radiofree.asia

Author: James Riley

  • ServicesAus’ tech delivery ‘run down’ by outsourcing

    Services Australia has been “run down” by a reliance on outsourcing and private contractors which has led to substandard ICT delivery programs, the public sector union says.

    In a submission to a Senate inquiry into Australian Public Service capability, the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) said that under-investment in ICT and an increase in outsourcing had damaged the department’s ability to deliver services for Australians.

    “The CPSU is greatly concerned that capability in the APS has been devastated by years of budget cuts, efficiency dividends, the government’s Average Staffing Level cap and the rapid rise of labour hire, consultants and contractors,” the CPSU submission said.

    “In Services Australia, core work has been contracted to private providers driven by commercial intent at a cost of over $1.6 billion to the taxpayer.”

    Finance
    Deskilling: Outsourcing has been detrimental to tech delivery capability in the public service

    There has been a reduction of 6000 staff at Services Australia in the last seven years, the union said, with permanent employees being replaced by casuals and contractors.

    The department’s contracts with labour hire and service delivery partners are worth over $1.6 billion, while consultancy expenditure is expected to hit $20 million in the 2020-21 financial year.

    “These are eye watering figures that demand robust checks and balances to see if they bring value to the taxpayer,” CPSU said.

    CPSU members have estimated that half of the ICT workers in the Canberra and Brisbane delivery centres are contractors, and insecure employment at the agency is at “unprecedented scale”.

    “Services Australia has lost sight of the benefits of in-house ICT development. A lack of career paths for ICT professionals and the government’s bargaining approach have impacted the agency’s ability to attract and retain ICT talent,” the submission said.

    “Additionally, the government’s Average Staffing Level cap has driven the increasing use of ICT contractors for both day-to-day and specialist ICT work.”

    The Digital Transformation Agency, which is housed in Services Australia, has already spent more than $20 million on “temporary personnel services” in this financial year, across 141 contracts with recruiters and HR firms, as InnovationAus reported.

    There is a steep reduction in transparency and accountability when private contractors and consultants are brought in, the union said.

    “Valuable funding has been directed to a growing component of insecure workers and to corporate interests to deliver core in-house work. This is driving down the wages and conditions and reducing the employment security of the workers undertaking agency work or engaged by privatised contract call centre providers doing Services Australia work,” it said.

    “These corporate interests operate without the same lines of reporting and accountability expected of departments of state, leaving the public with a distinct lack of transparency for the thousands of millions of dollars being expended.”

    The Coalition government has “run down” Services Australia through program budget and job cuts, and this reliance on outsourced work, the CPSU said.

    Services Australia has listed 31 contracts with labour hire and service delivery firms, with a total value of $1.64 billion. CPSU said these numbers are “staggering and previously unseen” at the agency.

    These contracts include $491 million with ADECCO Australia over four years, $145 million over four years with Serco and $121 million over three years with Datacom.

    The department should be required to prove that it can’t complete the necessary work in-house before going to outside contractors, the union said.

    “The CPSU has been vocal about the phenomenal increase in consultancy expenditure both in Services Australia, and the APS more broadly in the past five years,” the CPSU submission said.

    “Agencies must be required to demonstrate their assessment of whether they have the in-house skills and capabilities, and the benefit of nurturing specific in-demand skills and capabilities, prior to going out to tender for consultants and contractors. Agencies must rein in the amount of work that has been opened to private providers.”

    As of October 2020, there were 2,277 employees in the Services Australia technology services branch, equating to 7.3 percent of the workforce. But while ICT contractors were previously used mainly for surge capacity, there is now a “strong prejudice” to go to private contractors as a first option, the CPSU said.

    “The agency appears to have lost sight of the benefits of in-house ICT development. There is a lack of career paths for skills ICT professionals and this is hamstrung by an APS-wide bargaining policy that limits enhancing APS conditions to attract the best and brightest to tech APS, along with the staffing cap,” it said.

    “Members also advise that skilled APS ICT staff are leaving because they have no career anymore in Services Australia.”

    The post ServicesAus’ tech delivery ‘run down’ by outsourcing appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Plans to restrict foreign research teams ‘dangerous’

    The federal government plan to crackdown on foreign research collaboration on emerging technologies is a “dangerous development” that risks holding back burgeoning sectors such as artificial intelligence, UNSW Professor of AI Toby Walsh says.

    The government is planning to subject a list of critical and emerging technologies to restrictions on foreign research collaboration, and they will be screened in the same way that military and dual-use technology research currently is.

    The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security is conducting an inquiry into the national security risks affecting Australian universities and the research sector. It has heard that security agencies are set to provide universities with an expanded list of emerging technologies that they will aim to protect from foreign interference.

    digital ID
    Research networks: Limits planned for foreign collaborations in emerging tech

    ASIO boss Mike Burgess told the committee it would be “helpful and useful if there was greater clarity for what kinds of research and sensitive technology that needs protection”.

    “It would provide universities with greater certainty about the areas where they need to be cautious, including when engaging with foreign institutions,” Mr Burgess said.

    “It would give publicly funded research agencies, universities and other organisations more surety when applying for research grants in sensitive areas and it would mean that students and academics have a clear sense of how they can express their freedom without inadvertently undermining Australia’s national interest.”

    It has been reported that the Department of Home Affairs and ASIO are working on a list of emerging technologies, under direction of Prime Minister and Cabinet.

    But Professor Walsh said the government’s response to the legitimate concerns around foreign influence in Australian universities is “far too heavy-handed and blunt”.

    “There’s a dangerous and unpleasant taste of xenophobia in Australian politics, and this knee-jerk response feeds into this. I’ve heard that the government would like all of AI to be an emerging technology subject to restrictions,” Professor Walsh told InnovationAus.

    “This would be absurd and would hold back responsible innovation that will bring vital economic growth needed for Australia to emerge out of the COVID recession.”

    Universities should “defend their independence more vigorously,” Professor Walsh said.

    “It surprises me that universities are not pushing back on this harder. It speaks to the poor relationships between government and the academy that they are not,” he said.

    “Along with the debate about free speech, it appears the government wishes to meddle in the affairs of universities more and more. This is a dangerous development.”

    University of Sydney Quantum Control Laboratory director and Q-CTRL founder Professor Michael Biercuk said the industry is willing to work with the government with the existing mechanisms, but new restrictions could lead to scientists and entrepreneurs leaving the country.

    “Governments in the UK, Canada, US and Europe are all actively recruiting scientists and researchers to join their open efforts in areas of emerging technology, and we should not make the mistake of assuming that Australia’s best and brightest will simply accept growing restrictions – without the provision of clear alternatives to advance their research – when other options exist,” Professor Biercuk told InnovationAus.

    “There is an existing export controls regime which limits so-called ‘intangible transfers’ of highly sensitive information on weapons systems or certain dual use technologies, and Australia has a process to add new and emerging technologies to that list.

    “The entire research community is looking to government to use the existing processes at its disposal as a means to simplify and boost compliance.”

    There is a fundamental misunderstanding around the perceived secrecy around university research, Professor Biercuk said.

    “A core area of confusion seems to exist around what kind of work university researchers perform overall. Concern over IP theft is real in corporate settings where trade settings where trade secrets are a core part of preserving competitive advantage, or in national labs like the CSIRO where highly confidential information may be handled,” he said.

    “By contrast, university research is openly published for anyone to read and learn from. Even research that is patented is published in a globally accessible IP register – it is not kept secret.

    “So when we talk about theft of IP in the context of universities I constantly scratch my head wondering where all of this super-secret IP is.”

    The PJCIS is expected to hand its report to the government in July.

    The post Plans to restrict foreign research teams ‘dangerous’ appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Liberal Senators’ Big Tech inquiry gets knocked back

    A Liberal Senator has failed in his second attempt to launch an inquiry into the influence of Big Tech in Australia, after the motion was blocked by Labor and the crossbench.

    South Australian senator Alex Antic moved a motion on Tuesday for the establishment of a Select Committee on Big Tech Influence in Australia, which would look into disinformation, “de-platforming”, fake accounts and the extent that the likes of Facebook and Google comply with local laws.

    But the attempt was dismissed by Labor, who said there are already too many select committees, and the Greens, who took issue with the language of the motion, which they said was used “overwhelmingly by the far right”.

    Business fibre
    Big Tech: The senate has declined to establish a new select committee to investigate

    Senator Antic had originally planned to move the motion last month, but put this on hold. This was the same day that the government announced it had reached an agreement with Facebook over its media bargaining code, with news allowed back on the social media platform.

    He tried again on Tuesday, attempting to launch a select committee that would investigate and report on the activity of major international and domestic tech firms, specifically looking at disinformation, misinformation, shadow banning, de-platform and monetisation, fake accounts and bots, the companies’ terms of service and their compliance with Australian law.

    The motion was voted down with Senators drawn at 32 votes for and against.

    Labor voted down the motion due to the amount of Select Committees already operating.

    “We were advised by the government that they are concerned at the number of Select Committees that are currently operating in the Senate and at the level of work references committees have – that Select Committees are perhaps filling part of the role that references committees had in the past – only to be given this motion on the Notice Paper,” Labor Senator Katy Gallagher said.

    “So we won’t be supporting this today, based on the government’s own advice that there are too many Select Committees at this point in time.”

    Crossbench Senator Rex Patrick also voted against the motion for this reason, saying it would mean there are 10 Select Committees, even though it is recommended there should only be three at any one time.

    Senator Patrick said he would have supported an inquiry by a references committee into Big Tech.

    The Greens voted against the motion due to the language used in it.

    “There is no doubt that we do need an inquiry into the influence of Big Tech in this country, particularly its impact on our democracy and our media and the way that Big Tech has allowed for the proliferation of far-right extremism on digital platforms in Australia,” Greens Senator Nick McKim said.

    “However, this motion contains language which concerns the Greens. It is language which is used overwhelmingly by the far right, including terms like shadow-banning and deplatforming.

    “While we won’t be supporting this motion today, we do remain open minded and of the view that we need to have a look at some of the impacts of the Big Tech sector on those areas I mentioned earlier.”

    Shadow industry minister Ed Husic last month labelled the attempted motion a “joke”.

    “On so many levels this was a joke and a poor one at that. There are countless reports gathering dust now on what needs to be done to combat some of the excesses in technology that this government has ignored,” Mr Husic told InnovationAus in February.

    “On top of that did anyone seriously think that this government that had pulled the handbrake on implementing Royal Commission recommendations against big banks was serious about a Big Tech inquiry that would produce a report that would go nowhere?”

    The post Liberal Senators’ Big Tech inquiry gets knocked back appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Tech skills: What’s hot and where to find them

    It is estimated that Australia will need an additional 6.5 million newly-skilled and reskilled digital workers by 2025 to meet future demand for technology skills, a 79 per cent increase and it’s been suggested the country will have little chance of meeting this target without significant government intervention.

    The projection comes from a report produced by AlphaBeta and commissioned by AWS Unlocking APAC’s Digital Potential: Changing Digital Skills Needs and Policy Approaches. It follows a September 2019 report from AlphaBeta, Australia’s Digital Opportunity commissioned by the Digi, an industry lobby advocating for the digital industry in Australia, which estimated the technology sector contributed about $122 billion to the Australian economy, 6.6 per cent of GDP and this contribution would grow to about $207 billion by 2030.

    Dane Eldridge, chief executive and founder of Sydney based web and software development agency 4mation, in an InnovationAus podcast, said there was little chance of the forecast number of digital workers being achieved.

    “There’s been a shortage of talent for many years now. Unless there’s some massive shift – I just don’t see that number coming close to being hit.”

    Government intervention called for

    Mr Eldridge suggested informal pathways were doing much, but not sufficient, to boost digital skills.

