While the examples of government initiatives given above may or may not be appropriate for Australia, the main point is that initiatives need to be generated if Australia is not to become a major net importer of the products of biotechnology. In advanced economies the private sector picks up high technology innovations at this stage, with government incentives playing a key role. Independent expert analysts of the worldwide biotechnology industry see a strong correlation between government attitudes and incentives and economic growth in this high-technology sector. Hence, Australian industry policy should focus on the stage of development at which there becomes a significant increased demand for investment which will not be met by current and proposed initiatives and which generally is the major disruption point in the commercialisation process. However, the commercialisation funding gap still will not be fully bridged and further incentives should be considered.
Venture capital is very expensive and tends to invest relatively late in the development process.
There are bound to be many worthwhile product opportunities that miss out on support under current and proposed arrangements, ie. Any review of technology funding and support that does not include Treasury is bound to be inadequate and self-limiting from the outset. The Stocker review of Science funding also excludes tax issues. For the government to take this ostrichlike position overlooks investment issues that are an integral part of every day decisions in the real world and sends the signal that despite some window dressing the government is not serious about promoting high technology industry. Therefore, tax-based incentives should be a part of industry policy.