Kev, Kim and the research revolution

One of the criticisms of the new Rudd Government - in fact, it is one of the few criticisms I can think of, so powerful have been the angelic beams of light shining on the sanctified head of Our Glorious New Leader and his friends - has been about the amount of reviews and inquiries it has ordered since its election four months ago.

Surely, whinge the critics - almost entirely made up of depressed and despairing members of the former government - the Kevinistas were elected to get on with things, not to run around asking everyone else what to do.

Apparently, the latest tally is 47 reviews so far, the Liberal Party having little else to do with themselves these days but twiddle their thumbs, do their sums and then get back to the real job of self-destruction.

More reviews are promised, and Our Glorious New Leader makes no bones about it. He insists, as he did to Phillip Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald the other day, that the Howard Government instigated 495 reviews in 2005/2006 alone, including one into bean-bag standards.

I don't think even Kevin Rudd will be able to beat that one, leaving John Howard's comedy furniture legacy intact for all time. Rather than investigate beanbags, the new government says it is reviewing things it thinks are of slightly more importance, including a plan to tackle climate change, how to better manage the health system and how to set the Education Revolution on its way without scaring the kiddies.

This is where the new Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, the man formerly known as Kim Il-Carr, comes in. I think we can safely do away with that nickname, Senator Carr's suspected socialist tendencies being firmly tucked away with his anorak and his Che t-shirt if my chat with him is anything to go by.

While he holds firmly to good old-fashioned, wishy-washy lefty principles such as academic freedom and the importance of basic research, he is keen to get the private sector more involved, to the point of considering industry-funded PhDs.

Carr too has promised a couple of reviews, including one into the national innovation system and another into how to set up a new research quality and evaluation system, a program with a better sounding acronym than its proper name. Excellence in Research for Australia doesn't have a great deal of grunt to it but it made for a good headline in the press release. A new ERA for research quality? We'll have to wait and see.

Similarly with the innovation review, the committee of which is tasked with issuing a green paper by June. Carr has promised a Research Revolution to accompany its big sister the Education Revolution, so let's hope the RR doesn't turn out to be the idiot brother that no one likes to talk about.

Lurking in the shadow of all of these plans and programs, however, is the rather alarming figure of Wayne Swan and his Gillette 2008. Treasurer Swan will be co-sponsoring the white paper that will result from the innovation review green paper, Carr says, so while there may be some great ideas contained within, if additional funding is required then Swanny may very well decide that in this economic climate it is more sensible to have a close shave rather than grow designer stubble. Similarly with the ERA and any potential links it may have to the block funding system.

Again, we'll just have to wait and see, an attitude I took when interviewing Carr and one that he brought up when pressed on the issue of money. I've just written the interview in a straight question-and-answer format, allowing Carr to outline his basic philosophy but without too much in the way of real detail. Let's see what the next six months will bring.

In the meantime, if you have any ideas on how the research sector can take its place within the research revolution, do let me know. Kev and Kim say they are open to ideas, so let's give them some.