    “There’s a lot of self-learning and on-the-job learning happening, and people transitioning into technology because the barriers aren’t high, provided you are passionate about it.

    “There’s lots of online resources that can help you get started, but without some major government program or intervention, I just think we’re not going to be anywhere near that number.”

    For many of the tech roles 4mation must fill, Mr Eldridge said people with informal training were often more valuable than university graduates.

    “There’s much less correlation between being a great developer and having a tertiary qualification than in the past. We find great developers may or may not have a degree. I think most developers, when they come straight out of university, have the foundational thinking skills, which will set them up really well long-term, but not necessarily the practical, hands-on skills to make them useful.”

    Overseas talent needed

    To help address the skills shortage he called on the Government to ramp up initiatives to recruit overseas digital talent.

    “Australia’s got a great reputation for being stable, having a great environment, for being COVID-safe. If we could import a whole bunch of tech talent, who would be very attracted to Australia, it would go a long way to building that skills base.”

    He said 4mation, which was founded in 2001 and employs more than 80 designers, developers and user experience specialists, would not have achieved its growth without overseas talent.

    “Our preference is always to hire local talent. It’s easier, it’s cheaper, there’s less hassle … But we need to go where the talent is available. The 457 visa has been super useful for us over the years in filling some of the critical tech roles that we couldn’t source locally.”

    The in-demand skills

    Mr Eldridge identified the skills in highest demand for his business as being frontend developers and “anything in the JavaScript space… and good UX and UI designers and … great technical architects, people with CTO level experience in architecting systems and helping develop a roadmap.”

    He said also that software development companies increasingly needed to have software developers with strong skills in particular specialisations to be competitive.

    “It’s gone from a developer doing frontend and backend and databases and quality assurance. These days, if you’re trying to really compete and produce top-notch solutions, it’s more likely that you’ve got a cross-functional team with the best of each of those skill sets.”

    Also, he said successful companies were increasingly involving their developers in all elements of a project. “Companies that do really well use developers as creative problem-solvers and get them involved in the problem-definition phase, and get them involved very early on, because they can bring unique perspectives to the design of a solution.

    “That’s definitely the direction good companies are headed and using their developers in areas where they can really build a competitive advantage, where they can differentiate themselves.”

    This article was produced as a partnership between InnovationAus and 4mation. If you would like to know more about 4mation and software development click here.

    The post Tech skills: What’s hot and where to find them appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • NSW careers advice service to help workforce plan

    The NSW state government has unveiled plans for a career advice and educational pathways service following a review of the state’s vocational education and training sector led by high profile university chancellors David Gonski and Peter Shergold.

    The new service, known as Careers NSW, will be piloted by Service NSW and is a key recommendation from the yet to be released sector review by Mr Gonski and Professor Shergold.

    The state government has targeted a full roll out of Careers NSW by mid-2022, with a pilot program to be online by the end of this year.

    David Gonski
    David Gonski on the new Careers NSW advice service to help with workforce planning

    Premier Gladys Berejiklian said the new guidance service would help the NSW workforce evolve and adjust to disruptions like the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “NSW is the driver of innovation, research and development in Australia providing unique and incredible career opportunities for people, including at Tech Central, the Aerotropolis and in our record infrastructure boom,” the Premier said.

    “The pandemic has forced us to reflect on the workforce and it has never been more crucial for people across NSW to access quality advice to make informed decisions about their professional future,” she said.

    When up and running, the new Careers NSW “wrap around” service will “connect people to accessible and quality career guidance” and “advise on educational pathways and qualifications that match people to the skills they need to be employed faster”.

    The state is also targeting “highly-credentialed volunteers” to provide advice on specific innovation areas including manufacturing, cybersecurity and construction.

    NSW Skills and Tertiary Education Minister Geoff Lee said the government was committed to providing a dedicated careers advice service in NSW.

    “Students and people looking to change careers or develop their skills deserve access to lifelong careers advice to make informed decisions on their future,” Mr Lee said.

    “Careers NSW will provide a wrap-around service to not only connect people to accessible and quality careers guidance but to advise on educational pathways and qualifications that exist to match people to the skills they need to be employed faster.”

    The NSW government says the Review of the NSW vocational education and training sector led by Mr Gonski and Prof Shergold would be “released shortly”.

    The post NSW careers advice service to help workforce plan appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • First space techs awarded ‘Moon to Mars’ grants

    Two NSW space technology companies have shared $1.1 million in federal funding as part of the first round of the government Moon to Mars Supply Chain Capability Improvement initiative.

    The $150 million program announced in August last year aimed to help local SMEs become part the US government’s public-private Moon to Mars space exploration program. The first grants were announced today by Industry Minister Karen Andrews on Wednesday.

    “These grants are about expanding and supporting our domestic capabilities in the space sector, while helping Australian companies be part of NASA’s grand ambition to establish a sustainable presence on the Moon to prepare for missions to Mars,” Ms Andrews said in a statement.

    Karen Andrews
    Moon to Mars: Karen Andrews turns on the tap for the $150m program

    “Today’s funding announcement showcases two Aussie companies leading the way in space infrastructure and on-board spacecraft navigation.”

    Spiral Blue received $416,2050 to develop its satellite data processing software while partners Advanced Navigation and Q-CTRL received a grant of $690,892 to develop a “world-first inertial navigation system”.

    “These grants will help boost investment in the manufacturing sector, build Australia’s reputation as a manufacturer of choice, create new skilled Australian jobs and grow our economy,” said Ms Andrews.

    Spiral Blue’s software is used with earth observation satellites to enable data processing on-board the satellite rather than the typical approach of processing the information back on earth.

    Advanced Navigation and Q-CTRL is a joint initiative between the respective AI-based navigation hardware firm and the Quantum startup. The two companies have partnered to develop Inertial navigation, considered a critical capability a variety of space missions, where external navigational beacons such as GPS or even landmarks are not available.

    Australian Space Agency head Enrico Palermo welcomed the first round of grants.

    “The two successful projects showcase the talent and ingenuity in Australia’s space sector and increase the involvement and value add of local technology in national and international space supply chains,” Mr Palermo said.

    “Congratulations to Space Edge and Advanced Navigation and Q-CTRL for leading projects that will contribute to the development of national capability and help to build a high-tech workforce that can make a significant contribution to the national economy, while positioning Australia as a key player in the global space community.”

    The Moon to Mars Supply Chain Capability Improvement program offers grants between $250,000 and $1 million. Applications are open until June 30, 2023.

    The post First space techs awarded ‘Moon to Mars’ grants appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Bipartisan support for local games sector is growing

    Politicians from both sides of the aisle have backed the growing calls for the federal government to better support the Australian game development sector.

    Shadow assistant minister Tim Watts moved a motion in Parliament on Monday calling for recognition of the potential of the game development sector, the transferability of skills in it and the potential for it to “help drive the post-COVID economic recovery in Australia, creating jobs and expanding a significant export market”.

    A number of Labor, Liberal and Nationals MPs spoke in support of the motion and called on more government support for the sector.

    Mr Watts said the sector is “often overlooked” by politicians and needs to be taken more seriously in Canberra.

    crossy road
    Crossroads: The Australian games development sector gets some bipartisan support

    “This is potentially a billion-dollar industry for Australia and a source of jobs with skills that are transferable into other high-wage, high-growth industries, like cybersecurity and software development,” Mr Watts said.

    “It would be a huge source of jobs growth and direct foreign investment into Australia as we begin our post-pandemic economic recovery. This is an industry that we need to grow as an ecosystem.”

    There has been no direct federal government support for the sector since the $20 million interactive games fund was scrapped by the Abbott government in 2014, after only half of its allocated funding had been deployed.

    “With the right federal support, we could grow the domestic industry and take an even bigger slice of this global billion-dollar pie. Despite the Australian video game industry punching above its weight globally, we are at serious risk of losing this potential billion-dollar growth development industry,” Mr Watts said.

    “We need the Australian government to back in Australia video game developers and the high-wage high-skill jobs they create. It is this disadvantage – a lack of government support that the Australian industry faces globally – that we have to address here in the chamber.”

    Nationals MP Pat Conaghan agreed that governments need to do more to support the sector.

    “Governments at all levels do need to do more … this is the pool of talented young people that we have in our communities across Australia that we need to support. We need to work with them and engage them so that we can ensure that Australia is a leading nation and ensure that there is a future for our young people,” Mr Conaghan said.

    Liberal MP James Stevens hit back at claims the federal government is doing nothing to support the industry, pointing to the likes of the research and development tax incentive and the export market development grants.

    None of these policies are targeted directly at the game development sector, which also can’t access the tax offsets on offer to the screen industry.

    “There is already good support for the gaming sector from both the Commonwealth government and the state government. At the Commonwealth level we are doing a lot of things generally that are opportunities for the gaming industry to use that Commonwealth support to access export markets,” Mr Stevens said.

    “I see a very exciting future for the gaming sector and probably the creative sector in this country and in particular in South Australia. We need the industry economies of scale and the workforce capabilities in place as well as support from the state and Commonwealth governments to see this industry grow. I’m very confident that it will.”

    Labor MP Susan Templeman said the Coalition has “missed a massive opportunity” to support the sector over its recent time in government.

    Fellow Labor MP Josh Burns said that a “little bit of government investment would go a long way to create jobs and help build this wonderful local industry”.

    Late last year Mr Watts, along with Liberal Senator James McGrath, formed the Parliamentary Friends of Video Games in an effort to educate politicians on the sector and push for greater support.

    The post Bipartisan support for local games sector is growing appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Govt to amend Online Safety Bill with Labor support

    The government will move to amend the Online Safety Bill to provide more transparency and reviews after the controversial legislation was passed by the lower house with support from the Opposition.

    The Online Safety Bill hands new powers to the eSafety Commissioner, extending the online content takedown scheme to Australian adults, and allows for the issuing of removal notices for content deemed to be rated R18+ or higher, and to order the site or app to be blocked if it refuses.

    A set of basic safety expectations will also be outlined for Big Tech as part of the legislation.

    The legislation was given the green light by a Senate committee on Friday, and was passed by the House of Representatives on Tuesday afternoon.

    data
    Online safety: Labor will support governments controversial bill, albeit with amendments

    Labor supported the legislation in the lower house but is expecting a number of government amendments in the Senate to address the myriad concerns around the bill.

    Shadow cybersecurity spokesman Tim Watts acknowledged concerns about the bill, including that it vests significant power and discretion with the eSafety Commissioner, its lack of transparency about how this power would be used, its potential impact on the sex industry and for it to be used to remove content that is in the public interest.

    The government has been unable to address these stakeholder concerns, Mr Watts said

    “The safety of Australians online is of paramount importance and Labor will work with the government to iron out concerns with these bills in time for debate in the senate,” Mr Watts said in Parliament.

    “But in the meantime, Labor will not oppose these bills and we support passage through this place on the understanding that government amendments are forthcoming,” he said.

    “Labor considers that the government must consider further amendments to clarify the bill in terms of its scope and to strengthen due process, appeals, oversight and transparency requirements given the important free speech and digital rights considerations it engages.”

    The government amendments are expected to include increased reporting from the eSafety Commissioner on how the new powers are utilised, and a new internal review mechanism regarding these decisions.

    On Tuesday morning the Greens announced that they would be voting against the legislation, calling for it to be withdrawn and redrafted as it is “poorly drafted and could lead to widespread, unintended consequences”.

    “This bill would make the eSafety Commissioner the sole arbiter of internet content in Australia. It creates extraordinary powers for any one person to hold, let alone an unelected bureaucrat,” Greens senator and digital rights spokesperson Nick McKim said.

