UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) has been told that it?must regain the trust of an?equality advisory body after the science secretary, Michelle Donelan, was forced to?pay damages to?one of?its members.

UKRI said it would ¡°warmly invite¡± Research England¡¯s expert advisory group on?equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) to?reconvene, having suspended it last October when Ms?Donelan claimed that members had shared ¡°extremist¡± and ¡°unacceptable¡± views on?social media after that month¡¯s attack by?Hamas on Israel and the subsequent retaliation against Gaza.

Ms Donelan has now agreed to pay ?15,000 ¨C with taxpayers footing the bill ¨C to Kate Sang, professor of gender and employment studies at Heriot-Watt University, for suggesting that she had expressed support for Hamas. An independent investigation found no?evidence of wrongdoing by members of the panel, including its chair, Kamna Patel, a development studies academic at UCL, who had also been singled out by the minister.

Announcing the outcome of that investigation, UKRI had said that it ¡°regrets any difficulties¡± experienced by members of the advisory panel during the suspension, and that it would be keen for them to ¡°contribute their expertise as we resume the group¡¯s important work¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Another of the group¡¯s members, Dibyesh Anand, interim deputy vice-chancellor for global engagement and employability at the University of Westminster, said that although he could?not speak for other members, he would be willing to reconvene the 11-person panel.

¡°I understand the need for healing with UKRI, and I¡¯m quite willing to?do?it,¡± he told ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

However, Professor Anand said, members needed ¡°reassurances from UKRI that they have learned from the process because the work of EDI is more important than what happened¡±.

¡°The onus is on UKRI to regain our trust for us to do our work. We don¡¯t owe UKRI anything ¨C they owe us,¡± Professor Anand said.

The professor in politics and international relations claimed that UKRI¡¯s investigation process, which lasted more than four months, had made panel members ¡°feel very alone¡± because it was never clarified who was being investigated or?why.

But he added: ¡°Moving forward, it is important that the work on EDI should not be sacrificed because of our declining trust in how UKRI handled?it.¡±

Ms Donelan has withdrawn her allegation against Professor Sang and deleted her original post, but she has not apologised and the payout was made without any admission of liability.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Bindmans, the law firm that brought a libel complaint against the minister on behalf of Professor Sang, said Ms?Donelan had based the false allegation on a report by the thinktank Policy Exchange.

Professor Anand said the minister should resign, echoing a call already made by the University and College Union.

¡°For a minister who can¡¯t even do due diligence, it¡¯s highly irresponsible she was willing to destroy the reputation and even careers of academics,¡± Professor Anand said.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

¡°I can¡¯t imagine a prime minister having full confidence in a minister who has been so inept, ideological, personally vindictive and useless.

¡°It could have had a chilling effect on EDI work?[across] academia and research, but the outcome of the investigation will hopefully give a?reminder to the minister to be more responsible.¡±

Dame Ottoline Leyser, UKRI¡¯s chief executive, said the organisation had sought to adopt ¡°a?well-governed process to support evidenced, principled decisions¡±.

¡°I hope this will bring clear resolution in a way that best supports all of those who serve on our advisory groups,¡± she said.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com