Professor Gina Ravenscoft: Every time funding outcomes get released, up to 90% of applicants don't get funded. I and others then get emails and phone calls and people crying in our office about what that means for their careers, for their groups, for the research that they're doing. We often working on large timescales with these projects and you can put so much time and energy and effort into answering particular questions that you're working on, and then to suddenly have that end and that lack of job security and certainty around what the future might look like. Not only for yourself as a researcher, but for your team and for the students you're training. What do I tell the PhD students in my laboratory about what their future might look like? It's getting harder and harder for me. Even as much as I love and am so passionate about our field and the importance of our sector, it's really hard for me to still say hand on heart to those junior researchers and students that this is a viable career option for them.

BELINDA SMITH, HOST: Professor Gina Ravenscroft, Federal Science Minister Tim Ayres came into the studio for a chat about the future of Australian research and he heard her statement. What's your reaction to that?

SENATOR TIM AYRES, MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY AND INNOVATION AND MINISTER FOR SCIENCE: I have heard very similar stories in Australian science, but also more broadly across the social sciences as well, where applications in competitive funding rounds inevitably lead to some projects being approved and some projects not being approved. Those merit-based assessments – which aren't done by Government Ministers – but of course happen in a system that is designed to make sure that scientific merit is dealt with.

That doesn't obviate how difficult these processes are for research leaders and their staff who throw everything into an application for funding for the next round. And of course, they're not just doing that in terms of their ARC or CRC funding program or competing within their university for doing it. They're engaging with potential private sector partners and trying to find sources of funding.

I recognise this is very tough for Australian researchers. A competitive system brings some advantages, but it does mean, particularly where there are successful programs that don't then get funded for the next round. I absolutely recognise that as a very challenging process for scientists and it's been a constant feature of Australian science, you know, ever since the system was devised.

HOST: Well, 20 years ago, the success rates were like a quarter to a third. Now it's single digits. And as a result, a lot of the successful grant applications are from big established labs that show they can do the work. They've got the publications behind them, they've got the clout. And so, what we see is loads of young people leaving medical research or just research in general. The Australian Health and Medical Research Workforce Audit found that more than 60% of researchers left active research between 2019 and 2024. So, in terms of that, what concrete steps are being taken to stop the flow of people, mostly young people, leaving research or just taking their stuff overseas and going to where the money like, Europe?

AYRES: Well, there's certainly workforce challenges there now. But also for the future, whether it's in our defence related programs or medical research, we have to build the workforce of the future. The meeting that I held just a few days ago, with 60 of our research institutions and leading private sector players in this area, I made sure that these workforce issues were front and centre.

I'm not on your program offering a policy panacea for these questions. I recognise that there are some real challenges there and everybody in the system who's engaged with young workers in particular are talking about these questions. And I am very interested in working through how we make Australian science the place that young people in Australia and from around the world want to come and work in.

HOST: You said there wasn't going to be a policy for panacea presented to us on The Science Show today, but what would be the obvious things that you could do, not just over the next years, but I'm talking maybe the next 12 months.

AYRES: I don't think it's the kind of set of challenges that invite a short-term answer.

HOST: Just get something rolling. You heard Professor Ravenscroft there. The despair in her voice, it's palpable.

AYRES: What I'd say is you wouldn't want to be anywhere else. If you've got the capacity and aptitude for science and engineering and maths – you wouldn't want to be anywhere else but the Australian university system or the Australian research institutions. There are challenges there, but it's a very good place to work and it's got a very strong future. Where we can as a Government open up new opportunities, of course we're doing that. I point to the Horizon Europe opportunity. If you're in medical research, climate and agriculture research, food security research, defence and related technologies or energy and electrical systems – the list goes on. Astronomy and space. That opportunity to collaborate and to seek research funding and joint programs with European institutions is an enormous opportunity. It doesn't solve the problem by itself. And as I was suggesting to you, there are workforce issues that of course spring from the churn and turn that comes from competitive grants processes. But there are other challenges there too in workforce terms. And I want to work with the institutions, with the trade unions in this area, with the system more broadly, to look at how we meet that workforce challenge.

