John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 11/06/2026Juxtaposition of these two stories in my timeline seems highly ironic. If the UK can’t afford (or doesn’t want to) properly operate big facilities like Diamond which clearly support our industrial strategy, how can we even contemplate a multi billion share of a new particle accelerator? 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 10/06/2026After particle physics and astronomy, STFC's large facilities are next at risk for cuts: www.theguardian.com/education/20...theguardian.comWorld-leading UK science facilities at risk amid £162m funding crisisDiamond Light Source and ISIS Neutron and Muon Source face cuts of up to 20% as Science and Technology Facilities Council seeks savings 024
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 08/05/2026Maybe subscriptions were a foreign office responsibility at the time? 100
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 08/05/2026Maybe - I think it was more that PPARC science had big fixed costs in facilities like the royal observatories, ING and Hawaii telescopes, particle physics at RAL, and international subscriptions. EPSRC wanted none of this, just to run a grants programme using peer review panels and a lean staff. 100
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 07/05/2026There is absolutely no reason to transfer PPAN grants to EPSRC - especially right now, as the funding associated with any transfer would undoubtedly be at the planned reduced level and hence too low to sustain them properly. It would simply move the problem from one council to another within UKRI. 151
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 07/05/2026it certainly does "feel" like there has been an increase in vibes-based thinking over the last 5 years or so - some would blame social media for this, some would blame Covid. But maybe what's really happened is just that the particular "vibe" of trust-the-scientists has fallen out of favour? 000
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 07/05/2026Thanks Mike - and yes I have shared a copy with the Commons SITC @chionwurah.bsky.social 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 07/05/2026This is important and timely. It's easy to say "make decisions based on evidence not on vibes" but it's actually very hard to do. Agreeing with your friends' and colleagues' positions is a deep rooted human instinct; challenging them over lack of evidence isn't natural at all. 110
Reposted by John WomersleyLucien Heurtier @lucienheurtier.bsky.social · 06/05/2026What is the "Drayson Partition", why was it created, and what was it guaranteeing? 👉@johnwomersley.bsky.social makes it clear to UKRI and STFC after they seem to have abandoned it. ⏪In case you missed it: particle physics, astronomy, and nuclear physics research are facing huge cuts in the UK... 032
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 06/05/2026#STFC @astroroyalscot.bsky.social @lucienheurtier.bsky.social 130
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 06/05/2026I just sent this letter to the Science Minister and the CEO of UKRI concerning STFC's budgets 12214
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 02/04/2026Interesting, good to see - I'd be interested to know how its success will be evaluated and whether the messaging really addresses the "disconnect" problem 000
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/03/2026Bureaucracies have no reverse gear. UKRI spent the last year behind closed doors convincing themselves that while this is all terribly regrettable, there is no alternative. Now when asked to find another solution, they can only waffle in public - while digging their heels in behind the scenes. 130
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/03/2026Yes. Not one person, from the minister on down, has said that this is what they want to see happen. But no one seems to be willing or able to actually do anything about it. 131
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/03/2026Great book! I read it cover to cover in one day on the beach in Greece in 1986 120
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 25/03/2026but instead, we are told that this was not a strategic choice at all. Instead these research areas simply have the bad luck to be funded by a part of UKRI which is chronically unable to balance its budget - in completely different parts of its portfolio - and needs to learn to do so. 031
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 25/03/2026UKRI has a mandate to set strategic priorities, for sure. If anyone at UKRI had had the cojones to stand up and say that they were deprioritising particle physics and astronomy to allow spending in other areas to grow, they would have earned respect 131
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 25/03/2026No, apparently you just need to shut up and suck it up, because UKRI is “directionally correct:” bsky.app/profile/john... 230
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 24/03/2026I agree - US English doesn't make the distinction clear. From my experience people tend to say 'which' when in British English they should say 'that,' at least in science writing, perhaps because it sounds more educated 030
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 24/03/2026It helps me! To be honest, I don't remember ever being taught this in school. In the US the tendency is to over-use 'which' because it sounds more highbrow, so when I moved back to the UK I had to re-train myself in the correct British English usage 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 23/03/2026Yes - and for people, in English, it's also the same word 'who' 020
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 23/03/2026I just remember that it's all about pencils and tables. Pick up the pencil that is on the table vs. Pick up the pencil, which is on the table 440
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 23/03/2026Back in your box, particle physicists and astronomers! Shut up and suck it up, because (a) STFC is a chronic financial basket case and needs to be sorted out and (b) UKRI is doing important work, and Ian Chapman needs support 🤷 open.substack.com/pub/profseri...open.substack.comA Kerfuffle… UK research funding (and in defence of Sir Ian Chapman) 040
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 19/03/2026Read the article. It talks about both Reform and the Greens. 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 19/03/2026You can sense the frustration at not being able to control the narrative: "Why does everyone keep focusing on the 5% of our activities that are being cut? Why don't you talk about the 95% that we are investing in?" Well, duh, because one is news and the other is not. 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 19/03/2026Indeed. One could equally well say: - UKRI spends about 50% of its budget supporting missions, challenges and industry - it spends about 30% of its budget on supporting universities with funding allocated through the REF - and only about 20% on grant funding of proposals through peer review 121
