Scene-Setting in Transition: Signals from Australia’s New Industry and Innovation Minister

John H Howard, Acton institute for Policy Research and Innovation, 23 May 2025

Ministerial speeches at the start of a new tenure rarely change the course of history, but they do set the tone and expectations. When Senator Tim Ayres addressed Cooperative Research Australia’s Collaborate Innovate Conference on 20 May 2025, he stepped into a familiar ritual for those who track the ebb and flow of policy leadership: the scene-setting speech. For a minister with just a week on the job, the question is not “Did he deliver a new vision?” but “How well did he manage the balancing act between expectation and caution?”

The speech is worth reading for public service advisers, policy academics, and those with long memories of innovation debates. Not so much for what it promises, but for what it signals—and what it avoids.

---

What the Speech Delivered

Senator Ayres’s speech was grounded and steady. He opened with personal narrative—his father’s work in agricultural science and his regional roots—immediately building credibility with an audience that values authenticity and practical experience. From there, he leaned into established government priorities: respect for applied science, the historic achievements of Cooperative Research Centres, the productivity challenge, and the push for “Future Made in Australia.”

This approach is smart politics and sound policy process. The Minister’s central themes—partnership, collaboration, consultation—are designed to reassure, not provoke. The focus was on listening and learning, building his team, and taking stock before charting new directions. For anyone involved in policy transitions, these are the hallmarks of an effective early strategy.

What the Speech Did Not Deliver

If there was a glaring omission, it was in specifics. There were no new funding announcements, detailed policy roadmaps, or legislative promises. In a sense, this is entirely expected. Australian ministers, particularly those new to their portfolios, rarely overstep the conventions of Cabinet process or the realities of interdepartmental coordination in their first major outing.

Yet the absence of concrete action is also a risk. A segment of the policy community is always eager for reform and wants to see bold thinking about Australia’s economic complexity, innovation system, and research capacity (Dodgson et al., 2011). Some may interpret the caution as a lack of ambition. The challenge for Ayres will be to ensure that this listening period does not become an indefinite drift.

Was the Speech Policy Theatre?

It would be tempting for some to label the Minister’s performance as policy theatre, and that would not be inaccurate. But policy theatre is often misunderstood. At its best, it is a necessary holding pattern—public reassurance while the real work gets underway. It gives ministers space to learn, to take the temperature of stakeholders, and to avoid the trap of over-promising before they can deliver.

Still, there are pitfalls. The line between holding the fort and treading water is thin. If theatre continues for too long without a corresponding shift to delivery, even the most sympathetic stakeholders may become impatient. For policy insiders, this is a well-trodden path: many a new minister has started with carefully choreographed reassurance, only to find themselves, months later, still making similar speeches while the sector waits for detail.

Innovation: The Language and Intent

“Innovation” is a central thread running through Senator Ayres’s speech, appearing in various contexts and signalling its status as both a policy objective and a mode of working. The Minister references innovation as part of his Ministerial title, as the glue between research and industry, and as a national aspiration, linking it to productivity, economic resilience, and Australia’s future competitiveness.

The Minister speaks of “joining up our research and innovation system,” building “innovation ecosystems,” and harnessing “technological advances and innovation, such as artificial intelligence.” For Ayres, innovation is less about isolated breakthroughs and more about systemic capacity—the ability to connect institutions, deepen collaboration, and create environments where new ideas can be translated into value. His repeated pairing of “research and innovation” suggests he sees the two as mutually reinforcing rather than sequential.

Ultimately, the speech frames innovation as an enabling platform for transformation across industry, policy, and society. This careful language points to an intent to build structures and relationships that make innovation a collective and ongoing process, not just a slogan or outcome.

Sovereign Capability: Implicit Signals

Although Senator Ayres does not use the phrase “sovereign capability,” in the speech, the concept is woven throughout. He speaks of Australia becoming a “manufacturing powerhouse,” an “indispensable industrial, technological, energy and strategic partner” in the region, and the need to build “economic complexity and resilience.” These references all point to strengthening national self-reliance and strategic capacity—core elements of sovereign capability in contemporary policy debates.

The Minister also emphasises leveraging Australia’s energy, resources, and research strengths to secure its place in a changing global environment. His call for “marking out our national interest” and working alongside the private sector to secure prosperity reinforces the ambition for a more assertive, coordinated national approach. While careful not to drift into protectionist rhetoric, Ayres signals a clear intent to develop the capabilities Australia needs for long-term security and regional leadership.

A Minister’s Constraints and Choices

One should not underestimate the challenge facing a new Minister for Industry and Innovation whose portfolio ranks fifteenth in the Prime Minister’s portfolio order. The sprawling and complex portfolio intersects in many ways with Treasury, Finance, Home Affairs, Defence, Climate Change and Energy, Education, and Agriculture. Announcements of significance require personal conviction and collective support across Cabinet, the bureaucracy, and, increasingly, state governments and industry bodies.

It is also apparent that the speech bore the fingerprints of professional drafting by public servants, seasoned with a few flourishes from the Minister’s own team. This is entirely normal for a new minister who is still finding his public voice. The Minister’s references to regional experience and partnership power suggest a willingness to listen deeply and act pragmatically.

The measured tone may have disappointed some looking for fireworks. For many policy professionals in the room, the subtext would have been clear: the Minister is getting the lay of the land and is not about to make promises that cannot be kept. This is a rational, even commendable approach in an environment where overreach can quickly recoil.

