What will happen to UK science after Brexit? | FT

What will happen to UK science after Brexit? | FT

British bioscientists are
tackling some of the biggest challenges facing the planet. How to make clean
energy, how to develop the next generation
of medicines, and how to prevent disease. But some on the front
line are worried about the future
of their research, especially after Brexit. I think it’s no secret that
universities are really not in favour of Brexit. As a company now, over
half of all of our team are from outside of the UK. If the funding becomes
UK national only, that will restrict our
ability to expand our work. The main problem, at least,
for my work, is regulations. We don’t know what’s
going to happen. I’m going to examine the health
of an industry that generates £70bn a year for the UK economy
and employs almost a quarter of a million people
across the country. But first… that’s interesting. Red. I suppose it’s all
the cheese in it. This is personalised
shopping with a difference. I’m a sucker for both of those. Yes, I can go with
the chickpeas. I may be shopping in
a London supermarket. But I’m also trying out
the latest high-tech weapon in the fight against
the big killer diseases in modern society. The device I’m using is synced
with an app on my phone, which is matched to my DNA. It can tell me if I’m at risk
of obesity, hypertension, or even Type 2 diabetes. And more than that
it can tell me which foods are likely
to increase these risks and nudge me towards healthier
alternatives in real time. Its inventor, Chris
Toumazou, is onhand to explain why the
app is happy for me to buy some foods
but not others. Huh. Red The other one I picked out of
the bars was this Snickers. And that’s green. Okay, Mars out, Snickers in. Yes. And let’s see why. Mars bar– Mars has got 60
grammes of sugar. Choo! That was bounding. Whereas Snickers… Has got… 44 grammes. So nearly 15 grammes more sugar. So, in fact, you were
quite low with things like your obesity gene. Things like fats, you
were quite low with. So effectively, you
are being nudged towards things
that are a lot more appropriate for your heart. Putting personal health
in the hands of shoppers could help prevent
chronic diseases that cost the NHS billions. But so far, few
products like DnaNudge have made it out of UK
labs and onto the market. After the United
States, Britain produces more cited life
sciences research than anywhere else in the world. But in 2017, the UK ranked 12th
out of 18 comparable countries in the value of its
medical technology exports. Science and innovation
clusters across the country are trying to change that. Imperial College’s White City
campus is the latest example. It covers 23 acres of
west London and cost £2bn. We face huge problems in
society at the moment. Huge global challenges. And the idea of this campus
is to bring different people together. Bringing together different
cultures obviously brings together a
diversity of thinking. And it’s only with that
international linking and collaboration that
we’ll solve these problems. With that in mind, how do you
view the prospect of Brexit? I think it’s no secret that
universities are really not in favour of Brexit. We’re really worried that the
students will no longer come from Europe because they
bring a fantastic intellectual dimension. You know, without these
brilliant young students from Europe, I think
we’ll be a lesser place. The ultimate goal is to get
researchers and businesses working on the next generation
of products together. This lab and office
space for start-ups. Sixfold Bioscience is
just one of 70 companies already on campus. So, we are a
biotechnology company developing novel drug
delivery systems for cell gene therapeutics. And what you can see here
today is our R and D team. Sixfold is working on new
ways to deliver therapies that will fight diseases like
cancer, by fixing faulty genes or reprogramming living cells. So if we add more of this
protein to these cells, we can increase the efficacy
of our drug delivery. Thank you. The scientists on
their team get to use cutting edge equipment
at Imperial’s NMR lab and measurement suite. But more than that, the cluster
