THE Federal Government has rejected claims that a new probe into the efficiency and effectiveness of rural research organisations is a cover for cutting funding.
The terms of reference for a Productivity Commission investigation into the research and development organisations were released this week, promising to "consider the economic and policy rationale for Australian Government investment in rural research and development".
The inquiry will examine the "interactions and potential overlaps" across programs "to ensure Australia gets the best value for its research and development spending".
More specifically, the review will also consider the effectiveness of the current research and development corporation model in improving competitiveness and productivity in agriculture.
It will "examine the appropriateness of current funding levels and arrangements for agricultural research and development, particularly levy arrangements, and Commonwealth matching and other financial contributions to agriculture, fisheries and forestry RDCs".
Management, governance and administrative duplication will be under the microscope, as will the balance between the public and private good of research – that is, how much of this funding only benefits the farmer or the individual sector, and how much benefits the broader Australian economy.
When first mooted late last year Minister for Agriculture, Tony Burke, took to task some of the big pay packets earned by the bosses at these organisations.
In an address to the National Press Club last year, Mr Burke flagged his frustration that, despite requests to improve the way these organisations spend their money, very little progress had been made.
Mr Burke said some research and development corporations "ignored" his request to remove duplication and cut down on some "obscene" executive salaries.
He said there was a minority of these corporations paying salaries which "do not pass the test of credibility" and he was determined to ensure farmers in the paddock which pay huge sums in levies every year "see value for money".
But Opposition spokesman for agriculture, John Cobb, said those claims were a front for a deeper agenda to strip rural research by more than $60 million.
Mr Cobb would not say where he got that figure from, but said there was a fear within many of these organisations that research dollars were being stripped away to pay for climate change projects.
He said many industry organisations were also fearful to publicly express their opinion about Government policies in case it affected their future funding.
Mr Cobb said he was especially worried about the Government's intention to look at public versus private benefit, arguing this could mean anything not deemed to be in the broader public good – like climate change research – will be left to industry to fund.
"Tony Burke is more an assistant minister for the environment," Mr Cobb said.
"He wants farmers to do more with less, but my fear is he is going to strip away their ability to try and do that."
Mr Burke hit back though, arguing Mr Cobb had "stepped up with more misinformation".
He said Mr Cobb's claims the Productivity Commission inquiry was a precursor to cutting funding for agricultural research and development were untrue.
He said since the Rudd Government came to office, discretionary funding for agricultural research had increased.
"Under the Rudd Government, research and development has been a key factor in driving strong productivity, last year the Government contributed $207 million to rural research and development corporations to match industry funds," Mr Burke said.
"The Government also announced an additional $50 million to the existing $46.2 million for climate change research for on-farm testing of emissions reduction options.
"As the shadow minister for agriculture, Mr Cobb should review his sources and focus on the task at hand, developing policy rather than playing politics."
Email a friend