Hot topics                    

Wednesday 14 May 2008

RAPID ROUNDUP: Budget 2008 – Response from the scientific community

As the new Australian Labor Government announces the details of its first budget, the AusSMC is collating the views of scientists on a range of issues.  Feel free to use the quotes provided below in your budget stories. 

If you wish to speak to one of these experts please call the AusSMC on 08 8207 7415 or email us.

The Government’s Budget page is at www.budget.gov.au

Professor Stuart Cunningham is President of the Council for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (CHASS).

"This budget has delivered what people expected.  It reins in expenditure, while investing for the future.

Good news for the tertiary sector is the creation of the Education Investment Fund (EIF) of $11 billion.  Both the interest and capital from this fund will be used to restore crumbling infrastructure in the university system.

This will be supplemented by a special one-off Better Universities Renewal Fund of $500 million.  BURF is earmarked for capital expenditure on facilities to support teaching, research and student amenities.

The Government has honoured and funded its pre-election commitments on fellowships and scholarships, doubling the number of postgraduate scholarships available to higher degree research students by 2012.

Should some of this additional funding have been used to increase the value of the PhD scholarship?  Analysis by CHASS and CAPA show that in 1992 the scholarship was 44% of average weekly earnings, but today it is 34%.  This year the scholarship dropped below the Henderson Poverty Line. 

The Future Fellowships scheme for top mid-career researchers will offer 1,000 Australian and international mid-career researchers four-year fellowships of up to $140,000 a year, with top-up funding to support infrastructure and equipment.

Much of the action in the tertiary sector is anticipated to occur in the next Budget, in May 2009.  By then a series of reviews and inquiries will be complete, and the Government will have all the evidence it needs to frame new policies. 

These reviews include the Cutler inquiry into the National Innovation System, the Bradley review of Australian Higher Education, and the House of Representatives inquiry into research training and research workforce issues in Australian universities.

CHASS expects that over time the artificial (and unfortunate) divide between the humanities, arts and social sciences; and the natural sciences will weaken.  As Kevin Rudd said in his closing address to the 2020 Conference on 20 April 2008:

'This false divide between the arts and science, between the arts and industry, between the arts and the economy: we’ve actually got to put that to bed.  As if creativity is somehow this thing which only applies to the arts, and innovation is this thing over here which applies uniquely to the sciences, or technology, or to design.  This is actually again a false dichotomy: it’s just not like that. 

Our ambition should be to create and to foster a creative imaginative Australia because so much of the economy of the twenty-first century is going to require that central faculty.'

The Arts sector is steady as she goes, with some small but welcome increases (resale royalty rights, funds for young and emerging artists, funding for Screen Australia and the National Film and Sound Archive).  This sector may also benefit from the results of the Innovation Review."

Professor Ken Baldwin is President of the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS).

"While no one in the science or higher education sectors really believed this year’s budget would go beyond the election promises, it was good to see the anticipated initiatives in the budget.  These include HECS incentives for science students and teachers, and the career path opportunities established through the 1000 Future Fellowships programme.

In addition, the unexpected $500 million one-off investment in university infrastructure from the 2007 / 2008 surplus, and the consolidation of HEEF, will address some of the huge backlog and the ongoing infrastructure and maintenance requirements.

However, that leaves many other critical issues to be addressed in May 2009, notably providing more funding per science and technology student place; increasing the number of international PhD scholarships; a new funding model for universities that encourages knowledge transfer; funding the full costs of research providing infrastructure funding over the long term; and boosting industry innovation.

There are multiple reviews underway, and these are expected to be the launch pad of a new policy and funding environment for the 2009 budget process."

Professor Kurt Lambeck is President of the Australian Academy of Science.

"In the lead in to the budget the Treasurer indicated that there would be no rabbits pulled out of hats.  He was correct, at a minimum in so far as science and technology are concerned.

Innovation gets only mentioned in three places: in connection with the Future Fellowships, with new energy solutions, and in the context of new Enterprise Connect Innovation Centres. 

The previously announced investments in Future Fellowships and in postgraduate awards were confirmed.  These are substantial investments that meet urgent needs.

On climate change there were no surprises either, with the budget including measures totalling $2.3 billion budgeted over 5 years towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions, towards adapting to climate change, and towards the development of renewable energy resources.  These are also significant developments but perhaps do not reflect the urgency for putting existing S&T into known renewable and/or clean energy solutions.

The additional funding announced for education is also as previously announced, with little encouragement that much is earmarked for higher education since the urgent needs for investment in that sector were not recognised by promises in the pre-election period. 

The major new and important component is the announcement of the three Investment Funds: the Building Australia Fund, the Education Investment Fund, and the Health and Hospital Funds.

Of these the Education Fund of $11 billion incorporates the previous government's $6 billion Higher Education Fund but now includes skills and TAFE colleges so it remains to be seen whether universities will be better off.  What has changed is that there is a greater commitment to increasing the size of the funds in the future and to allow expenditure of part of the capital if seen to be appropriate.

