Astronomy and particle physics : report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence.
- Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology
- Date:
- 2011
Licence: Open Government Licence
Credit: Astronomy and particle physics : report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. Source: Wellcome Collection.
17/176 page 13
![2 Reductions to the astronomy budget _ An over investment and strategic planned withdrawal? 22. Given the relatively large reduction in astronomy funding over the next four years compared with the overall STFC budget settlement, the first question we had to consider was what the reason for this was. On 19 January we asked Professor Keith Mason, Chief Executive of the STFC, about these future reductions in funding for astronomy. He said that decisions made over the past decade prior to, and following, UK accession to the European Southern Observatory (ESO) in 2002 had resulted in a planned period of higher spending on astronomy: when we joined ESO in 2002-03 we still had commitments to a range of other ground-based observatories. So we recognised that in joining ESO we would be over- investing in astronomy for a period of a decade because we had to stay in these other facilities. As we withdraw from those facilities, the astronomy budget will go back down to what it ought to have been if we had been able to make that transition suddenly.”* 23. Professor Mason also said in January that the STFC’s planned withdrawal from Northern Hemisphere ground-based infrared and optical astronomical facilities, announced in 2009, was the result of a long-term strategic decision to concentrate resources, dating back to the plans made prior to ESO accession: It’s really a scientific dilemma. [Do] you concentrate your resources in producing the very best facilities that might be in a single location, or do you spread those resources in order to cover a broader set of activities? [The] strategic decision that was made a decade ago was to recognise that we do need to concentrate and stay at the forefront of activities. We had a choice to make. Do we do that through ESO or by some other means? I think the right decision is to do it through ESO.” 24. The thrust of both these statements was disputed in the evidence we received.” That is: a) that there had been a planned period of over-investment in astronomy following accession to the ESO; and b) that the STFC was concentrating its activities on the ESO for scientific reasons which would result in withdrawal from Northern Hemisphere facilities. 25. On the first point, the Royal Astronomical Society stated that this was contrary to the “recollection” of UK astronomers at the time, and was “not supported by any documentary 6 Transcript of oral evidence, Spending Review 2010, 19 January 2011, HC618-ii, Q 130 27 Transcript of oral evidence, Spending Review 2010, 19 January 2011, HC618-1i, Q 128 28 See, for example: Ev 41-42, paras 29-31 [Royal Astronomical Society], Ev 43, para 2 [Professor Robert Kennicutt], Ev w39, para 14 [University of Manchester]](https://iiif.wellcomecollection.org/image/b3222204x_0017.jp2/full/800%2C/0/default.jpg)