    “It also fails to provide for timely reviews or appeals of decisions made by the eSafety Commissioner. We are concerned that people opposed to sex work, pornography and sexual health for LGBTIQ+ people could abuse the complaints process to seek to have lawful online content removed. Public interest news that involves violent imagery, such as footage of police violence, could also be taken down.”

    While the Online Safety Bill has been discussed by the government for several years, it recently only gave stakeholders four working days to make submissions to the senate inquiry into the final piece of legislation, which was introduced to Parliament just a week after nearly 400 submissions were received on it.

    This short timeframe has “undermined confidence” in the process, Mr Watts said.

    “It is disappointing that the government has proved incapable of conducting a process that satisfies stakeholders in terms of process and substance,” he said.

    There is also a “worrying lack of conceptual and operational clarity” around how the new powers will work, with Mr Watts pointing to eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant recently saying that the “sausage” is still being made.

    “Finding the balance between free speech and protections against certain kinds of speech is a complex endeavour and we are concerned that this bill represents a significant increase in the eSafety Commissioner’s discretion to remove material without commensurate checks and balances,” Mr Watts said.

    “It doesn’t take much imagination to foresee a situation where, in the hands of an overzealous eSafety Commissioner, legitimate speech could be silenced – whether of racial or religious minorities expressing outrage at racist speech, or of women expressing outrage at sexual violence in the workplace.”

    The post Govt to amend Online Safety Bill with Labor support appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Hastie urges unity to combat rising cyber threats

    Assistant Defence Minister Andrew Hastie and the head of the Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC) have called on Australia’s cybersecurity community to unite against growing threats as more people go online, including criminals and state-based actors.

    The ACSC is increasingly turning to industry partners to mitigate cyber risks as it deals with more than 60,000 reports of cybercrime each year, and acknowledges more upgrades are needed to improve its “already stretched” support service.

    Speaking at the Australian Information Security Association (AISA) conference in Canberra on Tuesday, Mr Hastie said Australia’s sovereignty depended on its ability to thwart cyber-attacks, and it required government, industry and academia working “hand in glove”.

    Parliament
    Cyber alerts: Andrew Hastie has called for industry to come together to address threats

    “Cyber is the new battlefield, and whether we like it or not, we’re all joined in an online contest to preserve our personal security but also our digital sovereignty as a country.

    “And we cannot be complacent. It is essential we consider cyber security when we talk about Australia’s national security, our innovation and prosperity. And a major cyber-attack would have a devastating impact on our economy, our security and our sovereignty.”

    Mr Hastie told delegates it is also important to adopt proper cyber hygiene, including the current push to “mainstream” risk mitigation strategies like multifactor authentication.

    The Australian government consulted with 1,400 cyber stakeholders through its business led industry advisory panel in 2019. The recommendations informed a $1.67 billion 2020 Cyber Security Strategy to be delivered over 10 years.

    A subsequent Industry Advisory Committee, also led by big business, has been tasked with guiding the implementation of the strategy. The committee’s first report into ransomware and the basic steps business can take to mitigate risks was criticised by the opposition as a “missed opportunity” that lacked government policy and instead put pressure on the business community.

    The debate around Australia’s approach comes as cyberattacks increase in frequency, scale and sophistication.

    According to Mr Hastie, cyber criminals and state-based actors are focused on the “irresistible targets” of digital supply chains, with Australian cyber agencies now receiving more than 60,000 cybercrime reports a year.

    “We must combine our knowledge and our expertise as well as our unique insights and capabilities to detect and respond to this broad and evolving threat landscape,” Mr Hastie said.

    Head of the ACSC, Abigail Bradshaw, said her organisation is working to increase industry partnerships, and the size of its partnership program has more than doubled since she arrived in March last year.

    The increased collaboration is evolving the way the ACSC delivers advice to Australians, according to Ms Bradshaw, who noted the current approach is encountering hurdles as the organisation deals with a cybercrime report on average once every eight minutes.

    We’re preparing to initiate new call centre arrangements to expand our already stretched 24 hour watch force to enhance cybersecurity assistance the ACSC provides to all Australians, and with a specific focus on some of those most vulnerable to the small to medium enterprise sector.

    The cyber organisation is also currently working on a “significant evolution” to its cyber threat sharing platform. An updated “bidirectional” platform will be able to share emerging threats between the ACSC and Australian public and private organisations at “machine speed and scale”.

    The post Hastie urges unity to combat rising cyber threats appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Govt hands UK firm $11m digital ID contract

    The federal government has awarded a UK company a $11 million contract to deliver biometrics technology as part of its digital identity program.

    The Australian Taxation Office signed the deal with London-based iProov, worth $10.7 million and running until for three years, for the “provision of liveliness solution”.

    The work will see iProov incorporate its biometrics facial recognition technology with the ATO’s myGovID digital identity offering, with a planned public launch by the end of the year.

    The technology lets a user to prove they are a “live person” and are physically present while using the digital identity service. A user will be able to take a selfie and have it verified against identity documents such as their passport or drivers’ licence.

    biometric
    Hello sir, are you alive? UK firm wins ‘liveness’ test

    It is the second time the government has brought in a private company to deliver liveliness technology, with the Digital Transformation Agency paying French firm IDEMIA a $260,000 consulting contract over 12 months in early 2018, but the government opted to not pursue this work further at the time.

    The ATO’s digital identity service is a key part of the federal government’s wider digital identity project, which is aiming to provide identity verification across a range of government and private sector services.

    There will eventually be a range of digital identity services on offer for users, with myGovID to be available alongside services from the private sector and state governments.

    The project has received $460 million in funding overall, with the most recent federal budget last October providing $250 million for the scheme for a range of initiatives, including the incorporation of biometrics in myGovID.

    This had originally been planned to be active by mid-2020, but the ATO didn’t end up going to the market for the technology until October last year, and now plans to run a public beta by mid-year.

    iProov will be using its “genuine presence assurance” technology, a face verification service where users conduct a simple face scan on their mobile device as proof of identity.

    The company’s technology is in use by the Singapore government, the UK Home Office and the US Department of Homeland Security.

    “iProov is honoured that the Commonwealth of Australia has entrusted us with such an important task – to secure the creation of digital identities against impersonation,” chief executive Andrew Bud said in a statement.

    “We are delighted that the Australian government has chosen our unique combination of inclusivity and resilience, which is already trusted by governments worldwide to authenticate citizens.”

    The Digital Transformation Agency, which is leading the digital identity project, recently ran a round of consultations on legislation surrounding the scheme.

    In its submission, cybersecurity firm VeroGuard Systems warned against the use of biometrics technology such as the liveness solution.

    “The use of biometrics at any point of authentication introduces substantial privacy and security risks. Avoiding biometrics altogether would be a substantially better approach,” the VeroGuard Systems submission said.

    “The exploitation of any biometric system can be catastrophic for users. Once compromised, a user’s biometric cannot be simply replaced in the manner of a password or PIN…in open networks relying on variable hardware and software on user devices, the risks are substantial and cannot be effectively managed.

    “There are better, more secure approaches that do not require biometric data to be used.”

    Security researchers last year also identified a crucial design flaw in myGovID that they said would allow an attacker to easily trick a user into handing over access to their account and all of the linked services, which will eventually include private sector offerings such as banking.

    The researchers warned that Australians should not use myGovID until this flaw was fixed, but the ATO said that it is a public awareness issue rather than a vulnerability. In a further submission to the DTA, the researchers said the whole digital identity scheme should be “abandoned and redesigned from scratch” to focus on privacy and security.

    The post Govt hands UK firm $11m digital ID contract appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Audit Office to scrutinise R&D Tax Incentive

    The national audit office is scrutinising the government’s administration of the research and development tax incentive program and its readiness for a number of changes to take effect in the coming months.

    The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) is conducting an audit into the effectiveness of the Industry department and Australian Taxation Office’s administration of the research and development tax incentive (RDTI) program and is expected to table its report in October.

    The ANAO is accepting submissions on the issue until the end of May. It’s the first time the audit office has scrutinised the government’s R&D tax scheme since 2003, when it was known as the R&D tax concession.

    Parliament House
    R&D Tax Incentive: Let’s have a look under the hood, shall we?

    The audit will examine whether the assessment, compliance and assurangement arrangements around the RDTI are effective, if the performance measurement and monitoring arrangements are effective and whether the planning for program changes has been effective.

    These changes will come into effect from the next financial year, after being announced in the October federal budget, marking a significant reversal from previous plans to shed $1.8 billion from the scheme.

    The changes to come into effect include companies with annual turnover under $20 million to receive a refundable tax offset for R&D set at 18.5 percentage points about its company tax rate, and a new “intensity measure” to calculate the offset for larger firms.

    The RDTI expenditure threshold will also be raised from $100 million to $150 million, with a number of administrative changes to also be applied.

    A new platform to deliver the RDTI will also be launched in the second half of the year, after it was designed by consulting firm Deloitte for $1.1 million.

    The platform will modernise the processing of accessing the RDTI for Australian companies.

    The RDTI audit was listed on the ANAO’s planned work last year, with the inquiry officially launched last month.

    Last week a consortium of Australian tech giants wrote to the ATO requesting a “collaborative workshop” to hash out how software claims are treated under the RDTI.

    Representatives from the likes of Atlassian, AirTasker, Culture Amp and StartupAus, among others, wrote to the tax office requesting the meeting as soon as possible, following long-standing concerns over how software fits with the current RDTI scheme, and its implementation by the department.

    A number of tech firms have been subject of RDTI audits and have subsequently been required to pay back significant portions of their R&D claims.

    The organisations said the day-long meeting with ATO officials would help to iron out difficulties for tech firms in accessing the RDTI, and determine how it can work better in the future.

    The post Audit Office to scrutinise R&D Tax Incentive appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Civil society ‘ignored’ on hacking bill inquiry

    Civil society has been “completely sidelined and ignored” in the inquiry into the government’s proposed new hacking powers, after no civil or digital rights groups were invited to the only public hearing, Deakin University senior lecturer Dr Monique Mann says.

    The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) is conducting an inquiry into the Identify and Disrupt Bill, which hands sweeping powers to the Federal Police and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to hack into the devices and networks of suspected criminals to ‘disrupt’ their data and covertly take over their accounts.

    The PJCIS held its only public hearing as part of its inquiry last week, with those providing evidence including the Human Rights Legal Centre, the Cyber Security Cooperative Research Centre (CSCRC) and the Uniting Church.

    But no civil or digital rights organisations were invited to appear before the committee.

    Hacking digital
    Hacking powers: Digital rights groups are watching closely

    Deakin University senior lecturer and Australian Privacy Foundation surveillance committee chair Dr Monique Mann said the lack of civil society participation at the hearing was troubling.

    “It’s pretty disappointing that you have the PJCIS inviting mostly pro-law enforcement, pro-government hacking advocates, across a lot of the usual suspects,” Dr Mann told InnovationAus.

    “It was good to see the Law Council and HRLC, but I think there was a real lack of civil society representation, particularly given four leading civil society organisations put in a joint submission with expertise specifically in these topics, from law and academia,” she said.

    “It’s really disappointing to not have engagement with civil society, particularly when you have people invited to speak at the hearing such as the Uniting Church. I would question where their substantive expertise in matters of national security and surveillance law is.”

    The Identify and Disrupt legislation introduces three new warrants, allowing authorities to access and disrupt data of suspected criminals, access the networks of suspected criminal groups and take over their accounts and continue to run them.

    While the government has said the warrants will be used for “online serious crimes” such as child abuse and terrorism, they will be accessible for any crime carrying a jail sentence of at least three years, which includes fraud, tax evasion and forgery.

