Clendon David: Advanced Technology Institute Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Clendon David: Advanced Technology Institute Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6894. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a final call on the Advanced Technology Institute Bill which is an unfortunate bill as we said earlier. It could have been much improved by the amendments that were offered. Sadly that opportunity has been refused. 
The title change of the bill to the Callaghan Innovation Bill—we certainly supported the Minister of Science and Innovation’s amendment to that because we think it is appropriate that there should be a legacy to an extraordinary man. But we have a genuine concern—and this is not to make a political point frankly. The responsibility now lies with this Government to make sure that this organisation is something actually worthy of the man. With 20/20 hindsight we can look back and see that it was an unfortunate decision some years ago to attach the name of one of our greatest war heroes Charles Upham double VC recipient to a naval vessel that was intended to be a service vessel for the navy and do good work but sadly proved entirely unfit for purpose and ended up carting oranges around the world if I recall correctly. It would be most unfortunate if this organisation also turns out to be a lemon and there is a real danger of that given the way it has been structured and the extraordinarily hasty process of its establishment. Indeed the responsibility rests squarely on this Government to make sure that this organisation is worthy of the name that is being attached to it. 
The innovation part—it is rather an odd name actually: Callaghan Innovation. It almost cries out for another word like “institute” or “centre” or something. In itself—“I work for Callaghan Innovation.”—it is a peculiar choice. I do wonder at the decision behind that but so be it. Innovation actually is the role of the business sector and of the research centres the universities and the Crown research institutes. We always pictured that this would not necessarily be a centre for innovation as such. The role of this organisation as such an organisation ought to be a networking role of joining dots linking talent with demand linking supply and demand joining and facilitating discussions and building relationships between the scientific and research capacity we have and the business sector where the skill is to turn the good idea into dollars for the country—the weightless exports the high-tech manufacturing the stuff that we really do need into the future for economic social and environmental benefits. 
So it is a peculiar choice of name. It does reflect I think a bit of the muddled thinking of this Government as it has gone in such great haste to develop this organisation. The commencement date is 1 February a very few months away. Sadly the fact that this bill is now passing into law—or presumably will this week or certainly next week with the third reading whenever that is scheduled—means a very unhappy Christmas I suspect for many of the people currently employed by Industrial Research Ltd the status of which will be amended. Clearly as we know from the Cabinet paper the long-term intention is to disestablish Industrial Research Ltd. 
Once again we have a major centre of scientific and technical expertise and the people in that organisation now feel that their future is under threat. Many of them have no idea where they will end up. They do not know whether they want to be part of this new group. They do not know whether there will be a role for them—similarly with the New Zealand Transport Agency and indeed the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment. There will be people thinking “OK what does this mean for me and my future?”. 
This is a time when we should be making science and technology an extremely attractive career path for young New Zealanders and not-so-young New Zealanders. The fact that this is being done so quickly with so little clarity around the transitional arrangements will mean for those individuals and those people collectively that we are actually undermining that. It is very difficult in fact. I am a great believer in science. I have a science degree. It is very difficult—really honestly—to say to a young New Zealander “You should make your future in science.” You have to qualify that by saying “Don’t expect a smooth run. It will be a rocky ride the way things are here.” But nevertheless that seems to be the way they are going. 
So we do think that if the process had been allowed to be worked through in a more appropriate way and if the commencement date was extended out there would be no particular disadvantage. Work is being done. Very positive productive work is already happening with the various organisations I mentioned earlier like UniServices the WaikatoLink and the Economic Development Agencies of New Zealand group which are doing extraordinarily good work in terms of linking up the demand and supply and linking up the ideas and the people who can turn ideas into money. There is no need for such haste and it is a great shame for those people who will be left sadly over the Christmas break. Kia ora.