Labor minister vetos research grants on national security grounds

Two years after he introduced a law to end ministerial vetos of research projects, Australian education minister Jason Clare has quashed 13 grants on national security grounds.

Clare told parliament that he had directed the Australian Research Council (ARC) Board not to approve funding for the 13 projects “for reasons relevant to the security, defence or international relations of Australia”.

The order affects six applications that the ARC Board had intended to fund under Discovery Projects, the primary scheme for supporting fundamental research.

Funding has also been refused for five applications to the Linkage Projects programme, which bankrolls collaborative research, and two to the Linkage Infrastructure, Equipment and Facilities stream, which supports universities and industry to share their research hardware.

The ARC said it would provide no details about the affected applications “for national interest reasons”.

The grants are the first to be vetoed since an amendment to the ARC Act, passed by parliament in March 2024, transferred approval powers for research grants to the newly created ARC Board.

Under the changes, the education minister retained responsibility for approving grants of nationally significant scale. The minister also gained the authority to direct the board to quash grants that aroused national security concerns.

Clare said at the time that the new law would “end the days of ministers using the ARC as a political plaything”, after the agency had been “bedevilled” by political interference and ministerial delays for years.

“That has made it harder for universities to recruit and retain staff, and it has damaged our international reputation,” he said. “That’s not good for our universities [or] businesses…who work with universities.”

The reform came after a succession of Liberal Party education ministers – Brendan Nelson, Simon Birmingham and Stuart Robert – vetoed a total of 27 grants for approved humanities and social science research projects, deeming them a waste of money.

Outgoing Liberal education minister Dan Tehan also rejected five Discovery Projects grants on undisclosed national security grounds. Tehan had earlier reserved his decision on whether to approve 18 grants, pending advice from security agencies.

The Labor government’s election in 2022 also put an end to protracted delays that had plagued researchers for years, largely because the results of grant applications were kept under wraps until they had been announced by politicians.

However, the delays have recently re-emerged as the ARC intensified its checks to ensure that the proposed projects posed no security concerns – a response considered overkill by some insiders.

While the minister’s remaining veto power is seen by some as a second line of defence, enabling consideration of security concerns that become apparent through cabinet processes, the ARC has interpreted it as a responsibility to pre-emptively inform the minister about any potential threat.

Clare confirmed this interpretation in a “statement of expectations” to the agency in March. “ARC-supported activities [must] advance, and not compromise, Australia’s security, defence and international relations,” it says. “I expect the ARC, working with the Department of Education, to provide proactive advice on…these matters, informed by consultation with relevant…security agencies.

“I expect the ARC to focus on addressing threats of espionage and foreign interference affecting Australia’s research sector. This includes continually improving processes to identify and assess risks.”

Clare also urged the ARC to back research that “supports our inclusive national identity built around our shared values including democracy, the rule of law, basic freedoms and the fair go. I expect the ARC Board to have strong regard for relevant hate speech and anti-discrimination laws, including applicant’s past compliance with these obligations.”

The ARC has published a new “Research Security Framework” explaining how it meets these obligations. The agency applies four “research security principles” and explores at least 11 “risk indicators” that could signal threats to security, defence or international relations.

The document also outlines the responsibilities of universities and individual researchers, including disclosure obligations and the consequences for not meeting them.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com