Industry Research and Development (Small Business Digital Champions Project) Instrument 2019

The Industry Research and Development (Small Business Digital Champions Project) Instrument 2019 is a Commonwealth legislative instrument made under section 33 of the Industry Research and Development Act 1986. Its core function is narrow but important. It prescribes the Small Business Digital Champions Project as a program for the purposes of that Act.

In practical terms, this means the instrument gives the program a formal legal footing. It tells you that the program exists as a prescribed program under the Act and identifies the broad purpose of that program. It is not a complete rulebook for businesses. It does not read like a grant agreement, a set of application guidelines or a compliance manual.

If you are a business owner, the safest way to read this instrument is as the legal framework that authorises the program at a high level. It helps answer the question, "Is there a legislative basis for this program?" It does not answer many of the operational questions businesses usually ask, such as whether they qualify, how much support may be available, what documents are required, or what reporting will be expected if support is approved.

The instrument is directed at a program whose purpose is to fund and promote the adoption by small businesses of online digital technology. It also expressly refers to funding industry associations to advise on online digital technology. That means two groups are clearly contemplated by the text itself: small businesses, and industry associations involved in advising small businesses on digital technology.

However, the instrument does not define "small businesses". That is a key limit in the text. You should not assume that a common tax, employment or procurement definition automatically applies just because the phrase is familiar. The instrument itself does not tell you whether the relevant measure is employee headcount, turnover, corporate structure, industry type, or some other criterion.

The instrument also mentions mentors for selected small businesses, but it does not set out how mentors are chosen, engaged or managed. Likewise, it does not explain whether sole traders, partnerships, companies, charities, social enterprises or franchisees are included or excluded. Those are operational questions that need to be checked elsewhere before relying on the program.

The key trigger in the instrument is not a business action such as lodging a form or reaching a turnover threshold. Instead, the trigger is legislative. Section 5 states that, for the purposes of subsection 33(1) of the Act, the program is prescribed. Once prescribed, the program sits within the statutory framework created by the Industry Research and Development Act 1986.

The instrument then states the purpose of the program. According to section 5(2), the purpose is to fund and promote the adoption by small businesses of online digital technology. It gives three examples of how that purpose may be pursued. First, by providing funding for goods, services and training related to online digital technology. Second, by providing mentors to assist selected small businesses to access and use online digital technology. Third, by funding industry associations to advise on online digital technology.

These statements are useful because they show the intended scope of the program. They also show the limits of what the instrument itself says. The text identifies categories of support, but it does not say how much funding is available, whether support is competitive, whether co-contributions are required, or what outcomes a business must deliver. Those details are not in the instrument.

This instrument does not impose a general compliance burden on all Australian businesses. It does not require businesses to adopt digital technology, register with a regulator, file reports, or change internal systems simply because the instrument exists. Its role is to prescribe a program and describe its purpose.

That said, businesses should still read it carefully because it sets the outer frame for any support offered under the program. If a business later applies for support, the practical obligations are likely to come from separate program documents, funding terms, agreements, directions or administrative requirements rather than from this instrument alone.

For example, if support is offered for goods, services or training, the detailed conditions about approved spending, evidence of expenditure, milestones, acquittal, publicity, repayment or audit would need to come from the program's operational documents. The same is true for any mentoring arrangement or any funding provided to an industry association. None of those detailed obligations are spelled out in the instrument itself.

If you are considering this program, do not stop at the instrument. The instrument is only one part of the picture. Before making business decisions, you should confirm the current operational material issued by the administering department and check whether the program is open, what the current criteria are, and what contractual terms would apply if support is approved.

For many businesses, the most important practical step is to separate three questions. First, is there a legal basis for the program? This instrument answers that at a high level. Second, am I eligible right now? The instrument does not answer that. Third, what obligations would I take on if I receive support? Again, the instrument does not answer that in detail.

That distinction matters because businesses can easily overread a short legislative instrument and assume it contains the full scheme. It does not. A careful business should verify the current program status, the current definition of any key terms used in program materials, the nature of any funding agreement, and the evidence needed to support spending on digital goods, services or training.

The instrument was made on 5 February 2019 by the Minister for Small and Family Business, Skills and Vocational Education. It was registered on 11 February 2019 and commenced on 12 February 2019, being the day after registration. The Federal Register of Legislation lists it as in force and shows that it is administered by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

The instrument also specifies the constitutional head of power relied on for the purposes of subsection 33(3) of the Act. It identifies the Parliament's power with respect to postal, telegraphic, telephonic, and other like services within paragraph 51(v) of the Constitution. For most businesses, that point is mainly relevant as part of the legal basis for the instrument rather than as a day to day compliance issue.

Because program settings can change over time even where an instrument remains in force, businesses should always confirm the current position before acting. An in-force instrument does not necessarily mean there is an open application round or currently available support on the same terms as in earlier periods.

This page is based on the text of the Industry Research and Development (Small Business Digital Champions Project) Instrument 2019 as published on the Federal Register of Legislation. The key operative provisions are the name, commencement, authority, definitions, the prescribed program clause, and the specified legislative power clause.

The most important practical reading point is that the instrument is short and high level. It tells you what the program is for, but not how every part of the program operates in practice. If you need to know whether your business can apply, what evidence is required, or what conditions attach to support, you should check the current program material issued by the administering department in addition to the legislation.