Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to add my comments to the comments of Senator Pocock on the funding and resourcing of the CSIRO. Both of us attended the CSIRO inquiries. Indeed, we initiated this inquiry with the other Senator Pocock. I want to give a shout-out to all the CSIRO employees around the country today and let them know that their work is valued and that there are senators in this place that have got their backs. I also want to add to the record that nearly 10 years ago I chaired a select committee into the Morrison government's plans or attempts to cut 350 jobs in the oceans and atmosphere division at the CSIRO. At the time, we were very alarmed about the impact this would have on our capability to do climate and oceans research, not just in Australia but in our region. A number of scientists, many of whom are based in Tasmania where I live and are such an important part of our community, were facing losing their jobs and of course the funding for their projects. I chaired that inquiry but the co-chair was Senator Kim Carr from the Labor Party, as well as a number of Labor senators. We fought really hard to overturn those cuts to the CSIRO. That was nearly 10 years ago. In fact, at the time, to his credit, Minister Hunt actually put more money into the CSIRO, set up a separate climate division and ring-fenced funding for 10 years into the specific climate division, just as a display of commitment to climate research.

Well, I didn't think I would see in my time in the Senate the Labor Party doing the same thing, looking to cut jobs at the CSIRO. I was very interested as to where the majority of these job cuts would fall and, lo and behold, they are in the environment and climate research units, exactly the same place where there were attempts to cut jobs nearly 10 years ago. There is a couple of reasons for this which were explored in this inquiry and are outlined in this report that I'm taking note of today. One of the reasons is this is essentially public-good science. These scientists work on collaborative projects around the world. They don't necessarily bring in commercial income but, over the years, have increasingly had pressure put on them to go out there and find what they call external revenue sources. Some of those may be other government bodies but many of them are commercial bodies. It is difficult for these scientists to do this public-good science when there is constant pressure to do deep dives and come up with income. One of the professors described it to us as the CSIRO feels like it has been turned into a commercial consulting enterprise, where scientists working in the environment and science unit have to justify their time and work and careers. Of course, many of them have studied for a long time to get to this point. These scientists don't earn a lot of money—it is a calling for them—and they do critical work across all fields of scientific research but they are being told they are not valued unless they are bringing in external revenue.

I wanted to make this really clear: this government—every government—should invest in public-good science, and, you wouldn't be surprised to hear me say, especially in climate science and ocean science. The work that these climate and ocean scientists do is critical to understanding the changes we're seeing in our physical world. It is critical for our understanding of the weather. The services that these scientists provide are being used by farmers all around the country to help them plan their cropping for the year. This work is absolutely critical to adapting and mitigating the worst impacts of climate change, and it is very shortsighted for the CSIRO to be cutting jobs from these divisions because it is easy to do so. We will be watching where these job cuts fall very closely in the weeks and months to come.

In this report, Senate Barbara Pocock and I recommended that full funding be restored to the CSIRO, not just to solve its capital issues but we actually want see an increased appropriation to science in this country, especially a commitment to public-good science—science that we all benefit from, that shouldn't be having to face commercial revenue to justify its existence.

It is the most critical time in history for us to be increasing our capability in climate science, and the Greens recommended that as part of one of the key recommendations where we dissented from the government in this report.