From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 21:55:06 -0400

While I don't know all the details of this debate in the UK, Fred's
comment seems to me to be pretty much accurate.  What puzzles me is
why anyone thought that the outcome could have been different.

Joe Esposito

On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 4:51 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Frederick Friend <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 14:37:18 +0100
>
> Is it not amazing how, even in these difficult economic times,
> governments can find extra cash to smooth over the mistakes in their
> own policies! The extra £10 million for 30 UK universities to pay APCs
> to publishers is a political gesture to counter the opposition to the
> UK Government’s mistaken endorsement of the Finch Report proposals.
> Never mind that the money could have been spent far more effectively
> in supporting open access repositories! Never mind that the effect
> will be inflationary, enabling publishers to raise the level of charge
> for APCs! Never mind that the UK Government made exactly the same
> mistake 25 years ago in giving university libraries £10 million to pay
> for the higher cost of journal subscriptions, generosity which only
> poured petrol on the flames of journal inflation and within a couple
> of years left libraries no better off! Never mind that the UK
> Government has not thought through what to do when the £10 million is
> used up and we are left with a publisher-led open access
> infrastructure costing the UK taxpayer much more than an improved
> repository OA infrastructure would do! In brief this extra money is a
> short-term gesture still leaving the UK open access infrastructure
> worse off then it was pre-Finch.
>
> For the UK Government announcement see:
> http://news.bis.gov.uk/Press-Releases/Government-invests-10-million-to-help-universities-move-to-open-access-67fac.aspx
> .
>
> Fred Friend
> Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL
> http://www.friendofopenaccess.org.uk