Science is Not a Dirty Word

Could the Abbott Government’s determination not to send medical aid to western Africa to assist with the Ebola crisis be just the latest in the series of decisions that reject science?

Tony Abbott’s infamous statement that “the argument behind climate change is crap” should have been a warning. His words were deliberate – he was challenging the science of climate change. While he later admitted that he had been wrong, his actions suggest that he is ambivalent. The Abbott Government axed no ministry of climate change, has repealed the Carbon Tax, and when world leaders are uniting for action, Australia’s Prime Minister is refusing to discuss the issue at next month’s G20 in Brisbane.

When Prime Minister Abbott refused to attend the recent Climate Summit in New York last month, despite being in New York at the time, Australia was represented by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who seems to have no credentials at all in the areas of climate study, climate action or even science in general. With no climate change or science ministries, it’s puzzling why Environment Minister Greg Hunt was denied the honour of presenting Australia’s policy to the Summit.

Mr Abbott, who has not studied science since high school, has appointed high profile climate change deniers to key positions: Maurice Newman is his senior business advisor, and Dick Warburton is advising on Australia’s Renewable Energy Target. Mr Newman has called for an enquiry into the Bureau of Meteorology, citing doubt in some temperature recordings, a subject far outside his scope as an advisor on business. A few minutes of research shows that the only people questioning the figures are other high profile climate change deniers, including Jo Nova and Jennifer Marohasy. It’s an endless cycle of deniers quoting each other’s doubts to prove their argument.

Mr Warburton describes himself as a climate change sceptic: 

I am not a denier, nor a sceptic actually, of climate change per se. What I am sceptical is the claims that man-made carbon dioxide is the major cause of global warming. I'm not a denier of that, but I am sceptical of that claim.

The government’s attitude to climate change is also “sceptical”, if Treasurer Joe Hockey’s first budget is an indication. There were massive cuts to “green” science and technology programmes, including the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, the National Water Commission, Carbon Capture and Storage projects, the One Million Solar Roofs Programme, Landcare funding, and funding for research into clean fuels.

The ALP’s plan for a National Broadband Network has been all but abandoned, and yet every argument made to support the Abbott Government’s alternative network has been thoroughly debunked. Rod Tucker, Laureate Professor, Institute for a Broadband-Enabled Society (IBES) at University of Melbourne is highly critical of the Coalition’s broadband solution. 

The idea that we could use very fast broadband based on mobile technologies and existing fibre defies the laws of physics. The reality is that very fast broadband - 50 megabits per second and above - cannot be delivered to the entire population using wireless and existing fibre.

The science and technology sector also took a hit in Joe Hockey’s first budget, when billions of dollars were cut from various scientific agencies - another indication that the government doesn't consider science to be a priority.

So fundamental is science to Western civilisation that we take much of it for granted. Perhaps this is one of the reasons the government felt comfortable stripping millions of dollars from the budget of Australia’s peak science body, the CSIRO. 

As a direct consequence of the federal government slashing $111 million from CSIRO's funding over four years in the May budget, the organisation would lose 400 researchers and support staff by mid next year and another 300 positions would be cut after an internal restructure.

The budget has had an immediate impact on research into severe infectious diseases, including Hendra and Ebola.

Last month, management confirmed eight infectious disease researchers at the Australian Animal Health Laboratory in Geelong, the country's only facility for researching live samples of deadly diseases such as Ebola, would also lose their jobs.

Science is simply not part of this government’s vocabulary. A quick investigation into the current ministry shows that only one current minister has tertiary qualification in science – and that’s Scott Morrison’s degree in Applied Science (Economics and Geography) – not a test-tube or Bunsen Burner in sight. The next closest is Andrew Robb’s qualification in agriculture. The Shadow Ministry is not much better, with only Richard Marles studying science at tertiary level.

On social media, critics of the Government’s decision to refuse to send aid to West Africa have drawn comparisons with the government’s enthusiasm to send troops back to Iraq. Rather than being an expression of racist sentiments, or fear of being unable to control the spread of Ebola, it’s more likely to be a lack of confidence in the science being practiced, from biochemistry and statistical modelling to logistics and infection control protocols. 

The world’s future, our ability to feed and clothe a growing global population, fight disease, communicate, conduct business, travel and even amuse ourselves is now so completely intertwined with science that it’s unthinkable that the government of a wealthy developed country has sidelined it.  Mr Abbott needs to look past his own ignorance, beyond the limitations of his Ministry and advisers, and accept that Australia can have an important role as a global citizen. With that role comes responsibility, and as a nation, we are failing to meet those responsibilities.