Victorian feature: Biotech's a real synch

One word is consistently on people's lips when discussing Victoria's biotechnology scene: hub.

Just last week, while announcing that four of the state's biotech companies would seek European backing at an international conference, Innovation Minister John Brumby said the government's vision was for Victoria to be "one of the top five biotech hubs in the world".

Few would disagree that in terms of science and biotech clustering, Victoria is certainly a state on the move.

The evidence includes the controversial synchrotron project and the development of precincts like Bio21, collaborations like Neuroscience Victoria and government-backed business development company Biocomm International.

Eight of the 21 recent Federal BIF (Biotechnology Innovation Fund) grants were awarded to Victorian companies, while three of the four short-listed Biotechnology Centre of Excellence applications have roots in the state.

And as everyone in the local industry is quick to remind outsiders, Victoria has a proud history of research with such institutes as the Walter and Eliza Hall, the Baker Medical Research Institute, the Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development, the Howard Florey Institute and MacFarlane Burnet Centre for Medical Research, among others.

On the business side of science, the Deloitte Biotech Index this month revealed Victorian companies comprise 23 of the 62 listed biotech stocks and accounted for more than half of the total $14.9 billion market capitalisation.

Rothschild Bioscience Managers managing director Geoff Brooke said Melbourne was traditionally Australia's banking centre, so its strong financial base coupled with research and its popularity as a conferences venue added up to create a biotech focus.

Brooke said that while the State government had shown support in terms of trade missions and a strong drive towards commercialisation opportunities, it should consider setting up funds to invest in industry.

"The Victorian government and the City of Melbourne are making a significant push to create a biotechnology industry in the state, and are doing everything they can to sponsor it," he said.

"Anything they can do to attract big pharma to come here and set up facilities would be good, and to do drug development for the Asian market out of Melbourne would be great."

Building blocks BioMelbourne Network executive director Janine Kirk said the city had long had the "building blocks" in place to be a biotech centre.

Kirk said that the government had put in place effective policies to build on the back of research, but conceded there was little it could do to encourage investment without there being major tax changes at a federal level.

"We need to look at cooperation between groups across the country," she said. "If Australia is going to make its mark, then they need to cooperate more than they are doing at the moment.

"The BioMelbourne Network is allowing scientists, business people, lawyers and so on to mix horizontally."

Dr Graham Mitchell, a principal of biotech consultancy Foursight Associates and a chief scientist to the Department of Natural Resources and Environment, said Victoria also benefited from receiving a significant proportion of NHMRC funding. Mitchell said this, coupled with the State government's support, led to a natural biotech emphasis.

"The STI initiative by the Victorian government is a good example of the current Labor government picking up and continuing a Kennett government initiative," he said, adding that it set a good example for how a new government could manage existing programs.

Mitchell pointed to infrastructure as a key area of improvement, as well as initiatives to better reward researchers.

"The state has to constantly invest in infrastructure," he said. "There is nothing worse for a researcher than thinking they can't do a particular experiment because they don't have the equipment or facilities they need."

On that front, the government has set up a special working party to look at platform technology needs within the state, as well as the possibilities for spinning such technologies off into separate businesses to make them widely accessible while raking in some cash.

The committee, led by Monash University's Associate Dean of Biotechnology, Prof David de Kretser, is expected to report its findings later this year. One "piece of equipment" that has raised the ire of some in scientific and political circles has been the $157 million synchrotron, set for completion by 2007.

Eggs in one basket? Opposition technology and innovation spokesman Victor Perton said his party was concerned the Bracks government was "sinking" roughly a third of the state's total science budget into the project, saying it was "a bit like putting all the science eggs in one basket."

Apart from this, Perton said the facilities and biotech environment in Victoria were excellent.

"Victoria enjoys a world-leading cluster or community of researchers, scientists, educational institutions, companies, academics, developers and emerging now, entrepreneurs who are engaging in cutting edge and leading-edge research across an amazingly diverse range of fields," he said.

"In its present iteration, this community has been heavily influenced and sustained by the former Kennett government's Bio21 vision and action plan."

But another Foursight principal and synchrotron champion, Sir Gustav Nossal, said the synchrotron would provide enormous research potential to local scientists.

"When I was asked to, as it were, become Victorian champion of this project, I called a lot of people and it was very interesting to hear all of the x-ray crystallographers who were getting on and off planes going to synchrotrons around the world," Nossal said.

"This will help them get faster and better quality results and by spreading the cost out over years it is not so horrendous.

"It is a big pill to swallow, but I think that every 10 or so years something of this ilk will crop up where you just have to look at the international setting and decide if Australia should compete in that area."

Competition in a global sense is one of the drivers behind Biocomm International, which has a government brief to seek out commercial opportunities within member institutes and to build a capital pool with local and overseas funds from which to help build new businesses.

The company is currently working on 40 projects and is building a fund pool of about $15 million with the networking experience of US venture capitalist Stan Yakatan, who has been appointed strategic biotechnology adviser to the Victorian government.

The business development director at consultancy group TSL, Dr Shirley Lanning, said Victoria also benefited from having had more start-ups than other states and therefore more role models to follow.

However, she said more education was needed on the path to commercialisation, adding that TSL saw some very poor business plans.

Despite having a historically sound foundation for biotech business, Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development director Prof Alan Trounson said Brisbane was sizing up as a major competitor because of the level of government support it was now receiving.

"The current environment is very strongly in favour of biotech.there is a real commitment to wanting to do it better or harder," Trounson said.

He believed initiatives such as the synchrotron project will provide a strong morale boost to the research and biotech community, but said research directors in particular needed to stop being precious about their work and become more proactive in advancing the sector.

"The really innovative people are tired of the slow process," he said.

"We need to engage the innovators, make judgements on opportunities, build more infrastructure, and skill up more people."

Agbio emerges from biomed's shadow Melissa Trudinger

Victoria's biotechnology industry is by no means limited to the biomedical sector. Agricultural biotechnology is an important part of the state's growing industry and is well represented.

The Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE), which encompasses Agriculture Victoria, has 16 research institutes of which several are intimately involved in biotechnology research, including the Plant Biotechnology Centre, the Victorian Institute of Dryland Agriculture and the Victorian Institute of Animal Science.

DNRE has also recently become involved in a joint venture between the Plant Biotechnology Centre and publicly listed company Genetic Technologies, resulting in AgGenomics -- a centre offering plant genomics services.

Agriculture Victoria Services is the commercialisation arm of Agriculture Victoria. Last year they spun off Phytogene, a company to commercialise plant senescence technology developed at the Plant Biotechnology Centre.

Federally funded agricultural biotechnology research in Victoria is carried out in several CSIRO divisions, and at several Cooperative Research Centre (CRC)nodes. The CRC for Innovative

Dairy Products is based in Victoria and several of the other agricultural CRCs have associations with Victorian organisations.

Universities in Victoria also have a strong agricultural biotechnology focus. Melbourne University's School of Veterinary Science has a Centre for Animal Biotechnology as well as other research programs involved with biotech. The Monash Institute for Reproduction and Development has actively participated in development of animal reproductive technology including cloning. And plant biotechnology is going strong in several universities around the state.

Several biotechnology companies located in Victoria focus on agricultural biotechnology, including Clone International, Genetics Australia, Access Genetics and ProBio. In addition, agribusiness multinationals Monsanto and Aventis CropScience have facilities in Victoria.