Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak to the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023. Research is such an important part of our modern society, contributing to our quality of life and our way of life. Imagine our industrial sector without research into product development. Imagine agriculture without research into cropping techniques, the food industry, the wine industry, the defence industry, modern manufacturing and social services. Research can make our lives better. It can make our economy better. It's a fundamental tool driving our modern society, and it can be a competitive advantage against other countries.

The Australian Research Council, or the ARC, was established in 2001 out of previous Commonwealth government grant schemes. Its purpose is to grow knowledge and innovation for the benefit of the Australian community through funding the highest quality research; assessing the quality, engagement and impact of research; and providing advice on research matters. The ARC supports the highest quality fundamental and applied research and research training, and it encourages national competition across all disciplines outside of clinical and other medical research. It is a central pillar in Australia's research landscape, administering the National Competitive Grants Program, the NCGP, and assessing the quality, engagement and impact of the research.

The ARC safeguards research integrity and provides advice and support to the Australian government on research matters. It also facilitates partnerships between researchers, industry, government, community organisations and the international community. It provides research funding on a competitive grants basis to individuals, research teams and large-scale centres through two broad arms: the Discovery Program, which supports individuals and small teams, and the Linkage Program, which creates links between universities, industry and other partners. It also delivers Excellence in Research for Australia, which assesses research quality within Australia's higher education institutions. ERA provides a national stocktake, by research discipline, against international benchmarks and it administers engagement and impact assessment, which evaluates the engagement of researchers with end users and shows how universities are translating their research into economic, social, environmental, cultural and other public good. The ARC will invest over $895 million in research in 2023-24 to the most dynamic researchers in Australia, a significant component of Australia's investment in research and development.

I recently opened the ARC Training Centre for Biofilm Research and Innovation at Flinders University, in Adelaide. This is an excellent example of the type of research and industry collaboration that the ARC encourages, with five universities and 11 industry partners involved in the research on biofouling. Biofouling is when organisms—from single-cell organisms through algae to barnacles—attach themselves to submerged parts of a vessel or equipment. Once biofilms are established, they are almost impossible to eradicate, impacting a ship's hull, drag and manoeuvrability, reducing energy efficiency of vessels and increasing fuel consumption. The ARC biofilm training centre will train, mentor and foster close partnerships between highly qualified professionals and engineers in an interdisciplinary model, to find innovative biofouling control solutions. It is expected to attract 14 PhD students, 40 researchers, four research fellows and six research assistants. Of course, an important part of research is research translation—application to real-world processes. Among the most significant outcomes will be a generation of industry-focused researchers critical for growing Australia's defence industry capability, which will make Australia a world leader in sustainment of maritime platforms and maintenance.

This is just one example of the sort of research the ARC supports. Other recent research centres around the country include topics as diverse as those of the ARC Training Centre for Optimal Ageing, the ARC Research Hub in Intelligent Robotic Systems for Real-Time Asset Management and the ARC Research Hub for Advanced Manufacturing with 2D Materials. Topics of smaller grants have included biases embedded in leadership selection processes that keep the glass ceiling intact; how extreme weather events are affecting Australians' residential choices; infrastructure planning, disaster management and strengthening the Australian community's resilience; and creating a greater awareness of disability and increasing the capacity to combat ableism and discrimination for emerging disabled writers. ARC grants are a prestigious and effective way for the federal government to fund a diverse range of research outcomes, including partnerships with industry and, importantly, research translation. Ultimately, it aims to make a better Australia.

The ARC Act has not been reviewed since it was established in 2001 and does not reflect the range of functions now being undertaken or provide the framework required to support the evolution of the agency. In August 2022 the Minister for Education appointed Professor Margaret Sheil AO, Professor Susan Dodds and Professor Mark Hutchinson to conduct the first comprehensive review of the ARC Act. The ARC review's final report was released in April 2023. The Australian government announced its response to the ARC review recommendations in August 2023 and agreed, or agreed in principle, to all 10 recommendations to enhance the ARC's role, purpose, oversight and budgetary arrangements so that it may continue to best support Australia's dynamic research landscape.

The bill has strong support from the sector, which was also strongly supportive of the ARC review final report and the government's response. The purpose of the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023 is to amend the ARC Act to enhance the ARC's role, to better support Australia's dynamic research landscape. The bill refreshes the ARC's enabling legislation, providing a renewed focus on the integrity of decision-making processes and the outcomes from publicly funded research. A modernised role of the ARC will be reflected in the objects of the ARC Act so that it will clearly define the important role and place the ARC has in supporting Australia's research community and landscape, as opposed to the current legislation that only highlights grants processing.

