Industry is naturally a significant funder of research and development; its interests often leaning into surprisingly fundamental research rather than focusing exclusively on development. The once mighty Bell Labs1 was a famous example, but a recent resurgence of private-sector interest in essentially 'basic' research has been noted2, with companies such as Google and Microsoft at the fore. However, the responsibility for R&D may not always sit easily in private hands, particularly when the demands of society and shareholders compete.

Such is the situation evidenced by US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer's bid to take over the British-based company AstraZeneca. In the US, concerns have been raised that it is merely a strategy for tax avoidance3. In the UK, the issue strikes to the heart of its science base4, with Pfizer accused of wanting merely to asset-strip AstraZeneca. An open letter5 signed by scientists including astronomer and former Royal Society president Sir Martin Rees, and Rob Miller, director of the Rolls Royce University Technology Centre in Cambridge, UK, claimed that, “It is essential for the scientific future of the UK and its technological base that we have a pharmaceutical industry that is committed to work with UK universities and research scientists.”

Last month, Pfizer and AstraZeneca bosses testified in front of two UK parliamentary select committees, for business and for science. But assurances, sought by the government, from Pfizer as to what level of R&D it would maintain in the UK after a merger have not hit the mark — rather they were dismissed by opposition leader Ed Miliband as “worthless”. Business secretary Vince Cable has raised the possibility of “legislative remedies” — changes in law that might extend the rules of 'public interest' into the R&D sector.

As Nature Physics goes to press, Pfizer has laid a “final” £69 billion offer on the table — already dismissed by AstraZeneca's board. However, it remains to be seen whether the bid might tempt AstraZeneca's shareholders. If it does, the UK government must decide how far it is willing to intervene to protect national research interests that rest in private hands.