Opinion-04 March 2001

1953 – Louis de Broglie (1929 Nobel Prize winner for physics) wrote The Revolution in Physics – Watson and Crick published their determination of the structure of DNA.

The counter intuitive brilliance exhibited first by Max Plank with his discovery of Quantum Mechanics in 1900 and then Einstein's revelation of the Special and General Theories of Relativity (1905 and 1915) completely changed our understanding of the universe in which we live. That revolution in physics continues unabated to this day. The depressing truth is, however, that resident Australians have contributed little materially to this revolution, have derived industries from it but overall are heavy importers of the products that have been and are being developed from it. This imbalance not only is continuing, it shows every sign of increasing. Sue Sarjeantson's censure, "We need to be a whole lot more than a smart buyer of technology," sums up the matter all too well.

Perhaps it's worth recalling that in 1949 there were probably no more than four prototype digital computers in existence, two British, one American and one developed by Australia's CSIRO. Here we are more than fifty years later and it's questionable whether we've learned anything regarding the proper backing of our innovators.

The Watson-Crick model of DNA ushered in our current revolution in biology which has just finished its first phase with the elucidation of the primary structure of the human genome, i.e. the linear sequence of units comprising our genes and a preliminary assessment of their positions and functions. Along the way a number of other organisms have had their genomes sequenced and analysed but being an egocentric lot, ours is of course the most important. Only one Australian research group made any significant contribution to the publicly funded genome project. On the other hand the National Health and Medical Research Council reached and agreement late last year with Celera Genomics whereby Australian academic researchers have access to Celera's privately funded sequence databases and proprietary analytical software at very favourable rates.

The fact is that in the field of genomic research Australia is in as good a position as any other nation from the viewpoint of data manipulation and analysis. Nevertheless a recent visitor from the US who works at the leading edge of this field commented that Australian molecular biologists give the impression that they don't really see themselves as attempting to participate at the forefront of genomic research, "They seem to see it as taking place elsewhere – not involving them." So should we forget being involved in the genomic revolution that is about to move into high gear. More to the point is this impression of a defeatist attitude a true reflection of the collective Australian biomedical research community and if so why? Have the years of witnessing successive Australian Governments ringbarking our research establishments and tertiary institutions so demoralised our research and development community that they've given up? The Prime Minister's flaccid commitments in the January innovation statement, Backing Australia's Ability, is a travesty of a pledge to support Australian R&D; it requires only a cursory analysis of what is happening overseas to demonstrate the point. The incentives to attract first rank researchers to Australia (or back to Australia) pale compared to what, for example, the Germans now offer. Yet we are competing for the same personnel. And the research facilities that Australia has to offer are inferior. The degradation of our tertiary institutions is a disgrace.

Surely in the first instance it falls to the Australian research and educational communities to begin a campaign, perhaps crusade would be the more appropriate term, to demonstrate to the majority of Australians that their well being and that of future generations is crucially dependent upon developing and maintaining leading edge educational, research and developmental facilities. Despite lip service and less than adequate projected funding for upgrading faculties and staff, not one politician of any party has done an "Al Gore". It's just not seen as a political imperative. Matters of taxation legislation and petrol pricing are of far greater immediate importance. Not until our political leaders recognize that voting preferences can be markedly dependent upon far-reaching support for education, research and development, will substantial improvements be undertaken. In blunt terms it’s a matter of researchers and educators having the drive and the nuance to market the product, really market it. Will the real Australian Academy of Science, Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee and the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies stand up and begin to make their voices heard by the Australian people? Nobody is going to do it for you, and to date you've done very little.

Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web