An Australian Research Council board, appointed by the minister, will be established as the accountable authority of the ARC, enabling the independence and integrity of the agency and its decision-making processes and providing clear and empowered governance over the ARC. The board's functions will be to appoint the chief executive officer, consistent with policy for the meritorious appointment of statutory officeholders; to establish and appoint members to board committees, including the College of Experts; to approve funding for research projects; and to provide advice to the government on ARC's policies, priorities and strategies. Importantly, the board will approve research grants under the National Competitive Grants Program. This is one of the critical changes recommended by the ARC review. Under the existing act, these decisions are made by the minister. Over time this has allowed for political interference to seep into what should be an independent, peer reviewed process aimed at expanding our nation's knowledge base. The membership of the board will reflect the diversity of the general community. It will include persons with professional credibility and significant standing in one or more fields of research or in the management of research, an Indigenous person and a person who represents regional, rural and remote Australians.

The bill intends that an annual appropriation replace special appropriation arrangements for the ARC's administered funding, consistent with recommendation from the ARC review for a more durable and flexible arrangement. Indexation based on the consumer price index will be applied as part of the annual appropriation on 1 July each financial year. The Minister for Finance has also agreed to an indexation floor to protect against CPI fluctuations below zero per cent that is consistent with the arrangements in sections 198.10(1) and 198.10(2) of the Higher Education Support Act 2003.

The minister will retain the right to direct the ARC not to fund or to terminate funding for research grants, based on national security concerns, including those identified by the National Intelligence Community agencies. If the minister exercises the termination power, the minister may also require repayment of an amount of funding, if appropriate. If the minister intervenes to not fund or to terminate a grant, the minister will table a statement in each house of the parliament within 15 sitting days of a decision detailing the day on which the minister made the decision and a description of the research program to which the decision relates. The minister will also report the exercise of the national security powers to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and offer a private briefing to the committee. The ARC annual report, prepared by the board, will also specify the number of times the powers have been exercised by the minister.

The role of the ARC is an important one to keep Australia at the forefront of research in scientific, social and industrial knowledge, and it is important that it remains fit for purpose. This bill supports that aim, and I commend the bill to the House.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak to the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023. Spending by our federal government should comply with the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines. It should be effective, efficient, economical and ethical. The government should plan all spending programs based on its identified aims. It should determine the size and purpose of the grants to be expended, issue guidelines to potential applicants, arrange independent evaluation of submissions, disburse those funds, critically assess the effectiveness of the expenditure and report back to the taxpayer. All government programs must be critically reviewed at regular intervals, given the increasing evidence of decayed Public Service processes and systemic political interference in their actions in this country in recent decades.

Last year the ANAO released a scathing indictment of both the Morrison government and the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care's implementation of the Community Health and Hospitals Program. In administering that scheme, more than a billion dollars was allocated from what was essentially a slush fund, from which the health minister handed out grants without any competitive processes or Public Service advice. These were precious health dollars which largely went to marginal electorates rather than those which need it the most: the rural and remote communities. These were dollars which might well have saved Australian lives had they been better spent. In recent years, other health department programs have been similarly subverted. Concerns have long been expressed around allocations from the Medical Research Future Fund. By 2020, 65 per cent of the funds allocated from that fund by the health minister—65 per cent of MRFF spending—were noncompetitive.

Sadly, we've also had concerns about the administration of the Australian Research Council in recent years. The federal government is a major funder of basic research in Australia. It issues about $830 million in grants every year via the ARC. There are a variety of grants for researchers at different stages of their careers as well as grants for specific research projects. Researchers put a huge amount of effort into applying for these grants. Independent experts at the ARC assess all applications, and they make funding recommendations to the federal education minister for approval. It's a tough process. It's very competitive. Only about one in six applications is successful. And it's always worth us remembering that ARC funding can make the difference between researchers and their employees—their team members and lab members—keeping or losing their jobs. In some institutions, receipt of funds from groups such as the ARC are a hard barrier to promotion. The need to be successful in grant applications has compounded gender disparity at a professorial level in many research disciplines in this country.

Unfortunately, as the education minister himself has said, the ARC has been bedevilled by political interference in the last decade. From 2018 to 2019, Senator Simon Birmingham, then the Minister For Education And Training, vetoed 11 research grants recommended by the ARC. In 2020, the member for Wannon vetoed five. On Christmas Eve 2021, the then acting education minister, Stuart Robert, vetoed six projects on the grounds that they did not demonstrate value for taxpayers' money nor contributed to the national interest—a description one might easily apply to that minister himself! Each of those six rejected projects was in the humanities. Four were in literary studies.

This shameful interference in the academic process was not only disrespectful to academics who submitted applications based on their career-long professional interests; it was also utterly disrespectful of the generosity and the expertise of the scholars who gave their time to assess those applications. I know that the minister's decision was condemned by numerous prestigious national and international bodies. That is embarrassing for us as a country. This political intervention flies in the face of the research principle of academic autonomy. In some cases, the Morrison government deliberately acted to silence competing voices, such as those of students looking to study the extent and impact of climate change. We also saw the Morrison government use grant announcements for political PR. They trickled out announcements via media releases over weeks or months to increase the ability of the local minister and MPs to render political capital from them. Research training centres at the University of Melbourne and Monash University—neither being supporters of or employing my own research—were announced not by their local MPs, who were not members of the government; instead, those big funding allocations were announced by Morrison government MPs from nearby electorates. This was all about political capital for the former government and not about science or academic progress.

