards? That's a fact.

Stewart Jones ● 610d

Francis, if people voted to leave it was to leave and not expecting any deals.  From my point of view.

Janice Evans ● 610d

I read your post with great interest. People don't realise the vast impact of Brexit. Now I learn of the next bombshell, concerning carbon steel. Due in three weeks on all exports to the EU. In a product right down to a screw the nature of the steel within will have to be accounted for. Some companies don't even realise what's coming!

Nicholas Beard ● 610d

I blame all those who voted to remain but didn't manage to persuade enough other people to also vote to remain. It's all their fault, naturally.

Andrew Jones ● 610d

"Most leavers wanted a clean break with no deal so who to blame ?"Janice, do you have a source for that claim? Are you seriously suggesting that "most leavers", in June 2016, voted "Leave" knowing that they wanted out of:1. The EU2. The Single Market3. Horizon4. EASA5. Euratom6. The Customs unionand more? If so, I'd like a cite on that. Thanks.

Francis Sheehan ● 610d

If my experience is anything to go by 90% of people who voted leave would now vote remain. It’s just a total mess and no one is happy. In my view the vote was too close to call so should never have been accepted by Cameron.

Jayne Thorburn ● 610d

Most leavers wanted a clean break with no deal so who to blame ?

Janice Evans ● 611d

Thank you, Stewart. I want to repeat it loud and clear:Leaving the EU did not mean leaving Horizon [Norway, a non EU-member, is part of Horizon].Leaving the EU did not mean leaving Galileo [Again, Norway, is part of it].Leaving the EU did not mean leaving the European Aviation Safety Agency [Serbia, Albania, even Russia back in the day were part of it to one extent or another].Finally, leaving the EU also did not automatically mean leaving the Customs Union or Single Market. See Iceland, Norway. Boris Johnson's "deal" caused this.

Francis Sheehan ● 611d

Francis it was a vote Johnson just carried it out.

Janice Evans ● 611d

Being part of Horizon was agreed as part of the Trade and Co-operation agreement but Johnson undermined the entire deal by threatening to unilaterally override the Nothern Ireland Protocol. The UK government dillied and dalllied and some would say deliberately dragged its heels so that Horizon membership was no longer an option.Thankfully, Sunak has realised what am unhelpful stance the UK had taken and has managed to rectify the situation.If only he could adopt the same thinking to rejoining the Single Market. It was Johnson, after all, who said that only a fool would leave the Single Market.

Stewart Jones ● 611d

Francis,the BBC reporter must be wrong then, or lying.

Keith Iddon ● 611d

I thought the message was clear, but evidently not. Let's try in a simpler way.Leaving the EU did not automatic mean leaving Horizon, EASA, Galileo. It didn't even mean leaving the single market, the customs union, the free-movement area.The version of Brexit pushed forward by Boris Johnson, instead, carried all of the above implications.

Francis Sheehan ● 611d

You just said it wasn't a direct consequence of Brexit, but of course itwill all be blamed on Brexit, have fun.

Janice Evans ● 611d

I used to work for a UK company working as part of Horizon. We produced a very high end, and very costly (millions) bit of kit for a space mission. This required work from extremely skilled space engineers, as well as access to very high-end testing infrastructure (every unit that goes to space needs to be tested for vibration, heat, radiation and so on). Boris Johnson's government made the decision of leaving Horizon. It wasn't the EU kicking us out, it wasn't anyone else. It was Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and his government. As a result, our contract for this mission had to be rescinded, I - and about half of my team - were made redundant and for the other half a good chunk then moved back to the EU (most of them were European citizens).This needn't have happened. We lost an incredible amount of money in grants, grants that UK universities and companies were very successful in getting, and it has had an incredible impact on advanced research and space applications.Another incredible own goal was leaving Galileo, the satellite GPS constellation. That, admittedly, would've been harder to stay in as Galileo is sponsored by the European Commission, but there could've been a way. Again, the UK - under Boris Johnson - decided not to play ball, and - again - the UK space industry missed out on being part of a cutting-edge space development initiative with Galileo 2 now underway. The backup plan, i.e. using OneWeb, has been described to me by people with actual PhDs in relevant subjects as "totally subpar".I've lost my job due to us leaving Horizon, and I lost a subsequent job due to the fact that the company I went to work on was so impacted by the Brexit border checks (we used to transship a LOT of equipment between here and Belgium) that they divested, sold everything in that field and got rid of me in the process - I couldn't move to Belgium.I now work in the airline industry and I'm impacted AGAIN by an incredibly stupid decision made by Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. That decision was to leave EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency. Again, this wasn't a direct consequence of Brexit. Many nations that aren't EU members use EASA's framework. Turkey, for instance, trains its pilots and engineers according to EASA's ways of working. We decided to leave and, all of a sudden, you cannot hire an EASA-licenced aircraft engineer or EASA-licenced pilot directly from the EU anymore. They need to have CAA-licences. CAA and EASA licences say exactly the same thing, but to move from one to the other it takes dozens of exams which no one seems to be able to provide. The UK is short of both pilots and aircraft engineers; prior to Covid, the average age of aircraft engineers was in the high 40s and too few apprentices join the trade. Now there's thousands of gaps and it takes at least 12 months for an apprentice to become Licenced on ONE aircraft and engine model. Because of Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson we have cancellations. This is the impact of Brexit. This is the impact of "taking back control". This is the dud you've been sold.

Francis Sheehan ● 611d

A reporter on BBC news said last night that it was not a new agreement but that we were never supposed to have left the arrangement,despite brexit.The fly in the ointment for the deal proved to be the Northern Ireland impasse,which has been solved enough for the partnership to recommence.

Keith Iddon ● 611d

We didn’t need to leave Horizon, Euratom, Erasmus, the Single Market etc. We could have stayed in those and still left the EU. That so -called ‘oven ready’ deal was a load of rubbish. Apparently, we held all the cards….

Stewart Jones ● 611d

I am really not an expert on this topic, but the UK was meant to stay in the Horizon program after Brexit. It only got kicked out for political reasons in the aftermath of the Johnson government policies in Northern Ireland. There have been attempts at creating a UK replacement but it has not got very far. I also don't think that re-joining is a done deal yet. Very happy to be corrected, but that is my sketchy understanding.

Cecile Parfitt ● 611d

People are frightened that it is rejoining the EU drip by drip. We have seen recently we now have the freedom to polute rivers by changing the law for house builders.

Nicholas Beard ● 611d

So the will of the people has been denied. The Daily Fail will be up in arms. Or not.

Stewart Jones ● 611d

Unless the government improves freedom of movement, participation won't necessarily be of much use. Bureaucracy will still impede academic exchanges and research trips. A study commissioned by the Royal Society shows that a family of four coming to the UK on a five-year Global Talent visa for main visa holder and three dependants’ visas would be liable to pay £13,372 upfront.

Robert Fish ● 611d

It is shameful that we have been out of the Horizon program for so long.Lets be grateful  - but remember we have lost a lot of respect and amazing researchers in the interregnum.

Tessa Russell ● 611d

Not before time.

Alastair Banton ● 612d