ARDR-external comment: Nicola Purser, BDO
Jumping the gun on innovation
Will the Australian Government fail to incorporate industry insights in its new major innovation policy?
Australia's poor commercialisation outcome of its R&D effort is meant to be front and centre of the Government's new innovation policies - yet what business thinks on major schemes, such as the R&D Tax Incentive, may not play much of a role in the creation of its broader policy framework.
In the comment below, BDO Research & Development partner Nicola Purser takes a shot at the Australian Government's new found love for innovation, and the potential failure to incorporate commercial insights in its upcoming innovation policy.
“The Australian Government is putting academic research ahead of critical industry insights by delivering its Innovation Statement prior to finalising its current survey of R&D Tax Incentive registrants.
“While the Innovation Statement is expected for release on 9 December – almost two weeks following today’s [27 November] release of the ACOLA report 'Translating research for economic and social benefit - Country comparisons' - the industry survey commenced just this month as part of the broader Re:think Tax White Paper process.
“It is disconcerting that the Australian Government is planning to announce its 'revamp' of the R&D Tax Incentive prior to finalising this survey and gathering the insights from business, particularly given the ACOLA report itself highlights the need for greater collaboration with the business community.
“With innovation such a critical component of Australia’s economic future, jumping the gun on innovation policy without incorporating commercial insights is incredibly inept.
“In terms of specific measures, I would urge the Australian Government to consider more carefully the critical factors of expediency and promptness in commercial R&D, factors often misunderstood by academia and the public sector.
“For example, in my experience of working with Australian businesses from a wide variety of sectors, I fail to see how a move to grants and loans, which can be cumbersome, untimely and inflexible, could be seen as progressive.
“Likewise, in response to Australia’s Chief Scientist Ian Chubb’s recent comments suggesting the public sector takes a role in picking winners, I would counter that not only have governments proven notoriously bad at picking winners, this is counterproductive to the spirit of innovation and exposing new ideas to the open market to determine which are successful.”