The elephants in the FP9 room: Budget & Brexit

A strong and concrete position or engagement regarding the future EU investment in research and innovation (R&I) (i.e. the budget for FP9) was probably not to be expected from the Council. Nevertheless, it remains THE crucial aspect for an ambitious and successful framework programme. LERU calls upon the R&I ministers to convince their colleagues in government to invest in R&I at EU level, to respond positively to the Tallinn Call for Action 2017 and to counteract any further moves by the ECOFIN Council to decrease the FP budget. LERU thanks the European Parliament for its continuous support, safeguarding the Horizon 2020 budget from further cuts proposed by the finance ministers. The outcome of the 2018 H2020 budget negotiations was surprisingly positive. Let’s hope this will be the start of a period of bloom instead of doom for the FP budget.

The Competitiveness Council conclusions ‘recognise the importance of strengthening international cooperation and reaffirm the importance of reciprocity’ but failed to address the other elephant in the (FP9) room: Brexit. Despite its political sensitivity, LERU hopes science ministers will, in the future, speak up in favour of keeping UK partners on board in the FP. As LERU already mentioned in its FP9 paper, UK universities should be able to participate in FP9, regardless of Brexit, as they are an undeniably strong part of the European Research Area. Losing UK partners would strongly weaken the FP and the European Research Area in general.

R&I collaboration at the EU level, as emphasised by the Council, is indeed a successful example of European cooperation and integration, which LERU has advocated for on many occasions. However, the Council has regrettably completely forgotten to mention the two other parts of the FP that have an impressive proven track record and strong EU added value: the European Research Council and the Marie Skłodowska Curie Actions. Both programmes have influenced considerably and positively the European research landscape. The Competitiveness Council should certainly and explicitly recognise the importance of these two programmes in its next positions on FP9.

Prof Bert van der Zwaan, Chair of LERU states: “In general we agree with many of the points made in the Council conclusions. We are especially supportive of the positions related to the importance of further developing and strengthening the European Research Area, rationalising the R&I partnership landscape and the emphasis on excellence as the main evaluation criterion for FP9. These correspond very well with the LERU position on FP9 that was presented in June.”

Prof Kurt Deketelaere, LERU Secretary-General, adds: “The Competitiveness Council is rather vague when it comes to the implementation of principles and ideas mentioned in its conclusions. LERU looks forward to, for instance, finding out what Member States have in mind when calling for a very early ‘strategic programming process as part of the implementation of FP9’ or for ‘the strengthening of measures for Spreading Excellence and Widening Participation (SEWP)’. Regarding the latter, we hope the Council is not aiming at increasing specific funding streams for SEWP in FP9, but rather at supporting the participation of those Member States currently underrepresented in the FP, in ‘normal’ FP9 projects, through synergies with Structural Funds. I gladly refer those that seek examples of such synergies to the LERU FP9 paper. And finally, to mention my main and growing worry”, says Deketelaere: “Are the EU institutions able to get FP9 approved before the June 2019 EP elections? The timeframe is getting more and more worrying!”

A more detailed assessment of the Council conclusions and LERU’s position on the relevant points can be found in the policy brief.

Contact

Policy enquiries:

• Prof. Kurt Deketelaere, LERU Secretary-General: +32 499 80 89 99
• Ms Laura Keustermans, Senior Policy Officer: +32 476 977304 /

Media enquiries:

• Mr. Bart Valkenaers, Policy Officer: +32 498 08 43 49 /