THE Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman Kate Carnell has called for an industry-specific R&D Tax Incentive, saying the current system is hampering investment and growth in the sector.

In a submission to the Federal Government’s Financial Technology Inquiry, the Ombudsman described the R&D Tax Incentive as unsuitable for software development in its current form.

“The R&D Tax Incentive eligibility requirements need to be changed so that it is clear and simple to claim tax incentives under the existing scheme,” Ms Carnell said.

“Alternatively a dedicated software development incentive should be created to promote investment and growth in the sector.

“With 80 percent* of all R&DTI claims made by Australian SMEs, it is clear that many small and family businesses rely on the R&DTI to help fund their research and development.

“About half (48%) of all R&DTI claims come from the software development industry, so a transparent and predictable system is absolutely vital to those businesses.”

The Ombudsman’s recommendations to the government have been echoed by industry peak bodies and private tech sector heavyweights, including Atlassian.

“We welcome submissions supporting my office’s long-held position on this issue, including Atlassian’s reported ‘strong endorsement’ of an interim recommendation to clarify the existing scheme and put a time-limit on any potential clawback action," Ms Carnell said.

“At the end of the day we want small businesses to grow into big businesses such as Atlassian and a fit-for-purpose R&DTI scheme is a key support mechanism.

“Our R&DTI report, released in December 2019, found many small and family businesses were subjected to examination and audit several years after the R&D was undertaken and the R&DTI refund had been spent.

“Often these affected businesses were required by the ATO to repay the R&DTI in full, with a severe penalty applied.

“This has had a devastating impact on the businesses involved, with some discontinuing or scaling down their R&D efforts in Australia and reducing their R&D staff," she said.

“Ultimately for SMEs to continue to invest in innovation and growth, it is critical they are supported in their R&D endeavours.”

www.asbfeo.gov.au

• Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, Annual Report 2017-18.

ends

THE Indigenous Affairs Committee tabled its report on food pricing and food security in remote Indigenous communities on December 7..

The report found that food costs were very high in many remote communities, reinforcing long-held concerns regarding food security for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians who are living remotely, however it did not find evidence of systemic price-gouging taking place in remote community stores.

Julian Leeser MP, Chair of the Committee, said, "Food security issues for remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are not new. For many people living remotely, food security is a constant concern. The supply of quality and affordable food is often unstable due to poor infrastructure, seasonal changes, the high costs of living and operating stores remotely.

"However, despite these challenges, the Committee also learned that there is a very good story to be told about what happened in remote communities this year during COVID-19. We have an opportunity to harness some of the lessons of the Supermarket Taskforce and the Food Security Working Group that were established this year in response to this pandemic and can build on the networks and goodwill generated through that process.’

The report recommends several measures to build on the cooperative momentum of 2020 including:

• real-time price monitoring and a disclosure mechanism through a point of sale data system across all remote community stores.
• a national scheme of licensing and inspection of remote community stores.
• support for local food production schemes and enterprises.
• maintaining the Food Security Working Group established during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mr Leeser noted that while the committee did not find evidence of price-gouging, the persistent disquiet on the matter meant that allegations should be further considered and settled by a body equipped to do a thorough, forensic examination of what is taking place.

"It is important to acknowledge that this is the third time this matter has been examined in recent years and none of those inquiries has resolved the concerns about food prices and security that have been expressed," he said.

"Consequently, complaints concerning food pricing need to be examined by a body that is equipped to do the thorough, forensic examination that will satisfy the public. That is why the Committee is recommending these matters be investigated by the ACCC undertaking an enhanced market study which they have never done in remote communities."

The report also recommended measures to improve governance and oversight of community stores, to develop a national food security and nutrition strategy, and to encourage more competition between remote store management groups.

The report makes 16 recommendations to government and can be accessed and downloaded from the inquiry website.

ends

THE Australian Workers' Union wants Prime Minister Scott Morrison to announce a Royal Commission to investigate emerging evidence that Chinese migrants are living like slaves on Australian farms.

