TRANSCRIPT: ABC 981
8 October 2024
E&OE
Topics: Australian Research Council Government Waste
David Bevan
James Stevens, good morning to you, sir.
James Stevens
Good morning to you, David, and all your listeners.
David Bevan
As I say, You are the Liberal MP for the Federal seat of Sturt, which is Adelaide, inner eastern suburbs. Rattle off some of the suburbs you represent so we know who you are.
James Stevens
Well, the seat of Sturt runs from really David the tollgate up to Grand Junction Road. So if everyone thinks about that sort of arc from the hill's face and right into the skirt of the city.
David Bevan
You've also been given the job of Shadow Assistant Minister for Government Waste, which means you and your staff go through reports looking for waste, and you have turned your attention to the Australian Research Council. Now, frankly, I think you've buried the lead in this press release, because if you work your way through it, you maintain taxpayers funded research into ancient Greek tragedy, specifically the issue of gender bias. Can you explain to us what was going on there?
James Stevens
Well, not really, David. I've got as many questions as you and your listeners. I mean, what we've identified is that nearly half a million dollars, just as one example, is being given to the University of Queensland and the project they've been funded for is to identify the causes of gender bias in the staged English language translations of ancient Greek tragedy and to redress this problem. So seeing that, one wonders whether those of you listeners who work hard to earn money and pay their taxes. Think that half a million dollars of that money should be spent on a on a project like that. And I mean, that's one of many examples that we think are highly dubious, that the Australian Research Council spend about $900 million a year providing grants to academics that apply for projects that need to meet certain criteria. And it surprises me, and I think it would surprise any average Australian, that some of the projects that have been funded are indeed a worthy use of taxpayers funds.
David Bevan
Right now, and there are a lot of figures here. But just to be quite clear, you say nearly half a million dollars was allocated to just this one project. So $460,000 was given to somebody to identify the causes of gender bias in the staged English language translations of ancient Greek tragedy.
James Stevens
That's correct.
David Bevan
Right, and have you seen the results of this research?
James Stevens
Well this is a prospective grant. So this is from the list of applications that have gone in to be funded into the future. So from the first of January next year, the people at the University of Queensland will be able to use that money to undertake this project, which I wonder whether or not is indeed necessary. And I mean, it's one of one of many. I've distributed a list to the media of 20 projects we've got issue with. There's another one here, which seeks to challenge the protectionist myth by analysing literary and historical connections between different geographical sites that have been represented as enclosed in Australian history and questioning whether or not Australia is an island continent girt by sea.
David Bevan
I'm sorry, what does that mean?
James Stevens
If there are any grey nomads listening, they have probably, you know, confirmed that Australia indeed is girt by sea. It's in our national anthem. So we're now funding a research project to dispel the myth that Australia is girt by sea, which I find extraordinary. And there's another one here, which, you know, wants to advance the role of the arts as the missing link in global movements of multi-species justice.
David Bevan
What does that mean?
James Stevens
Well, again, your guess is as good as mine, David, but I think, I think the suggestion is multi species justice is obviously using music to bring justice to species beyond Homo sapiens. I suppose the various animals of continental Australia are missing out on appropriate music compositions that make them feel they live in a just world.
David Bevan
Now, the legislation governing the Australian Research Council, and by the way, we put in requests to the council, and we'd very much like to hear from them. It might be that this stuff seems opaque or obscure or obtuse and but when you burrow down into it, it's all very good stuff. But on the on the face of it, it does little sound a little obscure, doesn't it? Some of these research projects now we've asked for the Australian Research Council if they would like to explain their side of the story and we're waiting to hear back from them. The legislation governing this body was recently changed. Is that correct? James Stevens.
James Stevens
I think the Minister changed his predisposition to have a role in reviewing the final decisions made by the Australian Research Council. So in the past, the Education Minister would be provided with the ARC's recommendation, and if they had concerns with any project like, you know, investigating whether Australia was girt by sea, the Minister would step in and say, look, I'm not prepared to allow half a million dollars to be spent on that exercise. But the Labor Government has said, 'no, we're not going to cast our eye over these we'll just let the ARC make the decision, and whatever they do stands'. Now, that obviously means that in this circumstance, the projects I've just articulated to you and many others are going through without any oversight from the Minister, and therefore the Minister is effectively responsible for the decisions of the ARC, and it's the Minister who should be on your program, defending this expenditure and explaining why he doesn't think he should be running his eye over this and pulling out some of the patently ridiculous ones like we've been discussing.
David Bevan
Well we did also put in a call for Federal Minister Jason Clare, and I'm sure when he's available, he'll be able to come on and explain his role in all of this. But we'd love to hear his version of this story as well. Nigel on the text line says this has got a real whiff of anti-intellectualism. Perhaps we should only fund people to be accountants. What do you say to that?
