A rant of epic proportions: Why Australia will never make scientific progress under an Abbott government

In the latest government demonstration of scientific ineptitude, Prime Minister Tony Abbott has instructed Chief Scientist Ian Chubb to put the recently released strategic research priorities into plain English.  The phrase ‘human systems’ as a term for the word ‘habitat’ ostensibly stumped the PM, who wants scientific jargon removed from the report.

Not at all surprising from the man whose objectionable intellect was responsible for a well thought out response to the science of climate change.  He called it “absolute crap”.

Australia will never make any scientific progress under an Abbott government, because Abbott himself is so determined to steamroll science in favour of religion and his oh-so-precious border protection policies that make a mockery of basic human rights as well as UN conventions.

Sadly, he seems to be succeeding in his mission to repudiate science in Australia.

One of the first moves the Abbott government made upon election was to abolish the position of a dedicated Minister for Science, something every other government has had since 1931.  Abbott defended this move by stating “It’s been remarked upon that we don’t have a minister for science as such in the new government and I know that [people] may have been momentarily dismayed by that, but let me tell you that the United States does not have a secretary for science and no nation on Earth has been as successful and innovative as the United States.”.   

Perhaps Mr Abbott needs reminding that we are Australia, not America?  That, as a nation, our potential for innovation and scientific progress is, at times, completely unique to the rest of the world?  The sheer vastness and diversity of our country provides us with opportunities singular to any other continent and to so easily dismiss the advancements made by Australian scientists, and the potential of Australian scientists to make further advancements, because we’re not as ‘successful’ or ‘innovative’ as the United States is degrading to all Australian scientists. It’s also embarrassing. 

But perhaps the issue is not that he needs reminding that we are Australia and not America; after all this is the PM who abolished the Minister for Science position in his cabinet, yet has a Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on the Public Service position, a Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Centenary of ANZAC and fewer women in his cabinet than the government of Afghanistan has in theirs, so clearly he has his priorities well thought out, and his focus is where it should be.

The scientific community of Australia, for the most part, was not “momentarily dismayed” by the failure to elect a Minister for Science. It was appalled.  Even prominent Canadian scientist David Suzuki, who was visiting Australia at the time, commented on the situation by saying “What the hell kind of government is it that comes into office and the first symbolic act is to shut down a source of information?  The minute you shut down solid scientific information then you can run it on your ideology.”

Predictably, there was also no Minister for Climate Change.  Why assign a minister for a science you fail to understand and therefore declare it “absolute crap”, in Abbott’s own words? And, unfortunately for us, it did not stop there.

Abbott then personally introduced legislation to repeal the carbon tax.  

Meanwhile, our Environment Minister was too busy looking up references on Wikipedia to attend international climate change negotiations in Warsaw in late November 2013.  This is the same minister who also announced that he would commence the closure of the Climate Change Authority as well as the Climate Change Commission.  Although, in fairness, with no carbon tax, there is no real need for the Climate Change Authority whose main focus was on recommending the best carbon prices, as well as setting the national emission reduction targets. 

 It seems it is now more important to deny climate change than acknowledge that a lack of serious action now has the future potential to devastate the sunburnt land we call home.

And then there was the CSIRO.  

The premier science agency in Australia is one of the largest and most diverse research agencies in the world; comprised of National Research Flagships, National Facilities, twelve research divisions and a range of international standard laboratories.  However, up to a quarter of scientists, researchers and workers at the agency stand to lose their jobs under the public service job freeze.  Not only did the freeze threaten the jobs of up to 1400 CSIRO workers, it has the potential to devastate the progress of some of the organisation’s top research projects.

Therein lies the issue with how the government’s failure to invest in science and scientific progress will adversely affect medicine and healthcare: In order to have any progress in medicine, and ultimately healthcare, we must have progress in science.

In simplistic terms, medicine itself is the application of specialised fields of science such as biochemistry, neuroscience, pharmacology, genetics, cytology, histology, and molecular biology.  Without these specialised fields of science, there would be no medicine.  Without medicine, there would be no healthcare.  

The medical research occupation, an occupation necessary to facilitate growth and advancement in healthcare, is largely made up of scientists with qualifications and expertise in the biomedical, or laboratory medicine fields. Almost every major health initiative in Australia in the last four decades has been science, or medical researched based. The National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC) and their work, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), mass immunisation programs, the establishment of women’s health centres, breast cancer screening centres, men’s health services, and others, are just some of the initiatives which have played a decisive role in the health of Australia as a nation. 

The government is the major provider of healthcare services to the public, but without a basic understanding or respect for science (which emanates into medicine and healthcare) whether it will be able to provide healthcare services which accurately fill the needs the Australian public has remains to be seen. 

When you abolish things like the carbon tax and turn the Ministry for Environment into an international laughing stock, you risk the associated determinants of health (specifically social and natural environments as determinants of health) negatively impacting the population.  

When you fail to take the threat of climate change seriously, you risk affecting industries such as the agricultural industry when the consequences of your lack of action begin to take place.  The vast majority of people in these industries already experience limited access to healthcare services, and studies have shown that the previous decline in areas such as agriculture has a direct effect on those working in the industry.  Men living in remote or rural areas in the agricultural sector already have a higher rate of psychological problems, and poorer health in general compared with those in regional and metropolitan areas.  This will only be exacerbated by ignorant inaction on climate change. 

When you cut jobs from the science sector, you not only risk a lack of scientific progress, you adversely affect those who have lost their jobs.  A macro-theoretical framework of employment relations and health inequalities shows that power relations, such as political parties, influence social policies which then influence health systems and the end result is health inequalities.

When you attempt to mute the voice of Australian scientists, or allow your own political agendas and beliefs to stand in the way of scientific progress, you prevent the advancement of the nation as a whole, as well as the health of its people.  

Abbott has made it crystal clear that he has no use for science, and justifies his dismissal of it by forming alliances with a minority of conservatives who share his views, however underqualified and unintelligent those views may be. And Australia will suffer for it.  Not only have his actions doomed the future of scientific progression in Australia, they will adversely affect the progression of medicine, which will have a detrimental effect on our health as a nation.

Perhaps we should take a page out of Abbott’s book and start praying it all works out, and that he ceases in his determination to halt or abolish anything science related.  Because short of that, there isn’t much else we can do these days.

*originally published, by me, on rebeccamillarblog.com