Response to IBCC and RDTI Exposure Drafts

Research Australia supports the objective of encouraging early-stage private investment in innovative Australian businesses. The HMR sector is particularly dependent on patient capital because the pathway from discovery to commercialisation can be long, expensive and uncertain, particularly for biotechnology, medical technology, therapeutics and other regulated health innovations.

You can read our submission in response to the “Better targeting the Research and Development Tax Incentive – Exposure Draft Legislation” here.

Read our submission in response to the “Innovative Business CGT Concession – exposure draft legislation” here.

Response to Initial Draft of the NSQHS Standards (Third Edition) Consultation

Research Australia supports the direction of the initial draft National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) Standards (third edition), including the consolidation of the eight second-edition Standards into three integrated Standards – Clinical Governance, Person-Centred Practice and Safe Clinical Systems – and the more explicit recognition of clinical research within clinical governance. The three proposed Standards provide a clearer organising framework and should strengthen the connection between governance, workforce capability and patient outcomes. Consolidation is beneficial where it removes duplication and makes accountability easier to understand; however, it must not dilute research-specific expectations or transfer additional evidentiary and administrative burden to services. Research is integral to high-quality care: it enables health services to identify unmet needs, generate and apply evidence, improve outcomes and operate as learning organisations. Retaining research in the national accreditation framework will strengthen board and executive attention and help establish research-enabled care as a core function rather than an adjunct activity.

On balance, the proposed structure can enable research if implementation guidance makes research responsibilities explicit, accepts evidence produced under recognised research and clinical-trial frameworks, and applies proportionate requirements across different service settings and research types. It could create new barriers if consolidation obscures responsibility, duplicates ethics or governance processes, or imposes uniform capability expectations on services with different resources and remits. Governance compliance alone will not embed research. The third edition will require visible leadership, organisational capability uplift, a skilled and supported workforce, meaningful consumer partnership, proportionate governance, cross-institutional collaboration, data capability and systematic translation of evidence into care. The Standards should therefore be one component of a coordinated national approach linking accreditation with health-system funding, workforce, research, data, clinical trials, implementation and procurement.

You can read our full submission and recommendations here.

Response to the Horizon Europe Implementation Consultation

Research Australia’s submission to the Horizon Europe Implementation Consultation strongly supports Australia’s association with Horizon Europe, particularly the opportunities it creates for the health and medical research and innovation sector to access Pillar II funding and strengthen international collaboration.

Research Australia recommends a dedicated, hybrid Health National Contact Point (NCP) capability and a first year focused on building capability, partnerships and targeted participation rather than funding success alone. It calls for alignment with national priorities, including the National Health and Medical Research Strategy, MRFF priorities, SERD and research infrastructure planning.

We advocated that implementation should ensure equitable participation across universities, medical research institutes, hospitals, patient organizations, SMEs and regional, rural, remote and very remote communities. Research Australia also proposes a formal implementation, outreach and evaluation role for itself, helping connect government with the broader HMR&I ecosystem and ensuring Horizon Europe delivers sector-wide research, health, economic and societal benefits.

You can read our full submission here.

Response to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence

Research Australia’s submission to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence supports AI adoption that advances health and medical research, healthcare, productivity and sovereign capability while protecting safety, equity, privacy and public trust. It calls for a comprehensive national healthcare AI plan supported by a unified health data strategy, interoperable and secure infrastructure, sustained research investment and exemplar implementations demonstrating safe and scalable adoption.

Research Australia advocates proportionate regulation and clinical governance, investment in AI literacy and workforce capability, and stronger public participation and social licence. It emphasises equity by design, including First Nations leadership and Indigenous Data Sovereignty, and the needs of regional, rural and remote communities.

The submission also calls for public investment, procurement and commercialisation policies that retain Australian intellectual property, data, talent and sovereign capability while translating AI innovation into measurable health, social and economic benefits.

You can read our full submission here.