gives Sixfold’s founders the opportunity to rub shoulders
with entrepreneurs, funders, and potential collaborators. For you personally, as founders
of a biotech company, what does the opportunity to
interact with all these people, what does it give you? Just having a great
space to do science, to execute on the
science, then to discuss that with your peers. They want to come and meet us. We want to meet them. And I think it’s really
a good place to do that. What we are also allowed
to do is actually share our experience
with people that are even earlier during the
entrepreneurial journey. To share our struggles and
hopefully allow other companies to progress even faster and
have a smoother journey. It goes further than
just having companies. There’s a lot of
academics and there’s a lot of larger pharma companies
that are also in the area. That makes it a
unique environment, I would say, within London. And, of course, it’s a
very international space for an international
company, as you are. Do you see any threats
to that internationalism? As a company now, over
half of all of our team are from outside of the UK. We also work a lot
with people in the US, with other areas of
academic excellence. And maybe the
government could be forced into a position to making
it easier for those people to come to work here. And that’s something I think
is maybe a potential avenue or opportunity for us. The number of new start-ups
across all industries in the UK fell by 12.8 per cent in 2018. And researchers blamed economic
uncertainty caused by Brexit. On average, London
start-ups have fared better than those in other
parts of the country. But even here,
the government has been keen to help
new life sciences businesses find their feet. That’s because the
field is so specialised. It is immensely
difficult, actually, to find the right
research expertise, the right operational
infrastructure, and the right types
of patients to recruit into clinical studies. MedCity was launched
five years ago to help businesses find
collaborators in industry, academia, and government. The project is co-funded
by the mayor of London. London is proud to host
the largest investor base in Europe, and some of the
best universities in the world. But of course there’s a little
bit, tiny, whiney economic and political uncertainty in
the country at the moment. But I want to take this
moment to say to all of you that I remain very,
very confident. Come what may,
London will continue to thrive as a great city
in which to do business. I think in a post-Brexit world
that it’s even more important that we focus on some
of these sectors. And I remain fully confident of
London’s future and UK’s future in life sciences. It’s the innovation,
the entrepreneurship, that has kept London going. There is political uncertainty. But I think what we’re seeing
is that the interest of industry coming to London and
the greater south-east is really borne
out of the strength of the scientific excellence
and talent there is. And that definitely
is not changing. UK-based biotech companies
attracted £2.2bn of investment in 2018, almost twice
what they managed in 2017. In the same year, foreign direct
investment in UK life sciences more generally reached
£1.1bn, the highest it’s been in the past eight years. But there are warnings from
some of Britain’s top research institutions. The scientific excellence that’s
so attractive for investors could be under threat. The Francis Crick Institute is
Britain’s biggest bioscience lab. It has 1,200 staff. And scientists here come
from over 70 countries. We couldn’t really be
closer to continental Europe than the Crick. What does that mean
to you, personally? I suppose personally,
being a French citizen, I can jump in the
Eurostar in 10 minutes, and I’m in the train
two and a half hours, I’m in central Paris. So it allows us to really
get people from France, but also close by Belgium,
Netherlands now, and Germany. Seventy per cent of my
lab are non-British. But in general, I
think the proportion in the whole institution
is probably more than 50 per cent and with a
high majority of EU citizenship from laboratory
support technicians to group leaders. What about international
