'Questing spirits need money too Investment in research will reap great dividends, Robert Niven writes

Canberra Times
Friday 13/2/2009 Page: 15

February! The sweltering heat, the tragedy of bushfires and Australian Research Council grant applications. As I write, Australia's academics are now working feverishly, writing proposals to try to win research funding for their hopes and dreams. Very few succeed: success rates are down to 20%, and those who vin generally get less than half what they need.

Yet time and again, in these and other pages, expert commentators have pointed out the excellence of Australia's scientific research. Many capable projects are turned down and lost forever. Easily 60% to 80% cent of applications could be funded without any loss of quality.

The entire Australian Research Council budget, in all schemes, totals $600 million, with about Half in the main Discovery scheme. In contrast, the European Union is spending 50.5 billion euro ($A99 billion) in a new program over 2007-13, in addition to generous national schemes. The US National Science Foundation's annual budget is $US6 billion, and it is not the only funding source.

In the face of such severity, you can imagine our scientists' views on the Australian Government's $42 billion spending package, which follows $10 billion last year, $6 billion for the car industry and on and on. Leaving aside the question of the morality of such largesse, a second question follows: how will the package increase Australia's national prosperity? How will it help shift Australia from a low-tech, resource-digging, raw-materials-exporting economy to a modern, high-tech, people intensive society whose skills and capabilities are in demand around the world? Where is the support for new technologies and new industries?
How about:

• A commercial-scale solar energy plant with desalination plant for Adelaide or Perth, using Australia's world-leading solar technology?
• A major initiative in householder distributed electricity generation, accompanied by the development of innovative billing systems?
• A satellite-launching capability and aerospace industry? Most industrialised countries - and now Iran - have this; we don't.
• Development of thorium nuclear reactors, which avoid the emissions problems of uranium reactors and for which Australia can corner the world's supply of thorium?
• Re-engineering Australia's urban environment for a low-carbon future, with development of higher building standards and urban planning principles?
• A real-tine automated satellite bushfire warning system integrated with Internet, broadcast media and mobile communications? A once-in-a-generation opportunity to define Australia's hopes and aspirations, and we get more housing, rail boomgates and pink batts! Have they gone mad? The package clearly demonstrates the complete disconnect between our political class and its understanding of how national prosperity is generated.

Much has been said of the previous government's squandering of the boom, induced in part by its hatred of the halls of academe. Will the present Government continue the same course? If the Government wanted to boost Australian Research Council funding, it could be done easily, in this budget cycle. It could also speed it tip: the decisions are all made by June but not announced until November for funding in January. Since most applications are reviewed by overseas assessors, this long delay gives our competitors the opportunity to develop our ideas.

Why not two funding rounds a year? If you give scientists more money, how will they spend it? In part it will go on expensive equipment, increasing our ability to do new things. Yes, some will be imported, but a lot will be locally manufactured, increasing the demand for high-tech manufacturing from specialist enterprises which service universities and high-tech mechanical, electronics and IT personnel inside and outside universities.

A large part of research funding also goes on people, increasing the knowledge and expertise of Australia's human resources, and fostering its courage and resolve t o embark on radical new ideas. Scientific research funding is national prosperity-building funding. It is astonishing that it is not being considered in the Government's package.

Dr Robert Niven is a senior lecturer in engineering at the University of New South Wales, ADFA.