Chemistry World Blog

We realise that gold means only one thing to most people at the moment (and believe you me Chemistry World towers has been as gripped by the Olympics as everyone else) but we also need to congratulate the University of Edinburgh’s school of chemistry for getting a gold Athena SWAN Charter award. That’s the UK’s top accolade for good practice in recruiting, retaining and promoting women in science, engineering, technology, maths and medicine in higher education. Only two departments in the country have been judged to be gold standard: Edinburgh’s chemistry department and the University of York’s chemistry department (yay chemistry, etc).

This is especially relevant as Lesley Yellowlees, of the University of Edinburgh, begins her term as RSC President, pledging to identify and remove the barriers that prevent women from staying in chemistry. Hopefully more chemistry departments (as well as those in other disciplines) can rise up the ranks. And then, maybe one day, these sorts of awards won’t be needed at all.

Laura Howes

Giorgio De Faveri is a PhD student in the school of biological and chemical sciences at Queen Mary, University of London

I am not British, my name probably gives that away. I obtained my degree in chemistry in Italy, my home country, and I moved to London for my PhD. It was not an easy decision at the time, leaving friends, family and my old life behind to move to a different country, to a different language; to start everything again from the beginning.

I moved to the UK because I saw more opportunities than I had back home; more funding for research, better career chances and, let me be a bit venal here, better money for my PhD. I can very easily relate with the fear induced by the impending cuts to education and research proposed by the current government, to the possibility of a ‘brain drain’ like the one that has been happening in my country for years.

(more…)

On the whole, scientists are probably perceived as a relatively mild-mannered bunch. They chip away at the world’s problems, solving the great questions, many simply because of a love of research. Rarely do they throw their toys out of the pram.

Until now, that is. A storm has been brewing in the UK, and researchers have finally had enough. Fine, criticise peer review. Make research assessments an admin-filled nightmare. Pay them peanuts. But threaten to cut funding for science by as much as 25 per cent, and they ain’t going to sit back and take it.

The results of the government’s comprehensive spending review are due in less than two weeks, and government departments have been warned to prepare for significant budget cuts of up to a quarter.

The scientific seed of rebellion was planted when Jenny Rohn, a cell biologist at University College London, UK, wrote a blog post declaring war: ‘No more Doctor Nice Guy, no more hiding behind our work, no more just taking things lying down like we take everything else in our profession,’ she cried. ‘If they are going to bleed us dry, we might as well try to do something before it’s too late.’ (more…)

— EdMiliband

The UK Labour Party announced its new leader yesterday, with former climate change secretary Ed Miliband pipping his brother David to the post. So do we have any idea whether the new leader of the opposition is a friend of science?

At the RSC’s Parliamentary Links Day in June, he admitted that his Mum had wanted both he and his brother to become scientists, and persuaded them to take A-level physics. ‘I came off rather better from it than [David] did, but neither of us showed any aptitude for science,’ he said.

(more…)

— shears

Panic seemed to spread on Twitter this afternoon as news spread that the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) was going to cut funding for its public engagement activities. We spoke to the EPSRC earlier this week and this isn’t strictly speaking true.

The kerfuffle stems from this press release issued last week, in which the EPSRC says it is making changes to its public engagement agenda and cancelling the call for its Partnerships for Public Engagement (PPE) scheme this autumn. (more…)

So, our second online poll is well underway, and you are voting overwhelmingly to see more scientists enter the political arena. Does this mean we’ll be seeing more volunteers from the ranks of researchers in the next election?

Here are the results so far:

Yes: 82 per cent – scientists are trained to analyse complex problems and think creatively to find solutions.

No: 7 per cent – politicians have armies of scientific advisers, that’s what they’re there for. What we need to do is persuade the politicians to take notice of what their advisers say.

Doesn’t matter: 11 per cent – enthusiasm and openness to science are more important qualities in a politician than actual scientific qualifications

If you haven’t cast your vote yet, head on over to the Chemistry World homepage and look in the top right hand corner to find the poll.

Happy voting!

Phillip Broadwith

The latest Chemistry World online poll

— ballot box-election-SCIENCE-120

has gone live this week alongside a comment in this month’s issue.  Michael Brooks – the sole candidate for the Science Party, who was beaten to a seat in Westminster by an MP who believes in homeopathy and medical astrology – asks whether we should be worried about the small number of politicians with a good scientific understanding.

Your choices:

Yes – scientists are trained to analyse complex problems and think creatively to find solutions.

No – politicians have armies of scientific advisers, that’s what they’re there for. What we need to do is persuade the politicians to take notice of what their advisers say.

Doesn’t matter – enthusiasm and openness to science are more important qualities in a politician than actual scientific qualifications

So, head over to the homepage and cast your vote – the poll can be found at the top right of the page and will be running for the next two weeks, with roundups of the results at various stages.

Phillip Broadwith

— ideas

Last week saw 11 Members of Parliament (MPs) appointed to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. With all the hoohah recently over the amount of scientific expertise in the UK parliament, surely these would be the cream of the scientific crop.

We conducted an admittedly very brief (and unscientific) internet trawl to see if we could find out what kind of scientific interests/credentials these new committee members have, and get an idea of what kind of experience they’ll bring to bear when scrutinising governmental departments’ activities in relation to science and technology.

The highlights of our quick search are below – please do leave a comment at the bottom if you think we’ve missed anything significant. You can also find out how MPs voted on various issues on the They Work for You website. (more…)

— willetts1

Conservative MP David Willetts will take over as science minister under the UK’s new coalition government as we bid farewell to Labour’s Lord Drayson.

The appointment has been pretty roundly welcomed; Willetts, former shadow secretary for universities and skills, has stood up for science in the past and in his new role as minister of state for universities and science he should be able to keep an eye on the two deeply intertwined sectors. Having earned the nickname ‘Two Brains’, one Twitterer quipped that presumably one brain will be looking after universities and the other will focus on science… (more…)

While science may not be top priority on the front lines of the election campaigns, it is clear that politicians in the UK are paying a little more attention to what has become known as the ‘geek vote’.

So here at Chemistry World towers, we’ve decided to launch our very own online ballot – cast your vote on the Chemistry World homepage (the poll is near the top of the page on the right hand side).

If you’re still a ‘floating voter’, take a look at the responses from all three parties to the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE)’s ‘letter to the leaders‘ over at the CaSE blog. And don’t forget to check out the last of three live TV debates on the BBC tonight (there’s still time to submit a question to be put to the party leaders if you’re quick!) – with the economy in the spotlight and all three parties saying that science will be key to the economic recovery, there’s a chance we might see science policy debated openly (as long as there aren’t any comments about bigotry…)

After the election next Thursday (6 May), we’ll be comparing your votes with the outcome and looking forward to what it might mean for the future.

Are you gripped by election fever? Or resigned to the fact that nothing will change whatever the outcome? Let us know your thoughts.

Phillip Broadwith