Answers coming soon! Forum closed
Tell your friends

The Federal Government is committed to making innovation a centrepiece of the Australian economy. Policy Hack is an opportunity for industry to develop and pitch innovative solutions to some of Australia’s most pressing policy problems and help foster the growth of innovation industries in Australia.

Along with Assistant Minister for Innovation Hon. Wyatt Roy MP, BlueChilli will bring together representatives from startups, VC funds, accelerators and other components of the innovation ecosystem, with policy experts from departments of Treasury, Industry and Communications to collaborate in a one-day industry policy hackathon in Sydney, Saturday 17 October 2015.

We’ll use the hackathon methodology to nominate, select and work together in mixed teams on new government policy ideas designed to foster the growth of innovation industries including tech startups, biotech, agtech, fintech, renewables and resources.

Funding, taxation, education, migration — everything is on the table.

The champions on the highest voted policies will be invited to Sydney to lead teams on the day to workshop their ideas with government representatives.

The goal is to present a set of creative new ideas to an audience of government officials by the end of the day, to give them the top-line thinking from which full policy can be developed and implemented.

If you have a policy idea or you’d like to see and vote on which policy ideas are collaborated on at Policy Hack, you can get started right now.

The Federal Government is committed to making innovation a centrepiece of the Australian economy. Policy Hack is an opportunity for industry to develop and pitch innovative solutions to some of Australia’s most pressing policy problems and help foster the growth of innovation industries in Australia.

Along with Assistant Minister for Innovation Hon. Wyatt Roy MP, BlueChilli will bring together representatives from startups, VC funds, accelerators and other components of the innovation ecosystem, with policy experts from departments of Treasury, Industry and Communications to collaborate in a one-day industry policy hackathon in Sydney, Saturday 17 October 2015.

We’ll use the hackathon methodology to nominate, select and work together in mixed teams on new government policy ideas designed to foster the growth of innovation industries including tech startups, biotech, agtech, fintech, renewables and resources.

Funding, taxation, education, migration — everything is on the table.

The champions on the highest voted policies will be invited to Sydney to lead teams on the day to workshop their ideas with government representatives.

The goal is to present a set of creative new ideas to an audience of government officials by the end of the day, to give them the top-line thinking from which full policy can be developed and implemented.

If you have a policy idea or you’d like to see and vote on which policy ideas are collaborated on at Policy Hack, you can get started right now.

284
Ideas

9,456
Votes

494
Comments

This forum is finished. It closed about . You can still look at and comment on existing ideas!

One of the predominant issues in politics that transcends generations is healthcare. Whilst Australia's healthcare is regularly regarded as world-class, we are far behind in one glaring issue - organ donation. With it's ability to save countless lives and reduce the burden placed on the healthcare system by chronically ill patients, organ donation should be a talking point for every politician on every day of the week. Australia has fallen behind many progressive European countries in this area due an dated policy framework. Currently Australians are required to opt in to become organ donors whilst countries leading the way on this issue have moved to an opt-out policy. Citizens are automatically considered to be organ donors and then given the freedom to actively opt-out for any reason. The result of this, registration rates far higher than currently observed in Australia.

The discrepancy in registration rates between policies comes down to motivation. Innately, those who do not wish to donate organs and will be more motivated to opt out of being a registered donor than prospective donors are to opt in to donationship due to the fact the latter gain no person benefit whilst the former have their personal preferences catered for. The opt-out policy also therefore captures the people who are impartial to the debate further increasing numbers.
Such a policy change would allow for extensive saving in the healthcare sector, priming State Governments (those who spend the money provided by the Federal Government) to bring about further health innovation with the freed-up funds they now find available to them. Moreover, healthcare policy should always be progressing towards improved health outcomes and reduced expenditure. Indeed, costly technology has caused huge increases in health expenditure for the sake of improving outcomes but I believe it is time we seek both goals of healthcare policy concurrently with legislation that brings us to the fore globally as well as ensuring Australians are given the best opportunity for good health.