This behaviour costs all Australians. Researchers have suffered from the stress of waiting for the results of grant applications, which, in many instances, have been delayed. They've missed opportunities to apply for other grants. In some cases, they have picked up and left the institution, the field or even the country because of their frustration and disgust with the process. Members of review panels have quit and also removed themselves from the process. Subversion of the ARC grant process has made it harder for universities to recruit and retain staff. It has damaged our international reputation. This is obviously bad for our universities but it's also bad for those businesses which attempt to engage in research with our universities.

And so in 2022 the incoming Minister for Education commissioned an independent review of the ARC. This was the first comprehensive assessment of the ARC and its enabling legislation since its inception in 2001. The review ultimately made 10 recommendations, including those to amend the act to provide greater clarity of the ARC's purpose and functions, to strengthen governance and accountability arrangements by establishing a board for the ARC, and to reduce the legislative burden and increase accounting flexibility for the funding of research programs. In response, the Albanese government has produced this bill, the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023, which implements six of the review's 10 recommendations. Legislative reform is not needed to implement the outstanding recommendations. I commend the government for amending the objects of the act and the role and mission of the ARC, with a stronger focus on its impact and purpose. It makes sense to establish a board to ensure the independence and integrity of the ARC and its decision-making processes.

The bills also ensures that parliamentary scrutiny will be reserved for funding guidelines, which the minister will be responsible for. This has been designed specifically as a safeguard against the politicisation of research grant decisions.

The bill also amends the current funding arrangements to ensure greater flexibility for the future. Specifically, capped special appropriation for research funding has been replaced with a provision for annual appropriation, which will reduce the administrative burden of annually updating capped funding amounts via legislative amendments.

Board decisions must be made in accordance with the funding rules made by the minister and after considering advice following expert and peer review processes. I do note, though, that the minister retains the power to approve nationally significant investments for projects which he or she feels will drive research infrastructure, training and collaboration. Mr Deputy Speaker, this legislation is not perfect. Members of the board will be appointed by the Minister for Education. While the legislation suggests that they should comprise an appropriate mix of skills based appointees with sector experience and appropriate industry and governance experience, I note that there are no stipulations as to their qualifications. So essentially this is still a situation where the minister has carte blanche regarding the membership of the ARC board, which will be advising him on some pretty important issues. I would suggest that at least some of those representatives should have ex-officio positions. Obvious examples would include the Chief Scientist and a senior representative from the NHMRC. It's not clear from this legislation whether or not board members will be excluded from office should they hold current ARC or other federal grants. I'm not convinced that conflicts of interest have been adequately addressed in this legislation other than via ministerial discretion.

Finally, and possibly most importantly, we still await a definitive position from the government regarding the review's recommendation 10, which concerned the evaluation of excellence and impact. The independent review addressed the risks associated with replacing Excellence in Research for Australia, ERA, which is Australia's national research quality assessment, and its companion assessment, the engagement and impact measure, or EI, with a metrics based method. Metrics based approaches to assessing excellence and impact in research, I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, can be inherently flawed or biased, can be gamed, and don't work well.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 17:19 to 17:31

As I was saying, metrics based approaches to research to evaluate excellence and impact can be inherently flawed or biased. The government has signalled that the ERA and EI initiatives will not continue in their current form, and it's now asked the Australian Universities Accord Panel to advise on how best to measure impact and engagement in university research. That advice was given by the Universities Accord Panel to the government at the end of last year, but it has not informed this legislation. It's absolutely crucial that the ARC gets this right, but we don't, at this point, have an answer to what the government is considering.

Our research grants system is under great strain. It needs systemic reform. Our basic science and medical researchers are world-class, but they have, for too long, been subjected to funding allocated on a political and a personal basis in many instances, rather than on need and on merit. We need systemic change to our Commonwealth Grant Scheme. The vast majority of grants should be developed and administered by departments, with ministerial involvement really being limited to approval of the purpose and the size of the scheme. The minister should retain some discretionary ability to fund grants only in very special cases. The grounds for that appropriation should be clear and all spending should be subjected to regular and independent review.

We need to run our Australian research in a way that's consistent with the UK and it's Haldane principle—that is, once funding parameters, rules and assessment procedures are set, the decision as to which research represents the best mixture of originality, significance, feasibility and benefit should be left where it belongs, in the hands of the experts. We must remember and respect that not all research will have commercial implications, at least not at first.

I would suggest that all government research programs worth more than $100 million should be subjected to parliamentary oversight. This should be from their inception and while they are underway, not in retrospect. Our public service departments need the resources required to do their jobs themselves, not by outsourcing to external consultants. And they need appropriate governance frameworks to protect them from political manipulation. Our research system is unhealthy. We deserve better. I commend the government for presenting this bill and I look forward to engaging with it on the ongoing reform of governance in all sectors of basic science and medical research.