funding, particularly EU funding? What would happen if we
were cut off from that? In 2018, I think the
institute altogether get 12m euros from the
EU or its own framework. If the funding becomes
UK national only, that will restrict our
ability to expand our work. The UK’s annual share
of EU research funding has fallen by almost a third,
or 400m euros since 2015. And there’s been an
almost 40 per cent drop in British applications to one
of Europe’s biggest funding schemes, Horizon 2020. Many researchers feel
the prospect of Brexit is already having an
impact on their work. Ana, we don’t know what’s
going to happen with Brexit. No. But what are the
effects that you’re afraid of if it goes badly? The main problem, at least
for my work, is regulations. We don’t know what’s
going to happen. But in the event
of a hard Brexit, where there is no agreement
between the rest of Europe and the UK, if I’m trying to
run a multinational trial, for example, how can I do it if
there is no agreement in that for sharing? How can I develop
a medical device within the UK
regulations if I don’t know that Europe will accept the
UK regulations and vice-versa? Changes to regulation could
be particularly problematic for fields like cell
and gene therapy, where scientists use
the patient’s own cells to develop a living
treatment just for them. To give an idea of how
rigorous the process is, we filmed in Stevenage, some
30 miles north of London, at the manufacturing centre
of the Cell and Gene Therapy Catapult. The cells arrive at the centre
by special courier and are signed off before they
can be taken inside. Once logged, they’re
cross-checked before the package can even be opened. More paperwork before they can
be transferred to cryostorage. They’re signed out
and checked again before being taken into the lab. Nothing gets in without
being cleaned and prepped. Only now can the
scientists get to work. In real time, this
whole sequence of events takes place over days or weeks. And it’s only a small
part of the process. The clinical trial phase,
testing, and final delivery of cell and gene
therapies are all governed by strict
rules and regulations. To develop any new treatment
is a huge undertaking. There is no other ecosystem
for developing this end to end anywhere else
in the world that’s really as far on as we are. And that’s not just
because we’ve addressed the manufacturing issues. It’s because we’ve also
simultaneously looked at how the regulatory
system was reformed. The approval times have
gone down from over a year to under 60 days to get
into clinical trial. And we’ve seen several products
already start in the NHS, and start to be
used really early. And that’s kind of unheard of. The UK already is a world
leader in these therapies. And providing that we can
keep reinforcing investment, it will continue to be a world
leader in these therapies. Cell and gene therapy is
expected to become a £2bn industry in the UK by 2025,
supplying a global market that could be worth
almost £10bn by then. Right now, Europe is
by far the biggest market for UK medicines. More than 40 per cent of
our medicinal products go to EU countries. If Brexit limits our
access to that market, it could leave the life
sciences vulnerable. Yet, industry leaders
are keen to see the opportunities in Brexit
as well as the challenges. The best and worst
case scenarios for UK life science in
the coming years, I think are more dependent on
what happens globally than be seeing solely
through the prism of Brexit. If the Chinese market
opens up and Shanghai becomes a source of
capital for UK businesses, that would be fantastic. If Nasdaq continues to have
the experience in the next five years it’s had in the last
five, that would be fantastic. Those, for me, are the global
parameters into which the UK sector will succeed and fail. Brexit and the outcome of
Brexit plays a small part within those global
perspectives. The life sciences sector
relies on talent and funding from overseas. It depends on streamlined
regulation and easy access to international markets. It is also at the heart
of the UK economy. How it performs
after Brexit could be a guide for other
industries and even for the country as a whole.

