The new National Science Statement also doubles as an industry policy, subtitled “a future made in Australia.”
According to Industry and Science Minister Ed Husic, “we want science to drive industry growth, creating stronger businesses and more secure, well-paid jobs for Australians.”
The priorities might also make talking points at the next election;
- “next generation technologies,” clean energy and storage, advanced materials, artificial intelligence, quantum and robotics are nominated
- “healthy and thriving communities,” “so more Australians can enjoy healthier lives from birth well into old age”
- “elevating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge systems … particularly to have more of a say in advancing research that affects them.”
- “protecting and restoring Australia’s environment”
- “building a secure and resilient nation,” “to strengthen our democratic institutions while addressing economic, social, geopolitical, defence and national security challenges.”
When Mr Husic classed this as a science priority perhaps he means political science.
There is certainly a pitch to voters who like Labor’s science as nation-building approach in the accompanying five imperatives:
- “Australian scientists, science institutions, and infrastructure shaping Australia’s science future”
- science at the centre of Australian industry
- diverse, skilled workforce to underpin the translation of science into new industry
- embracing science to drive Australia’s regional and global interest
- science system prepared for future challenges.
“It’s been nearly ten years since the Abbott Government handed down the last National Science Priorities,” Mr Husic says, describing them as “no longer fit for purpose.”
Depends on the purpose, because the 2015 list was longer and a touch more sciencey, including:
- research on “soil and water” which are “national strategic assets” and environmental change
- cyber security, “including quantum technologies”
- “reliable low-cost sustainable energy supplies”
- ”sustainable extraction of our resources” and advanced manufacturing
Health, which “is not simply the absence of disease or infirmity:” was also there.
Whatever the differences over nine years, research lobbies were quick to support the new list. The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, called the priorities, “an authoritative vision for research and evidence driving Australia’s future.”
Although the Australian Academy of Science did point out that it had to be more than a list;
“previous science and research priorities were ineffective because they lacked implementation, monitoring and evaluation and therefore did little to focus and scale up science and research in the identified areas.”
And so the Academy called for, “a robust implementation plan that clarifies how ministers across governments, and the industry and research sectors can use the levers available to them to turn words into action.”
If Mr Husic’s staff get moving they could have one ready for the next election.
