What experts are saying about the 2026 Federal Budget
By Olivia Henry, the Australian Science Media Centre
The Federal Government released the 2026 budget earlier this week, with large tax reforms encompassing negative gearing and capital gains tax igniting intense conversations across the nation.
But how did science fare?
Chief Executive Officer at Science and Technology Australia, Ryan Winn, told the AusSMC this budget “gives with one hand but takes with the other.”
Funding for the CSIRO
Many experts are welcoming funding to support the financial stability of the CSIRO, with this budget seeing $387.4 million over four years, as well as investments for the CSIRO’s Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness and the STEM Professionals in Schools Program.
Chief Executive Officer, Kylie Walker AM from the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering said this is a win for science and research in Australia.
“We welcome the investment in science and research – including for publicly-funded research agencies like CSIRO. It’s a much-needed lifeline after many years of dwindling funding,” she said.
“Funding science and research is one of the best investments a government can make – we know that the extra funding announced tonight will pay dividends and set us up to be more prosperous and competitive.”
But Professor Chennupati Jagadish AC, the President of the Australian Academy of Science, said some elements of the Budget were disappointing, including the repurposing of Australia’s Economic Accelerator Program to fund many of these measures.
A focus on productivity
Productivity has also been noted as one of the key focus areas for this year’s budget, with investments to build capacity, unlock AI opportunities, and make it easier to engage with government.
However, Veronica Le Nevez, Head of Impact and Engagement at the George Institute for Global Health noted a huge missed opportunity to improve productivity through prevention of chronic disease.
“Chronic diseases cost $98 billion in 2023-24 - over half of all health expenditure - the investment in the budget in prevention (just under $1 billion) is out of proportion to this challenge,” she said.
“Instead, taxpayers will need to fund an extra $25 billion for hospitals each year, and more for urgent care centres. Not only do chronic diseases cost a lot to treat, sick people are less able to participate in the economy - lost labour force participation from chronic diseases is projected to reach as much as $63.7 billion by 2030. We can't afford to keep ignoring prevention.”
Increased investment in medical research
As part of their productivity focus, experts have welcomed the announcement that the Federal Government will provide $508.5 million over four years to increase the Medical Research Future Fund.
However, as Mr Winn added, the same support does not seem to have been offered to non-medical research, which could affect the future of innovation in Australia more broadly.
“There is an overwhelming sense of uncertainty in the research and development industry as funding for non-medical research grants see a significant reduction,” he said.
“One third of the workforce has told us they are planning to leave the sector. And we have decades-long under-investment in R&D that simply hasn’t kept up with the real cost of doing research.”
NDIS funding cuts
The latest budget’s changes to NDIS funding and eligibility have stirred much controversy and conversation.
New requirements will force patients to try all other “appropriate treatment” for their condition before becoming eligible for the NDIS – in an effort to cut $36 billion over four years. This cut does come at a cost, as Adjunct Associate Professor Graeme Hughes from Griffith University said: “300,000 people will lose NDIS access.”
Professor Nicholas Rohde from the Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics at Griffith University told the AusSMC this overhaul is an effort to combat ballooning costs, and is “probably necessary.”
“Without reform, the scheme will cost more than $70 b by the end of the decade. But this needs to be done in a way that doesn’t throw vulnerable Australians under the bus, which is no easy task,” he said.
Read the full AusSMC Expert Reaction here.
This article originally appeared in Science Deadline, a weekly newsletter from the AusSMC. You are free to republish this story, in full, with appropriate credit.
Contact: Olivia Henry
Phone: +61 8 7120 8666
Email: info@smc.org.au