❓ Mr Cook questions the Health Minister about continued funding for the Harry Perkins Institute. The Minister confirms overall research funding increased but the Institute's base funding will become contestable, requiring them to compete for it.
AnsweredQoN 319Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
HARRY
PERKINS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH — FUNDING
319. Mr R.H. COOK to the
Minister for Health:
I refer to media reports that the Harry Perkins Institute of
Medical Research may no longer receive its base $1.5 million annual grant under
the institute and infrastructure support fund to maintain and support vital
infrastructure for medical research in Western Australia. Will the minister
guarantee that the full $1.5 million of funding will be continued?
PERKINS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH — FUNDING
319. Mr R.H. COOK to the
Minister for Health:
I refer to media reports that the Harry Perkins Institute of
Medical Research may no longer receive its base $1.5 million annual grant under
the institute and infrastructure support fund to maintain and support vital
infrastructure for medical research in Western Australia. Will the minister
guarantee that the full $1.5 million of funding will be continued?
AnswerView source ↗
The total amount of that money and other money that goes into
research is going to be continued. In fact, as members know, the total amount
of research funding increased by $30 million over four years as part of our
election commitment. In terms of individual organisations getting their
funding, no, it is not going to continue; what will happen is that it will
become contestable. This was first put to me by Fiona Stanley, who was in fact
complaining about the money going to what is now the Harry Perkins Institute of
Medical Research and other locations, saying that some organisations went out
and put up proposals and developed research and got money for the research that
they did, whereas others got it as a base sum.
Mr
F.M. Logan interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Cockburn, I call you to order for the second time.
Dr K.D. HAMES : I
was not entirely convinced by the argument that we should do that, so I
discussed it with all the research organisations, including the Harry Perkins
research centre, to determine whether it was their view that this should occur.
Quite obviously, they said, ''No; it is great to have contestable
funding but we think ours should stay the same.'' The Chief Medical
Officer is now developing our future research policy in this state. He put to
me very strongly that it was his view that it should be contestable. I told him
to talk to those organisations and make sure that everybody was with him. In
the end, I accepted that argument. Whether that research funding will stay the
same will depend on the success of the Harry Perkins Institute in getting
research done. It has to put up research proposals and it has to compete for
the pool of research funding that each organisation will get. How much it will
get will depend on its success as a research organisation. It is anticipated
that it may well get exactly the same amount of money that it gets now, based
on the research work that it has been doing.
Mr F.M. Logan interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Cockburn, if you carry on like this, you will be having a rest!
Dr K.D. HAMES :
That is the proposal that has been put forward. I know that the member for
Cockburn initiated the money that went to the Harry Perkins centre, although I
know that his former leader tried to claim credit for his initiative. The money
from the state and commonwealth governments went to both of the Harry Perkins
Institute's locations.
Mr F.M. Logan interjected.
Dr K.D. HAMES : I
thought that giving the member credit like that might stop him interjecting.
Clearly, it did not work!
Those major research institutes are amazing facilities that
are supported by the taxpayers of Western Australia and Australia. They need to
be competing in the marketplace. They have been given a huge opportunity to
promote research. Their other competitors for that research funding are
universities, the Telethon Kids Institute and other research organisations.
Ms R. Saffioti interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for West Swan!
Dr K.D. HAMES :
While I am on my feet, I remind members that there is a function upstairs
tonight with research officers.
research is going to be continued. In fact, as members know, the total amount
of research funding increased by $30 million over four years as part of our
election commitment. In terms of individual organisations getting their
funding, no, it is not going to continue; what will happen is that it will
become contestable. This was first put to me by Fiona Stanley, who was in fact
complaining about the money going to what is now the Harry Perkins Institute of
Medical Research and other locations, saying that some organisations went out
and put up proposals and developed research and got money for the research that
they did, whereas others got it as a base sum.
Mr
F.M. Logan interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Cockburn, I call you to order for the second time.
Dr K.D. HAMES : I
was not entirely convinced by the argument that we should do that, so I
discussed it with all the research organisations, including the Harry Perkins
research centre, to determine whether it was their view that this should occur.
Quite obviously, they said, ''No; it is great to have contestable
funding but we think ours should stay the same.'' The Chief Medical
Officer is now developing our future research policy in this state. He put to
me very strongly that it was his view that it should be contestable. I told him
to talk to those organisations and make sure that everybody was with him. In
the end, I accepted that argument. Whether that research funding will stay the
same will depend on the success of the Harry Perkins Institute in getting
research done. It has to put up research proposals and it has to compete for
the pool of research funding that each organisation will get. How much it will
get will depend on its success as a research organisation. It is anticipated
that it may well get exactly the same amount of money that it gets now, based
on the research work that it has been doing.
Mr F.M. Logan interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Cockburn, if you carry on like this, you will be having a rest!
Dr K.D. HAMES :
That is the proposal that has been put forward. I know that the member for
Cockburn initiated the money that went to the Harry Perkins centre, although I
know that his former leader tried to claim credit for his initiative. The money
from the state and commonwealth governments went to both of the Harry Perkins
Institute's locations.
Mr F.M. Logan interjected.
Dr K.D. HAMES : I
thought that giving the member credit like that might stop him interjecting.
Clearly, it did not work!
Those major research institutes are amazing facilities that
are supported by the taxpayers of Western Australia and Australia. They need to
be competing in the marketplace. They have been given a huge opportunity to
promote research. Their other competitors for that research funding are
universities, the Telethon Kids Institute and other research organisations.
Ms R. Saffioti interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for West Swan!
Dr K.D. HAMES :
While I am on my feet, I remind members that there is a function upstairs
tonight with research officers.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.