Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think we heard a little before of 'post hoc, ergo propter hoc'. The member has taken two facts, one being the rise in enrolment in government schools in WA, which is a good thing, and presumed it had been caused by the mood for autonomy. Given the minister is so strong in science, hopefully one day he will show us how he managed to get the 'propter out of the post'.

The questions I want to talk to the minister today about relate to the Bjorn Lomborg Australian Consensus Centre, for which there is a $4 million allocation to pursue a particular controversial methodology in relation to various international issues. In Senate estimates, we were told that the decision to provide the funding for this Australian consensus centre was made well before there had been any discussion with the University of Western Australia or indeed any other tertiary institution. A decision was made back in the first half of 2014, we understand, to provide this $4 million worth of funding in principle and then have Dr Lomborg go out and sell his wares to a particular university.

I am just seeking to understand how this all came about given that this was not a proposition that emanated from any university. I would like the minister to explain to us who began this process. How was the minister or his department first engaged, because the money does come from his department? Who first approached the department? Given this is not something that came from any Australian tertiary institution or indeed a tertiary institution, I am particularly interested in knowing what methodology was used to assess the methodology. As we heard at Senate estimates, the decision was made to put $4 million into promoting a particular methodology. I am eager to understand, and I am sure the minister is going to be able to clarify, just what processes were put in place to determine the academic rigour and standing of this methodology. What processes were put in place to prioritise the funding of this methodology before any other project? Can the minister say whether any effort was made to get professional advice from the Australian Research Council or any other body as to the standing, rigour and merit of this methodology?

See this speech in context