82 thoughts on “What will happen to UK science after Brexit? | FT

  1. The UK will do well especially hitched to the United States' wagon. We attract students, entrepreneurs and professionals from every corner of the Earth and every culture. Independence and freedom are what make a country great not regulatory nonsense. Regulations are easily worked out. We in the US did our 'Brexit' in 1776 yet we and Britain became the closest of allies the world has known. Just sayin'.

  2. UK fucked it up… why would you leave the biggest single market out there? To negotiate everything again ? With less bargaining power? Congratulations… British people think they are the centre if the world.. loool

  3. Do you really need an electronic bracelet and an app to tell you not to buy a chocolate bar? And give you nutritional information that is on the label. God help uk bioscience if that’s the best they can come up with. Embarrassing.

  4. Thank you for posting this video. I love the medical field! So this is intriguing to me. 🙂 And how Brexit decision will affect the medical field, it will be interesting how the outcome will be in the UK along with having more or less International people through the upcoming years.

  5. Science will return, trans-fad will become depressed & learn they were a tool of the globalists, perhaps institutionalized. Return to male & female will be swift.

  6. Whilst I personally think that our departure from the EU is the wrong thing to do, this video conversely highlights why Brexit is probably good for the UK in one particular way. Possibly because of our history of having an Empire, the UK seemingly has a tendency for reliance on others to help it get by. Now in the 21st Century, we have the 'broken Britain' image of which I think that much of the content this video highlights. Clearly, the UK is capable of innovation, but our inability to translate that into a strong economy is of concern. I understand that the universities are concerned about the post-Brexit era, but their reasoning shouts 'less money from foreign students' rather than the reasons they first waffle on about. Again, reliance on a simple solution instead of tackling the hard work of selling their research and working with companies to create viable products that people around the World will want. 

    Some achieve it, clearly most are not. A misguided and unfortunate placement of priorities. The UK has utterly missed the opportunity that the EU presented us with. Instead, we chose to rely on it in some way, form or other. When you rely on something, you lose your ability to lead and it is of no surprise that even the least economically knowledgable or geopolitically disinterested citizen even could grasp the fact that countries like Germany had a stronger voice than our own. What is not made clear by anyone from either the Remain or Brexit campaign camps is that it is because Germany has earned the respect and is not really anything to do with EU bureaucracy or some kind of immature conspiracy theory that Germany is attempting to create some kind of Fourth Reich. That's nonsense. 

    The UK and in particular England, the dominant country in our union, needs a good shake, a clip around the earhole, a kick up the bottom….whatever you choose to call it metaphorically, the UK needs to acknowledge its realistic comparatively humble position in the World and get cracking on taking responsibility for our own success. Some people think we are achieving that through Brexit. I strongly disagree. Immediately, UK politicians of any party that supported Brexit cite the United States as our future trading partner as if nowhere else exists. It seems to me that these people were only looking to swap problems instead of finding a real solution. 

    Whatever we may think of Scottish independence or the total breakup of the UK, it may be a good thing if it happens at least for a short period of time. England desperately needs to throw off the shackles of its past and the past 100 years since the Easter Rising in Ireland. First Ireland became independent and then after the Second Word War, almost all of the former colonies gain their independence. A strong trend of decline has emerged. We are already in the 1970s which saw major changes in UK industry and tough economic times. The 1980s Thatcher government further shutdown coal mines and again, even though her administration brought us out of recession, reliance was put on foreign investment which was very successful. In fact Wales benefitted the most from Japanese investment and at the end of the 1980s had the largest concentration of Japanese companies than anywhere else in Europe. Such was the success of the Welsh Development Agency, but that too was 'reliance'. 

    Then, the 1990s saw the fall of the Berlin Wall and more poignantly, the fall of the Iron Curtain. Suddenly, the Japanese et al were presented with a geographically more convenient location that was also much cheaper than even deprived Wales and they moved on in droves. The EU then came along and whilst it was generally welcomed at the outset, the rush of the EU to add former Eastern Bloc countries into the 'Western Fold' to take them away from the sphere of influence of Russia led to a EU which was vastly different in its standards of living. Hence, the freedom of movement resulted in what appeared to many as 'mass migration'. At the end of the 90s, Scotland and Wales saw the reopening of their parliaments after hundreds of years. Northern Ireland also, but they didn't really have a history that is unique in this respect to the rest of Ireland. The feeling in England was probably mixed with its influence and power taking a hit once again. 

    On top of all this, most traditional business icons in the UK either disappeared or were to become foreign owned. People are lamenting that nothing is left. Well, who's fault is it? We've been witnessing the lessening of the UK for decades and no political party has taken up the gauntlet to instigate real change and acknowledge the real problem with the UK and deal with it. The reason being is that it is what the country needs to hear and not what they want to hear. Not usually the best strategy for gaining votes, so our politicians continue telling us what we want to hear. Here's to many more years of Broken Britain as I am not confident that the UK has yet got the message. Good luck Scotland, I hope you achieve your independence as once England has hit rock bottom, then it might and I sincerely hope will wake up, roll up its sleeves and start working for its living in accordance with its true potential. Then we can all come back together in a looser, perhaps just economic union and work together for a better future. But let's stop this charade of pathetic excuses. Otherwise, the decline will continue and regardless of the wishes of Scottish voters, the UK will breakup from failure if nothing else.

