Academics hit back at research fund's critics

Academics and politicians have rallied to defend the Marsden Fund from charges that its procedures require examination.

Critics have questioned the way the $38 million research fund distributes its annual grants after revelations that some award panellists received money.

The National Party's science spokesman, Dr Paul Hutchison, also queried the funding of a cultural history of sex, saying it was disturbing that research awards which were so hard to win in physics, chemistry and mathematics were going to "what appear to be somewhat nebulous sex studies".

The New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee yesterday said the main problem was that the fund was too small, as its unique position of being untargeted funding offered the possibility of profound and unexpected discoveries.

"While current criticism of the fund centres on the application selection process, it needs to be appreciated that top-level research is best assessed by leading academics operating through a system of international peer review," said Professor David Skegg, chairman of the vice-chancellors committee's standing committee on research.

"Inevitably, many outstanding applicants are disappointed. It is sad if that disappointment leads a few to question the integrity of the process."

The bulk of the Marsden grants - 85 per cent - goes to traditional sciences. About 10 per cent goes to social sciences, and the rest to the humanities.

Professor Ken Strongman, chairman of the Council of Humanities, said he backed a Marsden Fund statement which said allegations of corruption against recipients were "outrageous and completely unfounded".

"It is unfortunate that a fund which represents less than 5 per cent of all research, and which is so critical to New Zealand's research community, has been attacked in this way. It is vital to New Zealand that we have such a fund. Without it we could not make comparisons between ourselves and other OECD countries, which have long provided these opportunities to their academic communities."

Science Minister Steve Maharey called Dr Hutchison's comments deplorable, and said he had taken a cheap political shot in attacking an individual applicant to the fund.

Dr Hutchison was unrepentant and said he had long called for the taxpayer contribution to the fund to be increased. As an ex-gynaecologist, he believed sex was an important area of study, and all he had done was call for scrutiny of the awards process.

"It's hugely important to make New Zealanders aware what their money is being spent on. Academics need to find their feet on the ground and realise their work is being funded by the public."