Latest info from Senate Estimates
Blog Post | Blog of Rachel Siewert, Scott Ludlam
Monday 1st June 2009, 3:37pm
by TimNorton in
We're right in the middle of Senate Estimates, and are slowly picking out the best bits to put up here on the website. For the uninitiated, twice each year, usually in May and November, the estimates of proposed annual expenditure of government departments and authorities are referred by the Senate to the relevant legislation committees for examination and report. At the estimates hearings, Senators may directly question Ministers and public officials not only about the details of proposed expenditure but also about the objectives, operations and efficiency of the programs for which they are responsible.
Picking out some of the more interesting reads:
Scott grilled ASIO representatives over phone tapping and surveillance.
He also continued digging into aspects of the Government's proposed internet filtering plan.
Rachel asked a serious of questions about the recent closure of Land & Water Australia, which you can read here, here and here. This was then followed up the next day with questions about other cuts to agricultural research.
And continuing on our campaign against GM canola trials, some questions here.
We'll put some more of these up as they come. In the meantime, for the politics geeks out there, you can watch live here, see the transcript production here, and get involved in the discussion in the comments below or on our forums.
PDF version
Bookmark, email and share
Comments
Land & Water Australia
thanks to Senators Siewart and Milne for driving these questions into the absolutely gobsmackingly STUPID decision to axe Land and Water Australia. I first heard of this on the plane last Friday when I ran into old colleagues.
What a colossally short-sighted and stupid decision. We are losing a critical research hub for agricultural and environmental innovation for the sake of saving 13 million. This government seems to only understand nation building in terms of bricks and mortar infrastructure. They had a golden opportunity to invest in our R&D for the future, creating hundreds of jobs in the process, and instead they are killing our R&D and costing jobs.
Thank you to the Greens for drawing attention to this -shame it's not getting proper coverage in the media.
Future of R&D
Thanks myriad, I will pass on your message to Rachel and Christine.
Unfortunately we've also heard that WA will be phasing out 200 agricultural research positions, and Garrett's new plan for biodiversity in nothing short of a joke.
Seems things can get worse for R&D in this country...
scuttlebutt
that ex-colleagues passed on to me Tim when we were talking about the Land and Water decision was that the CEO was a Howard era appointment and seen as a Lib, and hadn't lobbied Garrett effectively. It was even put to me that she hadn't sought a meeting with Garrett.
No idea obviously if it's true, but it's such an appalling decision it's no wonder people suspect something as facile and spiteful as a political revenge exercise.
the news about WA is also terrible. And yes, so much for Garrett as champion of the environment. The only part of the sector I know that likes him are the land conservancies such as Bush Heritage Australia and the Tasmanian Land Conservancy, because he increased the money for buying reserves quite substantially. It's the only credible environmental decision he has made that I know about.
The problem with Aussie R&D
... is that we only research, we don't develop. That's why all those solar panels being put on people's roofs use technology invented in Australia are made in China or Germany.
Research has only a small financial return. You might invest $10 million in research and get $1 million in patent sales. Development has a very high financial return. Of the $10 million in research, $9 million will be for projects which turn out to be duds - but $1 million goes to something that turns out to work brilliantly, and that thing, you can sell the patents for $1 million, or you can spend another $10 million developing it, and earn $25 million from it, so that your firm ends up with $5 million profit at the end of all that.
And of course once developed, the deployment of the thing earns hundreds or thousands of millions, employs thousands, and so on. See for example the Danish wind turbine industry, employing over 20,000 people and earning several billion Euros in exports each year. If they'd just sold the patents overseas they'd be a poorer country. Like us.
So $10 million of R and $10 million of D gives you $25 million earnings, for $5 million profit. But $10 million of R and no D gives you $1 million of earnings, for $9 million loss. Thus the people funding you conclude "R&D is a waste of money." It's not. It's just that we research, we don't develop; and research alone is a waste of money.
This is unfortunately part of our culture. We don't like development. New things are scary. Solar PV or new strains of wheat may make millions, or may fail abysmally. But coal and iron and uranium will always succeed. So the conservative investor sticks to that. A key part of the Australian identity is "dig it up and sell it overseas." We get a bit lost with tasks other than that.
Which is where government with courage comes in. Ahem.
Problem with R&D
Kiashu, you are probably correct with your figures on returns, but there are very few companies, if any, that have the funds to risk with being part of the process of development. Even if you take the current devil, Clean Coal Technology, it appears that the Government is sinking the money in.
As you are possibly a Victorian, you may remember a certain Victorian Premier who set up to invest in R&D / Development where other private funds were not available. It turned into a big disaster, with subsequent Victorian Governments were paying off the debts for years.
You can count out Super Funds as no Government would try to force them to invest their members funds in such risky investments, as a major disaster with lost funds would also sink the Government of the day.
I just don't think we are large enough (economically) to sink anything other than small amounts of funds into R&D / Development .
Questions that need urgent answers
Is there any estimate underway to to research and confirm or deny the eddy postulated to exist between Fraser Island and the Great Barrier Reef?
Is there any objective to assess Australian east coast sewage nutrient pollution streaming in wind driven along shore surface water into the Fraser eddy area and then into GBR waters where algae is feeding on nutrients and smothering coral where coral bleaching is occurring?
Has there been any operation or is there any plan for any scientific R&D to differentiate between nutrients from Queensland farming and nutrients from Sydney or Brisbane sewage?
Do the Greens just act on solutions to problems locally or in the whole of the ecosystem? See area of ecosystem evidence at:
http://www.solomontimes.com/news.aspx?nwID=4043.
Error - p[lease correct
In my earlier post today there is a URL with a full stop on the end. Please remove that fullstop.
i.e
http://www.solomontimes.com/news.aspx?nwID=4043
Otherwise Google KILLING THE OCEAN John C Fairfax.
Thank you
Post new comment