Carina Garland (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The subject matter in the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023 is very important to me. Indeed, it was in my first speech that I spoke of the importance of academic integrity and freedom, so I'm really delighted to be standing today in support this legislation. As someone who has had an association for quite a long time with the university sector—as a student, as a researcher and academic, and now as a federal representative with multiple campuses in my electorate—I know how significant this legislation is. It's one that I'm interested in and that my community is interested in.

We've heard from previous speakers the work that our government is doing to reform the higher education and research sector. Indeed, this is something I've been arguing for for a long time, including in my first speech in this place. Throughout the process of reform and review, I've undertaken surveys in my electorate in relation to higher education and research. I've held mobile offices in the community in relation specifically to higher education and research. The feedback I've received has very strongly supported the strengthening of research in this country, particularly the importance of academic integrity and the need to strengthen and protect the way governance see freedom and freedom in academia.

We have a very fine higher education and research system in this country. Australian research has made an enormous contribution to the world. This bill ensures that as a nation we take necessary steps to invest in future research so we are at the forefront of new discoveries and innovations. Through amending the Australian Research Council Act 2001 and making changes to the Australian Research Council's purpose, oversight and funding arrangements, we are modernising the Australian Research Council and also strengthening it. The changes in this bill mean that the Australian Research Council can continue to be the catalyst for the productivity and innovation that Australia needs now and into the future. The amendments in the bill are in response to the final report, the Trusting Australia's Ability: Review of the Australian Research Council Act 2001, which made 10 recommendations, including to amend the Australian Research Council Act to provide greater clarity of the Australian Research Council purpose and functions, strengthen governance and accountability arrangements by establishing an Australian Research Council board and reduce legislative burden and increase accounting flexibility to fund research programs.

The Australian Research Council plays a unique role and significant role in this country. It supports basic and applied research across all disciplines except medical research, and no other agency does. This financial year alone will see $895 million in research administered by the Australian Research Council, supporting more than 5,900 new and ongoing grants. And, of course, we know that the Australian Research Council does not just fund research; it also acts as a very important safeguard on research integrity as well as providing advice and support to the Australian government on research matters.

There are economic benefits that flow too. We know, for example, that for each dollar of national competitive grants program funding administered through the Australian Research Council there are $3 of economic benefit. This is really quite remarkable, given that we as a nation account for only 0.3 per cent of the world's population but contribute about 10 times what would normally be expected when looking at our population size alone. This return on investment goes a long way to enhancing our reputation as leaders in research on the world stage. Over the last two decades, the Australian Research Council has supported the work of some truly outstanding Australians with some exceptional and world-changing ideas. From bringing the internet to Australia to getting quantum computing off the ground and driving the uptake of rooftop solar, the Australian Research Council has supported these projects. It's true to say that over the same period that the legislation that underpins the Australian Research Council has been in operation it has not been comprehensively reviewed. So legislation has not kept up to pace with the times.

As the Minister for Education has stated in relation to this important area of legislation, the Australian Research Council has in recent times appallingly been subject to political interference and ministerial delays. This is something I feel particularly strongly about. The former coalition government were known to interfere on at least six occasions to upend the independent peer review process, something that, as a researcher myself, I find to be absolutely disgusting behaviour. I know people and I've worked with people in some of the most highly regarded institutions in this country who were impacted by the political interference by the previous government despite well-respected, well-credentialled peer reviewers recommending projects, which is a secondary insult to the research community—to show such disrespect to those peer reviewers who are the experts in their field. Interference such as what we saw from the previous government is, frankly, an international embarrassment. Not only does it make it harder for universities to recruit and train staff, but it also damages the good standing of our world-class universities—reputations that have taken decades and so much work from dedicated academics to build. I'm really proud that our Labor government takes our responsibility seriously when it comes to protecting the integrity of the Australian university and research ecosystem. I will always stand up for the Australian university sector.

Our commitment has been demonstrated in many ways. It was demonstrated when the Minister for Education announced that this Labor government would undertake the first comprehensive review of the Australian Research Council Act. The minister tasked the review panel with terms of reference that were broad in nature, looking to what needs to be done to make sure that the Australian Research Council is both fit for today's research context and prepared for the future. The panel consulted widely. This included consultation with researchers, universities and other higher education providers, traditional owners, research organisations, industry groups, peak bodies and governments. The review concluded in April of last year and made 10 recommendations, with the Minister for Education announcing in August that our Labor government has agreed, or agreed in principle, to all of them. Some of the review panel's conclusions included that there was a need to strengthen the Australian Research Council governance arrangements and bolster its independence. This means not only getting the politics out of research funding decisions but also ensuring the end of those dark days of ministers vetoing things that they don't like.

The Minister for Education had previously instructed the Australian Research Council to commence work to implement three of these important recommendations. These included that we help universities attract and retain talented academics through meaningful fellowships and promoting academic careers in research, that we advance the support for Indigenous Australian academics through better consultation and additional fellowships and that we encourage more consultation between the Australian Research Council and stakeholders in the academic and research community. Six of the 10 recommendations require legislative amendments, which are addressed in this bill which will amend the Australian Research Council Act. The establishment of an Australian Research Council board as the accountable authority of the Research Council will also be facilitated through this bill. The board will be responsible for the approving of research grant programs under the National Competitive Grants Program, which is one of the essential changes that were recommended by the review.