    Leading civil organisations Liberty Victoria, Electronic Frontiers Australia, Australian Privacy Foundation and the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties made a joint submission to the inquiry, raising significant concerns with the legislation and their extraterritorial application.

    None of these groups were invited to address the committee directly, while many who were invited, including the Uniting Church and the Cybersecurity CRC, were supportive of the bill.

    The PJCIS secretariat confirmed to InnovationAus that there are no plans for any further hearings.

    Representatives from the Law Council of Australia and the Human Rights Law Council (HRLC) did address the PJCIS, raising significant concerns with the sweeping new powers. After this, the only other organisation to raise a number of issues with the legislation was the Communications Alliance.

    The HRLC has labelled the powers in the bill as “absurdly broad” and disproportionate”.

    It’s important for civil society to be able to offer input on these important pieces of legislation, Dr Mann said.

    “It’s easy to become very discouraged about the process of introducing new laws. Civil society organisations work very hard in terms of defending, upholding and advocating the rights of citizens, so it’s very disappointing to have these perspectives founded in subject matter expertise completely sidelined or ignored from these kinds of forums,” she said.

    Other organisations asked to appear at the hearing that were generally in support of the new powers were the Carl Ryan Foundation, a charity focusing on the safety of children online, the Uniting Church of Australia, and the Cyber Security Cooperative Research Centre (CSCRC).

    In its submission to the inquiry, the CSCRC said the powers were proportionate, appropriate and safe.

    A number of government departments and agencies also appeared before the hearing, including representatives from the Department of Home Affairs, the Australian Federal Police, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

    In the joint submission, the coalition of civil liberties groups raised concern with how the new hacking powers will apply extraterritorially, with the warrants accessible by authorities when they don’t know who the suspected criminal is and where they are based.

    “These powers effectively extend the reach of Australian law enforcement outside of the sovereign jurisdiction of Australia with significant extraterritorial impacts,” the submission said.

    “In absence of a clear transnational regulatory structure supporting transnational government hacking operations in cases where the physical location of the target computer and suspect is not known these proposed laws should be reconsidered,” it said.

    These concerns “strike at the heart” of the government’s legislation, and concerns about it being raised may have been why the groups weren’t invited, Dr Mann said.

    “The Identify and Disrupt powers will enable Australian law enforcement agencies to conduct extraterritorial government hacking outside of the sovereign state of Australia, which is against the rule of law,” she said.

    “Having critical people with expertise in this saying that would have absolutely struck at their proposal from the start – there’s no way they would’ve proceeded without recognising that.”

    Without hearing from critical voices, the new hacking powers will likely be greenlit by the powerful committee and proceed easily through Parliament, she said.

    “I can very much anticipate when the report is released it’s largely going to endorse these new powers, and they’re just going to pass into law like all the others,” Dr Mann said.

    “They’re moving to introduce new laws that have very significant human rights implications in situations where there’s not sufficient oversight or accountability, in a really knee-jerk way and justifying them because of evil wrongdoers on the internet. But the laws aren’t limited to that application, they define a broad range of different things and could apply to journalists and academics.”

    A number of other organisations have also been critical of the proposed powers, with the NSW Council of Civil Liberties labelling them a “catch-all formula for abuse” and “next in an accelerating wave, strengthening the powers of the state without any humility about the cumulative erosion of democratic freedoms they entail”.

    A group of Senators also raised concerns that a “wide scope of innocent third parties” could be caught up in the coercive powers.

    The Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills also questioned a lack of focus on privacy, no judicial oversight and the ability for the powers to be accessed without a warrant in an emergency.

    The post Civil society ‘ignored’ on hacking bill inquiry appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Senate committee green light for Online Safety Act

    The government’s Online Safety Bill has been given the green light by a Senate committee, paving the way for its debate in Parliament this week.

    In the final report, the Opposition did however signal that it would move to amend the legislation in Parliament this week, while the Greens called for it to be redrafted entirely.

    The Environment and Communications Legislation Committee tabled its report into the Online Safety Bill late on Friday afternoon.

    Data sharing
    Online Safety Bill: Senate report tabled in Parliament

    The legislation hands new powers to the eSafety Commissioner, extending the takedown scheme to Australian adults, allowing for the issuing of removal notices for content deemed to be rated as R18+ and higher, and order the sites and apps to be blocked if they don’t comply.

    While the committee received a number of submissions raising significant concerns with the impact of the new powers on the adult industry, the investment of huge powers with a single individual in the eSafety Commissioner, and the potential for the law to further undermine encryption, it recommended the bill be passed as is.

    The committee’s only other recommendation was for the bill’s explanatory memorandum to be amended to clarify that the requirement for the basic online safety expectations code for tech companies to be in place within six months is “for best endeavours” with the eSafety Commissioner to have further discretion to work with industry to determine a timeframe.

    In the report, the committee rejected the transparency and accountability concerns, and those worried about unintended consequences.

    “The committee notes that there are extensive existing mechanisms for public and parliamentary scrutiny, as well as provision for statutory independent review of the options of the Online Safety Act, and administrative and judicial review of individual decisions made by the Commissioner,” the report said.

    “Despite this, some committee members continue to share the particular concerns expressly identified by some submitters and witnesses regarding transparency and reporting in the exercise of the Commissioner’s powers.

    “The committee notes that the Commissioner’s view that the new scheme is intended to focus on online harm, which the committee considers is an appropriate approach and which would not capture the significant majority of adult content online.”

    In additional comments to the report, participating Labor Senators Nita Green and Catryna Bilyk criticised the rushed process behind the government’s consultation around the legislation.

    “The short timeframe at the end of this drawn-out process has undermined confidence in the government’s exposure draft consultation process, with a number of stakeholders concerned that submissions have not been considered properly,” the Labor senators said.

    The Opposition called on the government to make further amendments to the legislation to clarify its scope and “strengthen due process, appeals, oversight and transparency requirements, given the important free speech and digital rights considerations it engages”.

    “We are concerned that this bill represents a significant increase in the eSafety Commissioner’s discretion to remove material without commensurate requirements for due process, appeals or transparency over and above Senate estimates, annual reporting and AAT appeals,” the Labor senators said.

    In additional comments, participating Greens senators slammed the bill, saying it creates “extraordinary power for a single unelected bureaucracy – with little to no oversight – to wield”, and that the rushed process has meant it hasn’t been considered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills or the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.

    The new powers could also be “weaponised by people with moral or political agendas”, the Greens said.

    The Greens called for the legislation to be withdrawn and redrafted to address these concerns, including the potential for the powers to be used against lawful online content, an inadequate right of appeal, inadequate transparency and accountability, the potential for the powers to be used to undermine encryption, and their detrimental impact on sex workers.

    The Greens also called for a constitutionally or legislatively enshrined Charter of Rights, including privacy and digital rights matching the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation.

    The Online Safety Bill is now expected to be debated in Parliament this week.

    The post Senate committee green light for Online Safety Act appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Feud 2.0: Google and Microsoft fight heats up

    Google has returned fired at Microsoft after the Redmond-based behemoth singled out the search and advertising giant in calls for more technology and media regulation in the United States. Microsoft’s intervention has reopened fissures between the companies not seen since the company’s 2012 ‘Scroogle’ campaign.

    Following the introduction of Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code, which can force designated platform companies into ‘final offer’ arbitration with news publishers to determine revenue sharing models, Microsoft is now pushing for similar laws in the US as part of potential wider reforms to address big tech dominance.

    Google and Facebook railed against Australia’s latest media laws while Microsoft backed the laws, offering to fill the search void if Google followed through on its threat to leave the Australian market because of the code.

    Abstract
    In the abstract: It’s on like Donkey Kong between the tech giants as regulatory pressure mounts

    On Friday, Microsoft advocated to a US antitrust House Committee for an “Australian approach” to address the “structural imbalance between a technology gatekeeper and the free press”.

    Microsoft president Brad Smith told the committee Australia’s new media laws, while not yet invoked, are “proving effective in driving negotiations” of more than $100 million in deals between Facebook and Google and news media companies.

    But Mr Smith reserved much of his address to lawmakers to highlight Google’s omnipresence in the digital advertising ecosystem and the company’s use of news content, which he argued is having a chilling effect on journalism and democracy.

    Mr Smith outlined Google’s rise and dominance of not only the search business but also the wider market for digital advertising services that have allowed the company, along with Facebook, to capture most of the value from the shift to online advertising.

    But Google, which takes around a third of every dollar spent on digital advertising in the US, is unique, Mr Smith told lawmakers, because “it is the dominant technology firm in virtually every corner of the digital advertising ecosystem”.

    According to Mr Smith, Google’s rise has come at the expense of traditional media, but it is not a case of fair disruption.

    “News organisations have ad inventory to sell, but they can no longer sell directly to those who want to place ads. Instead, for all practical purposes they must use Google’s tools, operate on Google’s ad exchanges, contribute data to Google’s operations, and pay Google money,” Mr Smith said.

    “All this impacts the ability of news organisations to benefit economically even from advertising on their own sites.”

    Australian regulators are currently examining the potential conflicts of interest for Google in the digital advertising ecosystem and a lack of choice for other stakeholders in the local market, through an ACCC inquiry into the supply of digital advertising services.

    US Authorities, too, have locked in on Google, including multiple antitrust cases brought by an overlapping network of state and federal enforcers late last year.

    While the Microsoft President stopped short of saying antitrust committees should pursue Google, he urged the committee to consider what it can do as regulators elsewhere tightened their focus on big tech.

    “We respect [Google’s] sustained creativity, investments, and determination. But as we learned first-hand from Microsoft’s own experience two decades ago, when a company’s success creates side effects that adversely impact a market and our society, the problem should not be ignored. And this typically requires government action.”

    Later on Friday, Google released a statement accusing Microsoft of “reverting to their familiar playbook of attacking rivals and lobbying for regulations that benefit their own interests”.

    Microsoft’s calls for more scrutiny of Google come as the company manages a widespread cyber security attack that exploits vulnerabilities in its popular email software. The timing is not coincidental, according to Google.

    “Microsoft was warned about the vulnerabilities in their system, knew they were being exploited, and are now doing damage control while their customers scramble to pick up the pieces from what has been dubbed the Great Email Robbery,” wrote Google senior vice president of Global Affairs, Kent Walker.

    “So maybe it’s not surprising to see them dusting off the old diversionary Scroogled playbook.”

    In 2012 Microsoft launched a ‘Scroogle’ campaign against the quickly rising competitor, targeting Google’s business models and data collection and processing.

    Mr Walker pointed to Microsoft’s own platform businesses that offer news content, suggesting Microsoft had done relatively little to support journalism.

    The post Feud 2.0: Google and Microsoft fight heats up appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • A Marketplace milestone that is without meaning

    It is important to mark milestones and to celebrate successes. This is how most of us maintain forward momentum in important work. But when the ‘success’ is so lame and the supporting evidence so disingenuous, the milestone itself becomes pointless. It is completely without meaning.

    It is in this spirit that I ask Australia to please stand and join me in a slow hand clap for the federal government’s Digital Marketplace. Well done, and ho hum.

    Government Services Minister Stuart Robert and newly appointed Digital Economy Minister Jane Hume issued a media release on Friday to mark the $3 billion milestone. That is, the marketplace has delivered $3 billion worth of contracts since it was established five years ago.

    Stuart Robert
    Stuart Robert: The Minister for Government Services is celebrating the wrong milestones

    It’s a double milestone, the minister’s say, because more than $2 billion of those contracts were awarded to small and medium-sized businesses.

    These are shallow claims and certainly no cause for celebration. An inch-deep dive into the tech procurement numbers quickly reveals the depth of the misinformation that underscores the Digital Marketplace milestones.

