Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is for the minister for ageing, health, disability and the NDIS. The Medical Research Future Fund was set up to be a $20 billion fund which was to disburse $1 billion a year. It's now worth $24 billion, but you're spending only $650 million a year while our researchers are struggling with cost pressures and geopolitical uncertainties. Will you release this funding? Will you help our medical researchers achieve their potential and work for the benefit of all Australians?

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks to the member for Kooyong for that question. I want to acknowledge her esteemed career as a clinician researcher in paediatric neurology before coming to this place over many years—part of, frankly, the amazing Melbourne community of health and medical research that has helped over decades make Victoria one of the leading jurisdictions in medical research in the country. Consistently winning more than 40 per cent of NHMRC grants, Victoria really is the centre of our health and medical research ecosystem. It pains me to say it as a South Australian, but it absolutely is. The MRFF has really added to that capacity in a significant way. I pay credit to the former government for setting up the MRFF in their term.

I tried to give the Leader of the Opposition a compliment, but she couldn't quite stand it. It flowed from a review I commissioned 14 years ago that Simon McKeon, who was Australian of the Year at the time, conducted. Frankly, our budget for medical research was topping out then at about $650 million a year. The recommendations were to lift that significantly. It's now $1½ billion a year because of the MRFF as well as increases in the NHMRC budget. That's almost 2½ times at the budget that we had at the time the McKeon review was set up. It also established, as the member knows, a priority-driven part of research so that priorities around brain cancer, dementia, mental health and suchlike could be subject to research funding and not just investigator initiated research from the NHMRC.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Kooyong on a point of order.

Monique Ryan (Kooyong, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a pretty simple question: is the minister going to disburse more money from a fund which is overfunded to the tune of $4 billion already?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can appreciate the member would like a direct answer. But I need to make sure the minister is being directly relevant under the standing orders, and so far he is. He has another minute and 12 seconds to address the other parts of the question, and I'll ask him to make sure his answer is directly relevant.

Mark Butler (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member asked about the addition of capability for researchers, and I was trying to address the fact that not only is there 2½ times as much money; there's also a priority-driven stream of research funding now that I think is a real addition to what we've had for decades. The member is right: there has been a policy decision in government, going back to the former government, to cap allocations from the MRFF at $650 million a year—which, as I said, with the $850 million budget of the NHMRC, adds up to that $1½ billion. I know there is a debate within the research community about that. That debate will play out as part of the development of a national strategy for health and medical research. A draft of that strategy is due to be published very shortly, and I'm sure there'll be a discussion about the maximum allocation. Also, the Treasurer and finance minister have just conducted their 10-year statutory review of the MRFF, and that review will be published shortly as well.