Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is a great pleasure to be able to address this chamber on the very exciting work that the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Innovation has undertaken. I too would like to acknowledge the hard work and assistance of the committee secretariat. There is no doubt that we would not be able to inquire so extensively into some of these issues without their patience and assistance throughout the process, and it is very much appreciated by all members of the committee.

Today I wish to address three recommendations within the report on Building Australia’s research capacity that in my view deserve some commentary. I might start with recommendation 2, which reads:

The Committee recommends that the Australian Government increase funding for research and development by raising incrementally the Gross Expenditure on Research and Development as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product over a ten year period until it equals the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development average.

There is absolutely no doubt that at the moment we are lagging behind our competitor nations. Scientific research has become increasingly important for our society as we move forward. By lifting expenditure in this area, I think Australia will be much better placed to respond to the very significant and great challenges that face our economy at the moment, whether they be the challenges and the threats that come from the current financial crisis, from climate change or from the lack of innovation in many parts of the economy. If we do not lift expenditure in this sector we will not have the capacity to adequately respond in these areas. I certainly anticipate and look forward to the government’s response to that recommendation. I think it is critical for Australia.

The second recommendation that I wish to look at is recommendation 4, which reads:

The Committee recommends that the Australian Government fund the full cost of each higher degree by research program at Australian universities through the Research Training Scheme and within all national competitive grant funding programs. This funding should take into account:

• the removal of the high-cost/low-cost funding differential that currently exists between research disciplines, subject to interim arrangements to ensure that no discipline is disadvantaged;

               …            …            …

• the provision and maintenance of a minimum standard of supervision and resources.

This last point is the aspect of the recommendation that I wish to address. All too often, one of the significant challenges that PhD students face in their attempt to obtain their doctorates is the quality of supervision provided and the opportunities that extend from having appropriate supervision. Without appropriate supervision, and the resources in place to provide that appropriate supervision, it is very difficult for students to work through some of the challenges that may extend from their research as speedily as they might be able to otherwise. Providing those resources is a challenge that all universities face. Again, I look forward to the recommendation for that area being adopted by the Commonwealth.

The last recommendation I wish to shine the spotlight on is recommendation 8, which reads as follows:

The Committee recommends that the Australian Government develop and implement additional industry partnership programs, possibly modelled on Knowledge Transfer Partnerships, that will further facilitate connection between business and research institutions.

Time and time again we hear reports on the news that Australian researchers have had a breakthrough on matters that are very important to us in Australia, yet they find it extremely difficult to actually develop those partnerships with industry to get their knowledge or breakthrough realised in the Australian economy. Often, as a consequence of that, we lose our researchers overseas, so we lose their ideas and we lose their breakthroughs.

I think it is critically important that we develop better models and programs to assist with commercialisation of research. When I look in my own backyard, I have Deakin University’s Waurn Ponds campus within my electorate. They have, in a very innovative way, established a high-technology precinct that I believe, in due course, will enable commercialisation of technologies developed at that university.

There is also tremendous opportunity within the Geelong economy for Deakin University to work with the private sector to develop new products and innovations that can create a very substantial number of jobs within my region. The Geelong economy is of course an old economy. It is based on manufacturing, and we all know the challenges that Australian manufacturers face. I think Deakin University along with other regional universities and towns throughout Australia can play a significant role in assisting those economies and communities to meet the challenges they face. I again look forward to the government’s response on recommendation 8.

The report is very detailed and it canvasses a substantial number of issues. It is probably fair to say that the members of the committee probably did not quite realise the breadth of the work that we were taking on when we initially agreed to the terms of reference. But it certainly has been a very worthwhile process and it was pleasing for all members of the committee that, despite our differences throughout the process, we were able to come up with a set of recommendations in a bipartisan way and a way in which we believe will lead us towards identifying and resolving some of the challenges that universities, their students and our communities face. I again acknowledge the secretariat of the committee, and of course my fellow committee members, for their hard work.

See this speech in context