Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Women's Issues) Share this | Hansard source

in reply—In concluding the second reading debate on the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2006 I want to thank members for their contributions. This bill amends the Australian Research Council Act 2001 to implement changes to the Australian Research Council’s governance arrangements in response to the government’s endorsement of the recommendations of the Review of the Corporate Governance of Statutory Authorities and Office Holders by John Uhrig.

The assessment of the ARC against the recommendations of the Uhrig Review found that the functions of the ARC are best suited to the executive management template. The bill will enhance the ARC’s governance arrangements to make it fully consistent with this template. This includes retiring the ARC Board and transferring the majority of the board’s functions and responsibilities to the Chief Executive Officer of the ARC. The bill allows for the creation of and appointments to designated committees which will provide advice to the chief executive officer. The chief executive officer will receive input on research matters directly from an advisory committee which will be created as a designated committee under the amended provisions of the act. As I indicated in my second reading speech, the advisory committee will not look at individual grant applications. It will focus on providing strategic advice on matters related to research and the operations of the ARC. I understand that the ARC board has given some consideration to the functions and membership of the advisory committee and I will be grateful in receiving their thoughts on this matter.

As is the case under the current ARC Act, I will continue to be responsible for approving or not approving recommendations for research funding. The College of Experts will be maintained as a designated committee as it currently is. It will continue to play a key role in the ARC’s peer review processes, particularly through the consideration of applications for funding under the discovery projects program.

I have stated publicly that I want to be able to have faith in the independence and the integrity of the peer review processes. The recent Australian National Audit Office report on the ARC’s management of research grants states that the ARC has a substantial peer review process in place with a strong focus on research merit and national benefit enabling the ARC to select and fund high-calibre research.

Way back in 2000 during the debate about the establishment of the ARC as an independent statutory agency, I noted in this House that the ARC would be a provider of strategic policy advice to the government on matters related to research. This is not changing under the new arrangements. The College of Experts will make funding recommendations to the chief executive officer, who will in turn provide me with advice. This will expedite the ARC’s funding processes, provide greater certainty to researchers about the future of their ARC funding and allow the ARC to respond quickly and flexibly to emerging priorities.

I note the debate in the House last month surrounding the National Health and Medical Research Council Amendment Bill 2006. Some seem to think that the changes to the NHMRC and the ARC are wildly different. In fact, where the ARC and NHMRC have similar functions, the proposed governance arrangements of the ARC and the NHMRC will be similar. In both cases, it will be the minister who will be responsible for accepting or not accepting the recommendations of the chief executive officer. In both cases, it will be the chief executive officer who receives advice on the competitiveness of research-funding proposals.

The NHMRC will also have some governance arrangements that differ from the ARC. For example, the ARC does not have a committee comparable to the Embryo Research Licensing Committee, and nor should it. The ARC is also not required to issue regulatory guidelines. These arrangements make it necessary for the additional level of independence from the minister that those specific committees have.

The changes to the ARC and NHMRC indicate that the outcomes of the recommendations of the Uhrig Review are being effectively implemented by government, ensuring clear lines of accountability from the minister down to the agency, and implementing better corporate governance in the public sector.

As announced in the 2004 $5.3 billion package Backing Australia’s Ability, the Australian government signalled its ongoing commitment to the role of the ARC in the national innovation system by continuing to maintain the doubling of its program funding that was announced in 2001. Under the package, the government committed an additional $1.5 billion over five years for the ARC to 2010-2011. This commitment reflects the value and importance to the Australian government of funding high-quality research and maintaining the integrity of the ARC. I commend the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2006 to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.

See this speech in context