Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hutchison Paul: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:634;Page:5633] 
12.  
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
 to the  
Minister of Research Science and Technology 
: Is he satisfied with the administration of the Marsden Fund; if not why not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Research Science and Technology) 
: 
 Yes. Established in 1995 by the Hon Simon Upton the Marsden Fund supports groundbreaking research initiated by New Zealand’s top scientists across the full range of disciplines. Administration involves comprehensive peer review and strict conflict of interest procedures. Applications must be based on excellent ideas have an innovative design and build on a track record of achievement. An evaluation in 2004 reported that the fund is administered in a highly professional manner and aligned to international best practice. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Why has he failed to act fully on the 2005 report into the Marsden Fund that found among other things that there was doubt about the allocation process there was doubt about priorities and “there appeared to be some confusion in the sector about what the Marsden Fund should properly be funding.”? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The member will know that the Marsden Council has indeed been busy implementing reports about its practice. One of the things that it has done more recently which I applaud is that although in actuality there is no conflict of interest there has been a perception of that and it announced recently prior to the questions raised here that it would be changing the way it sets up its panels to assess funding applications and I think that is a move that is applauded by everyone. 
Dave Hereora 
: What reports has he seen on the response to recent criticism of the Marsden Fund by National’s science spokesperson Dr Paul Hutchison? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: In the last fortnight there has been nothing less than a backlash from New Zealand’s science community to Dr Paul Hutchison’s attack on the fund and his singling out of an individual researcher. Complaints have come from across the research community and I would include the following as the main ones: the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee the Royal Society the Council for the Humanities the Association of Crown Research Institutes the Marsden Fund itself and from a range of leading individual scientists like Professor Crispin Gardiner and Rob Ballagh I think perhaps Dr Hutchison should acknowledge that his position now has put him so far offside with researchers and scientists that the best thing he could do is apply for leadership of the National Party. 
Dr Pita Sharples 
: Kia ora Madam Speaker. Tena tatou katoa. He aha nga tohungatanga o te ao matauranga Maori kei nga kaiwhakariterite o te Ropu Toha Putea o Marsden kia taea te ki i whiriwhiria tikatia nga tono a nga kairangahau Maori? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What expertise do the Marsden Fund decision-making panels have in Maori knowledge to ensure that all the applications from Maori researchers were handled with competence? 
] 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: If I understand the member’s question correctly in terms of Matauranga Maori in the sense that I understand the member’s own research background as one where he has sought to articulate a world view based upon Maori knowledge I point out that the Marsden Fund is based largely almost exclusively in fact on a Western tradition of knowledge. Although there are Maori who are involved with the fund who sit on panels and who apply for money they do it within a Western science model of funding not within one that comes from a Maori world view. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Does he agree with Bob Brockie from the  
Dominion Post  
who says that at the very least the Marsden Fund should have the word “science” in its mission statement and that some previous grants for studies such as on women poetry and politics in England 1603-1688 the literacy and cultural significance of the piano and the editing of Jane Austen’s  
Persuasion 
 would be better funded by Creative New Zealand? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: As the member will recall when the Rt Hon Simon Upton set up this fund under the National Government of the 1990s it was applied to all forms of research which includes humanities social sciences and the sciences that the member appears to want to favour. I would point out that Mr Brockie’s research which was largely based upon animal roadkill or road deaths might also be seen by people as somewhat marginal to other forms of research that could be done on road deaths but the member has to remember that this fund funds all forms of research. It is driven by the researchers themselves. I think the most insulting thing the member has said is the implication that he wants to be the one who will decide what the country’s top scientists will do. 
Dr Pita Sharples 
: Kia ora Madam Speaker. He aha hoki he korero na ahakoa kua rahi ake nga Maori kua riro i a ratou te Tohu Takuta mai i nga wananga me nga whare wananga kare ano tatou kia kite kua whiwhi i nga kairangahau Maori he putea ka tohaina e te Ropu Toha Putea o Marsden.? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What could be a possible explanation for the fact that although the universities and wananga are seeing increased numbers of Maori PhD graduates we are not seeing Maori represented as researchers receiving funding from the Marsden allocation? 
]  
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I just go back to how this fund is run. It is run by researchers who are our very senior researchers making their own applications—this is not a strategic fund as most of our research funds are—to a range of panels that assess the research that is put before them. That goes to the council which then makes an overall assessment of what research will be funded. If I have a criticism of the fund myself I would simply say that for far too long it was not provided with additional funding so that at the present time we have a situation where about 20 percent of the applications that make it through to the final round get funded. That means many applications that are of outstanding merit do not make it into that final group. One of the things I guess I am doing here looking across at my colleague Mr Cullen is saying that one of the things I see in this fund is the outstanding research of this country being funded and perhaps one of the things we should be arguing about is how to fund it better. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Does he think that ordinary New Zealanders reacted in the same questioning way as he and the Prime Minister did when they learnt that nine members of the selection panel appeared to have $6 million out of a total of $38 million to fund their own project and when will the reports that both he and the Prime Minister called for be released? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I will start with the end of that question. I made it clear I had not called for a report. I regard the Marsden Fund as a well-run body. The Prime Minister is able to access and is accessing directly from the Marsden Fund its reports on how it is run. She understands that it is well run. I cannot remember the first part of the member’s question because it was probably as silly as the rest of it. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No that comment was not acceptable. I remind members that if they include in supplementary questions more than one thought or statement then the Minister has to address only one of them. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: Does the Minister agree with me that in a democracy such as New Zealand it is absolutely appropriate to have open debate about our most prestigious science fund—particularly over the issues of quality good process and adequate funding—and does he commit himself to championing science at a time when the total science investment in New Zealand is less than half of the OECD average? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes it is appropriate to have open debate; and yes I intend to champion research in this country. But I would say to the member opposite who is the research science and technology spokesperson for National that the chief researcher of the research that he chose to criticise was not the associate professor whom he singled out—because of her lesbianism no doubt— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please refrain from such comments. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The researcher is Professor Barry Reay DPhil University of Oxford BA (1st Class Hons) University of Adelaide. He is someone the member may like to pick up the phone and ring. That person is an expert in the cultural history of sex. He is a gynaecologist; perhaps he and the member could have a good conversation. 
Dr Paul Hutchison 
: I seek leave to table an article from the  
New Zealand Herald  
dated 9 September in which Professor Christine Winterbourn says the Marsden Fund is woefully small. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is.