posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
purplecthulhu at 09:38pm on 13/12/2007
purplecthulhu at 09:38pm on 13/12/2007Word back from an open meeting today on this subject is that the reason for the cuts is primarily because nobody thought to budget any running costs for Diamond (and possibly some other ex-CCLRC facilities).
This would seem to suggest culpable incompetence at STFC. Quite how that will play out is unclear. The usual reward for civil servants screwing up in this way is promotion to a less damaging post. I suspect the physics community would rather promote the offenders to a permanent position in the CERN beam dump.
Of course they're trying to avoid blame and suggest that the astronomy cuts are due to increases in international subscriptions, but we were assured that we would be protected against such rises due to currency fluctuations, and other increases are linked to GDPn so ought to be reflected in increased science funding anyway.
Not happy.
This would seem to suggest culpable incompetence at STFC. Quite how that will play out is unclear. The usual reward for civil servants screwing up in this way is promotion to a less damaging post. I suspect the physics community would rather promote the offenders to a permanent position in the CERN beam dump.
Of course they're trying to avoid blame and suggest that the astronomy cuts are due to increases in international subscriptions, but we were assured that we would be protected against such rises due to currency fluctuations, and other increases are linked to GDPn so ought to be reflected in increased science funding anyway.
Not happy.
angry