Letters from the BNA President and President Elect to Douglas Kell ...

The British Neuroscience Association
Department of Experimental Psychology
University of Cambridge
Downing Site
Cambridge
CB2 3AE
Direct Dial: +44 1223 766450
E.mail: bnaoffice@neuroscience.cam.ac.uk
21 st February, 2011
Professor Douglas Kell
Chief Executive BBSRC
Polaris House
North Star Avenue
Swindon
SN2 1UH
Dear Professor Kell,
Re: BBSRC funding of neuroscience 2011-2015: Response to your letter of 18/2/11.
Thank you for your letter of 18 February 2011 which we have circulated widely to our signatories
and to members of the BNA. Unfortunately, it fails to address the two central points of our
complaint. The first is the inescapable logic that (i) you propose to cut the level of funding in
neuroscience and behaviour research, even though it is among the most competitive in your remit
(in terms of funding level). It is not reassuring for you simply to talk about shifting the focus of
neuroscience research to your priority areas because of the clear statement of your spokesperson
that the intention was to cut this area, not shift its purlieu. If the same level of funding for
neuroscience was displaced into your priority areas, there would be less reason for complaint
(although many would query the wisdom of your selection in terms of reducing funding for basic
neuroscience and psychological research and would fear for the future of the field relevant to other
countries with whom we are competing). However, we will not debate further your remit in terms
of priority areas, some of which we agree are relevant to neuroscience.
The second failure of your response is the lack of mention of how BBSRC will respond to the
withdrawal of big Pharma investment in British Neuroscience, as emphasized on the Today
programme. We note in p 24 your strategic statement
“Shared top-level planning [of MRC and BBSRC] in areas such as the pharmaceutical sector “.
We see no evidence of this joint planning in your recent actions in terms of cutting neuroscience
investment. If it is the £24M of the MRC for neurodegeneration, this does not actually address the
area of lost neuroscience resulting from the drug company pull-out.

You also refer in your letter and on the Today Programme to the “extensive consultations” you
undertook concerning your strategic plan during 2009. However, we have some issues concerning
this consultation process. First, the original consultation did not apparently include the BNA itself or
any of its Officers. Did you consult in fact with any neuroscientists? Second, the original consultation
was relevant to the strategic plan, not the decision to cut neuroscience and psychology funding,
which is a quite separate matter, unrelated to the definition of strategic priority areas. The decision
to cut is also apparently based on much more recent BBSRC statements than your strategy
statement. Thus our question again was whether, and with whom, you consulted on this decision to
target neuroscience and psychology funding?
We look forward to your response regarding the consultation process at your earliest convenience
so that we can inform our members accordingly.
Yours sincerely
Professor Trevor Robbins
BNA President
Professor David Nutt
BNA President-Elect