Couple of developments on this:

1. The AHRC has issued what it describes as a refutation (it's a 
rebuttal, but let's worry about more important things) of the content of 
yesterday's _Observer_ piece:

http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News/Latest/Pages/Observerarticle.aspx

Uncommonly strong wording, there. States categorically that claims 
attributed to Peter Mandler ("AHRC was forced to accept the change by 
officials", etc) are falsehoods.

2. Mike Otsuka and James Ladyman have already pointed out that -- if the 
rebuttal is accurate -- this simply implies that the Council moved to 
direct spending towards the policy of the incoming government on its own 
initiative:

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/03/tories-want-ahrc-funding-for-research-to-be-directed-towards-their-ideological-program.html

Lest anyone is confused about why this itself should provoke alarm, the 
introduction to the relevant funded stream in the AHRC document 
'Delivery Plan 2011-2015' begins as follows:

"Connected Communities will enable the AHRC to contribute to the 
government's [sic] initiatives on localism and the 'Big Society' in the 
following areas..."

Full text at 
<http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/About/Policy/Documents/DeliveryPlan2011.pdf>.

Best
James

On 27/03/2011 16:03, M D Eddy wrote:
> To see this story with its related links on the guardian.co.uk site, go to
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/27/academic-study-big-society
>
> Academic fury over order to study the big society
>
> Researchers 'over a barrel' after coalition threat to cut £100m grant from
> Arts and Humanities Research Council
>
> Daniel Boffey
> Sunday March 27 2011
> The Observer
>
>
>
>
> Academics will study the "big society" as a priority, following a deal with
> the government to secure funding from cuts.
>
> The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) will spend a "significant"
> amount of its funding on the prime minister's vision for the country, after
> a government "clarification" of the Haldane principle : a convention that
> for 90 years has protected the right of academics to decide where research
> funds should be spent.
>
> Under the revised principle, research bodies must work to the government's
> national objectives, although the Department for Business, Innovation and
> Skills said that ministers will not meddle in individual projects.
>
> It is claimed the AHRC was told that research into the "big society" was
> non-negotiable if it wished to maintain its funding at £100m a year.
>
> The director of research at Cambridge University's history faculty,
> Professor Peter Mandler, told the Observer that the AHRC was forced to
> accept the change by officials working for the minister for higher
> education, David Willetts, regarded as one of the intellectual driving
> forces behind the "big society".
>
> Mandler added: "The government says they have rewritten the Haldane
> principle but they have junked it, basically. They say it is now their
> right to set the priorities for how this funding [is] distributed. They
> have got the AHRC over a barrel and basically told these guys that they
> cannot have their money unless they incorporate [these] research
> priorities.
>
> "Willetts was negotiating nominally, but the word is that it has come down
> from the secretary of state for business, innovation and skills, Vince
> Cable. Almost everyone who hears the story is upset about it. What about
> curiosity research, blue sky thinking? What is worrying is what won't be
> researched because of this."
>
> There is growing anger at what the Royal Historical Society (RHS) described
> as a "gross and ignoble" move to assert government control over research in
> favour of what one academic labelled a party political slogan.
>
> Professor Colin Jones, president of the RHS, said the move was potentially
> dangerous for the future of academic study in the country. "It seems to me
> to be absolutely gross," said Jones.
>
> "In a way, the AHRC should be congratulated for securing a good settlement
> in a difficult spending round, but there is something slightly ignoble
> about making the 'big society' a research priority."
>
> He added: "It is government money. They have the right to spend it on what
> they want, but there is a degree of anxiety about the strings being put on.
> They are being strengthened, which could be dangerous for independent
> research."
>
> A principal at an Oxford college, who did not want to be named, said: "With
> breathtaking speed, a slogan for one political party has become translated
> into a central intellectual agenda for the academy."
>
> Labour MP and historian Tristram Hunt said he intended to raise the issue
> in parliament, describing the research priorities as "grotesque". He added:
> "It is disgraceful that taxpayers' money is being spent on this bogus
> idea."
>
> It is understood that Oxford University intends to discuss the imposition
> of "big society" research at the next meeting of its sovereign body, the
> Oxford congregation, in May.
>
> Gareth Thomas, the shadow minister for higher education, condemned the
> development and called for transparency from the Department for Business,
> Innovation and Skills.
>
> He said: "Vince Cable and David Willetts need to explain why he has allowed
> an ill-thought-out, half-formed Tory election idea to divert precious
> funding away from genuine research.
>
> "When the government is axing virtually all the funding for the teaching of
> humanities, social sciences and the arts, wasting critical research monies
> on the 'big society' is simply unacceptable."
>
> Last month, the prime minister rejected criticisms of the "big society" and
> said the idea was his driving force. He said: "We do need a social recovery
> to mend the broken society and to me, that's what the big society is all
> about."
>
> One of the tasks of research, according to the AHRC's delivery plan, will
> be to define "difficult to pin down" values in "recent speeches on the big
> society", such as "fairness, engagement, responsibility, mutuality,
> individualism [and] selfishness".
>
> A Department for Business, Innovation and Skills spoksman insisted that the
> AHRC itself had proposed the "big society" as a strategic priority.
>
> "Prioritisation of an individual research council's spending within its
> allocation is not a decision for ministers," she added.
>
> "The government supports [the Haldane] principle as vital for the
> protection of academic indpendence and excellence."
>
> Dr Matthew D Eddy
> Durham University, Department of Philosophy, 50/51 Old Elvet, Durham, DH1 3HN, United Kingdom.  http://www.dur.ac.uk/m.d.eddy/  [log in to unmask]