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 19/03/2026"Communication in the age of misinformation" - latest It's worth remembering that THERE IS NO STFC COMMS TEAM. It was disbanded and merged into UKRI. So all we get is UKRI coprorate level spin, because only UKRI corporate level comms exists. To get reality, speak to staff on the ground 140
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 11/03/2026Note that this is Research England money, what used to be called HEIF funding for university infrastructure. It's not the research councils Infrastructure fund. 000
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 11/03/2026I wrote about this here www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-v...researchprofessionalnews.comWhat is UKRI for, and do the people in charge know? - Research Professional NewsBreaking up UK Research and Innovation could be the way forward, says John Womersley 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 11/03/2026No, this is not defence. It is more likely the ministerial preoccupatiion with AI, plus a way to pay for the exascale investment announced earlier (noting my institutional COI on that 😉) 100
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 11/03/2026Ever since it was created, UKRI has been something of a solution in search of a problem. Using it to set big research priorities is not a bad thing, in itself. But doing this in a way that looks non-transparent is not the right approach 100
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026Exactly. “We need to do something to make this go away. It’s distracting attention from the important structural changes we are trying to make at UKRI.” 030
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026What about your much-vaunted buckets, Lord Vallance? Tension the PPAN grants against the rest of Bucket 1. 020
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026If that has ever actually happened, which I am highly sceptical of, it must be a recent phenomenon. It could never have occurred when each research council had its own budget set by DSIT or its predecessors. 010
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026Begs the question of who decides how much money the research council will get 020
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026The comms have indeed been terrible. But the idea that this is primarily a communication problem is just a comfort blanket for Vallance and Chapman. The message is awful no matter how it is communicated. 142
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 03/03/2026I think this reveals two things: 1. Actual curiosity-led grant funding is really quite a small fraction of UKRI's spend, and they wanted to 'bulk up' bucket 1 to look better 2. They see both QR and grant funding primarily as ways to support a university system. The research outputs are a by-product 130
Reposted by John WomersleyResearch Professional News @resprofnews.bsky.social · 02/03/2026University physics heads warn Vallance of STFC cuts impact. Cuts “inconsistent” with government plan for growth, says open letter urging science minister to act. www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-r...researchprofessionalnews.comUniversity physics heads warn Vallance of STFC cuts impact - Research Professional NewsCuts “inconsistent” with government plan for growth, says open letter urging science minister to act 033
Reposted by John WomersleyResearch Professional News @resprofnews.bsky.social · 02/03/2026Fears over STFC cost-savings plan aired since September 2025. Oversight body repeatedly raised concerns over “lack of transparency” with research community. www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-r... 044
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 02/03/2026Jesus. Seriously? So it seems to have consciously been done as a way to allow them to raid grant funding this year. They knew just what they were doing. And Council, despite the reservations, went along with this? 020
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026I agree with Ken - I think it's saying 'stop whining astronomers, we are going to be hitting our own internal STFC staff even harder than we have hit you.' Which is not perhaps the reassuring message they think it is. 020
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026Don't count your chickens. I think 'borne by UKRI internally' means STFC's facilities and labs will have to absorb even more savings than the grant lines. This was always the plan. Until money has been moved around there is nothing to celebrate. 110
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026The research council exec chairs are UKRI appointments. So, other than resigning in protest, she has little choice but to toe the UKRI line. The sad thing is that this loyalty may well be repaid, down the line, by her being thrown under the bus by UKRI as being responsble for the whole mess 120
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026Yes, we can assume the letter was written by UKRI corporate comms. One of the first acts of UKRI was to abolish separate research council comms teams. 120
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026It tells you that STFC is still expected to solve its budget crisis within its own liitle part of the overall UKRI budget. This insistence is what led to the problem in the first place. No ownership of the problem seems forthcoming from UKRI management. 110
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026I think this critique misses the point. If the funder itself spent 5M to deliver 5M it would immediately come in for entirely justified scrutiny. But because the 5M cost falls on university PI's, it is treated as 'free.' Is placing this kind of tax on the system really a good way to run a programme? 000
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026Correct. In civil-service speak, "unsustainable" usually just means "costs more than I am willing to pay". 030
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026Michelle being sent out to take a bullet for her superiors 130
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026The fact that the response is from STFC rather than UKRI tells you all you need to know. 120
John Womersley @johnwomersley.bsky.social · 26/02/2026Hence the feeling there's been poor management, not fully open communication, and a sense that the problem won't be fixed because the outcome (less funding for Physics and Astronomy) is actually seen as a desirable one by ministers and UKRI. All very depressing. 020