London

Researchers at Mill Hill oppose being uprooted from their current labs. Credit: NIMR

Some of Britain's most eminent academics are embroiled in an unseemly public squabble over plans to relocate a prestigious London research institute.

At a House of Commons select committee inquiry on 1 December, neuroscientist Colin Blakemore, head of the Medical Research Council (MRC), was accused of inappropriately influencing the task force investigating site options for the National Institute for Medical Research (NIMR). One task-force member said that Blakemore threatened his job if he opposed plans to relocate the institute. Blakemore denies the allegations.

The future of the NIMR has been hotly debated for the past two years. Some, including Blakemore, argue that the facility should move from its current home in Mill Hill, a suburb of London, to a site closer to a London university and hospital, to speed the translation of basic science into clinical advances. But most NIMR staff say they could improve external collaborations without moving.

A ten-member task force was recruited in June 2003 to study the options. This July, they issued a report backing a move to a London university provided the partnership would be better than if the facility remained in Mill Hill. But NIMR staff say that a briefing note on this report was sent to the MRC's ruling council in July stating that the institute's future lay either with King's College London or University College London, ignoring the option of staying put. Blakemore counters that NIMR staff feelings were explained to the council in another document.

The House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology launched an inquiry in October into the matter after hearing complaints about this and other events.

One NIMR researcher on the task force, developmental geneticist Robin Lovell-Badge, testified that Blakemore called him and said, “I don't know how you can disagree with me, I am your employer”, which Lovell-Badge interpreted as a threat. Blakemore “absolutely denies” making any such statement.

Blakemore feels that the allegations are part of a campaign to discredit him and hence affect the decision of the council, which has so far backed a move. “I'm shocked that they feel my career is expendable if it means they get to stay at Mill Hill,” he says.

Blakemore presented the inquiry with a document, signed by most members of the task force, stating that its work was “properly conducted” and that the panel had been “united”. One member, Paul Nurse, who is president of Rockefeller University in New York, says the phrase “without coercion” was removed from an earlier version of this document in an attempt to convince more members to sign it — although Lovell-Badge and another NIMR worker still did not sign. Nurse says the task-force discussions were closer to “healthy persuasion” than “coercion”. Other task-force members agree. “Blakemore behaved with integrity throughout,” says Steve Tomlinson, deputy vice-chancellor of Cardiff University.

The select committee is due to meet again on 8 December to decide whether to continue the inquiry. The MRC will consider sites for the institute on 15 December, although a decision is not expected until next year.