As promised, the budget focussed on election promises made and as a result we should not have been be surprised that the words science and technology were barely mentioned.  But some recognition that infrastructure extends beyond ports, roads and rail, that the development of the technologies to underpin the requirements of the future also has been much neglected would have made our wait for the innovation revolution more bearable.

It places all the more urgency on the various innovation and research reviews announced to be completed well in advance of the next budget preparations if we are not to lose another year in, what by the Government’s own recognition, is an urgent task."

Rebecca James is CEO of Research Australia.

"The Federal Government’s $10 billion fund to support investment in hospitals, health care technology and medical research is an important first step in investing in the future health of Australia. The renewed commitment to a growth in funding for the National Health and Medical Research Council is welcomed.

Future fellowships for outstanding mid-career researchers, ($326 million over four years) and a doubling of postgraduate scholarships for higher degree research students, offer the prospect of providing much needed assistance for researchers from many disciplines, including medical researchers.

In addition to the investment fund as announced today, the sector is looking to a doubling of funding for the NHMRC from 2010 to maintain Australia’s leading edge in health and medical research.
Today’s budget clearly identifies health as a key priority for government."

Professor Thomas Maschmeyer is Federation Fellow at the School of Chemistry, University of Sydney.

"The simple message would be: Mandate renewable energy targets (biofuels, solar, etc.) with a phased-in approach to give the investment community security so that money will flow into R&D as well as into the building of electricity generating facilities and biofuels plants - Germany is doing very well with this approach and are now world-leaders in wind AND solar (they came from behind and until legislation was introduced nothing was going to happen), furthermore the first world-scale biomass (waste, non-edible) to gasoline plant is just about to open there as well."

ON CLIMATE CHANGE

Professor Barry Brook is the Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change at the University of Adelaide’s School of Earth and Environmental Sciences.

"The budget is a fantastic start to getting serious about tackling climate change and environmental sustainability. There are plenty of big challenges in these arenas to deal with over the next few decades, but to do so realistically, you have to start from a solid base of logical and innovative funding programs. The 2008 Budget delivers just this.

It is not just the substantial dollar value of these programs - it is how they are targeted. For instance, there is a strong emphasis on initiatives to encourage energy efficiency. This is a real no-brainer, and yet remarkably, has never been adequately addressed in previous budgets. These are initiatives that help people or businesses overcome the short-term higher costs of investing in more efficient power systems and appliances, and then cumulatively save power, year in, year out - eventuating in massive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions over the long term, and big savings. A win-win.

Similarly for biodiversity conservation, there is a focus on building resilience into the National reserve system - without sufficient investment in this sort of planning and on-ground management, our natural heritage will slip away as climate change continues to bite and other threats such as land use change and invasive species continue to stress species. It is about prioritising the conservation of our natural assests and optimising decisions in the face of inevitable future uncertainty. This costs, and the 2008 budget provides significant funding to allow exploration and implementation of these difficult choices in a realistic way.

In sum, I have no hesitation in saying it is the most environmentally responsible Budget ever delivered in Australia.

Climate change is of course a huge and ongoing issue, involving mitigation of emissions, compensation for those impacted by these changes, and funding the challenges of adapting to inevitable committed change. The upcoming emissions trading scheme will need to build significantly upon the 2008 Budget, to get Australia on track to halting growth in our emissions and starting the rapid path towards a largely de-carbonised economy. One Budget obviously can't do this. But one Budget which doesn't even start on this path can derail the process. Happily, this is a Budget that takes the first real step forward, rather than standing still or going backwards, on this most critical of issues for our long-term economic and environmental sustainability."

Professor Ian Lowe, School of Science at Griffith University and president of the Australian Conservation Foundation.

"The Budget broadly honours the new government’s election promises in the areas of environment, climate change and water. There are some long-overdue initiatives to improve the efficiency of using energy and water. But the government has missed its opportunity to set the broad strategic direction for the future by cutting the huge subsidies of fossil fuel supply and use. It has delivered on election commitments, but these do not go nearly far enough to restore the Murray-Darling system or prevent dangerous climate change.

There are some very good initiatives in the Budget. I particularly welcome the $14 million program to improve the efficiency of electrical appliances, the $26 million funding for solar rebates brought forward to speed up installation of solar energy and the rebates to encourage landlords to insulate rental properties. These moves provide economic benefits as well as slowing climate change. The funding for water projects will support some very good initiatives like the Adelaide parklands water recycling project, but significant amounts will also be spent on desalination plants in areas where improved efficiency would be a more cost-effective use of tax dollars. The support for renewable energy is counter-balanced by an equal allocation to 'clean coal', which is unlikely to deliver greenhouse pollution reductions as fast as we need.

Since the Budget has done nothing to reduce public subsidies of greenhouse pollution, I hope this crucial issue will be tackled in the forthcoming review of the tax system. It has been estimated that the fringe benefits tax concession on company cars produces about as much greenhouse pollution as a medium-sized coal-fired power station. ACF has pointed out that the Budget has allocated about $2 billion to climate change projects, while the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme costs taxpayers about $5 billion a year to discourage the mining and trucking industries from switching to cleaner transport options. There is a lot more that needs to be done if we are serious about climate change."