Senate debates

Thursday, 1 March 2012

Bills

Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2011; Second Reading

1:32 pm

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I am giving you some warning, Senator Conroy. You have advisers who might be able to help you. You do not know much about the NBN, but you are in charge of that, so I assume you have some advisers that might assist you there and that you have advisers on this bill that might be able to assist you. I just want to ask a couple of questions—I will not keep the Senate long—about research grants. The figures that I have are for the five years ending 2009 and I would be interested in what they have been since that time. I would also be interested in knowing how much research money has gone to scientists who have a different view on the cause of the changing climate of the world.

So, not wanting to keep the chamber too long with this contribution, I again endorse my colleagues' words about how uplifting and how great our Australian scientists are and how Australia, to use the vernacular, punches well above its weight when it comes to scientific research and the things that clever Australians—clever us—have invented, contributed to and helped with over many years. I will not individualise the fields of work that our scientists have contributed to because it is too wide, but we have been very good and the research grants program is essential so they can be provided those funds. So we support this amendment bill. But I do mention again, in relation to grants for climate change research, that they should be evenly spread for those who make application—not even evenly spread, but there should be some money for those who have a different view and want to research it. The only way, as any scientist will know, that you can really research things is with a bit of financial support to help with your research and with your living expenses while you are doing that research.

I am sure a lot of this $200 million odd that has gone to scientists who share the government's view on climate change and the causes thereof has been very good research. I am sure it has. But I would like someone to go through and identify in the information I have and the information I will be seeking just how many of those grants have gone to people who do not believe that human emissions are the cause of the changing climate that we are all experiencing in this world. It was scientists who told us it was going to get drier in the south. Some people were talking about one-metre increases in the sea level in the foreseeable future and there were outrageous claims promoted by Senator Brown in the Greens political party.

Science and research needs to be given without fear or favour. People need to be encouraged to challenge existing contem­porary views that are held by a lot of people. The only way we improve in this world—the only way we improve in our lives and the things we can do—is by challenging existing theories, proposals and presentations and to encourage argument to understand just what happens. By denying some scientists support to do that, I do not think we do ourselves a favour and we certainly do not do our learning and research areas any favours.

Comments

No comments