for 10 years we won’t have anything better

[GoodTaste]

Does the phrase "for 10 years we won’t have anything better" refer to "for 10 years we won’t have anything better (than the new funding or this law)"?

If it is, then the tence of "There was a true demand for this law" is questionable, because it sounds as if the demand occurred in the past and presently might have been met. Now "for 10 years we won't have anything better" means the present demand is hot and great. So it seems that "There is a true demand for this law" is more accurate. I am not sure.

Is "There is a true demand for this law" more accurate?

===================
The French government this week unveiled a draft science bill that promises to increase public research spending with an extra €25 billion over the next 10 years. French research minister Frédérique Vidal, who presented the bill to the Council of Ministers on 22 July, said the money fills an urgent need “to deeply refinance research.”


“There was a true demand for this law in the academic community,” says Patrick Lemaire, president of the French Society of Developmental Biology. Although the new funding would represent “some progress,” he says. “Paradoxically, the disappointment is immense because the needs were so great and we know now that, a priori, for 10 years we won’t have anything better.”

Source: Science By Elisabeth Pain Jul. 24, 2020
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/french-science-bill-promises-boost-public-rd

 

[GoesStation]

The bill hasn't been passed yet, so the translator should have used the present perfect. The original French probably used a tense that can translate as either the past simple or the present perfect.

 

[GoodTaste]

The bill hasn't been passed yet, so the translator should have used the present perfect. The original French probably used a tense that can translate as either the past simple or the present perfect.

Why present perfect but not simple present?

 

[GoesStation]

“There was a true demand for this law in the academic community,”….

The bill hasn't been passed yet, so the translator should have used the present perfect. The original French probably used a tense that can translate as either the past simple or the present perfect.

Why present perfect but not simple present?

The present simple would be the best choice if you were writing the sentence in English. The translator felt that it wouldn't express exactly what the original French said. I've found the French text, and I'm not sure I agree with the translation. It says Une telle loi est demandée par la communauté académique depuis de nombreuses années …. I might render this as "The academic community has been seeking such a law for many years …."

You'll notice that I used yet another tense.

 

[emsr2d2]

It says Une telle loi est demandée par la communauté académique depuis de nombreuses années …. I might render this as "The academic community has been seeking such a law for many years …."

You'll notice that I used yet another tense.

It could also be rendered as "Such a law has been sought by the academic community for many years". I definitely can't see a way to translate that and use the past simple.