But here we are in mid-2026, and the wheels are visibly wobbling. Last month, the much-touted Brisbane Airport site was unceremoniously abandoned in favour of a council-owned site at Moreton Bay Central. Yet, despite pivoting to an empty lot at a former paper mill, it appears that neither the company nor the government has publicly walked back their foundational commitment to have the site operational by the end of 2027. Promising to build the world's first million-qubit, fault-tolerant computer from the ground up in just 18 months is, to put it mildly, an ambitious logistical – and technical – undertaking!
More importantly, I am writing about this now because we should not continue to ignore the sheer opportunity cost of this mega-project. While the government plays venture capitalist with a single, highly speculative hardware gamble, the reality is that Australian science may be reaching a breaking point.
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Australia’s Gross Expenditure on R&D (GERD) was a mere 1.69% of GDP in 2023-24. This leaves us languishing far behind the OECD average, estimated at 2.93% in 2023, and significantly outpaced by peer economies that treat foundational research as critical infrastructure rather than a discretionary expense.
We are, quite literally, starving the ecosystem.
There is a profound irony at the heart of the PsiQuantum deal. The company is headquartered in Silicon Valley, but its co-founders are products of the Australian university system. They are the quintessential example of the ‘brain drain’ – talented innovators who left Australia when the domestic funding ecosystem failed to support their ambition. This leaves us spending nearly a billion dollars of taxpayer money to effectively buy back our own exported talent at a massive premium.
Yet, in doing so, we are contributing to the collapse of the very STEM pipeline required to produce the next generation of innovators. How does a government justify a near-billion-dollar bet on a speculative hardware project while simultaneously starving the foundation? The answer, as is so often the case in technology policy, lies in a deliberate semantic conflation. By using the word ‘quantum’ as a monolithic buzzword, policymakers have successfully blurred the lines between practical, deployable technologies and a long-term engineering marathon.
Let's dive in and look at the data.