An investigation published by The New Dailyhas revealed shocking testimony from a whistle-blower, known as Mr D, who said people smugglers were charging Chinese nationals up to $50,000 for illegal jobs on a Coffs Harbour fruit and vegetable farm.

The report followed a union funded investigation, published in early December, which detailed how fruit-pickers – including backpackers and bushfire victims – were paid as little as $3 an hour by labour hirers and rogue operators in the area.

AWU national secretary Dan Walton said a hidden culture of wage theft inside Australia’s horticulture industry had created slave-like conditions for some workers, who are initially lured to farms with the promise of high wages.

“The allegations of illegal behaviour in this latest story from Coffs Harbour are simply shocking and demand swift action from authorities. Mr D has bravely exposed how Chinese people are being trafficked to Coffs Harbour and forced to work like slaves, with miniscule wages and dangerous conditions” he said.

"Australia's had inquiry after inquiry highlight these issues over the last 10 years. We’ve explored every form of inquiry available – from academic studies to Federal, State, and Territory investigations. They all have the same findings, yet the industry remains riddled with systemic exploitation. And it's getting worse not better” Mr Walton said.

Mr Walton said the AWU would shortly brief Border Force officials, on confidential evidence his union has obtained from Mr D.

He said the exploitation and illegal activity identified near Coffs Harbour is just the “tip of the iceberg”.

“Migrant workers everywhere are highly vulnerable, and unions are aware that those who speak up about mistreatment are often threatened with deportation – or worse – by the unscrupulous criminals they work for.," Mr Walton said.

I believe a Royal Commission is the only option we’ve got left to stomp out the flagrant wage theft and illegal activity taking place, which has tarnished the reputation of Australian farms. This has become the story that overseas workers tell their friends and families when they return home” he said.

Mr Walton confirmed he had also written to the Prime Minister, offering to work with him and his government on delivering both a Royal Commission, and new reforms to end the underpayment, exploitation and abuse of local and foreign workers across the farm sector.

LINKS

Blue Harvest Report: https://mckellinstitute.org.au/research/reports/blue-harvest/

New Daily story by Cait Kelly: https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2020/12/07/farm-workers-exploitation/

ends

CONSUMER groups have called for a radical overhaul of privacy laws to provide greater protections for consumers to counterbalance the increased use and exploitation of big data by business and industry.

A joint submission by Financial Rights Legal Centre together with Consumer Action Law Centre and Financial Counselling Australia to the Attorney-General’s Department Privacy Act Review, Issues Paper, October 2020 argues that substantial reform is needed to rebalance Australians’ right to privacy and ensure our laws keep pace with future economic and technological change.

Financial Rights chief executive officer Karen Cox said the review of the Privacy Act 1988 was well overdue.

“Australians want a safe and secure data environment that puts their privacy ahead of the increasingly rapacious data desires of industry,” Ms Cox said.

 “Australians have had very little power to stop the trade, misuse and abuse of their personal information. The time to strengthen our right to privacy is now.”

The joint submission describes how the rapid pace of technological change has led to a data saturated economy and the development of new business models and markets centred on the harvesting of surplus behavioural data for predictive purposes. 

Calls coincide with research released by the Consumer Policy Research Centre today which reveals:

• 94 percent of Australian consumers are uncomfortable with how their personal information is collected and shared online;
• 88 percent of Australian consumers do not have a clear understanding of how their personal information is being collected and shared;
• 94 percent of Australian consumers reported not reading all of the privacy policies or T&Cs that applied to them in the past 12 months.
• Of consumers who had read privacy policies, 69 percent reported accepting terms even though they weren’t comfortable with them – the main reason for doing so was it was the only way to access the product or service.

Consumers should be free to decide how much or how little of their information they wish to share in exchange for the use of services, Ms Cox said.

