Report of the Prime Minister’s Manufacturing Taskforce Raises Hackles of Universities Australia. (August 17, 2012)

The non-government members of the Prime Minister's manufacturing taskforce estimate more than 85,000 jobs will be lost in manufacturing by 2017 without significant increases in infrastructure investment and improvements in the sector's global competitiveness.

The 117-page Report of the Non-Government Members of the Prime Minister's Manufacturing Taskforce was made public yesterday and is the product of:

Industry

• Mr Philip Binns, Vice President and General Manager, Agilent Technologies
• Mr Geoff Plummer, CEO, OneSteel
• Mr Ian Thomas, President, Boeing
• Mr Innes Willox, Chief Executive, AiGroup
• Mr Mike Devereux, Chairman and Managing Director, Holden
• Mr Chris Jenkins, MD, Thales
• Mr Phil Butler, MD, Textor Technologies
• Ms Rebecca Dee Bradbury, President and CEO, Kraft 

Unions

• Mr David Oliver, National Secretary, ACTU
• Mr Paul Howes, National Secretary, AWU
• Mr Paul Bastian, Acting National Secretary, AMWU
• Mr Dave Noonan, National Secretary, CFMEU
• Mr Charlie Donnelly, National Secretary, NUW
• Ms Michele O’Neil, National Secretary, TCFUA

Science and Technology

• Professor Roy Green, Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Business, University of Technology Sydney
• Dr Megan Clark, Chief Executive, CSIRO
• Professor Jonathan West, AIRC [founding Director of the Australian Innovation Research Centre], University of Tasmania

Universities Australia believes it is noteworthy that R&D academics are rather thin on the ground, not to mention the omission of chief scientists, state and federal.

Furthermore, while in many instances of governmental documents the devil is in the detail, that isn't the case with this opus -- there isn't any in its forty-one recommendations; or as the opposition industry spokeswoman Sophie Mirabella told The Australian the report had failed to identify any real solutions to assist the struggling manufacturing sector and represented "just more talk". It's essentially a hand-waving exercise.

But what really has frightened Universities Australia is recommendation 24:

Belinda Robinson, Chief Executive of Universities Australia, has come out guns blazing:

While strategic, translational and applied research must be encouraged and has a vital role to play in modernising and diversifying the economy, Universities Australia is concerned that the report understates the value of basic research as a fundamental building block of the research system needed to support innovation and product development Australia's success as a world leader in biotechnology, for example, could not have occurred without a heavy investment in basic bioscience research. Research is a distinctive part of the role of universities conducted for the benefit of all Australians and its value risks being undermined if it is subject to heavy handed direction.

Universities Australia opposes the report's recommendation (24) to tie research funding to collaboration with manufacturing industry. Given the very substantial role anticipated for research in transforming manufacturing, Universities Australia is extremely disappointed that the research community was inadequately consulted and its role represented as little more than as a service provider to the manufacturing industry. In seeking to achieve 'smarter networks' and an improved platform for systemic collaboration, a high level of engagement and fostering a sense of common purpose with the research community is essential. Universities Australia supports the ambition of the Taskforce to expand this collaborative model [between universities and industry] but is wary of this coming at the expense of other research priorities.

The report recommends the government establish a new committee to be chaired by a senior business leader to undertake a two stage due diligence process into the funding and activities of entities such as CSIRO, universities and the Australian Research Council. Such a committee should at least be co-chaired by a senior and highly-respected member of the research community.

Universities Australia rightly sees this report to be a significant additional threat to the autonomy of Australian academia and a sure-fire deterrent to attracting and keeping premier-league scholars.

Unfortunately it would be a mistake to believe that recommendation 24 -- we note here it is the reverse of Douglas Adams' Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything -- won't be smiled upon by both of Australia's political parties. For example The Australian reports it: "calls for a radical realignment of research and development to increase its commercial focus. One option would be to enable academics to claim credit for industry innovation instead of being judged only on peer reviewed academic journal works. The Australian understands the idea has won favour among some senior ministers," i.e. throttling the goose with one hand while holding out the other waiting for gold eggs to drop.