  7. But Brexit! Isn't everything going to be fabulous under Brexit? I thought it was all up sides all sunny uplands? Have our cake and eat it ? Easiest deal in human history? A extra £350,000,000 every week in the NHS ? Taking back control? Why all this negative talk when we all know Brexit is going to be a win win isn't it ? What could possibly go wrong with Boris Johnson at the helm,a genius of detail, the Brexit Empire is only in the toddler stage and with the other toddler and chief Trump , so our future is looking rosie isn't it?

  8. American here: somehow, somehow, the uni's in the states manage to attract non US citizens to their post grad teams. That angle would have been much more insightful.

  9. How very weird. That's the second time recently that when watching top notch science researchers, they use exactly the model of calculator as I do, and I've had mine for about 20 years! Maybe there is something wrong with the new ones, or something right about the old ones. Like musicians who use the old Moogs and Rowland keyboards maybe.

  10. not a fan of the EU, BUT medical device regulation alignment is essential – whether that be with the EU or the FDA doesn't matter, we wont be the first market these new technologies come to when we only make up 3% of the global market compared to the EU and US's 15% and 25% respectively!

  11. Hopefully after Brexit i wont get interviewed by a bunch of foreign pricks that took British jobs every time i apply for a PhD.

  12. Nice bit of scaremongering. "This facility employs people from over 70 countries". The EU only has 27. Proceeds to cry about how they won't be able to work here with no evidence.

    Give up FT, you have lost. Oh dear, the yuppies may have to invest in the UK labour economy instead of cheap imports of foreign labour. My heart bleeds.

  13. British scientists just have to refocus their research.

    – IT specialists will have to install an unvisible but effective customs border in NI.
    – AI specialists will have to create all kind of medical and nursing staff.
    – Genetic researchers will create unicorns.
    – National economists will negotiate 90+ beneficial (for britain) trade deals between lunch (31.01.2020) and supper. (31.12.2020)

    – Historians will have to rewrite the "History of the United Kingdom of England and Wales".
    Shouldn´t be a problem, should it?

  14. Queen's speech already highlighted points based migration, so skilled people will be allowed in and to apply for jobs from all over, not just Europe. Also a science first economy so funding will also be available. Remainers are still salty, I suppose.

  15. Who want to scan shopping with a limp wrist, just give the beer to the cashier to scan, you know how much your expected to pay the price is labelled on the shelf.

  16. We do not need the rest of the world is Britain so weak and incompetent to supply the trade goods, science and technology needed along with real jobs. The real unemployment is sky high if you were to look at the employed and those not for any reason rational or not.

  17. Science will be banned, it's offensive to the third world idiots that make up all of the 7 million foreigners that have moved to the UK. Being a delusional superstitious idiot that believes utter nonsense is the way forward.

  18. Most London live not originally from UK. London is different from rest another city UK because that way be fight London is remain Eu vote 2016 we didn't care about London.. simple that

  19. that's ridiculous…. just because you're not bind by international treaty to allow ANY EU citizen to move to the UK you cannot get EU talent into the UK??? Of course, you can allow anyone you want it's the UK based on their skills! Its the same with the US… if i have qualifying skills and want to go there… i can go there. Its entirely in the hands of our democratically elected government to decide if the want to recruit EU science grads… as it should be. To suggest that because we've left the EU and thus cannot recruit outside the UK is either ignorant or disingenuous.

  20. Let's face it, in a global market, UK-based is just geography. Intellectual expertise is readily transferable to any points-based-immigration host nation — as those names and accents attest. Post-BrexTWIT regulations? Probably very little to zero will change. Funding? BrexTWIT reduced the value of the pound, making "England-based" more affordable, possibly for years to come.