“Privacy agreements, privacy preferences, and terms and conditions are often complex and unclear so consumers don’t know what they are consenting to,” she said.

“Yet, declining to participate in data driven technologies is increasingly not an option for many consumers. Services are offered on a like it or lump it basis, meaning people have the choice to either fully participate in the modern economy or retain reasonable control of their personal data, you simply can’t do both.”

The Consumer Policy Research Centre research also found that Australian consumers believe that government has an important responsibility to ensure that consumers are protected:

• 94 percent of consumers expected government to protect them against the collection and sharing of their personal information (67% high responsibility, 27% moderate responsibility);
• 93 percent of consumers expected government to improve their understanding of how personal information may be collected and shared (67% high responsibility, 26% moderate responsibility);
• 94 percent of consumers expected government to protect them from having their information being used in a way that makes them worse off.

Consumer Policy Research Centre chief executive officer Lauren Solomon said the message from Australian consumers was clear.

“Companies have too much control over their personal information. Australians expect a modern protection and enforcement regime that gives them more control and ultimately ensures that they receive fair treatment,” Ms Solomon said.

Ms Cox said while ensuring consent is freely given and informed is difficult if not impossible, there are simple reforms that could improve the process in line with reform under the Consumer Data Right.

Data collection and use exists on a spectrum from the relatively benign, through invasive but justifiable, to outright exploitation. Regulation should reflect this, with controls appropriate to the circumstance and clear prohibitions on more egregious practices, she said.

“The concept of consent has been rendered completely meaningless when it comes to protecting our privacy.” Ms Cox said. “It is time for the Privacy Act be overhauled to deliver real life protections for the modern world, rather than a cloak of legitimacy for poor practices and exploitation.”

The submission can be found here

BACKGROUND

Key recommendations

Update the Objectives of the Act to among other things recognise that Australians have a right to privacy and the Act must promote the protection of that right;
Acknowledge the failures of disclosure, notice and consent as an effective regulatory tool;
Build privacy and safety into the very design of data collection and handling;
Overhaul notification and consent process to make them more effective;
Introduce higher privacy standards including restricting, limiting or prohibiting certain uses and disclosures that are anathema to privacy rights such as screen-scraping, secondary direct marketing, the collection of genetic test results in life insurance, for-profit trade in personal data through data brokers/data vultures;
Establish a right to erasure, a direct right of action, a statutory tort and an unfair trade practices law;
Establish specific privacy protections for children.

NEW RESEARCH FROM

THE CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE

Transparency and informed choice

• Privacy Policies and Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) continue to be ineffective at informing consumers of company data-handling practices – with 94 percent of Australians reported not reading all policies that applied to them in the past 12 months
• Of consumers who had read Privacy Policy or T&Cs in the past 12 months, 69 percent admitted to having agreed to them for at least a few products/services despite feeling uncomfortable doing so

Fair practices and treatment

• 85 percent of consumers consider it is unfair for companies to share personal information they’ve provided with other companies – while 90 percent think it is unfair for this information to be sold to other companies
• A large majority of consumers also find it unfair when companies collect more information than is necessary to deliver the product or service they are receiving (88%)

Expectations of companies and government

The vast majority of Australians think government has a significant responsibility to:

• Protect consumers against collection and sharing of their personal information (67% high level of responsibility, 27% moderate level of responsibility);
• Protect consumers against information being used in ways that make them worse off (79% high level of responsibility, 15% moderate level of responsibility);
• Improve consumer understanding of how personal information may be collected and shared (67% high level of responsibility, 26% moderate level of responsibility);
• Ensure options to opt out of what data consumers provide, how it can be used and shared with others (68% high level of responsibility, 25% moderate level of responsibility);
• Develop protections to ensure no one is excluded from essential products and services based on their data and/or profile (80% high level of responsibility, 17% moderate level of responsibility).

Full results of this research can be found at Consumer Policy Research Centre.

ends