UK universities have been told that they must convince the Treasury of the ¡°value for money¡± gained from European Union research funding to ensure the nation is in the bloc¡¯s next framework programme, given that an annual payment of more than €1 billion (?876 million) could be required to maintain current funding levels.

Senior sector figures also believe that, with the EU wanting a ¡°framework agreement¡± for the future relationship with the UK to be agreed in October, it is the progress of these wider negotiations that will dictate whether talks on the UK¡¯s potential association to Horizon Europe ¨C the EU¡¯s next research programme, starting in 2021 ¨C are able to proceed.

Being part of the EU¡¯s research programmes means that UK-based academics are eligible for prestigious European Research Council grants and can also join international research consortia funded by the programmes.

But Brexit advocates in the Conservative Party and right-wing media may raise concerns about any continued payments to the EU.

ÖйúAƬ

Damian Hinds, education secretary in the Westminster government, , backed up previous statements by universities and science minister Sam Gyimah that the UK would not pay ¡°any price¡± for UK association to Horizon Europe.

¡°We have to look at this and consider value for money,¡± said Mr Hinds.?Mr Gyimah was ¡°absolutely right to say ¡®not at any price¡¯¡±, he added.

ÖйúAƬ

In a speech on 21 May, Theresa May went further than her previous statements when she said:?¡°The UK would like the option to fully associate ourselves with the excellence-based European science and innovation programmes, including the successor to Horizon 2020 and Euratom R&D.¡±

She added: ¡°Of course, such an association would involve an appropriate UK financial contribution, which we would willingly make. In return, we would look to maintain a suitable level of influence in line with that contribution and the benefits we bring.

¡°The UK is ready to discuss these details with the commission as soon as possible.¡±

To become associated countries in the current research programme, Horizon 2020, non-EU member nations had to pay a fee calculated on the basis of their gross domestic product. Whether that system would continue to apply?to Horizon Europe has yet to be confirmed.

Some indication of the size of a UK fee may be offered by a by the Royal Society, which cited Office for National Statistics figures for the UK¡¯s investment in EU research. Although as a member state the UK did not make distinct payments into the research programme, the Royal Society said that ONS indicative annual figures for the UK¡¯s contribution to EU research and development produced a figure of €5.4 billion over the period of Framework Programme 7, the last complete EU research programme, which ran from 2007 to 2013. The UK received €8.8 billion in funding over this period, the Royal Society said, citing EU figures.

While these figures suggest that the UK has been a significant net beneficiary from EU research funding, that?is unlikely to be the case post-Brexit.

The European Parliament said in March that any UK association to Horizon Europe can only come ¡°without permitting net transfer from the EU budget to the UK, nor any decision-making role for the UK¡±.

ÖйúAƬ

If the UK cannot be a net beneficiary, then it would face a payment to the EU of about €1.26 billion a year to maintain the level of annual funding that it received in FP7.

ÖйúAƬ

Some in the UK suggest that an annual fee of between?€1 billion and?€2 billion would be required.

One vice-chancellor said that the question is whether the UK government feels that it would be ¡°getting value for money out of that, as with all public expenditure. The Treasury will want to know, ¡®what do we get out of this?¡¯¡±

Universities would have to find ¡°some way of showing the value of the [EU-funded] research to the economy¡±, the vice-chancellor added.

There are suggestions that David Davis, the secretary of state for exiting the European Union, has indicated in private that a ¡°voluntary contribution¡± to EU research would not be a problem as long as the UK would receive ¡°value for money¡± in return for its investment.

The EU previously tied Switzerland¡¯s status as an associated country to freedom of movement ¨C suspending the nation from the research programme after a referendum backed immigration restrictions. There is no clarity as yet as to whether the EU will seek to use its research programme as a lever on wider political issues when it comes to Brexit.

Michael Arthur, the UCL president, who leads for the Russell Group on Brexit, said that the government said ¡°research is part of that framework agreement¡± on the future UK-EU relationship scheduled to be agreed in October.

And ¡°a lot of the detailed work¡± on a research deal would happen ¡°during that next period [following an October deal], it¡¯s my understanding¡±, Professor Arthur said. ¡°Questions like ¡®how much will it cost¡¯ and ¡®what will the actual arrangements be¡¯ ¨C that detail won¡¯t be in the framework agreement, but it will be worked on if the framework agreement goes ahead.¡±

Ms May¡¯s ¡°as soon as possible¡± comment?could increase the chances of an early deal on research, separate?from the wider talks. But it remains to be seen?how her comments about using a UK payment to ensure that it can help shape the next research programme ¨C not?normally allowed for associated countries ¨C will be received in Brussels.

ÖйúAƬ

john.morgan@timeshighereducation.com