The current act, as previously mentioned, has given rise to reprehensible political interference and ministerial delays when it comes to the approval of grants. Thousands of grants and every decision previously were at the discretion of the minister, and there were some pretty appalling consequences of that for the research community in this country. I'm really pleased that our government knows that that is appalling and should not be the case. Our nation's best researchers deserve to have their work assessed through an independent expert peer-review process that provides them with the confidence that their research will be assessed on merit and not treated as some political plaything. Our government wants to send a loud and clear message to Australia's best and brightest that this government supports clear and transparent research selection processes based on research excellence.

On a practical level, the Minister for Education will be responsible for setting the funding rules that the board must follow when making grant decisions. Importantly, this will be a disallowable legislative instrument and a safeguard against future ministers seeking to circumvent the Australian Research Council board without the oversight of parliament. There will also be some provisions within the legislation for the minister to retain funding decisions as they relate to the approval of nationally significant investments. Importantly, this discretion will not be used for individual research grants in and of themselves, but rather for investment in research as it relates to infrastructure, training, collaboration and helping to move the needle on our nation's broader research efforts. This might include projects similar in nature to the Australian Research Council centres for excellence and industrial transformation research hubs.

Naturally, there are also provisions within the bill for the minister to instruct the Australian Research Council board to not approve a grant or to terminate funding altogether based on national security grounds. If this occurs, the bill stipulates that the minister must notify the parliament and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. The number of times that this occurs will be reported in the Australian Research Council's annual report, demonstrating very clearly our commitment to transparent and accountable process here.

This bill will also change the funding arrangement from that of a special appropriation arrangement to an annual appropriation arrangement. Doing so will provide both funding visibility and confidence for researchers and the university sector.

The bill will also strengthen research integrity measures to support the Australian Research Council functions, reflecting another important recommendation of the review panel. Organisations will be required to enter into funding arrangements with the CEO to receive financial assistance, and the CEO is able to terminate an agreement if the organisation breaches a term or condition. Additionally, the board and the minister may terminate funding approval for breach of an agreement. If an organisation's agreement or approval is terminated there will be powers for recovery of grant amounts, including the ability to set off a debt to the Commonwealth. These measures are appropriate and provide the integrity mechanisms that will allow the Australian Research Council to ensure that Commonwealth funding is being spent as intended. These important and much-needed changes to the Australian Research Council Act are going to be supported, I think, by most fair and reasonable people in this building. I would really question why people would not want to see academic integrity placed at the heart of Australia's research ecosystem.

The response from the sector and key stakeholders have been overwhelmingly positive. There is support from groups such as Innovative Research Universities and the Australasian Council of Deans of Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, and the bill has also received support from Universities Australia, the peak body for universities in this country.

Researchers know that, when it comes to supporting Australian research, it's only a Labor government that has their best interests at heart and actually treats them with the respect that researchers deserve. It's only a Labor government that will not meddle and run political interference with their life's hard work and expertise through calculated ministerial interventions and vetoes. It's only a Labor government that will act in a supportive and transparent way when it comes to elevating Australian research and, in doing so, will help position our researchers at the forefront of discovery and innovation.

I'm really proud of the researchers that live and work in my community. I'm proud of the people that I've worked with through my own research career. I'm proud of this bill before us today, which ensures that academic integrity and freedom and a strong research community remain the bedrock of higher education and research in this country.

Elizabeth Watson-Brown (Ryan, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm speaking today about the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023. While I understand the conversation about integrity, and that's absolutely critical, what I'm going to focus on this afternoon is underfunding. This bill does not address the urgent issue of chronic underfunding of our research professionals and institutions. We're talking about the crucial investment that Australia urgently needs to make in this space to ensure a good future and keep our economy competitive. We cannot afford to fall behind the rest of the world. Last year, the Labor government actually cut spending on research and development to the lowest level in three decades. They actually admitted it. Sadly, for many of us, that doesn't come as a shock. In my own electorate of Ryan, home of the University of Queensland, the hardworking people in higher education have been worn down and undermined for years by ever-reducing funding for important research, research for the betterment of Australia.

It's an ongoing tragedy that what used to be a field of imagination, of creativity, of discovery has become a cruel and competitive race for funding, causing demoralisation, burnout and, let's face it, brain drain. How is this good for the future of Australia?

I have a little local boast here: Laureate Professor Peter Doherty, the recipient of the Nobel Prize for medicine, was a student at Indooroopilly State High School in Ryan, and a teacher and researcher at UQ. That important work that Professor Doherty did is currently translating into new cancer treatments. Where is the support for future Peter Dohertys now? Come on, Australia. Come on, Labor. The rest of the world is moving forward, and we are being left behind here. The status quo is just not going to cut it as we face the exquisite compounding challenges of our time. It's time for common sense to prevail. We need fresh technology, new developments and innovative ideas to meet these challenges. If we don't support and fund essential research and innovation, we're going to be floundering in the dark ages while the rest of the world moves on and, frankly, steals our best minds.

