Why is the Albanese Government so reluctant to increase investment in Australian medical research and realise the full potential of the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF)?
The question is raised below by Croakey columnist Dr Lesley Russell, after investigating the implications of the recent Federal Budget for biomedical and health research. Her findings are disturbing and disheartening, she writes.
Lesley Russell writes:
Much of this year’s Budget from the Albanese Government is predicated around “Investing in a Future Made in Australia” and the skills to make this a reality.
Scientific and biomedical research will be an important aspect underpinning this commitment, which includes investing in new technologies and capabilities and building a more resilient Australia by preparing for drought and climate change. The Budget also commits to improving health outcomes and investing in women’s health.
These commitments demand substantial increases in research funding, education and training.
A statement from the Minister for Science and Industry, Ed Husic, acknowledges that: “Greater investment in research and development (R&D) by businesses in Australia is fundamental to maximising the impact of science, research and innovation on Australia’s long-term prosperity, security and wellbeing.”
But where are the Government’s greater investments?
This is my best effort to track down research spending, with a particular focus on biomedical and health research, in the 2024-2025 Budget.
First, a look at research spending in general. It appears that the Albanese Government will continue the focus of previous Coalition Governments on collaborative efforts between universities and industry, and research that delivers commercial outcomes.
That does not augur well for investments in “blue sky” research.
To quote the president of the Australian Academy of Science: “Needed re-investments in discovery science – the basic feedstock of a Future Made in Australia and the government’s net zero ambitions – are fundamentally missing”.
A new strategic review – but no new funding
The Government will undertake what is described as “a strategic examination of Australia’s research and development system to drive innovation in priority areas”.
But it seems, from an interview given by Minister Husic to the Australian Financial Review, that this review will be focused on building manufacturing and commercial capabilities and building business investment in R&D. (Australia’s current R&D expenditure is 1.6 percent of GDP, well below countries such as the United States, Germany and Japan that spend around three percent of GDP on R&D.)
As well as increasing the overall level of R&D spending, industry experts want the review to address the overly complex, bureaucratic process to apply for federal government R&D funding, which is delivered through 227 different programs and 15 federal portfolios.
This review will be something of a follow-on from the 2015 Review of Research Policy and Funding Arrangements (the Watt Review) which focused on research partnerships between Australian higher education institutions and industry, and translating research outcomes into economic and social benefits.
However, as outlined in Table 6.4.2 in Budget Paper #1, the Budget provides no increase in research funding over the forward estimates.
(I find this table incomprehensible and not very informative – it likely demonstrates the complexity of research funding arrangements referred to above. I am pretty certain that it does not include NHMRC and MRFF funding.)
The Budget statement says this: “General research expenses are expected to decrease over the period 2024–25 to 2027–28, attributable to fluctuations in funding allocated to research infrastructure programs, and the reprioritisation of funding to realign investment with Government priorities in the Industry portfolio.”
No new funding was announced for the Australian Research Council (ARC), which has around $1 billion annually in administered expenses over the forward estimates (see Table 2.1.1 in the ARC Portfolio Budget Statement).
Where is new funding for health and biomedical research?
The Government is currently reviewing how to improve alignment and coordination between the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) and the Medical Research Endowment Account (MREA) of the National Research and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).
The discussion paper, released May 2023, is here.
The consultation for this review closed in July 2023. The summary report from the consultation, released just this month, is here.
There does not appear to be any urgency in completing this work.
The Department of Health and Aged Care website states that it is in the “early stages” of work on a National Strategy for Health and Medical Research which is described as “a once in a generation transformation of health and medical research in Australia”.
While there is no announcement of increased funding for the NHMRC, the increase in the MREA over the forward estimates is higher than provided in the 2023-2024 Budget by $18 million in 2024-2025 and $24 million in 2025-2026. Total funding available for research is some $3.8 billion over the forward estimates (just under $1 billion annually). (See NHMRC media release here). Overall, the MREA is set to at least keep pace with expected inflation over the next few years.
There are no changes to forecast expenditure on research through the MRFF. This funding is not indexed and remains at $650 million per year over the forward estimates, so there is effectively a decline in funding in future years.
A Budget media release from the Minister for Health and Aged Care links health and biomedical research funding to the “Future Made in Australia” initiative.
It lists the following Budget commitments:
- $1.4 billion for new research via the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF): A new 10-Year Low Survival Cancers Mission; A new 10-Year Reducing Health Inequities Mission; More research into three health priorities: women’s health, chronic pain, alcohol and other drug treatment.
- $411 million to support research through the NHMRC.
- $62 million to support 26 clinical trials through the MRFF.
- $18.8 million to progress the National One Stop Shop for clinical trials and health research.
However, closer examination shows that the MRFF funding commitments are not new money but represent a redirection of current funds.
More transparency and more MRFF funding needed
I have spent considerable time over the past few years highlighting the lack of transparency in the operations of the MRFF and the funding shortfalls against the original commitment of $1 billion annually (since downgraded to $650 million annually under legislation enacted by the Morrison Government).
(See Croakey’s #MRFFtransparency archives here.)
The MRFF has continued to grow and the fund is now worth over $22 billion. As at December 31, 2023, a total of $2.524 billion had been distributed. In no year has the maximum allowable of $650 million been released and in 2023-2024 only $240 million was distributed.
Note that the MRFF 10-Year Investment Plan has allocated around $650 million per year for each year to 2031-2032. This adds up to $6.3 billion over 10 years. Yet the Albanese Government states that it will commit $6.4 billion over 13 years to MRFF funding.
It should be a matter of national concern that the success rate for NHMRC grants is 10-15 percent and the success rate for some types of MRFF grants is as low as 3.7 percent. That’s not because the ideas, innovation and scholarship are lacking, that’s due to low funding levels and a broken funding system.
The Board overseeing the Future Fund has indicated that $870 million was available for grants in 2023-2024 and $973 million is available for grants in 2024-25.
Why is the Albanese Government so reluctant to increase the investment in Australian medical research and realise the full potential of the MRFF?
Research organisations like Research Australia and the Australian Association of Medical Research Institutes have called for this to be done.
A second issue concerns how the decisions about moving MRFF funding around for the newly-announced initiatives were made.
True, it is the Government of the day (or, more precisely, the Health Minister) that decides which projects to fund, taking the MRFF Strategy and Priorities into account.
The MRFF Strategy was set in 2021; the MRFF Priorities for 2022-2024 do not include references to the topics of the two new Missions (although one would be hard-pressed to argue they are not important). And what aspects of MRFF research will be cut back to fund the new Missions?
As far as I can determine there have been no public consultations on the MRFF and its priorities since 2022.
Disheartening and disturbing
It’s disheartening to see that – despite some fine words and some written commitments – there is very little to boost research funding in general and health and biomedical research in particular in this year’s Budget.
It is also disturbing to see that the potential of the MRFF is not being fulfilled.
I recently attended a fascinating talk with Professor Jennifer Doudna who, together with Professor Emmanuelle Charpentier, was awarded the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their work on CRISPR technology. Doudna made the case for the importance of “blue sky” research in her work.
And here is what her colleague Charpentier says: “[Our research] is an example that shows how important it is to provide scientists with some budget where they are allowed to do some blue-sky research. For sure one always needs to have some kind of big hypothesis or direction or interest, but sometimes you just hit something, certain components that you want to put together in a way that maybe does not make sense but you just want to do it. Scientists need to have the support to be able to do some crazy experiments to see where they go.”
More detailed analyses of the research aspects of the 2024-2025 Budget are available from Research Australia (here) and AAMRI (here).
See Croakey’s extensive coverage of the 2024-2025 Federal Budget
