Lees-Galloway Iain: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:676;Page:21520] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 Up until just a few seconds ago I was under the impression we were on clause 15 but it turns out we are on clause 16. I am very happy to make a contribution on clause 16 of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. It is a bill as members are well aware that Labour has gone to great pains to make sure we examine in the finest detail. As technical a change as this bill might be we want to make sure that we get everything right and clause 16 should receive no less investigation than any other clause in the bill. 
Clause 16 refers to co-opted councillors and states: “Section 24(2)(d) is amended by omitting ‘science and technology’ and substituting ‘science technology and the humanities’.” Again this is one of those changes that goes to the heart of what this bill is all about which is of course allowing the humanities and people who carry out study and research within the humanities to become part of the Royal Society thereby expanding the Royal Society’s brief from simply science and technology into the broader area of the humanities. 
Obviously when co-opting councillors usually one co-opts individuals to a council a board or any governing organisation in order to bring in specific expertise. This provision could be particularly useful in the transition phase as we see more people representing the humanities coming into the Royal Society and as their numbers grow. Initially it might be important to co-opt on to the council an individual who has specific experience or knowledge in the humanities. As the Royal Society expands into this new area it will have people with particular abilities who are able to advise the other members of the council—whose experience might be more in the area of science and technology as opposed to the humanities—about new areas that the Royal Society might be going into. This makes a lot of sense. 
Obviously the Royal Society has always been able to co-opt members. This I suppose is useful when there are specific items of interest that the Royal Society might be examining. I know that the different components of the Royal Society sometimes take on investigations into areas of specific interest and that would be another time when co-opting a member would be of great value to the council. But as I said obviously in this new era when people from the humanities are able to be part of the Royal Society should such an investigation be embarked upon into an area that is not one of the traditional areas that has been the work of the Royal Society then co-opting someone with that specific ability that specific knowledge and that specific experience could be very useful. Clause 16 by amending section 24(2)(d) of the principal Act allows that to happen. It is an infinitely sensible move in the context of the broader bill which will allow greater rigour in a way to be brought to the area of the humanities. 
I have mentioned previously in the debate with pride the number of people from Palmerston North who are members of the Royal Society because of our concentration of people engaged in science and technology I suppose. But we also have a number of people engaged in the humanities—people who really are at the cutting edge of research in the humanities. Some people might see that as an oxymoron but I disagree. The member in charge of the bill Grant Robertson pulls a face. Maybe he would like to make a contribution about that statement; I do not know. 
Clause 16 is a very sensible clause in the context of the bill and the whole point of the bill. I am sure that although it is a technical change it will allow the Royal Society to embark upon this new era of enlightenment in which it includes the humanities. I am sure clause 16 will be a very useful component of doing so.