    Over the six years it has taken the Digital Marketplace to reach its $3 billion milestone, the federal government has spent a total of between $48 billion and $56 billion on ICT products and services. That’s six years of $8 billion to $9 billion spent on federal ICT. So, there’s some perspective.

    I raise these numbers merely to state the obvious: The main game in terms of tech procurement – including for digital consulting and delivery services – happens outside of the Digital Marketplace. The hundreds of millions of dollars the Commonwealth spends with the Big Four management consultants (and others) is a digital-focused testament to that.

    The Digital Marketplace does not operate as a online marketplace. It is rather simply a panel contract that is used primarily by recruitment companies, by tech industry body shops.

    According to the Digital Transformation Agency’s numbers, ten out of the top ten sellers on the Digital Marketplace in the past financial year were recruitment companies. That’s ten out of ten.

    Six of those body shops in the top ten sellers were SMEs. It is laughable that recruiters supplying individuals into the bureaucracy is being chalked up by this government as a win for local digital SMEs. What a jolly jape.

    If the aim of the Digital Marketplace was to make it easier for digital SMEs to get access to government work and to build digital capability and capacity for the nation, then it’s not working. It’s a farce.

    When ten out of ten of the top sellers are providing nothing more than warm bodies into the bureaucracy – albeit warm bodies with specialist skills – what chance is there that these small players can develop IP, build growing and commercially successful businesses?

    Just 28 per cent of the opportunities listed on the Digital Marketplace since 2016 have been open to all sellers. The proportion of these open opportunities on the Digital Marketplace has been trending down.

    The fashion these days, it seems, is for government buyers to restrict opportunities to invited sellers only. Sometimes this involves an invitation to a single supplier, which does make you wonder why it’s called a marketplace.

    This practice makes the procurement process more opaque, not less. And these single supplier arrangements involve huge amounts of money.

    All of this reminds me of the InnovationAus Selling to Government survey, published just four months ago (even if it feels like forever ago)

    Nearly three-quarters of the individuals participating in that survey reported that the process for selling into the federal government was neither simple, nor transparent.

    And 90 per cent of the respondents believe that the federal government favours larger multinational providers over Australian providers of technology.

    The results of the InnovationAus survey do not easily square with Digital Marketplace milestone celebrations of Stuart Robert and Jane Hume. It’s like we are accessing the experiences of completely different sets of suppliers.

    Because the damning assessment of the SME technology providers who responded to the InnovationAus survey simply don’t believe that the government process for buying tech is either fair or transparent.

    The post A Marketplace milestone that is without meaning appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • ‘Part privatisation’ of VicRoads tech system criticised

    The Victorian government’s decision to “part-privatise” key elements of VicRoads has been criticised by the services union, which called on the plan to be scrapped and the tech work brought in-house.

    Treasurer Tim Pallas said last week the state had made an in-principle decision to pursue a “joint-venture model” for some of VicRoads main functions, including registration, licensing and custom plates. This would involve a private company being brought in to rebuild and run the troubled IT systems for up to the next 40 years.

    The contract would likely run for up to 40 years, and seems likely to be inked with a partnership between a super fund and a tech provider.

    Melbourne
    Rego time: Victoria planning to privatise the tech behind its licencing

    It would be the first time that an Australian jurisdiction has partnered with the private sector to perform this key function and has raised significant concern in the public sector union.

    The Australian Services Union has slammed the plan, saying it would put jobs and wages at risk, and is something the Victorian government must be able to deliver in-house.

    Mr Pallas pointed to a scoping study that found this model was the “best way to develop modern registration and licencing services” and said the government would retain ownership of all data, and the “vital functions” of pricing, road access and safety.

    “We’re going to put in place a joint venture partnership with the private sector to ensure that we get a modernised, adaptable service,” Mr Pallas told the media.

    “This is not privatisation, it’s effectively a partnership that hopefully will work for the Victorian people, and hopefully them the IT system they deserve.”

    “The private sector is much better at delivering these tools. They are also much better at being responsive to customer needs.”

    The government will now begin the search for the private company to undertake the significant and lucrative job, with a contract expected to be signed by the end of the year.

    The Australian Services Union has raised significant concerns with the plan.

    “The Victorian government needs to be able to deliver the IT solutions and other tools needed by VicRoads workers without part-privatisation of this essential government agency,” Australian Services Union secretary Leon Wiegard told InnovationAus.

    “The Victorian government can get the best of private sector innovation without transferring any control of VicRoads operations to a private entity. Across the Victorian government, significant investment in the tools needed to deliver services to the public happens every day without going down a risky path of part-privatising government operations.”

    Mr Wiegard said the union is also worried about job losses and an impact on wages.

    “With any privatisation, despite any prior commitments, wages and conditions fall over time. And for VicRoads workers the only protection against this would be continued public sector employment,” he said.

    Mr Pallas said there will be “stringent parameters and principles” in place to guide the development of the IT system, and that all current VicRoads staff will be retained.

    “We are focused on delivering a better customer service experience for motorists, and protecting jobs for VicRoads workers,” he said.

    “VicRoads employees provide an incredibly important service for the Victorian community, and we will ensure these workers and their entitlements are protected throughout this process.”

    It’s not the first time the state government has looked to revamp the VicRoads registration and licensing system, with the RandL project scrapped in 2015 at a loss of $97 million. The project was troubled from the start after first being discussed in 2008 as a way to replace the legacy systems used by the agency for these processes.

    The move is also in stark contrast to the approach of the NSW government, which has moved its registration and licencing responsibilities to Service NSW, and recently launched digital versions of drivers’ licences.

    The post ‘Part privatisation’ of VicRoads tech system criticised appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Vic privacy breach of vulnerable youth data

    A youth case worker stood down from a Victorian health department service provider on suspicion of accessing child pornography continued to access sensitive information about clients for months afterwards, according to a data breach inquiry into the incident.

    Failings in the department’s privacy protections meant the man – who was also subject to a separate investigation into an alleged child sex offence – had unauthorised access to the personal information of dozens of vulnerable people for more than a year, according to the report which found “serious” contraventions of Victorian privacy principals by the department.

    Details of the incident, which occurred between 2017 and 2018, have been revealed in a report into the data breach by the Victorian Information Commissioner, which held back the report due to separate police investigations and a trial of the former case worker.

    Parliament House Melbourne, VIC
    Spring Street: Melbourne rocked by privacy breach of vulnerable youth data

    The man, named as ‘B’ in the report, was employed by a service provider contracted by Victoria’s Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), now known as Department of Fairness, Families and Housing.

    B worked for over a year for the service provider, which was administering the DHHS’s Finding Solutions program, a Victorian government early intervention initiative to keep young people and families out of the child protection and out-of-home care systems.

    In that role B had access to the DHHS maintained Client Relationship Information System for Service Providers (CRISSP). Records held in CRISSP include names, addresses, DOBs, relationships, case notes, and any history of sexual abuse or exploitation.

    The man ceased working for the service provider around September 2017 but his access to CRISSP was not revoked despite formal procedures requiring so.

    About five months later police found child pornography on a laptop owned by B but could not prove it belong to him because of multiple user accounts on the computer. Police told the DHHS that they had “serious concerns about B’s access to vulnerable and at-risk children”, according to the report into the data breach.

    By then B was working for another youth service provider, also managed by the DHHS but via a separate division. The DHHS notified the provider of B’s suspected access to child pornography and he was stood down.

    However, the DHHS did not discuss B’s access to the CRISSP system as he had not required it in the new role. He was able to continue accessing the records until October 2018 when a staff members from two service providers noticed B had accessed their clients’ files.

    When notified, the DHHS revoked B’s access, more than a year after it should have been when he left the original service provider. By then, though, B had had accessed CRISSP 260 times

    involving 27 clients. B also conducted 150 searches of the client record system, on each occasion accessing the personal and sometimes sensitive information of vulnerable people.

    On Thursday Victoria’s information commissioner released his report into the data breach, finding both the DHHS and the service provider that initially provided B access to the CRISSP had failed to take reasonable steps to protect personal information in the records system.

    “The [Privacy and Data] Deputy Commissioner found that both DHHS and the [contracted service provider] contravened the [Information Privacy Principles] and issued a compliance notice against DHHS,” Victorian Information Commissioner Sven Bluemmel wrote in the report.

    The service provider has already implemented the privacy watchdog’s recommendations while the DHHS is on schedule to complete all the specified actions required by the compliance notice.

    Under the compliance notice the DHHS must:
    • Implement a risk tiering framework for contracted service providers delivering the Finding Solutions program
    • Update and simplify its contractual framework and guidance material for CRISSP
    • develop training that is specifically directed at the information security and privacy obligations of systems administrators and organisation authorities
    • implement a procedure to periodically check the currency of user lists for CRISSP

    Commissioner Bluemmel said the finding shows public sector organisations can’t outsource their privacy responsibilities.

    “Outsourcing arrangements cannot be ‘set and forget’.”

    “When a government agency shares personal information and system access with its contractors, the agency retains both a legal and a moral duty to protect the personal information it collects, uses, holds, and discloses. Government organisations can outsource the management of a program, but they cannot outsource this responsibility.”

    The post Vic privacy breach of vulnerable youth data appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Ransomware report a ‘missed opportunity’: Watts

    A government advisory group’s report on ransomware calling on Australian businesses to implement basic cybersecurity practices to mitigate risks is a “missed opportunity”.

    The Cyber Security Strategy Industry Advisory Committee, formed late last year and dominated by big business, released a report on Wednesday outlining the threat posed by ransomware, and the basic steps businesses can take to mitigate the risks.

    In contrast to a paper on the ransomware scourge released by the Opposition last month, the government’s expert committee does not include any recommendations for government or any calls for new policies. Rather, it focuses on what businesses should be doing, such as implementing the Essential Eight baseline features.

    Cyber threats: A government expert panel has no recommendations for ransomware policy

    The recommendations include basic steps such as multi-factor authentication, regularly updating software, training staff in cybersecurity, data lifecycle management, backing up data and built-in security features.

    The report has been backed by Home Affairs minister Peter Dutton, who is responsible for cybersecurity, saying businesses should move to implement the recommendations quickly.

    “Cyber criminals continue to see Australian businesses as an attractive target and ransomware is a particularly disruptive form of cyber-attack that can have devastating impacts,” Mr Dutton said.

    “The good news is that many ransomware attacks can be avoided by implementing basic cybersecurity controls and I urge businesses to take the time to review the advisory committee’s advice.

    The Labor discussion paper, released by shadow assistant minister for cybersecurity Tim Watts, instead calls on the government to develop a National Ransomware Strategy and take actions to reduce the attractiveness of Australian businesses for hackers.

    The advisory committee’s ransomware report “falls short of acknowledging the scale of the $1 billion problem”, Mr Watts said.

    “Instead of using the opportunity to launch a debate about the role government can play in shaping the calculus of ransomware gangs sizing up Australian organisations, the Morrison government continues its approach of playing the blame game,” Mr Watts said.

    “It’s not good enough to tell businesses to defend themselves by ‘locking their doors’ to cyber-criminal gangs. The Morrison government must do more to actively tackle the ransomware threat and develop a National Ransomware Strategy.”

    The committee, which originally offered recommendations on the development of the 2020 cybersecurity strategy, has been criticised for being dominated by big business interests, although representatives from some smaller cyber firms have since been added.

    The committee is chaired by Telstra chief executive Andrew Penn, and includes representatives from NBN Co, Northrop Grumman Australia, PwC and Macquarie Group. It also includes AUCloud chair Cathie Reid and FibreSense chair Bevan Slattery.

