Hutchison Paul: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:13181] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 Thank you very much Mr Chair for your generosity in allowing me to speak again on the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill. I must say that I was appalled that Labour right from the beginning of Part 1 has tried to close the debate—firstly Moana Mackey then Jill Pettis then Sue Moroney and then Maryan Street more or less in that order—and that is of huge concern. 
Sue Moroney 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The member said that I tried to move a closure motion and I have not done that. It is wrong. The information is false. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is not a point of order although it did relate to a procedural matter. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Thank you Mr Chair. 
I would like to concentrate on this area of commercial sensitivity which has been of great concern to the universities and to the polytechs because in this last 15 years there has been a different era in terms of most of our academic institutions developing commercial arms. Prior to that what they tended to do was altruistic selfless and for the good of mankind. But what has happened over these last 15 years—I think starting with UniServices in Auckland University in about 1992—is that those institutions have all formed commercial arms. This may or may not be a good thing but it is certainly the reality of today’s world and it is very important for New Zealand that we make sure that the commercialisation of research is enabled to the greatest extent possible. 
The universities have said that being required in the summary plans to insert commercial information may ruin some of the deals that they could be planning. That is of great concern when members think for instance of the Pfizer deal with Auckland University. That was cancelled for other reasons but it was a $65 million agreement with the university and it was profoundly unfortunate that the company decided to withdraw the funding. 
In Supplementary Order Paper 161 I have tried just to diminish or protect to a small extent the amount of information that an organisation is required to put in its summary plan. It states: “an organisation is not required to include details in any plan summary of information that is confidential or commercially sensitive or that may otherwise be withheld from disclosure under the Official Information Act” etc. I think that brings us just another edge closer to giving institutions a degree of comfort and that is the reason why I have inserted it. I believe it was constructive and I think it is realistic. 
It is correct that at the end of the day one does have an Official Information Act process. However as we all know when an institution has something that is very sensitive it is very easy to have that document leaked in this day and age of emails—and we know it around Parliament around New Zealand and around the world. So I think every possible mechanism that we can bring in to ensure that commercial sensitivity is protected within the bounds of reason is appropriate. 
Clearly organisations like Business New Zealand have said in their submissions “that the bill should reflect the principle that information regarding the use of public funds must be as freely available as possible”—I totally agree with that—“apart from the fact that exceptions to this principle should be made only when there are compelling reasons; for example national security privacy—natural persons—or commercial sensitivities.” As we know New Zealand universities are very cash-strapped; there is a cap put on their funding 
Hon Steve Maharey 
: Promise more money. 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON 
: Well I say to Mr Maharey that he may need it in a few months’ time down there at Massey. I think it is after some funding. But the very important thing is that this is potentially a crucial source of funds for universities. Hence we want to make every protection possible. Thank you for indulging me Mr Chairman.