Australia needs its scientists. Photo: CSIRO.
The thing about science is you never know where it might lead.
Which is why prioritising some research areas over others can be an uncertain business.
But that’s what CSIRO is doing, and has been doing for some time.
The latest round of job cuts is nothing new. For as long as I can remember, CSIRO has been redefining its mission, adjusting to shrinking budgets and justifying having to let people go.
Its new list of national priorities includes what you’d expect – energy transition, climate change, advanced tech, including, of course, AI, boosting farm productivity through technology, and biosecurity.
There is also a vague one about applying disruptive science and engineering to unlock the unknown and solve unanswered questions.
Where does the environment fit in all this?
Apparently, that’s one of the areas that will take a hit, which is a worry for a country facing massive species and habitat loss.
What is disturbing about the latest announcement is that the language from a Labor Government is the same as its conservative predecessors.
There have been comments that these cuts are worse than those under Abbott in 2014.
The Albanese Government can throw some money at CSIRO the day after the cuts are announced, using the same pea-and-thimble trick used before to say how well science is being funded, but the reality is that funding has been falling for 40 years.
In 1982, CSIRO funding accounted for 0.16 per cent of Australia’s gross domestic product (GDP). By 2023–24, this had dropped to a new low of just 0.03 per cent.
CSIRO isn’t on its own; research funding in other organisations and universities has also decreased.
It’s 60 years since Donald Horne coined the ironic phrase “the lucky country”.
Australia continues to ride its luck, sitting on a diminishing mountain of riches as it outsources its future.
Despite this, Australia still manages to chalk up its share of inventions and innovations. CSIRO gave the world Wi-Fi.
One could only guess what else could have been achieved if our leaders had taken a longer-term view of the benefits of investment in science and research.
Australia should have been, and should still be, ploughing its wealth back into science, not penny-pinching.
Other countries that have prioritised research, such as China and South Korea, and are reaping obvious dividends.
If we want to be a smart country, cutting public science is a dumb way to go about it.
It is especially disappointing that a Labor government should continue to make the same mistakes, and it seems there are those on the inside who feel the same way, such as former science minister Ed Husic, who noted of government that “if you want to find the money, you can find it”.
He added, “We found $600 million for a football team in Papua New Guinea. I’m sure we’ll be able to find the money for our national science agency, because that is an investment … in our future capability as a country.”
In the background is the spectre of AUKUS, with its dubious defence benefits, as well as the sheer cost and the resources it will divert from other research investments.
The challenges facing the nation and the world are immense. We should be throwing all we can at the possible solutions. Not crying poor, and having this recurring conversation about cutbacks at CSIRO or the ANU or whatever other institution.
