Biotech responds to Brexit vote

Claire Skentelbery, Secretary General of the European Biotechnology Network, said:

“The European Biotechnology Network is disappointed by the outcomes of the UK referendum with regard for British and wider European science collaboration.  The impact of fragmentation on science is always negative for research, commercial development and end user benefits.  The UK and EU now has to minimise the damage to its thriving science sector for the long term benefit of the region as a whole.”

Christian Patermann, International Bioeconomy Expert and former Director Biotechnology DG R & I, said:

“It is indeed very unfortunate, and will not benefit anybody – least of all future generations and presumably the UK. Whether […] British researchers and institutions can remain partners in EU programmes remains to be negotiated. […] In any case, the decision is a loss for the European science and research, in particular because British research institutes were sought-after coordination partners and ‘hosts’ in the Erasmus programme, not least because English is the Lingua France in science.”

Paul Nurse, the head of the Francis Crick Institute in London, told journalists:

“This is a poor outcome for British science and so is bad for Britain. British scientists will have to work hard in the future to counter the isolationism of Brexit if our science is to continue to thrive.”

UK Bioindustry Association BIA’s CEO Steve Bates stated:

“This is not the outcome that the BIA wanted but we accept the views of the UK people. The life sciences sector is a resilient community, unfazed by new challenges and staffed by great management teams used to working in a global environment. The fundamentals of UK bioscience remain strong. In terms of potential new therapies in the pipeline, the UK is by far the strongest in Europe. But several key issues for our sector are now in flux.

Key questions about the regulation of medicine, access to the single market and talent, intellectual property and the precise nature of the future relationship of the UK with Europe are now upon us. This will require detailed and dispassionate thinking and the BIA will make its and its members’ expertise available to the government and its key agencies in the coming weeks and months as we work through these complex issues.

The BIA remains committed to making the UK the third global cluster for life sciences and we will work closely with government and relevant agencies to see how this ambition can be delivered in the new political context we now find ourselves in as a country.”

Mike Thompson, CEO of the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry ABPI commented:

“The voice of the British people has been heard. This creates immediate challenges for future investment, research and jobs in our industry in the UK. With that being the case, we are committed to working closely with the government to agree what steps need to be taken to send a strong signal that the UK is open for business”

European Pharma Association EFPIA said: 

“As everyone involved in European healthcare considers the implications of the UK ’s decision to leave the European Union, EFPIA underscores the importance of ensuring that the patient is at the centre of all subsequent decisions.

EFPIA shares the common goal of ensuring rapid access to innovative medicines for patients across Europe, as well developing a regulatory and policy environment that fosters innovation and supports the research and development of new medicines to meet the needs of patients, healthcare systems and society.  As an industry, over the coming months, we are committed to engaging with stakeholders both in Europe and in the UK to support these objectives.”

George Freeman, British Minister for Life Sciences, tweeted: 

“It’s Brexit. The British people have spoken. The anti-establishment insurgency has broken thru. Now we need steady heads to implement it.
After a divisive campaign we need to bring the country back together by implementing Brexit in a way which works for us all.”

James Butterfill, Head of Research and Investment Strategy, ETF Securities, commented:

“We have seen a classic fear trade in Gold and Sterling this morning with a reversal of the complacent relief rally we saw earlier this week. […] In this environment uncertainty will reign supreme, when will it subside? this is an open-ended question…”

Index Ventures tweeted:

“We remain committed to supporting entrepreneurs wherever they emerge, be that inside or outside of the EU.”

Werner Hoyer, President of the European Investment Bank, stated:

“Today is a very sad day for Europe. As President of the European Investment Bank, I take note of the UK vote with the deepest regret, although of course the Bank will work with Member States and other EU institutions to assure an orderly transition to a new negotiated arrangement according to the Treaty.

For the first time since the beginning of European integration after the war a country decided to reverse its course toward enhanced common governance of our continent and commonality of fate worldwide.

This is not just any country: it is the nation that first called for a United States of Europe to avoid our continent repeating the terrible mistakes of its past.

The only thing that would be worse than the UK leaving the EU would be the EU itself – its leadership and the leaders of its member states – to ignore the harsh lesson that comes from this vote and the debate that surrounded it, both within the UK and across Europe.

We have been careless in criticizing and attacking the EU and European integration for all its failings but too seldom and too weakly defending it for its achievements.

Those failings are many and they must be addressed more decisively than ever.

But we must also boldly and robustly make a new, strong case for Europe, for a joint European contribution to global governance and peace, for a commonality of destiny among our peoples. Member States should take special care to give credit to the European Union for its merits and achievements, and to avoid falling into the facile temptation of using it as scapegoat for flaws and mistakes for which the Union has little responsibility.

This is the compass that must guide us in our handling of the aftermath of yesterday’s vote and in our dealings with the UK’s departure, bearing in mind that we find ourselves in uncharted territory: the beginning of a process that will bring profound change.

Europeans must now stand together united, to ensure Europe remains strong for it to be able to influence the furthering of global cooperation in the interest of peace and prosperity. The globalization process with its strong competition will continue and we must join forces in order to strengthen our role and protect our values.”

John Carroll, biotech expert and journalist, wrote on Endpoints:

“Brexit is one more devilish headache that it likely to cause the celebrated investor some second thoughts about making biotech a central focus of his funds. 

Crises do end. And not all disruption is bad. But Brexit came at a bad time for the UK biotech industry.”