James Stevens
Well, it's $900 million of taxpayer funds. Don't forget, these universities get other funding to undertake research. This is just them deciding that they want to apply to an additional Fund, which I support us having. And what we don't know, David, is which projects missed out on being funded because these ones were chosen. I would be surprised if only $900 million worth of applications were put in. My guess is that people applied with other projects and missed out. And I'd be pretty surprised if some of the unsuccessful applicants were less worthy than the sorts of projects we've discussed, and this is taxpayers' money, so we're allowed to ask questions, and like you say, you've asked the ARC and you've asked the Minister to come on to your program and explain and give excellent answers to all these questions, and they're not doing so. So I'm pretty suspicious of that. And I think the average Australian, particularly when they think about what they could be doing with the money that's coming out of their pocket and going to the federal government to be spent on these sorts of things, would expect good answers to these questions as well.
David Bevan
Phil has called 891 you're sharing your morning with me. David Bevan and Phil, good morning. Phil.
Caller
Good morning. Look, if we're going to start talking about intellectual honesty and things like that, we should probably start a discussion with framing things as taxpayers money when we're actually talking about public monies. But the entire concept of the politician...
David Bevan
What's the difference, Phil?
Caller
How the federal government is actually funded, where the money actually comes from. The government doesn't need our tax to spend money on things. You know that there's, there's a there's a conceptual difference between what people pay, pay for tax and the public public monies. And when politicians don't want to spend money on something, they call it taxpayer money. And when they do want to spend money on something, they call it public money,
David Bevan
But it's all the same isn't it?
Caller
No it's not, but that that's not the, that's not the, you know, and that that's a point that is central to how government works, that we keep getting tied up on, but into, you know, I'm just using that as an example where, where a politician will skew facts to make a point. But here, what we've got is a politician coming on the air saying, I don't understand what this research is about, but I think it's bad. It's appealing to a dogma where we denigrate expertise, where the ARC, has been set up as the independent arbiter, because they know their stuff. And here we've got someone saying, Oh, this, this isn't going to play well in my electorate. So, you know, I'm going to, I'm going to sink the boot into it, because it's an easy boot to sink in. You never know what's going to come from pure research?
David Bevan
What do you think is going to come from identifying the causes of gender buyers in the staged English language translations of ancient Greek tragedy?
Caller
I don't know. That's not my area of expertise.
David Bevan
Well, give it a shot.
Caller
Someone, someone in the ARC probably does. Who knows it might, it might look, I mean, you know.
David Bevan
Well look, let's put it this way.
Caller
A lot of our literature and a lot of our entertainment is based on the on the on the on the tropes and archetypes that come from, from Greek literature. So understanding ...
David Bevan
When was the last time you went to a staged performance of an ancient Greek tragedy, Phil?
Caller
Well, I don't know when was the last time you watched 10 Things I Hate About You, which is based on Shakespeare, which is based on which is based on Greek tragedies, right?
David Bevan
So you'd be happy to have a research grant into 10 Things I Hate About You, but would you be happy to have $460,000 spent on an English translation of an ancient Greek tragedy?
Caller
If the ARC sees some utility in funding that grant, then I trust them. I trust them before I would trust any politician, especially one who's dog, dog whistling to a base in a way that is very anti intellectual, anti expertise. Terrible, terrible place to take society to.
David Bevan
Thank you for your call. James Stevens, you are taking society to a terrible place?
James Stevens
Well, we're asking some questions about decisions that are being made which have a cost benefit to them. And let me be very clear, David, I actually support spending money on research, and I'm not criticising the fact that around $900 million a year is allocated through the ARC, and as I made the point before, what projects have missed out on funding because instead, they've chosen the ones that we're discussing now. This is a democracy. We're allowed to ask questions about how the government spends our money. It is taxpayers’ money. I don't accept the point that there's a difference between public funds and taxpayer funds, and everyone listening to your program that pays tax is happy to do so on the basis that government is spending it on important things. And they also expect their elected members to question and look at some of those decisions and make sure that they are in the best interest of Australia and the taxpayers funding them.
David Bevan
Now, lots of texts coming in supporting the research council. In fact, they're very worried that a politician would get involved in deciding which projects do and do not get funding. They think it's a good idea to leave it up to the Research Council?
James Stevens
Well, the Research Council should be coming on your program and giving all these excellent answers to the decisions they've made to fund these projects. And in our democracy, it's the elected representatives that make decisions around the Commonwealth budget about what we spend money on, and are equally held accountable for that, and I don't support any suggestion that we should outsource from a democratic process the way in which government expenditure decisions are made. Quite rightly, journalists like yourself, and any Australian citizen should be able to ask questions about how our money's spent and expect good answers for that, and that's exactly what we're doing in this case. And as I say, it'd be great if the Minister and the ARC came onto your program and talked through the benefit of this expenditure.
David Bevan
James Stevens, thank you very much for getting the discussion going.