Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research, upon notice, on 7 June 2012:

In regard to exploratory partnership discussions between the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and various entities:

(1) On what occasions have discussions taken place between ANSTO and the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, regarding the establishment of an ANSTO sponsored Collaborative Clinical Radiopharmacy Research Facility at the intended Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre in Melbourne, and what documentation of the discussions, if any, exists.

(2) Have ANSTO funds been allocated to the proposed partnership with the University of Queensland's (UQ) Education Investment Fund bid for a Centre for Advanced Imaging (CAI).

(3) Does the proposed CAI also have funding as a node in the National Imaging Facility (NIF).

(4) Is there any risk that the recently announced commercial venture between CAI and Axiom Molecular will infringe on competitive neutrality provisions.

(5) Do the contractual arrangements make it clear that competitive neutrality must be respected in any commercial spin-offs.

(6) What particular expertise did the ANSTO Board identify at CAI that warranted the use of ANSTO funds to support the collaboration.

(7) Has UQ previously owned or had access to a cyclotron.

(8) Who are the lead researchers at CAI in charge of the PET [Positron Emission Tomography] tracer discovery and commercialisation program.

(9) Did the agreement with the Austin Health based Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, regarding joint competitive research, involve funding from ANSTO; if so: (a) when were the funds provided; (b) does the contract provide for a loan or a grant; and (c) are there any competitive neutrality considerations.

(10) Is the intent of the arrangement to supply Copper-64 (Cu-64), Iodine 124 (I-124), Zirconium-89 (Zr-89), and Yttrium-86 (Y-86) for research and clinical development, and what has been supplied to date.

(11) Did collaboration with the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital (SCGH) in Western Australia for cyclotron targetry involve ANSTO funding; if so, how much and under what provisions.

(12) Given that the Minister has noted that the arrangement would involve Cu 64, Zr-89 and radionuclide development research, how many doses have been dispatched for research or clinical use to date.

(13) Is there a reason why SCGH and the Ludwig Institute are both working on Cu-64 and Zr-89, when isotope half lives allow for distribution throughout Australia.

(14) Is ANSTO aware that: (a) Cyclopharm in Sydney has had the capacity to produce Cu-64 for several years; and (b) the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre has been producing Y-86, Cu-64 and I-124 with its research cyclotron.

(15) Were the Cooperative Research Centre for Biomedical Imaging Development (CRC BID) or the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre consulted by the ANSTO Board before the decision to allocate funds to the Ludwig Institute was made.

(16) Why did the ANSTO Board decide not to pursue the proposal for a CRC BID, ANSTO and Cyclotek co-funded project to make Cu-64, I 124, Zr 89, and Y 86 available using commercial hardware supplied through CRC BID partner GE Healthcare, projected to cost less than $350 000 per contributor.

(17) Did any ANSTO Board member with a potential conflict absent themself in discussions concerning the allocation of funds to the Ludwig Institute; if so, was the act recorded in the minutes.