Paul Wallbank – Brilliant Communications

Tag: government

  • If you need government money, do you really have a business?

    If you need government money, do you really have a business?

    Australia’s new Federal government handed down its first budget yesterday with savage cuts to scientific research, training and business support.

    I dissected the implications of the budget for businesses in a piece for Technology Spectator with the conclusion that modern Australia is turning its back on technology, the young and the entrepreneurial.

    None of which will come as a surprise to this site’s regular readers.

    Some of the critics of my Tech Spec piece made the point that if your business relies on government grants then you aren’t really an entrepreneur.

    I’d tend to agree with that, having spent a few months working for a state agency responsible for business development programs I realised that for most businesses the time cost of applying for and administering a government grant was often greater than the value they received from the programs.

    So government grants aren’t the entrepreneurial manna that many people believe.

    What’s worse, governments can axe these programs at short notice which leaves the businesses short handed. Which is exactly what happened last night.

    Indeed that’s the problem for Australian businesses, each time a government changes the new administration axes the previous one’s programs and this lack of certainty and continuity is one of my concerns about the viability of Australia’s startup scene.

    The truth is though, if your business does need government funds to survive then you’re at the mercy of bureaucrat’s whim rather than the rigours of the market.

    If you’re comfortable with owing your existence to a bureaucrat then you probably don’t really have a business and you certainly aren’t an entrepreneur.

    Similar posts:

  • Connecting bridges to the internet of things

    Connecting bridges to the internet of things

    On Networked Globe today I have a description of NICTA’s Sydney Harbour Bridge Monitoring Project where the research agency is rolling out 800 sensors across the structure to reduce maintenance costs.

    The project a good example of how cheap sensors and abundant computing power is changing workplaces, connecting the bridge to the Internet of Things makes it easier for asset managers and engineers to understand what is happening to their structure.

    While the project promises a lot, it’s only a fraction of what’s possible as the sensors are only measuring movements so there’s a lot more they can do.

    The big promise though is for smaller structures than the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Around the world local governments are struggling to maintain their assets, if NICTA can develop a feasible monitoring product then many agencies will be looking at how they can reduce their budgets.

    While we tend to focus on connected kettles and other household devices when we talk about the internet of things, the real benefits and profits lie in the ‘big iron’ industrial and infrastructure applications.

    Similar posts:

  • Sense-T and the Tasmanian economy

    Sense-T and the Tasmanian economy

    On Networked Globe I have an interview with Sense-T’s director, Ros Harvey.

    Sense-T is a project to connect the entire state to the internet of things using a sensor network monitoring soil, water and other environmental conditions to help the state’s agriculture and business communities.

    Harvey’s ambitions for the project are high where she sees Sense-T even having the potential of rekindling the interest of the state’s students in science and technology courses.

    It’s a brave project that means a lot to a state that’s doing it tough.

    Similar posts:

  • Renaming places

    Renaming places

    Madrid have renamed a subway station to Vodafone Sol and plan to rename an entire metro line as part of a corporate sponsorship deal.

    Personally I think renaming places changes the culture of place; something well understood by dictators but possibly not so well by corporate marketing people.

    Do you think this is a good idea?

    Picture of Madrid Sol station courtesy of Zaqarbal through Wikimedia

    Similar posts:

  • The taxing business of options

    The taxing business of options

    I’m burning the midnight oil tonight pulling together a story for Business Spectator on reforming Australia’s tax treatment of employee option schemes.

    This is a fraught subject as Australia bucked the global trend in 2009 after it became obvious the corporate sector was abusing the existing tax rules that were largely in line with most OECD nations.

    In a clumsy, poorly thought out reaction – which is sadly the mark of modern Australian governments of all shades –  the then Rudd Labor government radically changed the rules governing employee schemes that made it difficult for any business to offer stock to their staff.

    Last week I spoke to Sydney business intelligence company Encompass and after the video the founders told me about the importance of their share scheme, it illustrated exactly the problem facing Australian startups.

    Five years on and it’s apparent the strict rules are working against Australian business and various industry associations, accounting groups and startups are lobbying for reform.

    One of the lobbying initiatives is Deloitte’s Retaining Talent project that has some fairly modest proposals in bringing fairer rules back for smaller and younger startups.

    The story’s particularly interesting for me in that I’m bringing together a number of previous posts citing how other countries and cities like San Francisco and the United Kingdom have changed their rules on option schemes.

    For Australia, the closure of the country’s car manufacturing industry and the struggles of the agricultural sector are bringing home to voters and the government just how seriously the country squandered the massive mining boom of the last decade.

    While reforming startup option schemes is a useful start, it’s hard not to think it’s way too little and way too late for the country to begin planning for the post mining boom economy.

    Similar posts: