Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Science and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement Amendment Bill 2005. It amends the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement Act 1970 to incorporate the 2005 supplementary agreement to the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement. This bill allows for ratification of the supplementary agreement and for the eventual termination of both the original Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement and the supplementary agreement on 30 June 2010. This bill also provides for the transfer of ownership and control of the Anglo-Australian telescope to Australia. Finally, it formalises the United Kingdom’s funding levels for the telescope as per the 2005 supplementary agreement until transfer of ownership to Australia occurs in 2010. Under the agreement, the Anglo-Australian telescope has so far been funded on an equal basis by Australia and the UK. The supplementary agreement changes this situation to allow the UK to decrease its funding to the telescope in the lead-up to transfer of ownership to Australia.

What is most alarming about this bill and the former Minister for Education, Science and Training’s comments is that neither guarantees present funding levels to the telescope. The 2005 supplementary agreement could in fact result in a funding cut to the Anglo-Australian telescope, because the Australian government is not making up for the shortfall in funding as the United Kingdom reduces its investment in the telescope in the lead-up to the 2010 handover. The scientific community is rightly concerned about the government’s lack of commitment to an excellent research facility. This government’s contribution to science and research in this country has involved cuts to university funding, vetoing research grants it does not like and, lately, allowing the position of Chief Scientist to remain vacant for almost a year, so we should not be surprised by this latest cut to excellent research.

The withdrawal of the UK from the agreement offers a unique opportunity for Australia to expand its research effort and output in astronomy. Australian astronomers will now be able to spend more observing time at the telescope, because the agreement allows time to each country relative to its funding contribution. But Australian scientists could miss out if the government does not guarantee higher funding levels for the telescope.

The original agreement, signed on 25 September 1969, enabled the construction of the Anglo-Australian telescope at Siding Springs, near Coonabarabran in New South Wales. Its mirror diameter of 3.9 metres and state-of-the-art design made it one of the largest and most sophisticated optical telescopes in existence at the time. Thirty years later the excellent design, a long period of stable funding and a continuing program of technical enhancements have meant that the telescope remains at the leading edge of astronomical research, against stiff international competition. Staff at the telescope are considered world leaders in many areas of astronomical instrumentation and are often asked to provide advice to other organisations and build instruments for their telescopes.

But the new generation of telescopes, with mirrors that are eight metres or more in diameter, is closing in on telescopes like the Anglo-Australian telescope. The UK ended its involvement with the Anglo-Australian telescope because it is shifting its funding to the next-generation, eight-metre optical telescopes at the European Southern Observatory and the Gemini Observatory. Unless our government gets its priorities right, the Anglo-Australian telescope cannot keep up and continue to provide Australian astronomers, students and the general public with access to cutting-edge facilities.

At the moment, Australia and the UK provide $A4.112 million to the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board, indexed annually. In the lead-up to 2010, the UK will reduce its funding contribution to around $A2 million in 2006-07 and $1 million every year after that until 2010. This means a funding gap of at least $11 million over four years—a massive amount for the telescope, but not much for a government bloated with money and greed. Budget papers show that the Commonwealth is not intending to increase its funding to the Anglo-Australian telescope to compensate for reduced UK funding. The government will contribute $4.5 million in 2005-06 and only $4.9 million in 2008-09.

The Howard government blew over $50 million in about three nanoseconds on its outrageous advertising campaign for the extreme industrial relations changes. The AWB handed out over $300 million in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein’s government without a moment of hesitation. The Prime Minister managed to spend $5.2 million on his overseas luxury travel bills in two years. The Department of Education, Science and Training splashed out $600,000 on canapes, champagne and corporate hospitality. This is a bloated, out-of-touch government that knows how to waste taxpayers’ money. It has become very good with the taxpayer credit card. Yet, when we have a valuable research facility like the Anglo-Australian telescope in need of funding, this government is nowhere to be seen. Eleven million dollars is peanuts for this extreme and extravagant government, but it is intent on destroying an important scientific asset nevertheless.

Last year, the Department of Education, Science and Training told the parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Treaties that any additional funding to the telescope would only be through competitive grants—for example, through individual researchers applying for Australian Research Council grants. By their very nature, competitive grants are uncertain. It is ridiculous for the government to suggest that an $11 million black hole could be replaced by competitive grants either to the 12 or so staff employed at the telescope or to external researchers buying observing time at the telescope.

This funding uncertainty has, of course, shaken the Australian scientific community. Professor Penny Sackett, head of the Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics at ANU, told the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties:

I would like to express my concern, however, that the declining budget for the AAO in the period 2006-2010 could have deleterious implications for the ability of this model national facility to maintain its excellent service to its user base, while exploring new opportunities for optical-infrared astronomy for the Australian community. A separate review of this matter would be timely.

Even the government owned Anglo-Australian Telescope Board could not resist saying:

The gradual withdrawal of the UK funding does provide the AATB with some challenges.

Coming from careful and measured scientists not often guilty of exaggeration, these words are alarming indeed.

The draft Australian astronomy decadal plan 2006-15 is prioritising international collaborations on new generation optical telescopes and the major radio telescopes. But the Australian scientific community is concerned that Australia’s low contributions to very expensive international projects—around six to 10 per cent—are a disincentive to successful collaboration and do little to enhance Australia’s international reputation in and contribution to astronomy. CSIRO’s proposed construction of an Extended New Technology Demonstrator or xNTD may give Australia a good shot at being part of the international Square Kilometre Array project. However, we cannot let the ball drop on a facility with such a great track record. We must have excellent cutting-edge astronomical research facilities in Australia to allow for international collaboration, domestic projects and, I would emphasise, a state-of-the-art learning facility for Australian students.

The Anglo-Australian telescope is a national facility in high demand. Observing time is always oversubscribed. According to a recent study, the Anglo-Australian telescope is the most productive telescope for those greater than three metres in size as it has high citations in scientific papers. In total, 112 AAT data papers were published in 2003-04. That is an all-time high. Its Two-Degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey was the biggest galaxy survey ever made, producing a map showing the locations of more than 221,000 galaxies in space. It was completed in 2003 and labelled ‘undoubtedly Australia’s largest contribution to astronomical research ever’ by a leading cosmologist.

The Anglo-Australian telescope has enabled the discovery of more than 20 planets around stars other than the sun and a new class of galaxies—very small ones—known as ‘ultra-compact dwarfs’. The Anglo-Australian telescope web site consistently attracts over a million hits every month. Through its strong links with the universities in both Australia and the United Kingdom, the telescope plays an active role in higher education. This is a hard-working telescope and the government must support its work. The telescope requires funding certainty to maintain its quality and scientific capacity. Given that the Mt Stromlo Observatory in Canberra was destroyed in the bushfires, there is even greater pressure on the Anglo-Australian telescope.

The Commonwealth government is just not increasing its funding contribution to enable the Anglo-Australian telescope to meet growing demand. The former Minister for Education, Science and Training simply washed his hands of it and told the telescope board to go elsewhere for money. This is an extraordinary suggestion in a field reliant on public funding that cannot easily go out and make a profit. Astronomy is the wonder machine of Australian science education—the thing that excites and enthrals so many schoolchildren. It is critical in capturing more young minds and introducing them to the sciences. It is a high-impact science, but its impact cannot always be measured in dollars. The government’s short-sightedness could destroy the telescope and its critical role in promoting Australian astronomy.

Where countries like the United States and the UK are increasing funding, Australian funding to astronomy is fading away. The government has already cut over $5 billion from our universities. Funding for research and development has dropped to 0.6 per cent of GDP—the lowest level in two decades—and there is no doubt that it will fall further under this government, so there will be fewer researchers and fewer students. Young researchers were concerned that they had no prospects in astronomy if they stayed in Australia. Young researchers at the Science Meets Parliament this year knew that, if they stayed in Australia, they would have to give up astronomy altogether and become computer programmers.

Physics and chemistry have a declining number of students applying to enter university courses, and year 12 enrolments in physics, chemistry and advanced maths are falling steadily. Between 1980 and 2002, the proportion of year 12 students taking chemistry or physics nearly halved. We must engage young Australians in the wonders of science and the stars. We need to find new ways of instilling children with the wonder and curiosity at the world around them that leads them to undertake scientific endeavours. Astronomy is an awe-inspiring opportunity to do just that—to capture our young people with the magic of the stars, to stretch their realm of understanding beyond our earthly confines and to engage them in the beauty and wonder of this universe.

The Anglo-Australian telescope is a part of our natural wonder-making machine, and it must be supported and funded to continue Australians’ fascination with the skies. The government must announce immediately additional funding support for the telescope. On balance, the supplementary agreement in this bill is necessary to continue the smooth operation of the Anglo-Australian telescope until at least 2010. It is for that reason that Labor will support it this bill.

Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To expedite the passage of the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement Amendment Bill 2005, I will seek leave to incorporate my remarks. I understand that the Labor Party and the government are happy for me to do that. I am sure honourable senators would agree that it is rare that we in this place get the opportunity to talk about space. Astronomy is a particular interest of mine. It may be considered a somewhat nerdy interest, but I think it is a particularly exciting area of science.

On behalf of the Australian Democrats, as the Democrats science and biotechnology spokesperson, I indicate that we will be supporting the legislation before us. The Democrats do want to express disappointment that the government has not yet moved to ensure the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board, which actually oversees the Anglo-Australian telescope, will be compensated for what is a cut in funding from the United Kingdom—as was outlined by Senator Stephens—as a result of this legislation.

I remarked that there are not many opportunities to speak on this matter, because I guess we do not do a lot of space law. I suppose the last couple of times in the last decade that we have had a chance to talk about space would have been in relation to space activities legislation. I note that one senator from the government side in recent times called for a space policy. I am sorry that he is not here to be part of the debate, given his interest, but I am sure that Senator Stephens and I would be happy to be a part of that debate and research with that senator. I do think there are some pressing issues. Some of them have been effectively highlighted in the remarks made by Senator Stephens, and hopefully my incorporated contribution will add to that. Perhaps we should consider this through the committee system. I think it is an exciting area of not only law but also science. As Douglas Adams said, ‘Space is very big.’ So there is a lot of work that we could do. I seek leave to incorporate my remarks on this bill—and add once again that the Democrats are in support of this legislation but express concern in relation to certain funding arrangements.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

While the Democrats will support the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement Amendment Bill 2005, I want to express disappointment that the government has not yet moved to ensure the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board, which oversees the Anglo-Australian Telescope, will be compensated for the inevitable cut in funding from the UK.

This bill amends the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement Act 1970 to incorporate the 2005 Supplementary Agreement to the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement. It allows for the termination of both the original agreement and the supplementary agreement in 2010, with the transfer of ownership and control of the Anglo-Australian Telescope to Australia in 2010.

The United Kingdom has decided to withdraw from the original agreement due to a change in its astronomy research priorities, but has agreed for this to occur gradually, thus allowing the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board time to adjust to this change and to formulate long term policy for the telescope.

UK and Australian investment in the Anglo-Australian Telescope has been relatively equal since its establishment, but the UK’s contribution will steeply decline over the next few years until the agreement ceases in 2010.

The upside of the amendment is that Australian astronomers will have long-term, increased access to the telescope facilities and be allocated more observation time. Currently, this facility is in high demand, providing observing time for a national and international community of astronomers. At the moment, the demand for use of facilities at the Anglo-Australian Observatory completely outstrips available time.

However, as I have foreshadowed, there is a downside - a result of this amendment may be funding cuts for the Anglo-Australian Telescope, because the government has not yet committed to increasing its investment to make up for the loss of the UK’s contribution. I note the Supplementary Agreement allows Australia to maintain a higher level of financial contribution to the Anglo-Australian Telescope if it chooses, and urge the government to exercise this opportunity to increase its funding.