HOST: You said before that the Government has responsibility to fund science and research in Australia and said earlier this month that it would prioritise investments in science and research that would generate tangible commercial outcomes. But the thing is, we can't predict these things. A lot of the technology that we use came from blue sky or fundamental research. So, how do you plan to support that fundamental research?

AYRES: That effort to work with the science sector, with the CSIRO, with our universities to direct research and effort into those lines of inquiry that support our national science priorities and our Future Made in Australia objectives. Of course, that is really important work, but it's not to say that there's also not a central role for foundational research. Maintaining that capability in our university systems and in our science agencies is important. There will always be research that sits outside both of those lines of effort as well. And that's important because you just don't know where that leads. What technological solutions that will offer. So, I'm of course emphasising the research priorities. I want to see alignment and delivery in those areas. But foundational research is of equal importance and I think it's silly to position them as a binary. We actually need both of these lines of inquiry, which of course intersect and overlap to be working together.

HOST: If one of your kids came to you and said, ‘I want to be a research scientist’. What would you say?

AYRES: I'd say your grandfather was, and he had an incredible career in Australian agriculture. And it is a rewarding career that has a broad social impact. There's not many careers where you get to do work that changes the world and science is a way of doing that. If one of my kids came along and said that, I'd be absolutely delighted. If they're listening – you can do whatever you want, kids.

But of course the message that we send to young people about working science careers or engineering careers or trades careers. There's been a bit of a self-fulfilling negative talk in Australia about these questions. I don't say that to obviate the tough challenges and making sure that these are good jobs with good career paths, but we shouldn't talk Australian science down. We shouldn't talk Australian industry down and we shouldn't talk Australian engineering down. We've got unique capabilities here and a developed economy with a strong system, and we ought to be talking it up and offering as many opportunities as we can.

HOST: Oh, for sure. I mean, a line that gets trotted out often as Australian scientists and researchers and engineers punch above their weight. But they've done so much with so little, and there's only so long that a system under strain can operate before it collapses. What's your outlook for the future?

AYRES: Well, I'm optimistic about Australian science. And I can see just so clearly the connection between our science effort and the work of all of the researchers and all of the scientists in the system and the big national challenges that Australia needs to solve. To make us stronger, to make us more secure, to deal with the climate and energy and food security challenges for Australia and also for our region. You know, we live in one of the most exciting parts of the world, fastest growing regions of the world in human history, and Australian science has got its role to play here and in our region, making this a really good place to live.

HOST: If you were told every five years you had to apply for your job and you had a 9% success rate of holding onto your job, would you be in that position? Would you take that job?

AYRES: Well, as a politician, of course, in the Australian Parliament, we do have to apply for our jobs every three years –

HOST: You do.

AYRES: But it's not the same. And competitive rounds of funding for programs are very challenging. It is a great thing to have a secure job at an Australian university or an Australian science agency. They are really good places to work. But when your job's contingent upon rotating rounds of funding, that is tougher. I absolutely recognise that.

HOST: I also asked the Minister about an issue that we've been following on the Science Show for a couple of weeks. The Government's recent decision not to pursue full membership of the European Southern Observatory. This would have given Australian astronomers access to top-of-the-line optical telescopes in Chile, including the Extremely Large Telescope, which is on track to start observing the universe in 2030.

AYRES: Well, of course, I understand that'll be a source of real disappointment for scientists and research and development workers more broadly, who would be looking for access to that facility beyond the end of 2027 when our current partnership runs out. And we'll keep working with them. I've, of course, met with representatives of that community and we're looking, of course, at future opportunities but we declined that round.

HOST: What sort of future opportunities are we talking here? Specifically for optical telescopes?

AYRES: Well, we have some domestic capability, and –

HOST: I guess that would be the Anglo Australian Telescope at Coonabarabran. Will you commit to ongoing funding of that facility?

AYRES: It's one of the things that I will be working through with the optical astronomy community, but also our science institutions and public science agencies. We have a range of scientific facilities around Australia that are coming to the point where they will require future investment. We won't be making decisions or public announcements about where we're getting to until we've reached a conclusion. But that facility is very high on my list.

ENDS.