SIA Member News 2010

Collaborative Research Networks

SIA — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:54:50 +0000

The Australian Government is seeking expressions of interest from eligible higher education institutions for funding under the Collaborative Research Networks (CRN) scheme.

The CRN scheme will provide up to $51 million from 2011 until mid-2013 to help less research-intensive smaller and regional universities strengthen their research capacity by teaming up with other institutions in areas of common interest.

Innovation Minister, Senator Kim Carr, today released the CRN guidelines, saying that the CRN scheme offered a great opportunity to build research partnerships.

“This scheme is all about promoting and supporting Australian based research,” Senator Carr said.

“While successful eligible institutions will receive funding under an agreement with the Commonwealth, this funding may flow to partner institutions for the purpose of facilitating and supporting the collaboration.

“This means that the benefits of the scheme will flow right around Australia.

“The CRN scheme’s flexibility is one of its best features. Under the guidelines, projects may involve existing or emerging areas of research capability, and should be relevant to the participating institutions’ strategic directions.

“Projects need not be limited to specific research fields and may have more than one element with different partner institutions for each element.

“I fully expect that this scheme will encourage and assist some really exciting and cutting-edge research programs across a number of institutions.

“The great thing about these guidelines and the scheme is that the Australian higher education sector has been engaged in their development right from the start. The result is guidelines that match the sector’s needs.

Don't bet on the R&D tax bills anytime soon

SIA — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:50:58 +0000

By Nick Evans

PRIME Minister Julia Gillard’s decision to go to the polls on August 21 effectively puts an end to the chances of seeing the research and development tax credit changes introduced anytime soon. With the civil service and the government in caretaker mode and Parliament prorogued, the bills won’t be back for some time.

Either Gillard will win in August – or we’ll see a new government in Canberra next month.
The coalition doesn’t support the legislation, and will presumably ditch it in government.

But a returned Gillard government may not see the legislation passing the Senate quickly either.
Even if it’s still a priority for a returned Labor government, the Senate is unlikely to sit before October – as there’s usually a month or so between the election and the next Senate sitting date.
And even assuming that, there’s no guarantee the legislation will pass, as the Senate doesn’t change over until July 2011.

If the Greens pick up an extra seat somewhere – mostly likely at the expense of Senator Stephen Fielding in Victoria – the balance of power in the Senate will change, but not until mid-next year.
And that possibility may be balanced by potential for the National Party gain at the expense of the Greens in WA.

But even so, for the foreseeable future the legislation is exactly where it was when it failed to pass in June – in limbo.
The Greens and Labor support it as it stands, along with South Australian Senator Nick Xeonphon. But without substantial changes, the coalition will still be opposed and Fielding will still be, presumably, a little confused.

And it’s difficult to see what will likely be done to resolve that impasse until next year, barring a change of heart from Fielding. While the coalition hasn’t made much public comment about its opposition, the coalition senators sitting on the Economics Legislation Committee made their position clear in their dissenting report.

The introduction of the new R&D tax system, they said, should be delayed until July 1, 2011 to leave more time for consultation with industry and to help clean up some of the drafting errors. The senators said definitions of “core” and “supporting” R&D should be amended so they more closely reflect the Frascati model of R&D, essentially expanding the scope of what is claimable; the eligibility criteria should be broadened to exclude the “dominant purpose” test in its current form; and the “object” test should be removed to “ensure that both research and development are given equal tax benefits”.

There’s no doubt that there are a number of changes there that would be heartily welcomed by the life science sector – particularly that last issue. But the problem for the government, and therefore life science juniors, is that broadening the definitions will blow a hole in the government’s plans that the new tax system be revenue neutral.

The changes in those definitions were designed, pretty much, to limit the access to R&D tax benefits by the big miners and engineering companies. Allowing them back in to a system that is fundamentally more generous will blow at least a medium-sized hole in the budget – not something the government will likely consider in the short term, particularly as a returned Labor government will have the odd score to settle with the mining industry. Junior life science companies may well be the short-term collateral damage in the score settling with the miners, post-election. What eventually happens to the legislation will depend on the look of the senate landscape after the election.

