British scientists say cuts will cripple research

LONDON (Reuters) - Looming spending cuts in science will endanger Britain's fragile economic recovery, drive away foreign talent and do untold damage to the nation's competitive edge, leading academics warned on Friday.

Six of the country's top scientists, including Astronomer Royal and President of the Royal Society Martin Rees, joined forces to spell out the risk posed by chopping funding in science and technology.

The unusually outspoken university vice chancellors said the imminent cuts ran the "very serious risk of squandering" all the investment in scientific research and development undertaken over the last 20 years.

Speaking at the Royal Institution in London some said the cuts, to be announced on October 20, were likely to be the harshest for the field in the last 30 years and had to be fought.

"If we are unable to maintain the intensity of research we have achieved and the efficiency in the way we do it, then we are about to lose a national asset of great importance," Professor Malcolm Grant, president of University College London told reporters.

"I need to understand what is the economic case for long-term growth in this country to which research is not relevant?" he added.

The scientific community is lobbying hard against the ruling Conservative Liberal-Democrat coalition's commitment to slash spending across ministries.

Britain spends 3.5 billion pounds a year on science but that could be cut by up to 25 percent as part of the government's drive to eliminate a record budget deficit.

Prime Minister David Cameron has repeatedly stressed the importance of science and advanced manufacturing jobs in Britain's economy recovery.

BRAIN DRAIN

Scientific research and funding for universities will not be spared the axe and top scientists fear a brain drain as high-fliers flee to countries, like the United States, Canada and China, where investment is rising.

Business Secretary Vince Cable has further irked academics by saying he will cut the 6 billion pounds a year R&D budget in an effort to eliminate "mediocre" study.

President of the Royal Society, Martin Rees, talked of the "unacceptable" and "disastrous" consequences of major cuts.

He said innovation could be set back years, and crucial research into diverse health, engineering and technology programs, from cancer research and curing blindness to climate change, jeopardized, or even closed for good.

Rees said the Royal Society was preparing for two possible worst-case scenarios after talks with ministers. The first he said foresaw cuts of 10 percent to the overall budget which he termed "slash and burn".

The second, far more drastic scenario involved cuts of 20 percent, which he referred to as "game over" because he said that would "really irreversibly destroy the UK's potential as a leading scientific nation."

Prof. Glynis Breakwell, vice chancellor of Bath university, attacked the cuts as ill-thought out for quick gain.

"Short-termism is a fundamental, potentially fatal error," she said.

(Editing by Peter Griffiths and Michael Roddy)