    The 14-page paper warned ransomware is one of the “most immediate, highest-impact cyber threats to Australia”, and said that Australian businesses can’t be complacent, and must take action and understand their legal and regulatory obligations around the issue.

    Along with the Essential Eight mitigation strategies, the committee also called for companies to ensure boards are aware of the risk and actively addressing it, and that cyber insurance isn’t relied upon as a strategy in itself.

    “Ransomware is one of Australia’s fastest growing threats as business spends more and more time participating in the digital economy,” Mr Penn said.

    “There are countless businesses that are attacked every day in Australia, and, in some cases, those victims could have prevented or minimised the financial loss and emotional impact they faced through the use of simple cybersecurity controls and employee education.

    “This paper is an important contribution to helping Australian businesses understand the risks of ransomware and prepare accordingly by drawing from the committee’s diverse experience.”

    Mr Watts’ ransomware paper instead focused on what actions the federal government could take to mitigate the risk and make Australia a less attractive target for malicious cyber actors.

    These policy recommendations included increased law enforcement, targeted international sanctions, offensive cyber actions and the regulation of ransom payments.

    “Ransomware is a jobs and investment destroyer at a time when the nation can least afford it. We need a new approach. It’s past time the Morrison government developed a comprehensive national ransomware strategy,” Mr Watts said.

    The post Ransomware report a ‘missed opportunity’: Watts appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Qld taskforce to drive Qld hydrogen export capability

    The Queensland government has established a panel of experts to assess and help guide the state’s sustainable hydrogen supply chain with an eye to building export capability no later than 2030.

    Led by University of Queensland Professor Peta Ashworth, the seven-member team includes academics and leaders from industry and public sector.

    The taskforce will begin by assessing the state of play of Queensland’s current hydrogen supply chain and will then move to establish a Queensland export plan.

    The group will also identify short- and medium-term actions for planning and regulatory change to develop hydrogen as the state’s next major energy commodity, according to taskforce leader Professor Peta Ashworth.

    Data
    Hydrogen: Queensland is looking for its next energy super-export

    Professor Ashworth is chair in sustainable energy futures at The University of Queensland and worked alongside Australia’s Chief Scientist in the development of Australia’s National Hydrogen Strategy.

    The other members are:

    • Professor Ian Mackinnon, professor science and engineering faculty, Queensland University of Technology
    • Vanessa Sullivan, director, Sunwater
    • Renata Berglas, chief executive officer, Queensland Transport Logistics Council
    • Toni Power, Queensland’s Coordinator-General.
    • Paul Martyn, chief executive officer, Trade and Investment Queensland
    • James Purtill, Director-General, Department of Energy and Public Works

    In 2019 The Queensland government announced a five year plan to build out the state’s emerging hydrogen extraction industry, including a $25 million fund for renewable hydrogen projects.

    Energy, Renewables and Hydrogen minister Mick de Brenni announced the taskforce in parliament today.

    “Queensland will lead Australia’s effort to be a world leader in renewable hydrogen and our Hydrogen Taskforce will ensure that we seize this opportunity,” Mr de Brenni said.

    “The Hydrogen Taskforce brings together industry, academic and public sector leaders with expertise in science, energy, international investment attraction and economic development, infrastructure planning, regulations, skills development and logistics, and Queensland is lucky to have Professor Peta Ashworth at the helm.

    Professor Ashworth received an Order of Australia Medal in 2019 for her service to science in the field of sustainable energy.

    The post Qld taskforce to drive Qld hydrogen export capability appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • $30m in commercial grants open for manufacturing

    Grants of up to $1 million are now available for Australian manufacturers looking to commercialise new manufacturing products and processes, through a new $30 million fund.

    Industry Minister Karen Andrews said the Commercialisation Fund is in addition to the government’s $1.3 billion Modern Manufacturing Initiative, but part of the overall strategy unveiled in October last year.

    Projects for the Commercialisation Fund must still fall within the government’s manufacturing priority areas of medical, food and beverage, resource and minerals technology, recycling and clean energy, defence, and space.

    advanced manufacturing
    Commercial boost: Money through the AMGC’s $30 million fund about to flow

    Ms Andrews said the fund would help boost commercial outcomes in manufacturing research and capability.

    “We know that by making our manufacturers more competitive and helping them to take on the world, we will create jobs for Australians – both for the COVID-19 recovery and for generations to come.”

    Commercialisation Fund grants will be between $100,000 and $1 million and must be matched by the industry. Projects must also include collaboration with a research partner and at least one other industry partner.

    Grants will be distributed through two rounds over 18 months starting with an initial $20 million round. The remaining money will be delivered in a subsequent round.

    The Advanced Manufacturing Growth Centre (AMGC) is managing the Commercialisation Fund in collaboration with the government’s other growth centres, as well as the CSIRO.

    “For the past five years, AMGC has been working with our manufacturers to identify and support promising manufacturing projects,” AMGC managing director Jens Goennemann said.

    “These projects have resulted in an uplift in jobs, skills and Australia’s global competitiveness and the latest round of funding will allow us to continue the good work.

    “This funding supports AMGC’s vision to transform Australian manufacturing to be internationally competitive, dynamic and thriving, with advanced capabilities and skills at its core – in short, we want to help Australia move from being a lucky country to a smart one.”

    The post $30m in commercial grants open for manufacturing appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Pezzullo blasts ‘unconscionable’ tech giants

    American technology giants’ surveillance capitalism model of exploiting the personal data of individuals is “unconscionable” and will be increasingly curbed through regulation in Australia and abroad, Home Affairs secretary Michael Pezzullo says.

    Mr Pezzullo, one of the nation’s most powerful public servants and whose department is home to AFP and intelligence agencies, also flagged more onshoring of Australian data as a cybersecurity measure, as attacks from state-based actors and transnational cyber criminals intensify.

    The commercial data models of the tech giants were also having a health impact on citizens, he said.

    “It’s unconscionable that for private monetary gain, effectively these platforms are creating highly addictive systems and processes, they’re starting to affect the neural shaping of generations as they’re coming through,” Mr Pezzullo said.

    Michael Pezzullo
    Home Affairs chief Michael Pezzullo takes aim at tech giants and does not miss

    “They’re draining that data which they generate through that those addictive behaviors, and then they’re on-selling us back to ourselves. So, something’s going to have to be done.”

    Mr Pezzullo told an Australian Financial Review Business Summit that Australia had “led the way” on Big Tech regulation to protect public interest journalism through the government’s News Media Bargaining Code.

    There would be “more to come” in other areas, he said.

    The Australian government and its counterparts in the US and UK would increasingly hold tech platforms to their “original promise” to their users.

    “[Tech platforms’ original promise] is about creating a connected experience, which is about providing customer service. Not to, in a sense, monetize our privacy, to scrape it out and then to on sell it, which effectively it’s become,” Mr Pezzullo said.

    Australian regulators have already established an ongoing monitoring program for digital platform companies following a landmark 18-month inquiry.

    The competition regulator is currently probing the advertising technology ecosystem while the Attorney General’s department is leading a review of Australia’s Privacy Act, widely expected to lead to significant reforms.

    Mr Pezzullo also said, in the context of more sophisticated cyber threats, Australian businesses would need to onshore and secure more data than many would expect given the boom of international cloud computing providers.

    “We don’t get too hung up on all data being on shore, but I think realistically over the next few years we’re going to be onshoring more data than perhaps we might have thought of a few years ago.

    “Why? Partly it’s where the data stored from the sovereignty and privacy point of view, but partly the infrastructure is not always as invulnerable as what you might think it is.”

    Mr Pezzullo questioned the security posture of leading data service providers, citing concerns over the vulnerability of data as it transitions between various systems and where it ends up.

    “Where [data is] routed, where it’s housed, where it passes [through] can be exploited and scraped, and so there is a discussion that we’re having with the large data companies.”

    Mr Pezzullo said his department is working closely with the Treasurer and new Digital Economy Minister Jane Hume on the digital economy initiative expected to be a “centerpiece” of the May Budget.

    A successful digital economy creates great upside for the Australian economy but will also attract a new wave of cybercriminals and state-based attackers, Mr Pezzullo warned.

    He said Home Affairs is focused on three key areas to combat them: appropriately locking down data; cybersecurity at both the perimeter and device level; and identity security.

    The post Pezzullo blasts ‘unconscionable’ tech giants appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Aust tech giants push for R&D tax ‘workshop’

    Some of Australia’s largest tech companies have written to the tax office requesting a “collaborative workshop” to improve how software claims are dealt with under the research and development tax incentive, as the sector looks to be more actively involved with policy development.

    Co-signed by chief executives and founders from Atlassian, AirTasker, Culture Amp and including the advocacy group StartupAus, the letter raised long-standing concerns that software does not fit properly under the current research and development tax incentive (RDTI), with tech firms facing potentially costly audits and retrospective bills.

    “We are concerned that a lack of mutual understanding on eligible software-related R&D activities claimable under the program, may be hampering Australian businesses seeking to compete in the global market, particularly early-stage or startup companies for whom the first risk of retrospective tax rulings is too great to bear,” the letter said.

    Mike Cannon-Brookes Scott Farquhar
    Leadership role: The Atlassian boys Mike Cannon-Brookes and Scott Farquhar

    “This is despite the clear policy intent of government to support R&D in smaller businesses and the OECD’s acknowledgement that support for smaller firms represents the greatest return on government incentives.”

    StartupAus chief executive Alex McCauley said the sector wants to work with the tax office to improve the scheme and make it work for the tech industry.

    “The RDTI has been a critical part of the huge success of Australia’s tech sector over the last five to ten years. That’s why we’re so committed to working constructively with the government to make sure we continue to support the growth of this high-value industry,” Mr McCauley told InnovationAus.

    “We’re doing a lot of work behind the scenes to build collaboration among industry players, and between the industry and government, and this is part of that. My vision is for much more cooperative policy development like this in the future.”

    In the letter, the tech bigwigs requested a day-long meeting with ATO officials to iron out these issues and determine how the RDTI can work better for tech firms.

    “We feel that these issues arise because the processes around innovation in software development are considerably different to traditional research and development practices operating in other industries such as mining, industrial manufacturing or healthcare,” it said.

    “This is despite software innovation being one of the largest investors in research and development; and globally recognised as a significant engine for economic growth and wealth generation. We also do not feel that this is an insurmountable challenge.”

    The tech founders and executives offered to “work closely” with ATO, Treasury and Industry department officials to “better understand and define the nature of software-enabled innovation” under the scheme, and to hold a “collaborative day-long workshop” between experts and advisors from government and industry.

    They called for this to be held within the next two months as a “first step to improving the two-way understanding of how software is developed and how it is recognised within the RDTI”.

    This would be held confidentially under the Chatham House rules, with Atlassian to play a coordinating role.

    An ATO spokesperson confirmed the letter had been received and the offer was under consideration.

    “We are in the process of reviewing the letter and the request from the sector in partnership with the Department of Industry and the Treasury and will be responding shortly,” the spokesperson told InnovationAus.

    The tech sector has been pushing for changes to the interpretation of the RDTI to make it more friendly for software claims, following a number of companies being ordered to pay back previous claims.

    There has also been ongoing debate over whether alterations should be made to the current scheme, or if it would be easier and more effective to introduce a new program entirely to support tech-related R&D.

    The government released guidance on software activities and the RDTI in October last year in an effort to clarify how the claims will be made under the scheme.

    The post Aust tech giants push for R&D tax ‘workshop’ appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Salesforce chief calls for truce on digital platforms

    Australian governments and tech platforms who are at loggerheads should take a step back and compromise, according to Salesforce Australia chief executive officer Pip Marlow, who says “stakeholder capitalism” has helped the software giant’s own partnerships.