If there is no effective change in the numbers – if Fielding hangs on, or a Greens win in Victoria is negated by a loss elsewhere, the government will have no choice but to negotiate if it wants the bill to pass. But if July 1, 2011 brings the possibility of passing the legislation unchanged, why would the government give anything away before then? Better, surely, to wait it out and introduce the bills as originally drafted. If that’s the case, the onus will fall back on the opposition to decide whether it wants to support the bill in its flawed form, or oppose any change at all, knowing it won’t matter in the long run.

The only question that will remain, then, is whether Innovation and Industry Minister Kim Carr and his Cabinet colleagues will make good on their promise to back date the changes to July 1, 2010.

The changing nature of our national wealth

SIA — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:32:14 +0000

Phil Ruthven (Chairman, IBISWorld) has penned a very insightful (short) article on the rise and fall of our various industries since the 1800s and makes the point that even though industries such as agriculture and manufacturing have grown, waxed and waned over the decades, national wealth just keeps on growing.

Its a very good read and can be found here.....

$3.2m awarded to Otago researchers

SIA — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 18:03:20 +0000

More than $3 million will be spent by southern scientists as they develop long-life solar panels, work to alleviate age-related mobility loss and try to beat drench-resistant worms. More here.....

Federal Government boosts CSL's research capability via an injection of $30M of new funding

SIA — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:50:49 +0000

The project will deliver a major expansion in R&D capacity at CSL Limited’s facility in Broadmeadows, Victoria.

“CSL is a strategically important provider of vaccines, anti-venoms, blood products and diagnostic health products for the Australian community,” Innovation Minister Senator Kim Carr said.

“This investment will help build the infrastructure and develop the capabilities Australian scientists need to create complex, next-generation drugs and deal with future epidemic diseases.”
“It will result in over 333 ongoing, highly-skilled jobs and an average of 320 full-time jobs in the construction and commissioning phases,”

The Facts and Falsehoods of Commercialisation Australia: Six myths exposed

SIA — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 23:27:29 +0000

The Commercialisation Australia program, the successor to the Government’s COMET scheme, has proved a boon to many and a bane to others. Inevitably it was going to have a few teething problems. As with any new incentive program, it can involve navigating the industry-specific details to work out whether it’s right for your business. Here, Adrian Spencer explains the pros and cons that the grant can provide for those in the technology sector.

Myth 1: CA supports Research and Development (R&D) and Commercialisation activities

Myth 2: Aim to Double Dip

Myth 3: You can make anything seem like Pre-Commercialisation activities

Myth 4: Good ideas are better than financial security

Myth 5: The ‘Need for funding’; a Catch-22

Myth 6: Early Stage Commercialisation (ESC) is a grant that converts into a loan

Escaping the valley of death - bridging the gap between proof of concept and commercialisation

SIA — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:43:20 +0000

SIA has long lobbied government for both Proof of Concept support as well as funding support to help ideas make it to market.

In the US, since 1983, they have had SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) grants to help escape the "Valley Of Death". SBIR grants are a 27-year-old US government initiative that steers federal dollars to small businesses working on projects that might be too risky for private investors.

This article shows how the US is taking the next steps to build on the good that SBIR grants have wrought and fill in any further funding gaps. The new measure, sponsored by Rep. Paul Tonko, D-Amsterdam, would create a new grant program for companies whose federal research and development dollars are drying up -- just as they begin focusing on pushing new products to market.

Right now, Tonko said, "We just take people halfway through the journey."

There is "an abundance of success stories out there," where federal R&D money has led to promising prototypes, Tonko said. "That's not the time to drop the commitment or have a modest commitment. We need a robust, passionate resolve to absorb some of the high-risk, high-reward opportunities here."

Commercialisation Australia.......where are you.......?? Read the article here.....

Queensland R&D Investment Strategy 2010 - 2020: released by the Office of the Chief Scientist

SIA — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:49:35 +0000

Snapshot of Queensland research and development

Queensland is growing.

The current population of 4.4 million is expected to double by 2056. Two-thirds of those in the 25 to 34 age bracket have tertiary qualifications.

Public sector research and development is strong.