A recent review of the ARC funding revealed that many projects were turned down as 'poor value for money'. Just over 400 grants were approved in 2023. What a convenient excuse—'poor value for money'. Applications fell by 25 per cent this year because researchers know that it's just not worth their time. I'll tell you what's a truly bad deal: a whopping $11.1 billion in offsets for fossil fuel companies. And what have we gained for this colossal investment of Australian taxpayer dollars? Record floods, extreme heatwaves, devastating bushfires. We're paying a pretty hefty price for climate crises, and we're just pouring fuel on the fire. We need to focus our investment in the right place.

This government is sacrificing our kids' futures to instead invest in and prioritise the interests of those puppeteers of our government—the Woodsides, the Santoses, the Chevrons. We all saw that recent data. These corporations are bankrolling the major parties to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they in return are benefiting in the billions. To add insult to injury, these are companies that have to be bailed out by the government, with our money, to stay competitive. That's shameful, and I believe it's economically irrational.

I think our struggling communities have had enough. What about using our hard-earned dollars to invest in a healthy future, rather than killing it? They want to talk about value for money, but let me ask this: is it a good deal when students are shelling out more than ever to attend university? Over 50 per cent of people in their 40s are grappling with enormous HECS debts still, in their 40s. Labor want Australia to remain totally controlled by these big multinational mining corporations. That's the message they send when they hand over $11.1 billion in fossil fuel subsidies each year but peanuts—less than a billion—to publicly funded research.

Hear me out. The only way for Australia to create new industries, to bring manufacturing back onshore and to break the stranglehold that mining corporations have on our economy is to massively increase our investment in research. Compared to other developed economies, Australia spends an absolutely tiny amount on research, and we've ended up with a distorted economy, dangerously reliant on the resources sector. These big mining corporations rip our resources out of the ground, send them overseas—they send the wealth overseas as well, to overseas shareholders—and they hardly employ anyone. But our economy and our political class are desperately reliant upon them.

There is a way out of this, and it is to actually fund research and development publicly at a mass scale, build a high-tech manufacturing base and new jobs in emerging industries. Instead, Australia has been going backwards under both Labor and the LNP. Why would they change that status quo, when the two parties are happy to keep taking millions from their donors in the resources sector and happy to keep opening new coal and gas mines that make the climate crisis worse?

But government isn't just holding back researchers; it's dragging the whole country backwards. Australia needs to support high-quality research that isn't directed by the agendas of massive, and often destructive, for-profit corporations. We shouldn't have to outsource innovation to private companies who sell our own breakthroughs back to us for an astronomical price, the same ones who overwork and underpay the brilliant minds behind these discoveries.

Just take a look at Norway as a case in point. They've actually got it figured out. They make big fossil fuel companies pay their fair share, and education is free, from primary school to university. Australia used to have something like that—free university education. I wouldn't be surprised if half the people in the chamber got their degrees for free. I certainly did, and I'm forever grateful and want that for every Australian.

An honourable member: I haven't got a degree. I left school at 14!

That's fine—a degree in life! Year after year the government chips away at research funding and jacks up university costs. The government effectively tells students—the very ones trying to learn, improve and contribute to Australia—that they don't matter.

Not a single city in Australia is affordable for someone on youth allowance. They're saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of student debt. Even those lucky enough to get full-time work and start paying off their student debt see their balances barely move due to indexation, and when students graduate from degrees in science and research fields, what opportunities are there for them in their field?

Why would any intelligent person pursue a career in research when these roles are now notoriously insecure and underpaid? Why would anyone want their livelihood to be subject to the whims of the ARC, with their tiny budget? Why would anyone want to take the begging bowl and spend hundreds of hours on endless grant applications that have only a very small chance of success? This is not the approach to encourage innovation and a sophisticated economy.

Ultimately, this is what keeps Australia reliant on the resources industry. The major parties and their donors are, of course, happy to keep it that way. That status quo suits them and they see no reason for drastic change. It's time, however, to prioritise our future and the future of our children and grandchildren, invest in education and make Australia a place where everyone can thrive, not just the privileged few. It's time to invest in research that serves the public interest, not the pockets of profit driven giants.

Alison Byrnes (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023. This bill was introduced after the completion of a formal review and extensive community consultation. The Australian Research Council had not been reviewed since it was established in 2001. This bill seeks to address the shortcomings which exist within the existing Research Council funding process. The Australian Research Council review's final report was released on 20 April 2023. It has not taken the Albanese Labor government long to act upon its recommendations.

The Australian Research Council provides advice and support to the Australian government on research matters. It is a central pillar in Australia's research landscape. It also builds partnerships between researchers, industry, government, community organisations and the international community. It is important that the Research Council fund projects of merit. This bill was designed to address this issue.

