France to boost nuclear funding

27 June 2011 Last updated at 12:05 GMT Anti-nuclear groups have urged France to close Fessenheim - its oldest atomic plant France will invest 1bn euros (?0.8bn) in nuclear power despite warnings after the Fukushima disaster in Japan, President Nicolas Sarkozy says.

The new investment will include a boost for research into nuclear safety.

The French nuclear giant Areva is developing the fourth generation of reactors. France gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear power.

Earlier this year neighbouring Germany, Switzerland and Italy voted against nuclear power, following Fukushima.

The BBC's Christian Fraser in Paris says that as president of the G8 and G20 industrial groups, Mr Sarkozy has been pushing for an international standard on nuclear safety.

"We are going to devote a billion euros to the nuclear programme of the future, particularly fourth-generation technology," Mr Sarkozy told a news conference.

"We are also going to release substantial resources from the big loan to strengthen research in the sphere of nuclear safety."

He stressed his government was still investing "massively" in renewable energy. He announced 1.35bn euros of investment for that sector.

But our correspondent says it is obvious how important nuclear power is to the French economy and its energy security.

The Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant's cooling systems were knocked out by the 11 March earthquake and tsunami in Japan. The disaster caused a meltdown at three of the reactors and the plant is still leaking radiation.

View the original article here

Wildlife warning over EU funding

21 June 2011 Last updated at 13:08 GMT Farmers can receive thousands of pounds for initiatives boosting wildlife on their land More than ?400m worth of funding from Europe to promote wildlife on farmland in the UK could be about to be stopped, conservationists have warned.

The RSPB fears the money provided through the Common Agricultural Policy will be the victim of EU spending cuts.

The charity said such a move would be "savage" and could threaten the recovery of many wildlife species.

The government said the initiative was good value and any cuts should target farm subsidies for food production.

Under the terms of the Common Agricultural Policy, farmers are paid subsidies for the food they produce. Officially these direct payments - the lion's share of the CAP - are known as "Pillar One".

Many farmers across Europe also receive payments which can amount to thousands of pounds for developing initiatives on their land aimed at promoting biodiversity and wildlife. These rural development payments are called "Pillar Two".

Continue reading the main story

Our countryside has faced many threats, but this would be really savage. We're staggered.”

End Quote Martin Harper RSPB conservation director 'Ultimate extinction' The RSPB said it understood the European Union was considering scrapping the Pillar Two payments to save money.

RSPB conservation director Martin Harper said: "Our countryside has faced many threats, but this would be really savage. We're staggered.

"Rewarding farmers for protecting threatened wildlife has provided a lifeline to many sensitive species, which would otherwise have ebbed away.

"If the EU continues with this plan there is no doubt that wildlife will suffer, with the possible ultimate UK extinction of some threatened species including the turtle dove and cirl bunting."

The RSPB, the UK's largest conservation group, said hedges, stone walls and waterways could also be affected.

The UK's Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) echoed the RSPB's concerns.

A Defra spokesperson said the CAP budget "needs to decrease very substantially - but cuts should be focused on Pillar One. We're concerned by rumours that Pillar Two may be disproportionately in the firing line.

"Pillar Two is better value for money, contributing to economic growth, supporting the environment and agricultural competitiveness, and should have a larger share of a smaller CAP budget."

Proposals for the EU's new budget will be announced on 29 June.

View the original article here

Brain research 'funding crisis'

13 June 2011 Last updated at 23:37 GMT Scientists fear the cost of getting drugs to the market place is holding back brain research Scientists say research into mental illnesses such as depression is facing a funding crisis.

They warn that new treatments will be delayed and that the next generation of neuroscience researchers will not be trained.

A report by the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology said private companies were pulling out due to the challenge of bringing drugs to market.

It called for more investment and changes to the way trials take place.

The report was the result of a summit of more than 60 representatives of governments, universities, the pharmaceutical industry and patient groups.

Higher failure rate

It said up to 80% of funding for brain research in Europe had traditionally come from the private sector. However, pharmaceutical companies were retreating from the field because of the cost of bringing drugs as far as the consumer.

The report said it took much longer to develop drugs for mental illness - 13 years on average. Those drugs had a higher failure rate and were harder to get licensed for use, it said.

Only one new anti-depressant has been approved in Europe, agomelatine, in the past 10 years.

Professor Guy Goodwin, from the University of Oxford, said a lack of funding could lead to a "generational crisis" in neuroscience research and training.

He said there should be more public money invested in brain research: "The cost and burden are really quite high, yet research attracts disproportionately low investment.

"Public investment in research should be somehow related to the burden of the disease."

The report suggested ways of encouraging more people to invest, such as increasing the patent length for psychiatric drugs - making them more profitable.

A European "medicines chest" was also suggested. Pharmaceutical companies would donate drugs they were no longer using for research, which could then be used by other organisations.

The report suggested that drugs discarded for treating Alzheimer's disease, for example, could be used in research for psychiatric disorders.

Professor David Nutt, of Imperial College London, described the current situation as "madness".

He said: "With Europe's extraordinary tradition in neuroscience innovation relying so heavily on private-sector investment, the consequences for the region's research base and public-health agenda are of major concern."

View the original article here