The government holds a lot of data relating to property sales and purchase, along with details on property type/size/year built etc. This information is available to only a select few intermediaries that use the data to produce "information" to their target industry. Two major providers are RP Data (realestate.com.au) and APM (domain.com.au).
1 - If you are purchasing a house, you have to pay to receive a breakdown of information from these providers for the properties potential valuation and sales history. The valuation is always off the mark which would indicate poor analysis.
2. If you are a startup that wants to crunch the big data available through land councils you must become a "Property Sales Information provider" which is difficult, or access the data via requests through current intermediaries, this is often expensive (~$12 per request) which makes it prohibitive.
3. All Australian residential property sales data is supplied to the ABS by CoreLogic RP Data, this is a closed loop and has limited oversight. Relying on a single source to provide stats back to government and on which population growth and land release is calculated allows a whole raft of innovative approaches to fall through the gaps. I would like to see the states and territories provide open access to startups and businesses that wish to use historical property information to provide structured data and meaningful analysis back to the government or public. This would increase competition in the online real estate sector, allow better government planning for housing, and open a whole raft of important facts and figures to be produced by those who at present cannot access the bulk of The Crown's and Housing. At best we could push towards consolidation of all states housing sales and information into a single source of truth.

The Interior needs Rail links!
In the Interior, one day soon we will have NBN. We have many large, successful and world renown businesses, especially agricultural, which are growing through their use of available technologies. But they do not have the basic infrastructure to assist continued growth. Why? Because rail freight is at capacity.
An Inland Rail link has been proposed and has been in the process of assessment for many years, perhaps 10? The leap of faith for the good of the Country as a whole must be made by the Implementation Group to use a corridor further inland than the well used route through Wagga Wagga. There are good towns/cities like Narrandera, Griffith, Leeton, Shepparton and many more that could benefit from the additional links which would enable them to grow so taking some of the strain off the coastal cities.
More 1000's of tonnes of cotton, citrus, nuts, rice and many more products produced in the Riverina could be exported by rail, more economically, instead of being trucked. Oil will not stay low for ever! With NBN added to a fast Rail link, (as unlike Narrandera-Leeton and Griffith many towns do not have an airport,) the interior could attract more technology-based companies seeking to reduce their over-heads and living costs and improve their quality of life. In the 1920s we created the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area canals and the Riverina, now the food bowl of NSW and the largest wine producing region in Australia. Re-establishing rail corridors could have a similarly dramatic effect but maybe, with NBN, a technology bias. There would be no reason why Australia's 'silicon valley' could not be situated in The Riverina or any other area around the inland track.

The challenge is how do we expect people to start businesses if they don't get exposed to it. So many students are told about careers and further training when they are at school, but miss out on being exposed to the exciting opportunities that could transform their region and their country, with starting their own business one of them.

To change this, a full Year 4-12 curriculum needs to be developed for enterprise education and entrepreneurial thinking, to promote a knowledge of how business really works, those 'so-called' soft skills that cover every industry, the capacity to creatively solve everyday problems and to prepare to be the entrepreneurs of the future. This should start with creative approaches to problem solving in primary school where the community actually puts ideas into place because we need to also show that when ideas are proposed that they need to be implemented as well. Then as students progress through school, they'll be exposed to principles around financial accounting (and personal budgeting), developing and implementing strategy, the ability to pitch and build partnerships, and also about their own local economy as well.
This has to be supported by providing existing businesses leaders an opportunity to get into schools and sustain the cycle as well. When businesses and schools are two separate silos, then of course students will not see business as a place to move into and how they can start their own. But these business owners are important, as we can't just promote entrepreneurs to create new jobs, as we need intrepreneurs to go into existing businesses and sustain them as well. Countless Australians are employed in businesses who right now are strong, but they will remain strong if new capable young people step into those businesses and keep them strong. Once the curriculum is in place, then our young people will also be able to apply for funding and properly pitch for the funds that are already out there. Often when new business areas are opened up, the funding and application process requires an existing knowledge of business so entrepreneurs struggle to get the leg up existing businesses already have - and we need to level the playing field by teaching these skills early. That way the existing funding models can be enhanced and used to go further because it's not only existing businesses getting subsidies, but new ones getting the start they need.

People submitting ideas
Ed Bernacki cameron johns Jeff Black Nathan Waters Elaine Saunders Ryan Wardell Topaz Conway Jack Taylor S Kilham Seamus O Concheanainn sean harris David Jordan Geoff Geary Dave Hall Tom Worthington Phil McFadden Pete Cooper Suzanne Nguyen Annie Beaulieu Andrew Waltho Garry Visontay Ivan Teong Gareth Hughes David MacSmith Ram Hemmige