While cynics have questioned the value of this week¡¯s ¡°choreographed¡± economic summit in Canberra, an innovation expert says work behind the scenes promises genuine policy impact.

Dozens of ¡°workmanlike¡± forums have taken place ahead of the three-day ¡°economic reform roundtable¡± starting tomorrow in Parliament House. Unlike the main event, these portfolio-specific discussions have been largely unpublicised, and research and development has been a prominent theme.

Roy Green, special innovation adviser at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), said an economic reform summit that ignored research and innovation was like ¡°Hamlet without the prince¡±. But organisers had made the ¡°understandable¡± decision to focus on other matters as the government awaited recommendations from the Strategic Examination of Research and Development.

In the meantime, smaller meetings have canvassed many areas, including R&D. ¡°It¡¯s not the first time ministers have held such roundtables, but for it to happen in a relatively coordinated way across all portfolios ¨C that¡¯s very unusual,¡± said Green, a board member with science agency Csiro and former head of the UTS Business School.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

Employment and workplace relations minister Amanda Rishworth there had been over 40 ¡°preliminary¡± roundtables in the lead-up to this week¡¯s summit. But scepticism about the event escalated after the ABC that the Treasury Department had given the government an advance briefing about the outcomes. Opposition leader Sussan Ley the government of pre-empting the discussion and wasting participants¡¯ time with a ¡°choreographed¡± event.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said nothing had been decided in advance, and the Treasury had simply briefed the government on ideas it expected to emerge at the talks. But the episode added to a sense of futility around the roundtable, after prime minister Anthony Albanese ruled out adopting tax reform ideas that had not been put to voters in the May election.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

Green said the summit may not achieve much more than ¡°fiddling around with deregulation¡±, but the earlier roundtables were ¡°genuine exercises in consultation¡±. While it was unclear how they would contribute to policy development, he said they would have impact.

¡°The minister is there in each case,¡± Green said. ¡°Ministerial officers are there taking notes, so that will certainly affect the individual portfolios.¡±

The roundtables have included discussions about resources on 17 July, technology and innovation on 1 August and education and training on 8 August. ̽»¨ÊÓƵ understands other forums have focused on climate change, health, immigration and industrial capacity, while an online confab on 15 August examined the progress of the Strategic Examination of R&D.

These invite-only meetings have had little publicity, allowing for expansive discussions free from media pressure to rule measures in or out, while also appeasing stakeholders who were not invited to the main summit.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

John Byron, principal policy adviser to Queensland University of Technology, said there was risk in handing over ¡°line agency policy¡± to central agencies like the Treasury and the Finance Department. ¡°They¡¯ve got people who know a bit about science, but they don¡¯t have nearly as much knowledge about science as the science department does.

¡°You can¡¯t leave the central agencies to do all the heavy policy lifting in specialist areas. Those satellite roundtables [suggest] they genuinely want to generate ideas and discussion.¡±

Green said roundtable discussions involving government, researchers and industry players could have major impacts. He said one such meeting in Denmark decades ago had recognised wind power as an ¡°area of potential competitive advantage¡±. As a result, the Danes were now major players in renewable energy, and Vestas ¨C then a ¡°very small company¡± ¨C had become the world¡¯s largest wind-turbine manufacturer.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com