Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Senator Sinodinos. I refer to the Turnbull government's decision to cut around 200 positions at the CSIRO. Won't these cuts to the CSIRO strip away the organisation's remaining climate science capacity and reduce the monitoring of climate change in the southern hemisphere? Can the minister confirm that both the Prime Minister and Mr Pyne signed off on these cuts.

Arthur Sinodinos (NSW, Liberal Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank honourable senator for her question. The short answer to your question is 'no' and I will explain why. First and foremost, what has happened with the CSIRO in this announcement is an operational decision of the organisation. After an extensive review by the management of CSIRO, they stated the need to reorganise the organisation to better fulfil its mission as outlined in its strategic plan. Advice from the CSIRO is that the realignment will take roughly two years and that there will be no net job losses across the agency. As such, any suggestion that this is the result of changes to the CSIRO budget is incorrect. And it is not the role of the Prime Minister or of the minister for science to sign off on staffing changes of an independent agency.

I can also add that there is a realignment of activity within the climate change division and that the stories reported in the media today, including in the Sydney Morning Herald, to which you are referring are factually wrong. First and foremost, is CSIRO will continue their relationship with the Department of the Environment on the National Environmental Science Program. It will still be spending $83 million a year on climate change research and the oceans and atmosphere division of the CSIRO will continue to employ more than 300 people. However, there will be a stronger focus on abatement and mitigation strategies. In the words of the CSIRO CEO, Larry Marshall:

We have spent probably a decade trying to answer the question is the climate changing … After Paris that question has been answered. The next question now is what do we do about it.

Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. At the Paris climate conference, Mr Turnbull said:

We do not doubt the implications of the science, or the scale of the challenge.

So if Mr Turnbull believes in the science of climate change, why has he cut the jobs of so many Australian climate scientists?

Arthur Sinodinos (NSW, Liberal Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can only repeat: we will continue to spend about $83 million a year on climate change mitigation, adaptation and research. The excellent climate science of CSIRO has provided guidance to government and industry across a range of climate change sciences. Its collaborative work on global and national measurement and modelling of the climate has been outstanding. We are continuing to be committed to research on climate and climate modelling and we have provided $23.9 million over six years to establish the Earth Systems and Climate Change Hub under the National Environmental Sciences Program.

Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. How does the Prime Minister reconcile the abolition of 200 more science jobs with his claim of support for science and innovation? Aren't these drastic cuts just another example of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull saying one thing and doing the exact opposite?

Arthur Sinodinos (NSW, Liberal Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All I can say is that the Prime Minister, the foreign minister and the Minister for the Environment in Paris did Australia proud. They went there and stood up for the Australian way of dealing with climate change. That is what they did—the Australian way.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order: direct relevance. The question had nothing to do with what the Prime Minister, the foreign minister and whoever else did in Paris. It was a question that said:

How does the Prime Minister reconcile the abolition of 200 more science jobs with his claim support for science and innovation? Aren't these drastic cuts just another example of Prime Minister Turnbull saying one thing and doing the exact opposite?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Cabinet Secretary, I will remind you of the question and inform you that you have 43 seconds in which to answer.

Arthur Sinodinos (NSW, Liberal Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can only repeat: the advice from the CSIRO is that there will be no net job losses within the organisation. What they are doing is realigning their resources with their priorities internally. In the case of the climate change situation, they are looking at mitigation and adaptation measures.