There is something we can do about it, though - always accept requests to review if you possibly can. You may feel not expert enough, but remember, if you say no, your replacement will probably be even less expert - if there *is* a replacement.

It is really very tricky. There isn't really much that the College can do by that point, except flag for special discussion if they feel it's resulted in one out-of-whack report having disproportionate influence.

Congratulations to all the successful applicants, commiserations with those not so lucky, and a communal sigh of relief with all that the uncertainty is over for now!

RMS was down for maintenance for a while this morning. Gears turning perhaps...

The sort-of reason given, if accurate, would also mean they were flat-out lying to us when they initially blamed in on the caretaker period, no? Why?!?

Such a weird response: caretaker is long gone. The Department of Energy, for example, started making post-election announcements in May (eg this on May 20 www.energy.gov.au/news/discoun...), so at least as far as they were concerned caretaker was done and dusted by then.

Remember this announcement?

ministers.education.gov.au/clare/ending...

I was so naïvely excited about it...

*Election “caretaker” period ENDED a whole month ago

After about a week of sending an email and a Facebook dm every day, ARC actually responded to me - but only to point me to this "update."

But then why does their network message blame the Caretaker period? Weird.

Worrying thought, though surely not possible, just pure paranoia: are they waiting for the report from the "New Plan for Research" consultation? They surely wouldn't retrospectively cancel schemes after running the whole selection and application process?