I hope details of increased funding appropriations for the Anglo-Australian Telescope will be revealed in the upcoming budget.

However, current budget forward estimates indicate Australia will only maintain it own share of the funding. Around $4.6 million will be allocated to the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board next year, increasing annually to $4.903 million in 2008/9.

According to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties Report on the Supplementary Agreement, UK funding will decline in this time to around $2 million in this financial year and around $1 million in the following years, until the agreement ends.

This leaves a funding shortfall of around $11 million over four years which is yet to be found.

One suggestion that emerged from the committee report is that additional funding may be provided through the competitive grants process. Australian astronomers may apply for funding for university-based research through the Australian Research Council. The Anglo-Australian Telescope Board can access funding through visiting astronomers, who are able to apply for these grants, using their facilities.

However, astronomers are not guaranteed success in their grant applications. If some are successful, it is difficult to imagine a patchwork of grants funding making up for the shortfall caused by the UK’s withdrawal.

According to the Minister for Education, Science and Training, the revised Agreement allows the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board to develop and access other sources of funding, such as earnings from instrument development and UK competitive grants.

There is a theme developing in science funding. As government funding stagnates, scientists are forced to jostle for external money to supplement the piecemeal funding on offer.

I spoke about this on Tuesday in regard to CSIRO’s new investment directions, reflecting on the organisation’s “partner or perish” mantra, which requires it to scramble for funding from external sources. I hope the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board will not experience pressure to succumb to commercial research at the expense of other pursuits to attract private funding.

The Board, while welcoming the amendment has admitted “the Gradual withdrawal of the UK funding does provide the AATB with some challenges.”

Such a critical facility as the Anglo-Australian Telescope must be properly invested in and maintained.

The Anglo-Australian Telescope is currently a world leader in survey astronomy. Anglo-Australian Observatory telescopes have conducted some critical surveys, including the Two- Degree Field Galaxy Redshift Survey, lauded by leading cosmologist, Carlos Frenk, as “undoubtedly Australia’s largest contribution to astronomical research ever”.

This survey yielded a map showing locations of more than 221,000 galaxies in space which was used to “make the most precise estimates to date of the Universe’s mass and density…”

Other achievements have included the discovery of more than 20 planets around stars other than the sun, and a new class of galaxies aiding in the understanding of how galaxies were formed.

It is clear from the National Committee for Astronomy’s report on Australian astronomy over the next decade that the Anglo-Australian Telescope has a critical role to play in the future.

The report says the Telescope will “continue to be a world leader in survey astronomy for at least the next five years and beyond that will be critical as the single biggest source of optical/infrared observing time for Australian astronomers.”

However, the report also reveals the effect of short term, piecemeal funding on Australian astronomy, asserting “The funding and evaluation of mechanisms in Australia are primarily bottom up, depending on the success of individuals or groups in securing grant-based funding through a variety of routes. The funds available are usually short-term and are rarely in any one grant, sufficient for participation in the projects of the scale expected in the next decade.’

It warns that “Australian astronomy has difficulty operating internationally with any weight or authority and continually has to deal with the difficulties imposed by funding horizons of just a few years.”

Long term, stable funding in Australian astronomy is necessary to restore and maintain Australia’s high standing in the international astronomy community.

Australian astronomers have made some of the most important technological advances in astronomy of the past 20 years, including the use of fibre optics and robotics in astronomy and advanced signal processing techniques.

We have been at the forefront of astronomy, but without sufficient investment, we will be lagging behind.

The Department of Education, Science and Training has just announced a Review of the Anglo-Australian Observatory, which includes investigating “the funding position and requirements of the AAO while the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement remains in place”.

It will report back by June this year.

I hope this Review is able to thoroughly investigate the funding requirements of the AAO and the Government responds promptly.

While the Australian Democrats do not oppose this bill, I would like to emphasise our concerns about the uncertain and destabilising lack of information about future funding arrangements for the Anglo-Australian Telescope, and to reflect our deepening concern over the state of science, and research and development investment in Australia.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.