Investment in higher education research and development (HERD) consistently exceeds the OECD average. Queensland scientists publish more scientific articles per million of population than the OECD average, and citation rates also exceed the global average.

Overall research and development intensity remains low.

Business expenditure on research and development (BERD), although increasing, is lower than the OECD average, as is the number of patents filed per million of population.

Connections between public sector research and industry are increasing.

The number of university start-up companies formed per $100 million investment in research and development is triple the national average.

The state government is a significant investor in research and development.

Between 5 and 10 per cent of Queensland’s overall research and development expenditure comes from the state government’s investments in either intern

Download the full Queensland R&D Investment Strategy here.....

New Zealand Science Funding Roundup

SIA — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:30:52 +0000

If you're either doing business in NZ direct or through an agent, here's some links to information about recent announcements on science and technology funding.

Govt funding announced for sauvignon blanc research.....

$150 million benefit expected from new embryo research.....

Govt concentrates science spend in three areas.....

Nobel winners' protest halts science funding change

SIA — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:11:56 +0000

With the local initiative coming out of DIIRD, “Excellence in Research Australia” (ERA) being endlessly discussed and mulled over, here's the reaction in the UK to a very similar scheme......

NICNAS News - increased fees and charges for 2010/11

SIA — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:48:20 +0000

NICNAS fees and charges for Registration and New Chemical applications will increase from 1 July 2010. More info here.....

Can Australia really be 5th in world competitiveness?

SIA — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:51:30 +0000

It's surprising we haven't heard more about it really, the fact that Australia now ranks 5th in overall performance in the prestigious IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2010.

No guessing either where we need to improve: international trade, labour market efficiency, and particularly infrastructure. In Australia, our media has conditioned us to think of ports, roads, and rail as “infrastructure”. It’s telling that in both of these surveys, that term is much broader, and includes our technological and scientific infrastructure as well – for example, telecommunications, IT, universities, and overall “innovation”. In world competitiveness, IMD rates Australia just 25^th in technological, 19^th in basic, and 16^th in scientific infrastructure. More.....

Australian Innovation System Report 2010 - used to measure and monitor the progress of the national innovation system against the Government’s priorities and targets in coming years

SIA — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:30:48 +0000

Senator the Hon Kim Carr has released the first Australian Innovation System Report 2010

In Powering Ideas, the Australian Government committed to produce annual reports on the impact of Australian innovation and the performance of the Australian innovation system as a whole. The Australian Innovation System Report 2010 is the first of these reports.

This report outlines features and trends of the Australian innovation system as a whole; compares Australia’s innovation performance to other OECD countries; and tracks progress against the Government’s innovation priorities and targets. It highlights baseline performance under the four (4) policy headings identified in Powering Ideas:

skills and research capacity;
business innovation;
links and collaboration; and
public sector innovation.

The metrics and baselines included in the report will be used to measure and monitor the progress of the national innovation system against the Government’s priorities and targets in coming years.

Indexation arrangements for higher education - a significant recurrent funding improvement for the Higher Education sector

SIA — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:27:36 +0000

Legislation to provide for new indexation arrangements for higher education has been introduced in the Australian parliament. It will deliver an additional $2.6 billion to universities over five years. This, together with the increased funding for the indirect costs of research, spells a significant recurrent funding improvement.

The new formula for higher education funding indexation will be made up as follows:
• Professional, Scientific and Technical Services labour price index (75%)
• Consumer Price Index (25%)

This measure see the implementation of an important recommendation in the Bradley Review. For a critique of the legislation, please see the Parliamentary Library Bill Digest for this Bill: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bd/2009-10/10bd162.pdf

NATA - accredited laboratory database

SIA — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 14:06:35 +0000

NATA is one of four bodies that form Australia's standards and conformance infrastructure.

NATA’s role is to serve the national and public interest by ensuring that member facilities comply with relevant international and Australian standards and so are competent to provide consistently reliable testing, calibration, measurement and inspection data to government, industry and the wider community.

NATA currently accredits the work and performance of the laboratories of nearly 2,500 companies Australia wide. Details of these accredited laboratories can be found here.....