Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research, upon notice, on 7 June 2012:

In regard to exploratory partnership discussions between the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and various entities:

(1) On what occasions have discussions taken place between ANSTO and the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, regarding the establishment of an ANSTO sponsored Collaborative Clinical Radiopharmacy Research Facility at the intended Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre in Melbourne, and what documentation of the discussions, if any, exists.

(2) Have ANSTO funds been allocated to the proposed partnership with the University of Queensland's (UQ) Education Investment Fund bid for a Centre for Advanced Imaging (CAI).

(3) Does the proposed CAI also have funding as a node in the National Imaging Facility (NIF).

(4) Is there any risk that the recently announced commercial venture between CAI and Axiom Molecular will infringe on competitive neutrality provisions.

(5) Do the contractual arrangements make it clear that competitive neutrality must be respected in any commercial spin-offs.

(6) What particular expertise did the ANSTO Board identify at CAI that warranted the use of ANSTO funds to support the collaboration.

(7) Has UQ previously owned or had access to a cyclotron.

(8) Who are the lead researchers at CAI in charge of the PET [Positron Emission Tomography] tracer discovery and commercialisation program.

(9) Did the agreement with the Austin Health based Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, regarding joint competitive research, involve funding from ANSTO; if so: (a) when were the funds provided; (b) does the contract provide for a loan or a grant; and (c) are there any competitive neutrality considerations.

(10) Is the intent of the arrangement to supply Copper-64 (Cu-64), Iodine 124 (I-124), Zirconium-89 (Zr-89), and Yttrium-86 (Y-86) for research and clinical development, and what has been supplied to date.

(11) Did collaboration with the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (SCGH) in Western Australia for cyclotron targetry involve ANSTO funding; if so, how much and under what provisions.

(12) Given that the Minister has noted that the arrangement would involve Cu 64, Zr-89 and radionuclide development research, how many doses have been dispatched for research or clinical use to date.

(13) Is there a reason why SCGH and the Ludwig Institute are both working on Cu-64 and Zr-89, when isotope half lives allow for distribution throughout Australia.

(14) Is ANSTO aware that: (a) Cyclopharm in Sydney has had the capacity to produce Cu-64 for several years; and (b) the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre has been producing Y-86, Cu-64 and I-124 with its research cyclotron.

(15) Were the Cooperative Research Centre for Biomedical Imaging Development (CRC BID) or the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre consulted by the ANSTO Board before the decision to allocate funds to the Ludwig Institute was made.

(16) Why did the ANSTO Board decide not to pursue the proposal for a CRC BID, ANSTO and Cyclotek co-funded project to make Cu-64, I 124, Zr 89, and Y 86 available using commercial hardware supplied through CRC BID partner GE Healthcare, projected to cost less than $350 000 per contributor.

(17) Did any ANSTO Board member with a potential conflict absent themself in discussions concerning the allocation of funds to the Ludwig Institute; if so, was the act recorded in the minutes.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:

(1) As noted in response to Senate Estimates question SI-155 (Supplementary Budget Estimates Hearing, 19 October 2011), there have been informal partnership discussions on this topic. There have been no recent discussions on the matter.

(2) Yes.

(3) Yes.

(4) This question should be directed to the parties to the commercial venture.

(5) This question should be directed to the parties to the commercial venture.

(6) Please see answer to Senate Estimates question SI-155.

(7) This question should be directed to the University of Queensland.

(8) This question should be directed to the Centre for Advanced Imaging.

(9) As noted in response to Senate Estimates question SI-155, ANSTO has contributed funding as part of a collaboration with Austin Health/Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research for a competitive research cyclotron access for novel radioisotopes on an open proposal basis to the Australian research community. This covered the cost of hot cells, targetry and radiochemical equipment. The cyclotron was already funded and established by Austin Health/Ludwig, meaning that ANSTO's funding leveraged this underlying investment. In addition, ANSTO receives a weekly delivery of one of four radioisotopes (for research purposes) and training in solid targetry which would not otherwise be available to ANSTO staff.

(a) June 2010 and February 2012.

(b) Neither.

(c) No.

(10) Yes. Cu-64 and I-124 have been supplied to date.

(11) Please see answer to Senate Estimates Question SI-155

(12) The University of Queensland, the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and ANSTO have received Cu-64 and Zr-89.

(13) ANSTO cannot answer this answer this question on behalf of Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital or the Ludwig Institute.

(14) (a) ANSTO is unaware whether Cyclopharm can successfully produce Cu-64, (b) Yes.

(15) No.

(16) ANSTO is not aware of any such formal proposal being made.

(17) As noted in response to Senate Estimates question SI-155, as required by section 27F of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997, ANSTO requires any director who has a material personal interest in a matter that relates to ANSTO's affairs to give the other directors notice of the interest. To that end, ANSTO maintains a Board register of interests, which is updated at each Board meeting.