Editorial 14 March 2002

The Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) held its first meeting in May 1998. Since then it had convened at approximately six monthly intervals until its seventh meeting on June28^th  last year. It seems that there have been more pressing matters demanding the PM's and his department's time; the eighth meeting is now scheduled for May 31^st; it will emphasise Sustaining our Natural Systems and Biodiversity.

The gap of eleven months is disquieting, because although the relevance of PMSEIC to governmental policy was debatable the 11 month gap sends the message that PMSEIC is not only of little consequence but there is scant concern in showing this to be the case. That June 2001 meeting dealt with Australia's mineral exploration, commercialisation of public sector research and developmental health and well-being: Australia's future. Quite apart from any other considerations it would be interesting to determine just what positive consequences have ensued from that PMSEIC meeting. After all public monies are spent to hold these get-togethers.

It might have seemed an appropriate and major topic, after all over a year has past since Mr Howard promulgated Backing Australia's Ability, to discuss and debate its consequences to date, its reception by the research community, what are seen to be its benefits what its short comings, and what should be done so that its promise has reasonable expectations of fulfillment. Not so, and yet since January 2001 much has happened in our OECD cohort. Where does Australia fall relative to the international benchmarks with regard efforts to revitalise our research and higher education sectors? If the Canadian government is to be taken near to its word about aiming to be one of the top five nations in respect to investment in innovation, research and development, what are our government's aspirations?

Media releases from groups such as the Australian Academy of Science and the Group of Eight make no bones about our performance being well in the lower half of OECD nations, and even incorporating the additional resources promised in  Backing Australia's Ability we are at best destined to remain there.  But so far as TFW is aware no Federal minister has addressed their contentions using a critical independent assessment to demonstrate the falseness or validity of the AAS' and Go8's claims of too little and near too late.

In this context the recent announcement by Prime Minister Howard's Government of the formation of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on "Science and Innovation" seems relevant. According to the Minister for Science, Peter McGauran, it's to consist of ten members with a government member as chair. Mr McGauran went on to say that it would be an "all party committee" which in itself could be interesting seeing as the House consists of Liberal, Labor, National Party, Country Liberal (1) and three independent members.

Just in case you're wondering what this committee is going to do, according to the Minister for Science, "The committee's work will expand the Parliament's knowledge and support for research and development." No suggestion as to just how this  is going to be accomplished and how it might work in with PMSEIC. It'll be of particular interest as to what "expand ...support for research and development" will mean in tangible terms and what positive influence the committee will have on Cabinet decisions.

A very cynical octogenarian acquaintance of mine made the caustic remark the other day that when you want to be seen to be doing something about something that you don't really want to do anything about, you form a committee.

Or is he merely a realist. The fact that PMSEIC won't have met for 11 months when its members next get together in the Cabinet Room at Parliament House doesn't augur well.

And when the current President of the AAS Brian Anderson, a Ph.D. in electrical engineering and Director of ANU's Research School of Information Sciences and Engineering  writes in The Australian "We must not forget the fundamentals upon which a solid and sustainable knowledge-based economy is built. The foundations of good research and innovation are still to be found in the enabling sciences," and we then examine the parlous state of the enabling sciences at our universities, there is little indication that our leaders understand the problem let alone care about remedies.

Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web