Mr Buschor, as the former Educational Minister for the Canton of Zurich you recently took over the office of the vice-presidency of the ETH Board. Then and nowyou have been faced with matters pertaining to education at universities. Have you met with anything in your new capacity that has surprised you?

Ernst Buschor: ETH isn't new to me. Numerous contacts during my time as Educational Minister afforded me a close insight. What impressed me most was how strongly the culture at ETH was research-oriented. The cantonal universities do not usually attain this degree of focus.

Doesn't that mean that teaching often has to take a back seat?

No. Both ETHs have a better teacher-student ratio than philosophical faculties. This makes teaching easier and improves quality.

You arrived as an elected politician, responsible for a classic university that cultivates and promotes Humboldtian ideals, from a culture, therefore, where the term "tightened up courses of studies" doesn't carry a negative connotation. Am I wrong in supposing that the ETH domain fits your notion of a modern university more closely than a cantonal university?

I used to be professor and pro-rector at the University of St Gallen, whose studies system is similar to that of ETH. Later, as Zurich's minister of education I tried to introduce structured courses of study at the University of Zurich, also in the philosophy faculty. I am convinced that this would be for the benefit of the students. ETH changed over to a modern system of studies very early on. In other respects it's not true that the university clings to a generalised system while ETH is only interested in specialisation. The latter is just as strong at the university as at ETH. Georg Christoph Lichtenberg once said, 'he who only understands chemistry, doesn't understand that either.' – Fortunately, ETH has declined to take this route.

As an experienced reformer you met with an ETH domain that had already been tidied up; structures have been modernised with the new ETH statute and the "Bologna" reform already introduced, at least at ETH Zurich. Where do you locate call for action?

Certainly, the new statute exists but we still need ordinances and decrees to put it into practice. There are also a number of other important tasks that remain to be done, such as the assessment of structures in research institutes and the university reform 2008. The latter will centrally involve the entire ETH domain. We will all have our work cut out for us in the coming years with the necessary – sometimes total – reconstruction of the Swiss university and research landscape.

Can you name the areas which will be touched most by this intensive reconstruction?

It is possible that the position of the ETH domain will change in the university landscape. On the one hand, natural science research tends, because it needs to be very widely based and expensive, towards the ETH domain. The Arc Lémanique (1) is an expression of this tendency, as is the increase in the numbers of dual professorships between the University and ETH Zurich. When, on the other hand, cantonal universities are increasing their networks for reasons of cost and efficiency, the question ETH's leading role in natural science research will be posed anew. In any event we are faced with the national duty of determining and prioritising focus points and wide-based competence centres.

Could you imagine an analogous "Arc zurichois"?

Why not? Such a construction deserves to be looked at in detail. What shape co-ordination takes will become clearer over the coming years. In my opinion what we need in wide areas is a leading house, which would competently steer the necessary co-operation. In the usual way of things, for the natural sciences this would be the ETH domain.

The ETH Board very recently gave the green light for the creation of an institution, led by ETH Zurich, for systems biology in Basel. Sceptical voices had been heard previously, especially from Zurich's point of view, about the funding of the institution. Can you explain briefly how the ETH Board arrived at its decision?

The Board voted for the time being for funding for the initial construction phase until 2008. What was important to us in reaching this decision was that, in addition to the University of Zurich and Basle's chemical industry, the University of Basle is also making a substantial contribution to the new research centre. We have to ensure that the ETH domain is not burdened with the entire financing of the centre after the inception phase comes to an end.

The university reform 2008 will have a central affect on the ETH domain, says Ernst Buschor, Vice-president of the ETH Board since 1. 1. 2004. large

Where do you see the main areas of focus for ETH Zurich in the coming years?

The fundamental point is this; the absolute priority for ETH Zurich is to continue to face up to global competition. This tendency must increase, starting from a strengthened local and a consolidated, interdisciplinary concentration of vigour. Foreseeable areas for a future concentration of forces, for example, can already be identified in the Life Sciences, Nanosciences and, in their entirety, urgent problems pertaining to the environment, water and climate. Important contributions to the issues of sustainability and ecology can also be expected from engineering and architecture. I also anticipate sundry benefits arising from the promotion of co-operation between research institutions.

On the theme of university fees – there is talk of a four-fold increase. What can ETH students expect for coming semesters?

I find it highly regrettable that the discussion has been limited to the questions of fees. For me it is important that the parliament and government continue to support the central role that teaching and research have for our future well being and do not curtail budgets. Furthermore, foundations aimed at supporting teaching and research need to be more strongly favoured as far as taxes are concerned than the decision taken recently by the Council of States. Considerably more funding would then flow into research and education – the USA is the best example of this. I am also disappointed over the "gold debate". Above all, these profits should feed into the state pension scheme. In the sense of solidarity between the generations, and for future orientation it would also be appropriate for education and research to gain from what is after all a national good. Against this background, I support an increase in university fees in principle; how high this should be and when it should arrive are questions that have to be discussed. I think the time has come for students to participate more equitably in the costs of their university education. The government should be looking into the solution to a basic system of students' credit together with the planned changes in the grant system.

In a recent interview, which you gave to the "Weltwoche" you were quoted as saying, "We are no longer champions". Does this go for universities too?

Switzerland's universities are still among the best; globally we have the highest rate of citations. The teacher-student ratio, particularly in Zurich, is still good in comparison with neighbouring countries. This position is jeopardised, however; current political tendencies lean more towards imprudent reductions in research and educational budgets. What's more, this is happening after a time, during the 1990s, when funding for education fell slightly as a share of GNP. Educational costs stand in direct competition to social and health care costs, which have massively increased over the same period. If this trend should continue the consequences for Switzerland would be devastating.

Have you said the same to the Minister of Finance?

I will certainly seek the dialogue with Federal Councillor Merz. We aren't complete strangers, as we were assistants at the same institute. What we need to do is show the political establishment exactly what the universities actually do. We're good – some of us are extremely good – but we don't manifest this clearly or sufficiently. Communicating in a convincing manner is more important than ever today for science. Because in these political times, being good is no longer enough.