  21. Britain has been at the forefront of technological and scientific advancement for centuries. The EU is 26 years old, a pathetically small blip on the history of Britain. Leaving will open up more opportunities globally, not restrict them. It's not a coincidence that Britain's decline as a great power began 40 years ago, when the UK joined the common market. The entire goal of the EU is to dissolve nation states, and birth a new superstate in their place. So of course it's in Britain's national interest to leave such a disastrous organisation.

  22. I am extremely proud to have been part of the team that built the Crick!

    Brexiteers have no idea what damage they have done to this country.

  23. Don’t worry nay sayers, people will still be able to come to Britain. We will just have more control over who they are. Scientists welcome. Guardian readers think scientists from Europe will be somehow banned; they are of course full of it.
    The uncertainty affecting investment was created by remoaners blocking Brexit. Let’s see what happens over the next 10 years, we now have certainty, and greater opportunities to trade, and recruit from across the globe.

  24. Are they really calling that stupid app medical technology? If you want to know whats healthy read a book it's not that hard.

  25. Historically, some of the greatest intellectual ideas have come from Britain. Depends what kind of science you want to do. Group think massive funding , or ….

  26. If there is money in it the regulation will, in time, be amended to accommodate. Could it take a decade to re-align; yes. But Brexit was never about money and lining your own pocket except for remainers.

  27. So from the 31st of January uk has to follow Eu law but will no longer have representation and voting rights in Eu institutions when Eu makes decisions

  28. Youtube needs to invent a super downvote button where you can pay a small fee to give one video 100 downvotes. I would be willing to spend good money on this video.

  29. Science will hang up its white coat and file out out the exit marked ‘experts this way’. While unicorns bound in through the the sunlit uplands entrance.

  30. I am not convinced that science and technology can make more than a marginal difference to the health condition of the UK population. Doubtless, it will be useful for the educated middle class with impending middle and old age. But the real problem is with the lower-paid and less educated populace (most of the Brexit voters, in fact) whose lifestyles and diet are seriously defective. Part of the problem is the phenomenon of poverty in work; part of it is lack of basic education about diet and health; part of it is lack of time and energy to prepare healthy meals; and part of it is the aggressive marketing of convenience foods that have the inconvenient effect of overweight, poor cardiovascular system, possible Type II diabetes, weak immune system, and ultimately poor overall health and premature death.

    This is a socio-economic problem, which cannot be adequately addressed by mere technology. It requires a massive effort across a wide range of policy areas. We can be sure that the Tories will not do this.

  31. Are scientists beyond filling in a form or two to come to the UK legally, having been checked, post Brexit? Talk about moaners. If they don't want to come, there is plenty of global talent that is a little hungrier to learn in the UK's more advanced sectors.

  32. Time to view change as an opportunity? The terrible conversation rate (2nd in funding but 12th in utilisation) smacks of complacency and complete mismanagement.

    NB: Like everybody else, these people are free to bet their own time and money on turning a 'hobby' into a profession.

  33. What will happen to UK industries once they start operating like EVERY OTHER non EU industry on the planet? Brexit concerns like this are ridiculous. How does Canada do it? Japan? Brazil? India? None of them are in a quasi-confederation and they're doing just fine, only in Europe are nations compelled to merge together politically as well as economically.

    I'll posit this, trade between the USA and China is MASSIVE, far larger than the figures we in the UK deal with, does that mean they need to have a common parliament and supranational laws governing them?
    We can still cooperate, entice, and collaborate with EU and non EU nations post Brexit, we don't need to be in the EU to work with Europe or the world anyone who says otherwise is lying.

  34. British universities and researchers will lose lots of money which have been previously available in funds of the European Commission.

  35. All of these comments from dumb middle aged men giving their opinions on UK science and academic research are hilarious.You all left school at 16 and probably get your daily dose of reading from the Daily Mail. Your opinion is irrelevant and uninformed, yet you think you're more educated on this topic than actual specialists.