A modernised role for the Research Council is also reflected by changes to the object of the act so that this clearly defines the important role and place the Australian Research Council has in supporting Australia's research community and landscape. By contrast, the current legislation only talks about grants processing. The Albanese government is committed to backing our universities and providing targeted research grants to ensure the continuation of real research as a vital part of our tertiary institutions. I am proud to be part of a government that has made available $895 million in non-medical research grants for 2023-24.

This government is also committed to principles of accountability in public expenditure. It is important to ensure that the best projects receive assistance. One of the principal objectives of this bill is to ensure the integrity of all future grants processes and ensure the public's faith in government funding. To facilitate this, decisions on funding approvals have been devolved from the minister, as is currently the case, to the Australian Research Council board. The Australian Research Council board is to comprise a CEO and up to six other members who will provide a combination of skills, experience and perspective reflecting the areas of Research Council funding. The minister will appoint the Research Council board, who will, in turn, appoint the CEO, consistent with a policy of meritorious appointment for statutory officers.

The next phase is to establish and appoint members to board committees, including the College of Experts. This body has the role of approving funding on research projects and providing advice to government. This should help to ensure that the best projects are funded and bring to an end the days of ministerial intervention in the grants process. While it will still be open for ministers to direct the board to not approve a grant or to terminate funding based on national security concerns, parliament will be notified of such decisions within 15 days of the decision to terminate a grant being made, and there will need to be good reasons for this to have been done. The minister will also report the exercise of the national security powers to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and offer a private briefing on the reasons. The members of the board will reflect the diversity of the general community and include people of professional credibility and significant standing in one or more fields of research. It is important that we have transparency and that public trust is restored to our research and grants programs. These reforms are part of this vital process. The public needs to be confident that the best projects have been funded and that public moneys have not been wasted.

The recent impact assessment of Australian Research Council funded research has found that every dollar invested in the ARC National Competitive Grants Program generates more than $3 in economic output. Our universities have done great work with Australian Research Council grants. The objective of this bill is to ensure that grant moneys are well spent. Grants provided through the Australian Research Council have been a direct benefit to the electorate of Cunningham.

The University of Wollongong is a fabulous university, and I would like to personally thank the vice-chancellor, Patricia Davidson, for her dynamic leadership of this fine institution. Over the last five years, the University of Wollongong has been awarded more than $71 million through the Australian Research Council. These grants have been used to fund the ARC Training Centre in Energy Technologies for Future Grids, which is looking to address issues currently limiting the growth of renewable energy through innovations that facilitate widespread integration into electricity grids, while maintaining grid stability. It will address the complex and challenging issues currently limiting the growth of renewable energy through innovations that facilitate widespread integrations of the resources into the grid. The ARC Training Centre for Innovative Composites for the Future of Sustainable Mining Equipment is another one that has been funded. It will train industry focused researchers in advanced manufacturing and in how to use new-generation mining equipment and sustainable mining technology. These grants also fund the ARC's Steel Research Hub, which develops new higher-value products and more advanced manufacturing processes to build a stronger and more competitive local industry backed by world-leading research. These grants also fund the ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, which looks to bring First Nations culture to a wider audience.

Of course, Australian Research Council grants are not the only assistance that the Commonwealth provides for universities. I secured investment of $10 million for the Energy Futures Skills Centre, which is a project to train the energy workforce of the future. This will also be located at the University of Wollongong. The University of Wollongong have also received an investment of more than $1 million to study finding ways to keep Australia's grid secure through the renewable energy transformation.

There is also $1.04 million in ARENA grant funding which will support the University of Wollongong's harmonics study to develop a methodology that will help energy grids accommodate various energy outputs, such as wind and solar generation. This is vital work, and it places our University of Wollongong and our TAFE at the forefront of the transition to renewable energy.

The Albanese Labor government has provided funding to grow additional places in STEM courses across universities to help Australia acquire the skilled workforce required to meet the challenges of tomorrow. The University of Wollongong has been allocated an additional 425 places in STEM related courses, designed to attract more students to train in engineering, mathematics, chemistry and physics, which is in addition to our government's funding of an additional 936 university places to train more teachers, nurses and engineers. This is part of an injection of funding of more than $29 million to train Australians under-represented at universities in areas of skills need.

The University of Wollongong was chosen because it has a strong record of working with industry, government, universities and other partners, such as ANSTO, to deliver solutions. Our university has acquired a reputation for excellence in higher education over the 70 years of its existence. The fact that it has received ARC grants and all other grants as part of competitive processes is indicative of the high regard in which our local university is held within the Australian research community. These grants show that its capacity for innovation has not diminished with the passage of time and that it continues to undertake research of great value.

Previously, special appropriation arrangements were made for grants provided through the Australian Research Council. Such vital research undertaken by universities such as ours should not be based on such insecure funding. This bill makes provision for an annual appropriation of funds, which should provide a secure base for the Research Council's work. What is more, this annual appropriation is to be CPI indexed to ensure that the real value of funds provided to the Australian Research Council is retained.

