Brexit negotiations: what is next for science?

Abstract

Both the EU and the UK are firmly committed to ensure that international cooperation in research continues after Brexit. But as the date nears, the effects for science and foreign researchers in the UK are not clear yet.

Sometimes it can be hard to look ahead to what is coming next. Finalising a journal paper or thesis can understandably take over from working out the next line of inquiry that will progress a scientific idea. The same can be said about Brexit negotiations. We have been agreeing the terms of the UK's withdrawal from the EU for over two years, which has made it difficult to think about the next vital step: working out the future relationship between the UK and EU, and ensuring that global research continues to thrive after Brexit.

Cancer researchers across the world collaborate because we are motivated to understand the causes of cancer and to find new therapies for patients. International partnership is so embedded in what we do that we usually do not give it a second thought. Evidence shows that working with colleagues from overseas makes research more impactful. Publication citation scores reach almost double the world average when the UK and EU work together—benefiting research and patients globally 1. Nearly 50% of all UK cancer research involves international collaboration, highlighting the importance of working across borders 2. Cancer Research UK's (CRUK) scientific workforce is a prime example: half of all CRUK funded PhD students and 76% of post‐docs at CRUK institutes are from outside the UK.

Scientists have been offered some guarantees and clarity during the turbulent Brexit period, but uncertainty is still high. However, there has been some progress, driven by those in power and the collective action of the European research sector. When Prime Minister Theresa May set out her first twelve negotiating objectives for exiting the EU, one was maintaining a high‐quality UK science base that continues to collaborate with European partners 3. Likewise, European Council President Donald Tusk emphasised cooperation on research when announcing draft guidelines for the future UK–EU relationship 4. Science and research is also at the heart of the UK Government's plan for a post‐Brexit economy, set out in its Industrial Strategy.

Stephen Curry 5, commenting in EMBO Reports in 2016 about Brexit, said that scientists needed to convince politicians to protect research and collaboration. A letter from international Nobel Laureates to EU President Jean‐Claude Junker and Prime Minister May calling for the closest possible scientific cooperation is one example of such action being taken 6. There are signs that suggest a compelling case has been made—namely references in the declaration agreed between the UK and EU, which will form the basis of the future relationship (https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/37059/20181121-cover-political-declaration.pdf). Acknowledgement of the issues is a positive step, but what genuine progress has been made of importance to cancer research and, more critically, what still needs to be done in negotiations and in the UK?

Domestically, the UK Government is in the process of designing a new immigration system 7. For research, the proposals have some promising elements. They emphasise the importance of skilled workers by removal of arbitrary caps and time‐consuming labour market tests. However, expanding the immigration system to EU citizens is not going to be without disruption. There are still concerns, from the retention of damaging fees for employers to the use of salary thresholds. The Government says it will spend the next year consulting on their immigration plans and the scientific community is actively contributing to these discussions. The UK has a reputation for attracting and training the global research workforce: future immigration arrangements must maintain this reputation.

Whilst not legally binding, the political declaration on the future relationship expresses a desire for continuing mobility of researchers between the UK and the EU. This should be built on through a comprehensive agreement in the next phase of negotiations. When it comes to the rights of European citizens currently living in the UK and vice versa, it has been positive to see that early UK–EU agreements protect these rights, including for those arriving during the proposed implementation period. Of course, things are not quite as clear‐cut or favourable if a deal is not reached. In a no‐deal scenario, EU citizens who wish to remain in the UK for longer than 3 months would need to apply for permission to work or study for up to 3 years. Those who wish to stay longer would need to reapply after this time and be subject to future immigration arrangements 8.

We should be encouraged that the UK's future immigration system seeks to accommodate the interests of research and that researcher mobility is recognised in negotiations with the EU. However, we require more than positive indications. The devil is in the detail and changes need to operate smoothly for researchers who want to work overseas. We want a system that facilitates the UK's ability to attract the best scientists from everywhere in the world—and makes them all feel welcome.

A prosperous funding environment is also essential to support research projects and collaborations. The UK Government has said it wants to explore involvement in future European funding programmes. Current proposals for the next framework programme also leave the door open to UK participation. It is now imperative that the UK cancer research community stay involved in the development of Horizon Europe since current proposals include a specific focus on finding cures for cancer. For existing Horizon 2020 grants, domestic UK underwrites have been promised and administration to facilitate this is underway. There are still challenges, which include reports of grants involving UK applicants stalling due to uncertainty, as well as a lack of clarity about the status of some grants if a deal is not reached, including European Research Council grants and Marie Sklodowska‐Curie Actions.

The UK itself can increase investment in research. Uplifts in research funding have been announced since 2016, and the Government has set an ambitious target of 2.4% of GDP to be spent on research by 2027. As we leave the EU, hitting these targets is important for reaffirming the UK as a leading research centre. CRUK has also been fostering collaboration across Europe and globally. Our Accelerator Awards have so far invested a total of around £60M in cross‐institutional teams in the UK, Italy and Spain—including a consortium from the 3 counties combining their expertise to work out how to detect blood cancers earlier. CRUK Grand Challenge Awards have gone to seven cross‐border, multidisciplinary teams to tackle some of the toughest challenges in cancer research. The biggest questions in cancer research will only be answered if the best international teams are able to work together.

Continued collaboration with EU partners also depends on harmonised regulation. For cancer research, regulation of clinical trials is critical. Between 2004 and 2016, the UK participated in 4,800 clinical trials with other EU countries 1. CRUK directly funds around 200 trials, 28% of which involve at least one EU partner. Cross‐border trials are particularly crucial for rare and paediatric cancers to recruit enough participants. The new EU Clinical Trials Regulation will streamline approvals and reduce divergence between different countries, but it does not come into force until after the UK is expected to leave the EU. The UK Government has committed to adopting as much of the regulation as possible, but it is not completely within their control to gain access to the shared infrastructure 9, which is subject to negotiations—hopefully discussions with the EU will be able to start soon. Equally, close regulatory cooperation between the UK and EU on medicines is in the best interests of cancer patients. In the next phase, the European Medicine Agency and the UK's Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency must set out how they will work together, including the important issue of how to licence medicines.

It is encouraging that the UK and EU have expressed a desire to keep working together when it comes to science and that the UK Government recognises domestic reform is important. Rhetoric is positive, but as discussions focus on the future relationship, more tangible actions and commitments are required. The whole European research community can come together to ensure that the priorities of research and patients are on the list of priorities for negotiations. We are still in a period where the terms and timings of the UK's exit from the EU are unclear. Some scenarios will undoubtedly present more challenges for research collaboration, but we can be prepared to champion the research community no matter what happens next. Cancer Research UK believes it is vital to put heads together and get the details right—so all the mechanisms work for, rather than against, the interests of research and patients.

EMBO Reports (2019) 20: e48026