![[trees] ←(･_･┐) [forrest]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-v_Rhr-D0kZY/UkQG5RBeRzI/AAAAAAAAACI/fRmiLXP_qRQ/s1600/123.png)
(from http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/31/tony-abbott-defends-science-credentials-minister)
Abbott directly acknowledged the controversy over his decision not to appoint a dedicated minister for science. The position now falls under the portfolio of Ian Macfarlane, the industry minister.
Abbott directly acknowledged the controversy over his decision not to appoint a dedicated minister for science. The position now falls under the portfolio of Ian Macfarlane, the industry minister.
“It’s been remarked upon that we don’t have a minister for science as such in the new government and I know that there are people in the room who may have been momentarily dismayed by that,” Abbott said.
“But let me tell you that the United States does not have a secretary for science and no nation on Earth has been as successful and innovative as the United States. I’d say to all of you please, judge us by our performance, not by our titles.”
THERE YOU HAVE IT- america doesn't have a minister for science, so, why the heck should we?
it would have been nice if someone had pressed mr abbott on his definition of "successful"
THERE YOU HAVE IT- america doesn't have a minister for science, so, why the heck should we?
it would have been nice if someone had pressed mr abbott on his definition of "successful"