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023. I will be supporting this bill. It enacts the recommendations made by the review of the Australian Research Council, the report of which was handed to the government last year. The review is arguably one of the most critical analyses of the ARC since it was first established in 2001 and recommends some fundamental changes.

First of all—for everybody—what does the ARC itself do? The Australian Research Council is a statutory Commonwealth agency under the ARC Act. Its fundamental purpose since it was established has been to grow knowledge and innovation in the national interest and for the Australian community. This kind of innovation aims to underpin positive environmental, social and economic outcomes, exactly what is needed as we face the climate crisis and transition to a net zero economy. The ARC does this by advising the government on research matters as well as administering the national competitive grants program and the Excellence in Research for Australia and Engagement and Impact Assessment frameworks. The ARC runs various funding schemes, under the banner of linkage programs, which encourage research collaborations between researchers and a range of different styles of organisations, including private enterprise, community organisations and other research agencies.

The ARC also supports industrial transformation research hubs. These engage researchers to investigate new technologies and economic, commercial and social transformations. The ARC brokers crucial partnerships between government, business and academia, international institutions and community organisations, with over 9,000 domestic and international partnerships over the last two decades. An economic impact study commissioned by Universities Australia found that, for every dollar spent on university research and development over the past three decades, Australia's GDP grew by around $5 in present value terms. Put simply, the ARC plays a key role in Australia's research and innovation success, helping achieve greater national benefit for Australia. However, it is right that we take stock of the ARC and ensure that it is well positioned to further advance research in the years and decades ahead, hence the review commissioned by the government.

I know that the government agreed to all of the review's recommendations in principle. Some of these recommendations require legislative amendments, and they are addressed in this bill to amend the ARC Act. At the core of these recommendations is the most important aspect of the reform this bill does. It removes the minister as decision-maker for who and what will be funded. Essentially, it removes political interference.

This bill also establishes an ARC board. This was recommended by the review as a key way to strengthen the independence, governance and integrity of the ARC. Under the proposed legislation, the board will be appointed by the minister. There are criteria to ensure that those appointed to the board are suitably qualified and have the appropriate background for such an appointment, and at least one member must be a First Nations person. The board will appoint the ARC's chief executive officer and approve the appointment of members to board committees, including the College of Experts. The board will approve research grants under the National Competitive Grants Program, and this is at the crux of the change in this bill—currently these decisions are made by the minister. So it's incredibly important that we take away political interference, but we must be mindful that this board be fit for purpose with the appropriate skills as well as that it has good diversity, gender equity and First Nations representation.

This bill is important because the political interference that has dogged ARC grants funding in the past needs to end. We saw it under the previous coalition government, where time and again ministers would veto applications in relation to certain research projects based on their own views and preferences. This isn't how you unleash innovation. This isn't how scientific discoveries are made, so I welcome the change and commend the government for its commitment to implementing the review changes in full.

As I noted previously while speaking on the ARC, we're quite lucky to have various innovation and research hubs in Warringah that support this vision of a new economy, from the Lakeba Future Hub to SEVENmile Venture Lab. They're incubating the next iteration of products, services and businesses, and Warringah's workforce is supporting the new innovative economy. In fact, 23.9 per cent of people in my electorate are engaged in professional, scientific and technical services. They are in fact the leading employer in the electorate.

So, noting the importance of what the ARC helps deliver in innovation, I also take the opportunity to call for greater investment in Australia's research and innovation. Australia is falling further and further behind the rest of the world when it comes to innovation. We were once ranked 17th in the world, according to the Global Innovation Index. In 2023, we ranked 24th. The spend from the Australian government has consistently declined relative to the economy for more than a decade, dropping from the OECD average of 2.24 per cent of GDP in 2008 to now sit at 1.68 per cent of GDP. It is too low. We simply will not be part of the technologies and the innovation of the future unless we make sure we are investing into R&D and innovation.

A key driver in this drop in focus on innovation is the drop of government spending when it comes to R&D, which slumped to its lowest-ever share of GDP at 0.49 per cent in 2022-23. So whilst I welcome this bill, it's clear we need to take political interference out of allocation of research and grants. We need to make sure that these projects get up because they are scientific, because they bring something new. They cannot just be pandering to the political ideology of those that are in power at the time. We have to have an open mind to these problems of the future. We also need to focus on innovation and R&D, so I call on the government: we must lift that percentage of spending in relation to the GDP. If not, we will continue to fall further and further behind other OECD countries. I know that this is important for so many people in Warringah, because many of them work in this sector.

I support this bill and the changes it makes to the ARC structure. It will help set up the ARC for future success and, therefore, Australia's success in scientific research, discovery and innovation. We have a long history, we have amazing technologies that have come out of Australia—the cochlear ear implant, solar panels—but we lost them, so we have to do better when it comes to research, innovation and then transitioning those ideas and those discoveries to being able to actually stay in Australia and benefit Australia. So I commend the government, but I urge them to do more.

Question unresolved.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.