Comments on: 12 months on from Commercial Ready axing, Australian companies are hurting

By: Alison Joseph

Alison Joseph — Mon, 11 May 2009 01:24:52 +0000

As a small and very innovative start-up company that sought funding through the commercial ready process – I strongly supported the Government’s decision to axe it. It was a program that lacked the technical experitse to differentiate good innovation from spin. As a public service run program, it also strongly avoided risk – which meant that start-ups were the last thing it wanted to fund. However, that said- some kind of funding may have been better than nothing at all. I remain deeply concerned by the lack of action by the Government in not putting an alternative funding stream in Commercial Ready’s place. None of the recommendations of the Innovation Review have been implemented – not even the small and easy such as a system to provide greater access to scientific papers.
Tough economic times are when we should be building for the future – and investing in innovation. Even if it is just a HECs type scheme for small business – there has to be a way of funding innovation – so we can still have some kind of industry when the tide turns. It is a pity the stimulus package didn’t direct some of its money towards innovation – as the long-term return on this investment would have been far greater than consumer “retail therapy” and the mass purchase of imported consumer goods.

By: Chris Thomson

Chris Thomson — Wed, 06 May 2009 05:08:29 +0000

An excellent article Nick! You’ve covered the issues well and I concur with your findings. However the negative impact of cancelling the CR grant scheme affects many companies other than start-ups heading to capital raising.

As a strategy consultant to manufacturing businesses across a range of markets I see many established companies deferring or limiting new product development because the cost and risk are too high in the current economic climate. The leverage previously provided by CR would shift that risk/reward pivot point and ensure a higher level of innovation investment by business. Today, when our manufacturers are desperate to seek alternatives to automotive, is when this grant is required more than ever before.

By: D. Anderson

D. Anderson — Mon, 04 May 2009 11:29:13 +0000

Huh?

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 04 May 2009 05:22:10 +0000

Best to keep it in the media. Rudd will be out next election and hopefully the Libs are listening!

By: D. Anderson

D. Anderson — Mon, 04 May 2009 05:00:33 +0000

The Minister has stated that Commercial Ready will not be reintroduced.
Guys, isnt it time we moved on?

By: Cindy Reese

Cindy Reese — Mon, 04 May 2009 03:51:00 +0000

I would like to write in support of your observations here, Nick. As a Business Advisor in the not-for-profit sector, I’ve seen a marked decline in the number of ‘new ideas’ that I see on a weekly basis. Whether they even applied/qualified, I think that the very existence of an innovation grant fund gave individual inventors or researchers the confidence to come forward with new ways of solving problems. The Australian market desperately needs the government to act as a catalyst–aligning the interests of individual Angels and institutional investors to invest in early stage commercialisation. I’ve spent the past 12 months working almost exclusively with established businesses seeking expansion. That is fine, for this recession, but in order for us to weather the NEXT one, we need to nurture good ideas from the early stage minefield to commercial reality. For all its talk about infrastructure—the government needs to consider the need for an innovation infrastructure fund to feed our future economic capacity.