    The internet has its benefits, but unfortunately it's also a breeding ground for idiots to express opinions that would get people side-eyeing them if they were to say it in person. This video features academics and scientists who are directly involved in this sector expressing their concerns regarding Brexit, BUT Pete from Hartlepool in the comments (who hasn't studied or researched a day in his life) says that they are wrong… major facepalm.

    I used to laugh at some American people in the past at how idiotic they were in comparison to Brits. But, in recent months I've realised that some people in this country aren't very different to the yanks I used to take the piss out of.


  37. I am amazed by how most of the comments here are mere speculations without the actual hands on knowledge and experience in the field. I am working in science and tech R&D field and I’ve seen a lot of these so called fear-mongering happening for real.

    A lot of talented scientists and engineers have decided to leave this country for good due to the uncertainties of Brexit—and wait for it, these include those international, non-EU scientists and engineers that most of you thought are not affected by Brexit! A lot of tech companies have also decided to let go of their talented EU scientists and engineers due to Brexit uncertainties.

    Let me put it straight. Brexit uncertainties mean that we will not have clear jurisdictions for years. Without clear jurisdictions, we cannot have clear regulations; to put it simply. Without clear regulations for years, it is impossible for R&D field to prioritise and strategise our work—so much so it will end up costing the UK more monies due to wasted research. Why we need to strategise and prioritise our work? Because funding or monies will run out at some point! And where does these monies substantially comes from? The EU! So, there you have it. Thanks for ruining the future for everyone in the planet! Because the UK universities are not only solving the problems of your ‘Great’ Britain, but also the global challenges—which the UK also either contribute to or are affected by—that we have now.

    And btw, don’t you dare talking about what you know not. Yes, we are developing avant garde technologies, but no, it is not reserved for middle and upper class part of the societies! We are also striving to develop and tweak these avant garde technologies so they can be accessible for everyone including the poorest and the most forgotten of us. Thanks for ruining it for everyone! I hope your Make Britain Great Again fetish will bite you in your arses one day so that you will realise how wrong you all have been and then you will realise that unicorns are not real. Oh, and yes, of course I am so damn salty about it!

  38. The lack of innovation from U.K. companies is quite frankly embarrassing, we need our own Silicon Valley in order to thrive in this extremely competitive cut throat globalised world.

    Our finance sector is great but we are too reliant on it.

  39. Listen FT you can’t have it both ways. One minute you’re anti Corbyn the next you’re anti Brexit. You made your bed, now sleep in it! If you think Corbyn renationalising the railway would be bad for the economy you can’t imagine what Brexit will do for it.

  40. Fake news. Instead of concentrating on UK young training them wanna hire cheap labour but forget standards drop aswell. EU limits data sharing etc anyway. After Brexit open to whole world

  41. I'm sure we can just invest in education in the UK and I'm also confident skilled scientists (and entrepreneurs) will be eligible to immigrate here still like in Australia.

  42. ”What will happen to UK science after Brexit?”

    It will boom as we will no longer be compelled by our European Union membership to give preference to the unskilled or even criminal EU immigrants we don’t need in preference to the non-EU STEM experts we desperately need.

    This is turn leads to increased revenue for the exchequer per capita as we increase the quality of our population and spending on public services such as schools and the NHS.

    There is a new golden age coming a I am very excited.

  43. Unbelievable propaganda! Why people are not going to come in UK after Brexit ?! This is nonsense! People are coming from everywhere not only from EU country even since many years before EU creation! Stop your propaganda it does not work! Not with me at least.

  44. This should be a non issue. There is no reason why EU or other qualified citizens should be denied work permit ID. The UK can remain a very open society by enacting a few unilateral and simple changes to WP policy and by simultaneously tightening up eligibility rules for social security and welfare payments. We simply need to solve the issue of people receiving social security benefits before paying into the system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *