Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Senator Carr) to questions without notice asked today relating to the Commercial Ready program.

Of all the decisions taken in the Rudd government’s 2008 budget the one that has been labelled and is the saddest and dumbest, not surprisingly, is a decision that fell within Senator Carr’s area of responsibility. The short-sighted and vindictive cut to the Commercial Ready program puts up in lights for all to see that Labor is about spin and not substance. Before the election Senator Carr ran around telling anyone who cared to listen that the Howard government was neglecting innovation and that he and Mr Rudd would revitalise the sector. In typical Orwellian spin, less now means more to Messrs Rudd and Carr. But can I tell the minister that the sector is telling me that it would prefer the so-called neglect of the Howard years to the so-called care of Mr Rudd and Senator Carr.

You see the Commercial Ready program was a scheme designed to assist innovators commercialise their inventions and get them out into the marketplace. The test to get funding was rigorous and robust. It funded literally hundreds of science graduates and engineers and helped commercialise many, many innovations right around the country—innovations as diverse as cancer cures, fuel-efficient cars and cutting the road toll. Mr Rudd has his education revolution—and today for the first time we were told about a national innovation revolution, which of course is led by a $700 million cut to innovation; that is how we have a revolution. Senator Carr should know, with his extreme left-wing policies, that revolutions always come with a lot of blood on the floor. Of course that is what he has done in relation to the Commercial Ready program and innovation. There is a lot of blood on the floor. He has simply axed any program that has the word ‘commercial’ in it.

Mr Garrett warned, ‘Don’t listen to what we say; look at what we do.’ Weren’t those words prophetic? Senator Carr and Mr Rudd promised increase funding and increased support to the innovation sector. Yet what did they do in the very first budget they could control? They slashed the CSIRO. They slashed the innovation budget. These cuts were both cruel and unnecessary. The minister’s first attempt to justify this saddest and dumbest of decisions the day after the budget was to run the old class warfare line about not providing assistance to millionaires. Only one of the dumbest—and I had better be careful here; I cannot say one of the dumbest ministers, but can I say one of the most intellectually challenged of ministers—could take such a decision and then seek to justify it with this silly Marxist justification about not supporting millionaires. Australia’s future—which is inextricably interwoven with innovation and doing things better, more cleverly and increasing our competitiveness and our productivity—is being jeopardised by a government that is in disarray and engaged in ad hoc decision making. Increasing productivity, for example, is one of the best ways to fight inflation, and that is what innovation is all about: increasing productivity. So what do those opposite say? ‘We have to cut the budget for innovation, which will impact on productivity, to somehow fight inflation.’ It just goes to show the adhocery that went into this current budget.

When you have even a former Labor science minister willing to condemn this decision, when you have got somebody like Sir Gustav Nossal willing to condemn the decision, when you have got the CEO of Cochlear saying it is the saddest and dumbest decision of the entire budget—and can I say, Mr Deputy President, the competition was very high to get the tag of being the saddest and the dumbest; it was a competitive process—I agree with the CEO of Cochlear: this decision to cut the CRP, the Commercial Ready program, was the saddest and the dumbest, and the government stands condemned. (Time expired)

Linda Kirk (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to take note of answers given by Minister Carr in relation to questions directed to him by the opposition in relation to the Commercial Ready program. There was no question that the first budget delivered by the Rudd Labor government and by Treasurer Wayne Swan was going to be a tough one. We indicated that for some time, and everybody knew that it was going to be a tough budget. The reason for this is in part the inflation legacy that we inherited from the Howard government. People know that we have the highest inflation that we have had in 16 years. As a consequence of the legacy left to us by the Howard government it was necessary for the Rudd Labor government to take some very hard decisions, and that is what we did. People are very familiar with the range of savings measures that were outlined in the budget. These all demonstrate the fiscal responsibility and the clear commitment that the government have to modernising government spending in this country. It was necessary for us to take difficult decisions in order to secure Australia’s long-term prosperity. The disciplined savings measures that were contained in the budget will help to put downward pressure on the inflation, which I mentioned earlier, that is the highest in 16 years, because we in the Rudd Labor government understand that inflation is real and is hurting working families.

Turning now to the Commercial Ready program and its closure, there is no question that the closure of the Commercial Ready program was a difficult decision. While it is regrettable that there are some applicants who spent time and resources in preparing applications, the government made the hard decision which has been implemented. This decision will allow us to get on with the job of implementing a new streamlined set of programs following the review of the national innovation system. It is important to note that all existing commitments under the program will be met. This is worth about $200 million over four years. Also, it is important to emphasise that all of the regional AusIndustry offices originally established with the Commercial Ready funding will remain open, providing advice and support to regional small and medium sized businesses across the country. It is also important to remember that almost three-quarters of the savings from the Commercial Ready program in 2008-09 had already been earmarked in our election policy Clean Energy Plan to tackle climate change in order to offset the government’s new $240 million Clean Business Australia package that the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research mentioned here today in question time. We in the Rudd Labor government are meeting our election commitment to establish Clean Business Australia because we recognise just how important it is for governments to work in partnership with industry to meet the challenge of climate change.

The Rudd Labor government will continue to support Australia’s innovative businesses through R&D tax concessions, the tax offset, the COMET program and a range of venture capital measures including the Innovation Investment Fund Program as well as new initiatives such as Enterprise Connect, researchers in business, Clean Business Australia, which I have already mentioned, and the Green Car Innovation Fund, about which a lot has been said in the last few weeks.

The Rudd Labor government is determined to get the policy settings and programs for innovation right, and part of this is making tough decisions when necessary about spending priorities. The closure of the Commercial Ready program is one of the tough decisions that needed to be made in order to ensure that we are spending in a fiscally responsible manner.

Alan Eggleston (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I must say that as a doctor I am very, very disappointed by the fact that this government in the last budget had a pattern of cutting funding to medical projects and medical research. The cutting of the funding to Commercial Ready is yet another example of this. Up to 20 per cent, I believe, of Commercial Ready grants went to the high-risk biotechnology sector, where it is very hard to get private capital funding because there are not necessarily quick returns. In some cases, companies in this sector depended very heavily on the Commercial Ready program to provide them with seeding funding so that they could raise private capital against that financial base, and by taking away the Commercial Ready program this government has demonstrated its disregard for quality medical research in Australia.

Senator Carr even spoke of Australia’s high international reputation for innovation in the same breath as he was justifying the cuts to the Commercial Ready program. I find that incredible. Australia does have a very great reputation in medical research. We have had four or five Nobel Prize winners in medical research and, as Senator Abetz said in his speech today, Sir Gustav Nossal, one of Australia’s most renowned medical scientists, has been quoted as saying the decision to axe the Commercial Ready program was very regrettable. That is just a very polite way of saying that it was a totally irresponsible decision by this government.

Some of the medical programs supported by Commercial Ready have included clinical trials for treatments of cancer. In fact there are 11 such clinical trials, including one for prostatic cancer, which is very debilitating to men of course. With a very high mortality rate, it is one of the most common causes of death in men. It is very important that we find a way of treating it; cutting the funding for that trial with the axing of the Commercial Ready program is certainly not going to help realise that objective. Also gone is the development of an insulin nebuliser, which would have meant that diabetics, instead of having to have injections, could have had their insulin by inhaler. That would have been much easier and kinder for children in particular.

Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Alan Eggleston (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hear Senator Barnett agreeing with that. He would know from his own experiences how difficult it is to get children to accept needing injections for diabetes. Then there was the Sienna program, which was developing innovative tests for the diagnosis of cancer. There was a grant of $120,000 over four years proposed for the Sienna program. Sienna were still negotiating in good faith with the government when this program was cut. They lost their $120,000 and are now going overseas to find other partners to develop their innovative diagnostic test, so we have lost another important medical development because of cutting of this program.

Senator Carr said 75 per cent of the money secretly cut from the Commercial Ready program would go to climate change. I wonder how he then justifies the cutting of funding to the Permadrive program, which was seeking to commercialise a new engine that would reduce fuel consumption by up to 25 per cent. Senator Carr can be assured that the mothers of diabetic children in Australia and the relatives of those with cancer will not thank him for cutting the Commercial Ready program.

Dana Wortley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is very encouraging to see those opposite showing such a keen interest in innovation these days, because they certainly did not when they were in government. They never showed much interest during their 11 years in government. Those 11 years saw Australia go backwards as our competitors forged ahead. Australia ranked eighth in the OECD for business expenditure on research and development as a share of GDP in 1995-96. By 2005-06 we had slipped to 15th—from eighth to 15th. Why? Because Australia was one of only three OECD countries to reduce its tax benefits for business research and development in the late nineties while 12 countries increased their level of support.

That was nothing compared to what those opposite did to our universities. Between 1995 and 2004, public funding for tertiary education rose 49 per cent on average across the OECD. In Australia, guess what? It fell four per cent. Australia was the only OECD country where the total level of public funding for tertiary education decreased during that time. Is it any wonder that the government’s review of the national innovation system has attracted over 630 submissions from all quarters of the Australian community and all sectors of the economy?

The Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research has said the decision to close the Commercial Ready program was not taken lightly. He has also said that the government will honour all existing contracts under the Commercial Ready program. The government will also continue to support Australia’s innovative businesses through research and development tax concessions, the research and development tax offset, the Commercialising Emerging Technologies program and a range of venture capital measures, as well as new initiatives such as Enterprise Connect, including Researchers in Business, Clean Business Australia and the Green Car Innovation Fund.

The budget that delivered the closure of Commercial Ready is also the budget that delivered new directions for innovation, competitiveness and productivity. It has delivered significant changes in Australian government innovation policy aimed at ending the brain drain, working in partnership with Australian businesses to tackle climate change and providing more effective support to small businesses and innovative companies.

Initiatives for the Innovation, Industry, Science and Research portfolio include: a $326.2 million investment over four years in Future Fellowships to attract and retain the best and brightest midcareer researchers; $240 million over four years for new Clean Business Australia initiatives; $42 million over four years to provide funding to over 30 business enterprise centres, providing business advisory services to small businesses; the introduction of a small business advisory committee to help monitor regulation; a range of saving measures aimed at contributing to the Australian government savings plan and fight against inflation; $251 million to establish Enterprise Connect innovation centres to connect businesses with new ideas and new technology; $209 million to double the number of Australian postgraduate awards for PhD or masters-by-research students; and $500 million for the Green Car Innovation Fund to encourage the development and manufacture of low-emission vehicles in Australia.

The new innovation program to help make Australia climate ready is also significant—$75 million for the Climate Ready competitive grants program as part of the Clean Business Australia election commitment. Climate Ready will encourage Australian businesses to develop and commercialise products, processes and services that save energy and water, reduce pollution and use waste products in innovative ways. This initiative demonstrates Labor’s commitment to working in partnership with Australian industry to meet future challenges through innovations. Innovations supported by the Climate Ready program could include new technologies for water recycling, waste recovery or small-scale renewable energy. The development of green building materials to make homes more— (Time expired)

Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand to take note of the answer from Minister Carr, and specifically to say that the scrapping of the Commercial Ready program is one of the worst decisions that this government has made. I think the underlying reason for the government’s decision is its inclination—I will not call it a hatred—towards not supporting, helping and encouraging small business and entrepreneurs in this country. The fact is that the coalition has been a friend of small business. We have been a friend and supporter and encourager of entrepreneurs throughout Australia in each state and territory of this great country. They are the backbone of our country, particularly in the rural and regional parts of this nation, and they need and deserve our support.

The Commercial Ready program was working. It had the runs on the board. It started in 2004 and has provided about $200 million per year in individual grants, from $250,000 to $5 million, to small companies, small businesses and entrepreneurs to assist them to bring new and innovative products to the market. It is not easy. This is a tough part of the business cycle. You get your plans ready and you do the research. Getting it to market is another matter. What this program has done is to get those products to market. It has worked. Since the program began there have been hundreds of successful businesses getting these products to market. It helps them to leverage extra venture capital, so for every dollar that goes in they get further funds invested by venture capital outfits and support for these private sector initiatives.

In fact, 20 per cent of the Commercial Ready grants went to the often high-risk biotech sector, where it is harder to get private venture capital. Insulin infusion products are very important for people with type 1 diabetes. It is hard, particularly for families with young kids who have type 1 diabetes, to get those injections and inject each day—up to five times per day in some instances. I had five injections per day for many years. Through medical technology I am now using an insulin pump, but I think of so many young Australians who potentially are missing out on this new intervention as a result of this mean-spirited approach by the Rudd Labor government.

The minister did acknowledge that there were many Australians who were very disappointed by his decision, and I am pleased he acknowledged that. What he did not do was apologise to them for the decision. In particular, he has not apologised to Mr Jimmy Seervai, who is an award-winning inventor, is financially supported by others and is working on solutions to Australia’s obesity epidemic. He is coming up with solutions; he is an innovator; he has won awards for this. Sadly, he, together with others, was described by the minister as ‘a millionaire’. Earlier I quoted from the Hansard, and the minister did not seem to recall what he said on 14 May—

Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He didn’t say it.

Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will quote it again, because Senator O’Brien is querying it. He said:

We had this expectation that we should go on providing assistance and various other measures to millionaires ...

We can place on the record for the Senate today that Jimmy Seervai is not a millionaire. Nothing is further from the truth. I think the minister should come back into the chamber and apologise to all those small business owners and operators and those entrepreneurs who, as a result of this misinterpretation—that is the best way I can put it—from Senator Carr, have been maligned in that way.

Underneath all this, you can see that this is a government with no theme, no rationale, no narrative behind its programs and actions. Yes, it might be implementing some of its government measures but, in this case, it said before the election there was no promise to scrap this program, so in that sense it has broken an election promise as well. There is no heart in it from the government, no heart in what it is doing. There is no rationale to it and it does not, in my view, support the small business sector. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.