    “Technology and government, [or] technology and business, we have to work together,” Ms Marlow said told the AFR business summit on Wednesday afternoon.

    “Because actually I don’t think we can make the progress that we need to [by] working in silos or working not in partnership,” she said.

    Pip Marlow
    Pip Marlow: Australia is at a sliding doors moment. Big Tech.

    The Salesforce chief said the pandemic had shown the value of public and private partnerships and what can be achieved in a crisis.

    According to Ms Marlow, Australia is at a “sliding doors moment.” It must capitalise on its relative success in managing the pandemic, which has seen increased levels of trust in government and business, notwithstanding a drop in trust in the technology sector.

    Ms Marlow said Salesforce was guided by a commitment to “stakeholder capitalism” where community, employees, government, customers and the environment factor into decisions much like shareholders do. She said some commitments made under the approach are not always met, but the company is transparent about it as it pursues “true stakeholder capitalism”.

    The software giant’s platforms have become a popular choice for governments, including to manage COVID-19 contact tracing efforts, helping the company to grow revenue 20 per cent last year and forecast similar growth in 2021.

    Salesforce’s platform was used as a replacement to Victoria’s largely manual contact tracing system, for example. It has similar contact tracing deals with South Australia, Western Australia, Victoria, New Zealand and over 30 US states.

    Key to partnering with government is a willingness to consider each other’s stakeholders, Ms Marlow said.

    “The way [Salesforce] try and get to that [partnership] point is taking that stakeholder approach,” Ms Marlow said.

    “If your number one thing that is important to you above everything else is profit, you will make decisions aligned to that. If you have a more balanced scorecard and say ‘actually it’s our role to help government, help business [to] drive customer satisfaction, you will operate differently because you have a more balanced scorecard, and that’s why we take the stakeholder approach.”

    When negotiations get tense, such as with Google and Facebook’s stoush with the federal government, Ms Marlow says it is time to take a step back.

    “If you have two parties who both have a position and you’re both pushing against each other [then] nobody’s making any progress,” she said.

    “So actually, sometimes you have to be the person to take the first step back to seek to understand the other person’s position and go ‘Right, what can I do to help you. And how can we change the dynamic here?’”

    “But waiting for the other person to make the move, if both parties are waiting for the other person to make the move, nobody’s going to make a move.”

    The post Salesforce chief calls for truce on digital platforms appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Online Safety ‘sausage’ is still getting made

    The Online Safety Bill “sausage” is still being made, according to the eSafety Commissioner, with the detail about how sweeping new content and site blocking powers will be implemented still uncertain despite a rush to pass the legislation.

    The Online Safety Bill is currently the subject of a whirlwind senate inquiry after it was introduced to Parliament earlier this year.

    After giving only three working days for submissions to be made, the committee is expected to hand down its final report on Friday, just a week after it held its one and only public hearing.

    Julie Inman-Grant
    Julie Inman-Grant: Australian eSafety Commissioner

    This was after the committee asked for one extra day to deliver its final report, originally due on Thursday.

    At the hearing, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant addressed the numerous concerns about the proposed new powers and attempted to justify them.

    The bill extends the eSafety Commissioner’s content takedown scheme to Australian adults, allowing the office to issue removal notices for content deemed to be rated as R18+ or higher, and then orders that the site or app be blocked if it does not comply.

    The bill also gives the commissioner the power to order internet service providers to block domain names, URLs and IP addresses, and for the government to set “basic online safety expectations” for tech companies.

    “Our goal is to make the internet a safer, more civil place for Australians to enjoy and we believe this bill is an important next step in achieving this ambitious and worthy goal,” Ms Inman Grant told the hearing.

    “We’re privileged to be leading the globe as the world’s online safety regulator, and we welcome the opportunity to provide even greater levels of online protection to our citizens.”

    The legislation has led to significant concerns centred on censorship and the potential blocking of industries such as sex work, along with concerns around the centralisation of significant power with the eSafety Commissioner.

    Despite the legislation currently being in Parliament, and likely to pass within weeks, Ms Inman Grant said her office and the government were still working through how the powers would be implemented and used, with much of this to be outlined in subsequent regulatory guidance.

    Labor senators raised concerns that they are required to vote on the legislation before knowing how it is to operate and deal with issues such as frivolous complaints, and how complaints will be triaged.

    “These are all things that we are thinking about, we are actively planning for. We’re thinking about the staffing profiles we need. We’re thinking through what’s in, what’s out, what would our standard operating procedures look like and what is the staffing profile that we need to have,” Ms Inman Grant said.

    “We’re basically looking at scenarios and other experiences that we’ve had. We’re also setting up a regulatory action committee so that we have checks and balances within our organisation, so when decisions are made we have legal people who have speciality and technical expertise as well as the investigators, particularly where there are grey or edge cases.

    “So, this is the sausage being made right now, if you will.”

    Ms Inman Grant said the new powers would not make her office a “quasi-law enforcement agency”.

    “Where platforms don’t enforce rules in removing abusive accounts, we will need to seek from them basic subscriber information for the purposes of issuing fines or remedial notices. This does not make us a quasi-judicial agency or law enforcement agency,” she said.

    “Our powers are purely civil, but this does give us the tools for both deterrence and enforcement where the big tech agencies have continued to fail to halt the abuse.”

    In a submission to the inquiry, the Australian Lawyers Alliance said the bill should be scrapped entirely, saying it “invests excessive discretionary power in the eSafety Commissioner”.

    Digital Rights Watch also said that too much power is being handed to the Commissioner.

    “There seems to be a lot of political willingness to trust the eSafety Commissioner to act in good faith and stick to the intention of the legislation rather than explicitly define and limit the powers in the bill,” the organisation said.

    “This is a naive trust in the cult of personality and risks that under any administration these powers will be misinterpreted and used to bully and marginalise individuals and movements.”

    The post Online Safety ‘sausage’ is still getting made appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Qld: $5m grants for renewable hydrogen projects

    The Queensland government has opened a second round of its Hydrogen Industry Development Fund, offering up to $5 million in financial assistance for renewable hydrogen projects.

    “We have an opportunity to position Queensland as a world leading exporter of renewable hydrogen in the future. That’s what this initiative is all about,” Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said.

    “We’re seeing growing demand for hydrogen and other renewables. We’ll continue to invest in this emerging industry to create jobs and rebuild our economy in years to come.”

    Annastacia Palaszczuk
    Annastacia Palaszczuk: New money to help develop the nascent renewable hydrogen sector

    The second round of the fund is focused on renewable technologies in the transport sector and the integration of renewable hydrogen into wastewater treatment plants.

    The fund has been designed to build out projects throughout the supply chain.

    The first round offered $15 million in funding, leading to four projects across the state. The Queensland government tipped in an additional $10 million into the fund in December last year.

    The fund is part of Queensland’s Hydrogen Industry Strategy, a five year plan announced in 2019 to build out the state’s emerging hydrogen extraction industry.

    The strategy is focused on five key areas: supporting innovation, facilitating private sector investment, ensuring an effective policy framework, building community awareness and confidence, and facilitating skills development for new technology.

    Deputy Premier and Minister for State Development Steven Miles said: “Renewable hydrogen offers the opportunity to create a new high-tech industry delivering enhanced environmental outcomes and highly skilled jobs.”

    The second round is open to private sector businesses, government owned corporations, and local governments located in Queensland.

    Applications will be assessed through a competitive merit based process across two priority areas:

    • Application of hydrogen technologies related to mobility or transport sector projects, such as cars, buses, marine transport; machinery such as forklifts or farm equipment; refuelling infrastructure or hydrogen production equipment; and
    • Integration of hydrogen technologies with wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), including WWTP hydrogen production components.

    Applications are open until 5pm, 2 June 2021.

    The post Qld: $5m grants for renewable hydrogen projects appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Visa outsourcing is a very bad idea: CPSU

    The public sector union has urged the federal government to reconsider its latest attempt to outsource the development of a visa processing platform, labelling it another “rush to use consultants” for work that should be done by the APS.

    The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) has written to the Department of Home Affairs to begin discussions on the decision to contract out the development of a new “permissions capability” to eventually be used across the APS for a range of government services.

    The Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) late last year issued a tender looking for a private company to build a base platform that is capable of handling the digitisation of incoming passenger declaration cards and a simple digital visa application. This platform would then be used more widely across the APS as a permissions capability.

    city
    Give it a rest: The visa outsourcing plan needs a bit of a think

    The government has shortlisted three tenderers for the work, and all are major US tech companies.

    The three remaining bidders are IBM, Pega in partnership with Accenture, and an Oracle, PwC and Sayers consortium. The government is expected to pick the winning bidder within the fortnight.

    The “scalable, innovative” platform would be an “integrated, enterprise-scale workflow capability to be used across the Commonwealth, not just by Home Affairs”.

    But the CPSU said this work could be done cheaper and more effectively by APS staff, and they were never given the chance to make their case or pitch for the work before a tender was issued late last year by the DTA.

    “CPSU members know that they have the skills and experience to deliver this project for the department,” CPSU assistant national secretary Michael Tell told InnovationAus.

    “But they were not given an opportunity to make a case that the work be done in-house. It’s yet another example of the rush to use consultants, contractors and external vendors for work that could and should be done by the public service itself,” Mr Tell said.

    “We believe that there are strong arguments, on both cost and capability development grounds, for the government to reconsider the decision to go for a complete external build.”

    The CPSU has written to Home Affairs requesting a meeting about the issue, with plans to also write to Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton and the Parliament and request it be investigated by the current senate inquiry into the capability of the Australian Public Service.

    It is the third time in recent years that the federal government has attempted to outsource the development of a new visa processing platform.

    In 2006 work began on the Generic Visa Platform, which was built by IBM as part of the $520 million Systems for People program.

    Five years later, after a spend of about $450 million, the platform was launched. But it was only in operation for less than a year before it was decommissioned because it was not fit for purpose.

    Then in 2016 the Coalition embarked on the development of the Global Digital Platform, a digital visa platform. It spent more than $90 million on the project, which never made it past the tender phase, including $65 million on external consultants.

    The project was shuttered early last year following ongoing conflicts of interest with the tenderers.

    This is the third time that the government has attempted to outsource this core government function, but in the meantime the system developed in-house by public servants has proven effective, Mr Tull said.

    “The previous two were expensive failures. But in between those two failures there was a project that worked – and in-house built – where APS staff built the visa system and tools that have worked successfully for years. Despite that history, the department and government have again opted for an external provider,” he said.

    “There has been a number of reviews and reports that have pointed to the need to reduce the reliance on external providers and build internal APS capability. Most recently the Chief Statistician, David Gruen, who heads up the new APS Data Profession, has said that there is a need to build ‘native capability’ and have key skills in-house.

    “I’d say that a permissions platform that is intended for use across multiple departments is indeed a key capability the APS should further develop in-house.”

    The union is not pushing for the entire project to be completed in-house, but for it to be led by the public service in partnership with local tech firms.

    “We don’t say that every element of the work has to be in-house, and there may well be specialist solutions or other elements of the work that will require external involvement and would present opportunities for Australian businesses to be involved, but we do say that major projects like this are generational opportunities to build on the existing skills and capabilities of the APS,” Mr Tell said.

    The post Visa outsourcing is a very bad idea: CPSU appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • ‘World-leading R&D’ a big part of recovery: PM

    Australia should become a world-leader in research development as part of its economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on regulation and data, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said.

    Addressing the Australian Financial Review’s Business Summit on Tuesday morning, Mr Morrison said Australia “must become a world-leader in [R&D].”

    Mr Morrison flagged R&D facilitated through “smart regulation” by governments at all levels, and better use of data, as being key to Australia’s economic recovery, and will play a central role in an update to the government’s digital strategy, which will be unveiled later this year.

