Significant thanks for removing the veto power must go to Senator Dr. Mehreen Faruqi, who first introduced a Bill to do it back in 2018.

This led to a parliamentary enquiry which led, in no small part, to the #ARCreview which recommended removing the veto.

Thanks, Senator!👏

https://aus.social/@ARC_Tracker/110930581619759213

👆Excerpt from the Government's response to #ARCreview's recommendations ▶️https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/resources/australian-government-response-trusting-australias-ability-review-australian-research-council-act

Only relevant question was this.
Sen O’Sullivan asked whether CEO was concerned by any #ARCReview recommendations?
CEO: No.

Does CEO agree with them all?
CEO: Yes, generally, in principle, on key points. Maybe not some details.

Interesting. No follow-up though.

"Restricting the Ministerial veto and requiring transparency for such decisions...is a critical recommendation of the Review" - read more reaction from @Science_Academy @ScienceAU @ATSE_au @uniaus to the #ARCreview https://www.scimex.org/newsfeed/expert-reaction-australian-research-council-arc-review

RT @ARC_Tracker@twitter.com

The #ARCreview recommendations have been published⤵️

✅No vetos
✅Board approves grants, appoints CEO
✅Review assessment criteria & ROPE
✅Direct consultation with researchers
✅Streamlined app process – 2-step?
✅Indigenous Fellowship
✅Scrap ERA/EI

▶️https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/review-australian-research-council-act-2001

🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/ARC_Tracker/status/1648961188422905856

RT @ARC_Tracker
The #ARCreview recommendations have been published⤵️

✅No vetos
✅Board approves grants, appoints CEO
✅Review assessment criteria & ROPE
✅Direct consultation with researchers
✅Streamlined app process – 2-step?
✅Indigenous Fellowship
✅Scrap ERA/EI

▶️https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/review-australian-research-council-act-2001

On first (fairly quick) reading, I think the #ARCreview offers some really good ways to improve the ARC.

It notes in many things that the ARC’s own (ongoing?) review of processes could improve, too.

Will these recommendations be accepted by the Minister? I really hope so!

🍿🍿

Finally, there’s strong statements in #ARCreview about the experience/background of the ARC CEO.

These recommendations, if accepted, would basically insist that only experienced researchers can be appointed as ARC CEO.

And, of course, ERA & EI were recommended for scrapping.

No surprise there: ARC already scrapped it! But said they’d investigate replacing it with a “data-driven, metrics-based approach”.

There's no misunderstanding what #ARCreview thought of that:
“We DO NOT RECOMMEND …"🔥

#ARCreview considered several ways to better engage Indigenous researchers👇

A major recommendation here is to create a new Fellowship scheme in the Discovery Program for Indigenous researchers.

Many researchers’ submissions said “proposals are too long” & unis complained about admin burden.

Well done, because #ARCreview noted these & recommended streamlining👇

A two-step app process was supported in submissions – ARC asked to consider this.

#ARCreview also tried to address problem of ARC's almost complete lack of engagement with researchers.

It recommends ARC “expected to engage” in “direct consultation with the academic and research community”, amongst other stakeholders, when it considers changing grant programs.

The #ARCreview recommendations have been published⤵️

✅No vetos
✅Board approves grants, appoints CEO
✅Review assessment criteria & ROPE
✅Direct consultation with researchers
✅Streamlined app process – 2-step?
✅Indigenous Fellowship
✅Scrap ERA/EI

▶️https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/review-australian-research-council-act-2001

Liam Mannix reporting on #ARCreview report released today, in @smh@twitter.com/@theage 👇

Broadly the recommendations are being welcomed. A real chance for positive change here!
https://www.smh.com.au/national/government-review-blasts-political-meddling-in-science-20230420-p5d20c.html

RT @ARC_Tracker
The #ARCreview recommendations have been published⤵️

✅No vetos
✅Board approves grants, appoints CEO
✅Review assessment criteria & ROPE
✅Direct consultation with researchers
✅Streamlined app process – 2-step?
✅Indigenous Fellowship
✅Scrap ERA/EI

▶️https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/review-australian-research-council-act-2001

The 2023 Sheil, Dodds, Hutchinson ARC Review has been released: https://www.education.gov.au/higher-education-reviews-and-consultations/review-australian-research-council-act-2001 Check out Recommendation 10: it recommends that “the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) and Engagement and Impact (EI) exercises be discontinued.” Thank you 🙏🏽 #ARCReview So many human-years of time would be released for us to actually do research if this recommendation is followed.

@callmesipo It is almost as good as gone now that it's to be assessed only by the peer assessors (detailed and general assessors) and not the ARC CEO or Minister. They've changed the scope of what the NIT is supposed to mention, and it only needs to be signed-off by the DVCRs (just like the rest of the application does). I doubt it will go any further than this, really, but who knows what the recommendations from the #ARCreview will throw up.

RT @ARC_Tracker@twitter.com

“Low job security & high competition could be contributing to long working hours for early-career researchers”

The ARC is part of this “miserable” situation, but surely a grants system can be part of turning it around? #ARCreview an important opportunity!
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00193-z

🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/ARC_Tracker/status/1617755648237907968

RT @ARC_Tracker
“Low job security & high competition could be contributing to long working hours for early-career researchers”

The ARC is part of this “miserable” situation, but surely a grants system can be part of turning it around? #ARCreview an important opportunity!
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00193-z

“Low job security & high competition could be contributing to long working hours for early-career researchers”

The ARC is part of this “miserable” situation, but surely a grants system can be part of turning it around? #ARCreview an important opportunity!
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00193-z