Scientists for Britain

The EU has been militarising its science programmes. Even Berlin-headquartered Nature magazine, our detractors in the EU referendum era, voice concern in their editorial here. But they’re far too late, the EU has prepared this for years and won’t change. nature.com/articles/d4158…

And at 9.30pm the UK is importing 20% of its electricity from the Europe. 10% is coming from France alone. 🤔

Philip Rycroft, arch Whitehall insider who said Brexit has "slowed our progress as a nation, if not put it into reverse", called it a "wrong turn", and said the "Brexit insurgency rode a wave of divisive identity politics", wrote a report for Starmer which blocks Reform from receiving money from its biggest financial backer. Dominic Cummings warned Reform would face lawfare from the British state. Cutting off Reform's major donor base is exactly that. Rycroft is not an impartial civil servant - he constantly retweets pro-EU accounts (e.g. one talking about "Brexit cultists"), heavily criticised David Frost/Cummings' Civil Service reforms, and implied support of Labour's radical constitutional reforms.

How is this fair? British kids have to get 3 As to get into University yet foreign students have to get 2 Cs and 1 D.... for the exact same course.

The idea that the Clvil Service is neutral is a convenient fiction. It is not, we need to be honest about this. And we need to accept the ramifications of this.

I kid you not. Rachel Reeves praises Canada and Norway for INCREASING their production of oil and gas. So while the Labour Party proudly ban new oil and gas production in the UK, they openly support it in other countries. You literally couldn't make it up. This is INSANE!

NEW: Britain is the most expensive country in the world to build a nuclear power plant. The Fingleton Review challenged the Government to deliver a radical programme of planning and regulatory reform to make it cheaper and quicker to build nuclear power plants. The Government have now published a full response and implementation plan. Did they deliver 'full implementation' or is it another Labour U-Turn? Here's @BritainRemade's analysis. This is a really big step forward. On safety and reactor design, this is the radical reset of nuclear regulation the review demanded. On planning, this is the most radical infrastructure reform agenda the govt has put forward yet. However, it is not 'full' implementation. Some key measures have been watered down. For example, Habs Regs reforms have become 'updated guidance' and lack statutory underpinning. Some have been rejected such as the call for statutory time limits for permits and the call to make community benefits a material consideration in planning. Overall, it's really good news for nuclear (and therefore energy security). This could end up as Starmer's best legacy as PM. More detail in the blog below. samdumitriu.com/p/how-serious-…

As Channel 4 made their own video about English Water I thought I would do my own. So here you are. Some actual facts about English water.

The more details emerge about the Gibraltar deal, the worse it gets. Now we learn that Spanish forces will be allowed to board Royal Navy vessels under the terms of the treaty. This is a total capitulation. telegraph.co.uk/world-news/202…

The EU is fundamentally transactional. Nothing explains this more than fish. There was no common fisheries policy before we joined the EU. In the recent EU reset negotiations, Labour gave away 8 more years of access to our waters. Just as before, it all came down to the fish.

Labour’s plan for dynamic alignment with the EU threatens the UK's sovereignty and harms British farmers. The proposed EU food deal is a one-way street benefiting EU exporters over our own. Laws for Britain should be made here, not in Brussels. 👇 telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/…

Nothing better explains why the UK should NOT dynamically align its Agricultural regulations with the EU than the EU's current dilemma over convincing (bribing, actually) its farmers to accept its trade deal with Mercosur. Add to this the EU’s third attempt to get an Australian trade deal over the line, and it is obvious why the UK should resist the siren voices of dynamic alignment, which claim “it would help UK agrifood exports”. Oh no, it wouldn’t. The EU has no interest in importing food from anywhere – even from the world’s most efficient producers. The Trouble with EU Agrifood Trade open.substack.com/pub/catherinem…

Oh dear. The two floating wind farm licences have gone to companies with majority foreign stakes. Tell me again about the jobs and IP staying here?

Elections alone don’t make a democracy, argues @CJCHowarth. Britain’s institutions are under strain, and trust in the state is slipping thecritic.co.uk/do-we-still-li…

Starmer’s government prepares its next assault on British democracy, transferring control over swathes of UK government functions to a foreign power.

This is simply untrue. The Turing scheme funded UK students to study abroad. It was a lot cheaper than Erasmus, which is about hard pressed UK taxpayers subsidising EU students to study in the UK.

Something being missed about Erasmus. The £570m in year one, close to £1 Billion in year 2 onwards, isn't just covering UK students studying in the EU. It also pays for: - EU students studying in the UK - EU students studying in the EU Why should UK taxpayers fund that?

This tweet isn’t true. There was the Turing scheme for this. What worries me is she probably knows that. Which begs amplified existing questions about how honest this Government actually is with people. Their new deal is overpriced and not driven by helping students.

No wonder Starmer want to re-join Erasmus+: 'Brussels, September 17th 2025 - A bombshell new report reveals that the European Union's Jean Monnet Programme, ostensibly an academic initiative, is in fact a taxpayer-funded, global propaganda network designed to embed pro-EU narratives, quash dissent, and shape public opinion far beyond the classroom. This program, part of Erasmus+, funnels an estimated €25 million of public money every year into universities worldwide, transforming academic institutions into "vehicles of institutional propaganda".' Professors of Propaganda: How EU funding corrupts academia brussels.mcc.hu/news/professor… via @MCC_Brussels

The UK would be paying 16% of the EU's Erasmus scheme's total budget if we agree to Nick Thomas Symonds absurd negotiated payment. If the same number of people use the scheme as did when we were EU members, this would work out at £42,100 per participant. There are so many better ways to use £810 million, you can read about them in my substack below. I also list how much Erasmus+ money is spent on EU propaganda. All of the citations are in the Substack. open.substack.com/pub/catherinem…

It is reported that the measures “in their original form” would have raised around £500 million per year. That’s less than the government is wasting to rejoin Erasmus (£570 million in Year 1, likely rising thereafter). It was always just spite. dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1…