Where Was the Vision?

Still, it is fair to ask: where is the vision? Australia’s innovation and productivity challenges are well known, and incrementalism alone will not solve them. The speech acknowledged these challenges, but mostly in broad terms. Those hoping for a new industrial compact, a bold commitment to R&D investment, or fresh strategies for boosting economic complexity will have to wait.

Ayres’s early moves suggest he sees his role as a consolidator and consensus builder, not a disruptor. There is wisdom in this. Experience suggests that early, poorly grounded reforms rarely endure. Yet there is also risk: the innovation system needs not just reassurance, but clear signals and, eventually, decisive action.

Direct Commentary: Reading Between the Lines

This is where the speech merits a closer look from those steeped in policy craft. There were subtle signals about future direction: an emphasis on “joining up” research and innovation with national priorities, a focus on regional and applied science, and a repeated nod to productivity as a national goal. The commitment to “coordination, delivery and impact” was made, but specifics were deferred to the outcomes of the forthcoming strategic review. of R&D

In other words, Ayres is laying the groundwork. His careful, consultative style suggests he understands the value of bringing stakeholders with him. There is every indication that he recognises both the risks of haste and the cost of inaction. The test will be how he leverages this early goodwill—whether he can pivot from policy theatre to substantive delivery, and how he navigates the inevitable tensions between ambition and consensus.

There is also a pragmatic realism here. The Minister is not pretending to have all the answers. Instead, he invites the sector to help shape the policy conversation, setting up a collaborative model that is often talked about but less often achieved.

Grounds for Optimism

For those attuned to the undercurrents of ministerial rhetoric, there are quiet but distinct signals of promise in Senator Ayres’s address. His openness to learning—signalled by a willingness to listen, consult, and draw on the expertise of Australia’s research and innovation community—points to a policy process grounded in evidence. More significantly, his focus on system-wide integration, the deliberate “joining up” of research, innovation, and the Future Made in Australia framework, hints at a move away from fragmented, siloed policy toward more cohesive national strategies.

The speech also acknowledges the structural weaknesses in Australia’s economic model, suggesting a preparedness to grapple with legacy challenges rather than skirt them. Ayres’s inclusive, nation-building language frames the task ahead as one for all sectors and all levels of government, setting the stage for genuine collaboration rather than top-down mandates.

While specifics are deferred for now, the careful assembly of these foundations—deliberate sequencing, strategic review, and a team-based approach—suggests a Minister preparing for substance, not just show. For policy watchers, these are the signs that scene-setting will give way to meaningful reform.

A Promising Future—With the Right Support

It would be remiss not to highlight the Minister’s prospects. Senator Ayres has already shown an innate political touch—balancing reassurance with hints of reform, drawing on personal story while staying within the bounds of collective responsibility. He also benefits from a highly competent Assistant Minister in Dr Andrew Charlton and a cadre of experienced policy advisers. These assets matter: the path from policy theatre to real change requires both political smarts and a team that can navigate the machinery of government.

If Ayres can maintain this balance, using the early period for deep learning and coalition building, he stands to emerge as an influential policy leader. The stage is set, and the foundations are solid.

Final Thoughts

Transitions in leadership are always more than a matter of changing names on the office door. They are moments when tone, intent, and early decisions set the stage for what follows. Senator Ayres’s speech was less about unveiling a blueprint and more about creating the conditions for genuine dialogue and collective effort. At its heart, the address was an act of scene-setting, calmly mapping the boundaries, acknowledging complexity, and inviting participation in what promises to be a demanding policy journey.

The signals are clear for those in the policy community: the Minister is not rushing to disrupt, but neither is he complacent. His language of inclusion, his nods to structural challenge, and his willingness to build on legacy while seeking integration all suggest an administration preparing carefully for the next act. The real test will come as first impressions give way to decisions, delivery, and—hopefully—tangible results.

If the steady, inclusive tone of this scene-setting is matched by substance in the months ahead, observers may look back and recognise this as a necessary foundation for the kind of policy renewal that Australia’s industry and innovation sector demands. For now, the transition is underway, and the stage—wisely—has been set.

References

Carson, L., & Kerr, S. (2017). Public policy theatre: Communicating policy reforms to the public. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 76(3), 323-332.

Hood, C. (2011). The Blame Game: Spin, Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government. Princeton University Press.

Lindquist, E. A., & Tiernan, A. (2011). The Australian public service and policy advising: Meeting the challenges of 21st century governance. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 70(4), 437-450.

Tiernan, A., & Weller, P. (2010). Learning to Be a Minister: Heroic Expectations, Practical Realities. Melbourne University Press.

Dodgson, M., Hughes, A., Foster, J., & Metcalfe, S. (2011). Systems thinking, market failure, and the development of innovation policy: The case of Australia. Research Policy, 40(9), 1145-1156.

Dr John H. Howard is a policy analyst, economist, and innovation strategist with over three decades of experience advising governments, universities, and industry. As Founder of the Acton Institute for Policy Research and Innovation and a Visiting Professor at UTS, he brings an integrative perspective to complex policy challenges. His work bridges academic insight and practical application, offering clear analyses grounded in deep professional and personal experience. His Innovation Insights are informed by a lifetime of thinking, doing, and questioning orthodoxies.

John can be contacted at john@actoninstitute.au

This Insight first appeared in InnovationAus on 21 May 2025

© Acton Institute for Policy Research and Innovation. 2025