The Academy of Science wants its constituents to have top level access, by “bolstering” the National Science Advisory Council and elevating the Chief Scientist to a Prime Ministerial adviser.
“A coordinated, transparent and expert-driven science advice system strengthens government decision-making,” the Academy asserts in its submission for this year’s budget. It proposes that the science council be a resource for all ministers, providing, “evidence and data to inform their decision making.”
And basing the Chief Scientist in PM&C would “ensure direct and independent science advice to the Prime Minister and Cabinet, aligned with international best practice.”
The Advisory Council now consists of the Prime Minister, the Minister for Science, CSIRO’s head and six to eight “expert scientific members.” But it is not the policy-making powerhouse the Academy hopes for; meeting three times in 2024 and once last year, with the Prime Minister chairing twice.
The meeting last November discussed AI in research and critical minerals and sustainable agriculture creating jobs in regional areas.
It probably was not the engagement the Academy had in mind, but the political establishment has never liked looking to scientists for advice. Back in 2019 former Science and Education Minister, Kim Carr, then on the Senate backbench, made the case for a parliamentary science office, as recommended by a Senate inquiry and along the line of the one at Westminster. But the Morrison Government was not interested, to which Senator Carr responded, “neither the Government nor Parliament should fear science. If we do, we are afraid of the truth.”
Of course, formal access is not needed when there is a Chief Scientist who knows how government works and can make a policy case in political terms. Alan Finkel, (Chief Scientist, 2016-2020) demonstrated how to do it.