Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2016, which was introduced recently by the minister, who is in the House. It gives us a great opportunity to reflect on where we are headed in this space. From my own particular point of view, having had the digital economy and future work added to my portfolio of responsibilities of, for which I am grateful, these types of things are very big issues for the nation, both now and into the future. Our digital economy was estimated by Deloitte last year to stand at about $80 billion, which is not a small thing. It is estimated that it will rise in future years to nearly $140 billion and the application of digital technology is set to provide a huge economic bonanza, not just in terms of extra businesses and the value of those businesses and their output, but obviously in terms of jobs. It is very important.

But what has happened in this space in the immediate aftermath of the election is interesting. Last year everybody was talking about innovation—everyone was talking about how big it was to the country. There was a big focus on early-stage innovation particularly. Both the member for Griffith and I have taken a deep interest in this for quite some time. We actually spent time over in Silicon Valley earlier this year, where we visited places like 500 Startups, which is one of the great examples of how to build start-up communities and, in particular, new firms that are providing opportunities for jobs. In the Australian context we can see from figures produced by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science that between 2003 and 2014 two million net new jobs were created by very young enterprises. A lot of those are start-ups.

But all the focus that we saw on start-ups has gone. It seems to have literally disappeared from the political landscape in this country. I do not know why. I would be interested in knowing why there has been such a retreat. The start-up community in Australia was very supportive of the Turnbull government. They were very vocal in their support of some of the things that are being done, but you hardly hear the new minister, who is here today, talk about them. In fact, he is leading the retreat from any discussion on start-ups. Agility these days equals speed a retreat—that is what agility means. The exciting time to beat a retreat is right now under this new minister, who brings in these bills that ostensibly are part of the National Innovation and Science Agenda. I basically see a lot of this stuff as being make-work for a minister who is not really interested in championing the cause of start-ups.

The argument now is that we need to broaden it out—that there are existing SMEs for which we need to be focused on how to make them innovate more. On paper that sounds great, but the reality is that it is quite different. Those opposite do not have the capacity to argue the case for the start-up sector in this country, because they have detected that there is a degree of reticence in the Australian community about the impact of technological change on jobs. There is no denying that is there. It is a reality. But the key for us is to keep focusing on the huge job-creating capacity of start-ups in this country, from the figures I have quoted before, and also to help manage the change going forward. But there is absolutely no game plan from those opposite. It is why the federal opposition has added specifically a responsibility within our shadow ministry for looking at the future of work to deal with the fact that automation will change the nature of work in this country, as it will in most advanced economies. It will change jobs right from entry-level ones through to jobs that are being done now by white-collar people in blue-collar people.

You have 3-D printed homes in China, as is happening right now, and you see entry-level jobs that have completely changed because automation is doing the work that people used to do. Look at some of the categories. For instance, drivers' jobs will change as they potentially are impacted by self-driving vehicles. Even this afternoon I was speaking to people about how journalists, for instance, can see automation occurring within their field, as well. The reality is that those jobs are going to change. Between 10 and 40 per cent of jobs will be impacted by automation and we need a game plan not. Those opposite do not have it. When they pick up the anxiety of the general public in relation to this issue, they retreat. They equate any talk about start-ups and early-stage innovation with causing an anxiety that they are unable to deal with.

You can see that inability in the way that they fail to support school funding in this country, in the way that they fail to support the expansion of TAFE in this country and in the way that they fail to support the proper expansion of universities and tertiary education in this country. When they retreat, we see what we are getting from this innovation minister. I am surprised about the comments I am picking up from the start-up community about the blase nature of this innovation minister towards the start-up community. Prominent members of the start-up community have told me—

Mr Hunt interjecting—

What, so that you can go on a witch-hunt. Prominent members of the start-up community have told me that they have tried to meet with you, Minister, and have been told that they can meet with an adviser. Roundtables are held instead of actually going and meeting with the community itself. Why is it that we have this? The reason is that you have an inability to engage with the sector. Ever since you have come into the job—

See this speech in context