Sir, You report (April 30) on the “intense criticism” levelled by the Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee against Professor Keith Mason, CEO of the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC).

This is alarming, because there is no evidence that the committee has risen to any decent standard of due process. Its function is political, and the attribution of blame for failure is normal. But there is no balanced process that takes proper account of the rights of individuals such as Professor Mason who are on the receiving end. The committee itself determines the breadth of the inquiry and selects which witnesses to examine, and how, if at all, to test the evidence — often complete hearsay — that is presented to it.

The scapegoat is given no prior notice of the charge, no opportunity to reply, no right to legal representation, no appeal, no recourse to judicial review, and members of the committee enjoy immunity from defamation proceedings. Not only is this process deeply unfair, this committee’s proceedings will make it impossible in the future for the UK to recruit to leadership positions on our research councils the high-quality scientists that the country needs.

Professor Malcolm Grant
President and Provost,
University College London

Sir, The “prioritising” made by the science funding body, the STFC, places two of four large hadron collider (LHC) experiments (ALICE and LHCb) in low categories.

As a particle physics PhD student working on ALICE at the University of Birmingham, I am disillusioned by the UK’s attitude to the scientific study that inspired me to follow physics as a career and which now leaves my prospects in jeopardy. As I work frantically towards final preparations with my colleagues from all over the world, each of us equally enthusiastic and passionate about our experiment achieving its goals, it is difficult to comprehend the uncertainty that I face in my own country.

While it is not surprising that the STFC’s expensive mistake has led to devastating consequences for UK science, I see no sense in such a rejection of the LHC, which promises to bring the next new wave of discovery in particle physics. As the 1950 Nobel prizewinner Cecil Powell remarked on discoveries at the very beginning of this field, “it was as if we had broken into a walled orchard, where protected trees had flourished and all kinds of exotic fruits had ripened in great profusion”.

Even more rich and unimaginable beauty is waiting to be seen, far beyond the boundary of our current energy scale. And what then, once we have crumbled this wall at the LHC? Some of us will be faced with a “no admittance” sign.

Zoe Matthews
Harborne, Birmingham

Explore Letters

• Feedback