Category: Submissions

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.

Response to the Independent Review of the Operation of the NRFC Act: Discussion Paper

Research Australia’s submission to the Independent Review of the NRFC Act emphasises the importance of the NRFC’s role in enhancing Australia’s sovereign capability, productivity, and economic resilience. It also advocates for greater coordination across the research, innovation and commercialisation ecosystem.

Research Australia argues that the NRFC should address market failure by providing patient capital to bridge the “valley of death” between research and commercialisation and crowd in private investment. It calls for stronger alignment between the NRFC, MRFF, NHMRC and broader national research and industry strategies, alongside improved coordination across government portfolios.

The submission advocates flexible financing and co-investment models that combine government, industry and philanthropic capital, particularly for health and medical innovation. It also calls for clearer measures of impact beyond financial returns, including health, productivity and sovereign capability, and stronger institutional support for translating Australian research into commercially viable products and services.

You can read our full submission here.

Response to the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Australian Medical Research and Innovation Strategy and Priorities Consultation

Research Australia’s response to the August 2026 consultation on the MRFF Australian Medical Research and Innovation Strategy and Priorities broadly supported the proposed direction while calling for stronger national coordination, equity, translation and long-term capability building.

Research Australia emphasised that research excellence must translate into measurable health, social and economic impact, supported by sustainable workforce capability, interoperable health data, research infrastructure and implementation pathways. The response called for stronger support across the full innovation pipeline, from discovery through clinical development, commercialisation, manufacturing and adoption, to strengthen sovereign capability and productivity.

Our response also advocated health equity by design, including greater focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, regional, rural and very remote communities, children and other underrepresented populations. Additionally, Research Australia called for responsible implementation of AI and digital health, sustainable research careers, community partnership, prevention and early intervention, and explicit recognition of Australia’s international health obligations across MRFF investment.

You can read our full submission here.

Response to the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 Consultation Paper

Research Australia welcomes the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 as an important step towards improving access to higher education and supporting greater participation by students from disadvantaged and underrepresented backgrounds.

Our submission supports the Bill’s equity objectives while emphasising that education and research are intrinsically linked and should be considered together in implementing the Universities Accord. Research Australia recommends that reforms strengthen pathways into research careers, particularly in health and medical research, and ensure that the new Australian Tertiary Education Commission (ATEC) considers research capability alongside teaching and workforce planning.

The submission also highlights the need for sustainable research funding, noting that universities play a critical role in driving innovation, improving health outcomes and supporting national productivity. Finally, Research Australia calls for implementation of the broader Accord recommendations that reinforce Australia’s research and innovation system, ensuring that expanded access to higher education also builds the skilled research workforce needed to meet future economic, health and societal challenges.

Read Research Australia’s full submission here.

Response to Capital Gains Tax Reforms – Arrangements for Innovative Start-Ups Consultation Paper

Research Australia is pleased to submit its comprehensive response to the “Capital Gains Tax Reforms – Arrangements for Innovative Start-Ups” consultation paper.

Recognising the critical role that start-ups play in fostering innovation, economic growth, and job creation, Research Australia has carefully analysed the proposed reforms and their potential impact on early-stage companies. Our submission highlights key considerations, including the need for supportive tax mechanisms that encourage investment in innovative ventures while ensuring fiscal responsibility. We emphasise the importance of a balanced approach that attracts investment for start-ups, reduces administrative burdens, and promotes sustainable growth.

We encourage members and stakeholders to review our detailed response in full, which provides valuable insights and recommendations aimed at fostering a more conducive environment for start-up success. Research Australia remains committed to supporting policies that drive innovation and economic development.

You can read our full submission here.

Response to the consultation on Streamlining and simplifying IP regulation

Research Australia recently provided a submission to IP Australia’s consultation on streamlining and simplifying IP regulation.

As the national peak body for the health and medical research and innovation sector, Research Australia has consistently highlighted the need for clearer and more streamlined IP policy and supports to strengthen Australia’s commercialisation pipeline and sovereign capability development. This has been reflected in our recent policy submissions to the Strategic Examination of R&D (SERD) and draft National Health and Medical Research Strategy – where we advocated for measures to help researchers and businesses navigate and protect IP rights. These recommendations formed part of a broader range of measures to overcome the current ‘valley of death’ between discovery and real-world translation, commercialisation and innovation.

You can read our full submission here.

 

Response to the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Research Missions Program Consultation

Research Australia is pleased to provide a submission to the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Research Missions Program (the Program) consultation, in addition to our attendance at the MRFF Virtual Consultation for Research and Research Organisations in February 2026.

There is broad support for the mission-driven model under the MRFF Research Missions program, which has become an essential mechanism within Australia’s research funding landscape. MRFF Missions are a favoured model due to the potential of their long-term funding and the ability to drive collaboration across disciplines, institutions, and sectors. Whilst there are strong elements of the MRFF Missions Program, there is a need to more clearly articulate a Theory of Change, clearly coordinate individual Missions and align to national policy frameworks, and embed genuine partnerships with community, priority workforce cohorts and the states and territories.

You can read Research Australia’s full submission here.