    Scott Morrison
    Scott Morrison: Research and development will be a key to the recovery

    Australian businesses must focus on R&D as part of the economic recovery, Mr Morrison said, and continue the digital push that was forced upon them due to the pandemic.

    “Past-COVID we need to keep our foot on that digital accelerator. This requires governments to adopt a different mindset to regulation. Modernising regulation, whether around competition, consumer protection, finance, safety or security, shouldn’t be seen as a hand brake on innovation,” Mr Morrison said.

    “Through smart regulatory design, the challenge is to open up new economic opportunities in the private sphere, while ensuring the benefits of the digital era deliver broader publics.”

    Mr Morrison pointed to the big tech media bargaining code, which was passed by Parliament last month, as a successful example of this.

    “Our government successfully took on this challenge most recently with the news media bargaining code through the big tech companies. Many people said, ‘you won’t get that done’, but we have,” he said

    Better use and availability of data will also be a key plank of the economic recovery, Mr Morrison said, with a need to improve skills in this area.

    “Data needs processing, just as oil needs refining. Data will power much of the transformative technology of the future, like artificial intelligence, machine learning and predictive analytics. Data doesn’t need huge refineries, but it does need smart people and businesses and digital infrastructure,” he said.

    “That’s why our skills agenda is so important. It’s also why we’ve progressed so many other initiatives, like the regulatory sandbox, digital economic agreements, the Consumer Data Right, NBN, 5G, e-invoicing and digital identity.”

    Senator Jane Hume, newly appointed as the assistant minister for the digital economy, has been tasked with developing an update to the government’s digital strategy, which will include this focus on R&D, deregulation and data.

    The post ‘World-leading R&D’ a big part of recovery: PM appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • NSW sets up new agency to oversee R&D spend

    The NSW government is to establish a new agency dedicated to research and development, following recommendations to improve outcomes from the nearly half a billion dollars it spends each year on R&D.

    Speaking at an Australian Financial Review Business Summit on Tuesday afternoon, NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian unveiled a new government body – Investment NSW – that will act as a one-stop shop for businesses looking to invest in the state.

    Investment NSW will include an independent R&D agency that will oversee the whole of government spending on R&D, including on research-related investment attraction.

    Gladys Berejiklian
    Gladys Berejiklian: A new R&D NSW agency that will oversee the state’s research spending

    Ms Berejiklian said Investment NSW is an opportunity to capitalise on Australia’s relative success in managing the COVID-19 pandemic.

    “There’s a lot of pent-up demand and I’m hopeful that the economy will keep turning corners, and it’s really important for us to be working hand in glove with business.”

    She said said Investment NSW would consolidate all the state’s research and development capacity alongside all investment arms of government “so that business has a one stop shop”.

    “So, if you want to set up in New South Wales increase your footprint, or do something innovative, or have an idea, there will be one shopfront for business,” the Premier told the AFR business summit.

    Investment NSW’s new agency, R&D NSW, is part of the state government’s response to an action plan to accelerate innovation through R&D.

    That action plan – which is the result of a long consultation with an R&D Taskforce that began before COVID-19 — found NSW could accelerate innovation and economic growth by developing more research and development capability and investing in ‘soft’ infrastructure.

    This focus on ‘soft’ infrastructure would compliment NSW’s large-scale ‘hard’ or built infrastructure, according to the action plan, delivered by Accelerating R&D in NSW Advisory Council Chair David Gonski and Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier Gabrielle Upton.

    “NSW as a state can be the R&D leader in Australia, I have no doubt about this,” Ms Upton told InnovationAus on Tuesday. “This new agency, makes it clear that we are putting in place the steps that make that possible.”

    Ms Upton said R&D NSW is expected to sit within another new body, Investment NSW, which is part of the Department of Premiere and Cabinet cluster. It will connect to other programs in government but will focus specifically on supporting translational research.

    “NSW R&D is discrete, it’s purely about research. It will have carriage of programs that already exist across government. But it’s in a place inside of government where it can be whole of government.”

    Previously responsibility for R&D programs have sat across different government clusters, meaning some of the $486 million worth of research programs have lacked “currency” and “accountability”, according to Ms Upton.

    “It wasn’t doing the job that that cluster was about and it was trying to manage and babysit an activity that went across other clusters. It just wasn’t a very practical way of making the most of that investment.”

    A central agency for R&D was part of one of five priority areas for government recommended in the R&D Action Plan delivered in January.

    An R&D “matchmaking” platform to connect research buyers and sellers was also recommended, as well as boosting open and portable data; develop precincts like Sydney’s Tech Central to attract talent; and targeting strategic support for NSW Universities.

    Ms Upton said funding has been secured for the Small Business Innovation Research program and the matchmaking platform.

    Billed on Tuesday as a “one stop shop” for business interacting with government, Investment NSW is designed to help the government attract billions of dollars in investment from local and international business.

    The government says locating R&D NSW within Investment NSW will allow it to work more strategically and in a coordinated way to attract investors and create new jobs.

     

    The post NSW sets up new agency to oversee R&D spend appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Chequered past of COVID partner HealthEngine

    Local startup HealthEngine has won the federal to contract to deliver a COVID-19 vaccination bookings platform, just months after the company was fined nearly $3 million for privacy breaches.

    HealthEngine, which offers a medical appointment booking app, said on Monday that it had been contracted by the Health department to provide a booking platform for the vaccination roll-out. This is a part of the federal government’s end-to-end vaccination information and booking service.

    The platform, which will be used primarily by pharmacies and other clinics without existing booking systems, is expected to be up and running within weeks to facilitate the rollout of the vaccine from Phase 1b onwards.

    Crowd
    Lots of people: HealthEngine booking system is a win for a local startup

    “The system is a light-touch platform that will help consumers to more easily access vaccines. It will allow consumers to make appointments for both vaccine doses at a clinic most convenient to them,” a Health spokesperson told InnovationAus.

    “It will also send appointment confirmations and reminders, and allow consumers to take control of their own vaccinations.”

    The bookings platform will operate alongside other COVID-19 vaccination bookings software already purchased by state governments, including a Microsoft off-the-shelf solution bought by the Victorian government for nearly $6 million. States and territories will have the option of using their own software or to use the HealthEngine platform.

    Six months ago, HealthEngine was fined $2.9 million for engaging in misleading conduct by sending information on its users to private health insurance companies and editing or not posting reviews on its platform.

    The department spokesperson said this is “historical” and that the company had since improved its “privacy and security processes and authentications”.

    “Following the ACCC’s recommendations, HealthEngine has strengthened its privacy and security processes and authentications. This includes the introduction of additional levels of authentication in the latest version of its popular iOS and Android apps to increase data security and further protect personal information,” the spokesperson said.

    “The privacy and security of HealthEngine’s solution were thoroughly evaluated by the department prior to making its final decision to offer them a contract to provide the national booking system.”

    Between 30 April 2014 and 30 June 2018 HealthEngine handed over non-clinical personal information, including names, dates of birth, phone numbers and addresses, of more than 135,000 patients to third party health insurance brokers without adequately disclosing this to the users.

    The company earned more than $1.8 million through this arrangement with the private health insurance firms.

    HealthEngine also admitted it had not published about 17,000 reviews and had edited about 3000 reviews to remove negative aspects or embellish them.

    According to the department, HealthEngine was selected to build the federal bookings platform following a “competitive, limited tender evaluation process”, the spokesperson said.

    The company’s chief executive and founder Marcus Tan said the quick turnaround was a “challenge” the company is eager to take on.

    “Given the very tight timeframes involved and the complexity of such a project, we are under no illusions about the challenge we have signed up to,” Dr Tan said.

    “However, the opportunity to support a historic public health effort involving millions of Australians by assisting the federal government with a very important piece of national digital health infrastructure, was one we simply couldn’t pass up.”

    The HealthEngine solution will allow patients to locate and book a vaccination appointment at a nearby clinic. All clinics offering COVID-19 vaccinations to the public will be listed on a Service Finder based on HealthDirect’s National Health Services Directory, no matter what booking platform they are using.

    Last month it was revealed that the Victorian government had purchased Microsoft’s vaccination registration and administration solution for nearly $6 million.

    This platform will also allow for the booking of appointments for the vaccine, the same function that HealthEngine is developed for the Commonwealth.

    “All clinics have the autonomy to decide how they will open and accept appointments, and what software they may use to do that. This includes state and territory-run clinics,” the Department of Health spokesperson said.

    The post Chequered past of COVID partner HealthEngine appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Catherine Ball on the future of drone tech

    A key reason that Australia has attained the famed capability level of “punching above our weight” in relation to drone technologies – and autonomous robots – has been the forward-looking strength of our regulatory environment.

    Aviation is a heavily regulated industry and drones are – very often – things that fly. If the regulator did not have the ability to look into the future, the fast-growing commercial application of drone tech would have been stymied in this country.

    “As with all emerging technologies, [drones and robotics] are not limited by academic capability, but what they can be limited by is regulatory capability,” said Catherine Ball, an associate professor in engineering at the Australian National University and co-creator of the World of Drones and Robotics Congress.

    In this episode of the Commercial Disco, Dr Ball talks about Australia’s strengths in drone technology, as well as the industry 5.0 movement – described as tech with purpose – as well as the need to secure university research funding.

    Catherine Ball
    Catherine Ball: The drone sector is taking off in Australia

    Australia was the first place in the world to formalise drone regulation through its airspace regulator CASA (Civil Aviation Safety Authority) and the sector has not looked back in this country. (It is worth noting that the opposite has been the case in the space sector, where Australia has been a laggard in producing a regulatory environment, which has been an obstacle for the local space sector, particularly for building launch capability)

    “As soon as you create the regulatory environment, then businesses flourish. Because they then have a business model which people can apply, rather than just being involved in the research and development,” Dr Ball told InnovationAus.

    “If there is one thing that frustrates me around some of the R&D in Australia were not good at the … commercialisation.”

    Without a regulatory capability, as a business it’s hard to get things like insurance, making regulation a fundamental building block to investment. In Australia, we know that Alphabet subsidiary Wing carried out the first delivery via a prototype drone to a farmer in 2014 and is currently running commercial drone deliveries in a pilot test in a Canberra.

    Airbus and Facebook has been trialling drones in Western Australia. There is a lot of activity in this new market.

    Dr Ball said the creates of the World of Drones Congress – now in its fifth year – had added “and Robotics” was because of flourishing commercial activity in the sector.

    “All drones are robots, but not all robots are drones. The reason we added the robotics element to the Congress is that we have seen the drone industry mature to the point where we are seeing a l ot of acquisition activity,” she said.

    Robot companies are buying drone companies. Car companies are buying drone companies. Flying taxis are coming, Dr Ball says. They’re real.

    Drones have been used in bushfires – to help with the fight, to scope damage, to search for wildlife and do food drops – and in shark detection, crocodile detection, and by indigenous rangers in protecting turtle’s nesting in Australia’s north.

    Drones don’t just fly. They also sale and they crawl. Sail drones are collecting environmental data over long periods on the ocean, there are submersible drones mapping the ocean floor.

    “And now we have a drone on Mars in Ingenuity, or Ginny as she is known at NASA/JPL where she was created.”

    Dr Ball is urging board directors across industries to “get educated” on the rapid rise of drone technology, because of the opportunity it presents in Australia.

    “These technologies are going to be business as usual in the next five years. Soon we will be eating fruit and vegetables that have never been touched by a human hand.

    “Anything you can think of really, there is a robot somewhere that can pick it. Pick it, pack it and put it on your plate,” she said. “And Australia is the best in the world at some of these things.”

    The post Catherine Ball on the future of drone tech appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.