Science journal Nature pleads government to change research integrity law

At the time, Stuart Robert said he had rejected the grants because they “do not demonstrate value for taxpayers’ money nor contribute to the national interest”.

Critics say the decision to block the grants was “a dog whistle to the pentecostal right” and another chapter in the culture wars that was undermining relations between universities and the Coalition.

The move attracted international criticism. The former heads of the European Research Council and the National Science Foundation in the US, as well as the publicly funded German Humboldt Foundation, have been among leading members of the global research community who said the move undermined the integrity of the research sector and was destabilising to democracy.

Thousands of researchers signed petitions. However, a Coalition-dominated Senate committee chaired by Nationals MP Matt Canavan that examined whether the legislation that allowed Mr Robert to veto the grants should be changed found there was no case to answer.

The Nature editorial notes there have been four instances of ministerial intervention since 2001, three of them in the past five years.

“These are projects that had been recommended for funding by independent committees of experts in the fields concerned,” the article said.

“Moreover, there is inconsistency because a ministerial veto doesn’t apply to grants awarded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council.“

”If all of the main parties continue to support the current law, there is a grave risk that the next government will have the means to wield its research-funding veto power with impunity.

“That can only undermine the integrity of Australian science. Researchers must continue to urge all of Australia’s political parties to see sense and change course.“