King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
King Colin: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:677;Page:687] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is good to speak during the third reading of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. One does so with a level of a heavy heart in the sense that during the 49th Parliament we had a strange situation occur where the Labour Party trivialised the democratic process in this House tried to draw this particular bill out and made the whole process a considerable farce.  
In actual fact it was a talking point among those who were waiting within the Royal Society to see this process concluded that it was quite a shameful process. It is really a dark blemish on the conduct of the Opposition in the way that it conducted itself over this. When you consider it one would have expected a lot more dignity around dealing with a process that was to do with an organisation that goes right back to the very founding days of New Zealand. When you look at the Royal Society of New Zealand you see it was set up in 1867 and for the bill to be held up by some juveniles on the other side of the House was quite shameful. 
Hon Member 
: Shameful. 
COLIN KING 
: It was indeed. It is worth reminding those people over there— 
Sue Moroney 
: Didn’t you go to the select committee hearings? It was already in place. 
COLIN KING 
: We have Sue Maloney—Moroney—it is sort of catching these days— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! That was out of order. 
COLIN KING 
: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker for that reminder. Sue Moroney who was also part of that Parliament was doing her utmost to support the member who was promoting this bill in drawing it out to a level that was an embarrassment to the Labour Party.  
It is appropriate that we are now at the stage of giving the go-ahead to this piece of legislation. It was dealt with very professionally in the Education and Science Committee where Mr Grant Robertson was very collegial but when it came down to the issues around another piece of legislation that was going to go through the democratic process Labour started playing games.  
It was resolved back in 2008 that the Royal Society should extend its compass to include humanities and effectively it has done that. It is not the only royal society or science body to extend and widen its scope to humanities. It has been done in other countries as well.  
While it was doing that it also saw fit to conduct some housekeeping. This bill basically brings the Royal Society to a stage where there is consistency and clarity around some of its terms and traditions. One is the 3-year process around elections and the other was to do with the academy council and the point where you have the council of the society. So that has been tidied up. It is quite appropriate. It makes good sense.  
When we look at the definition of “humanities” it is quite interesting. Whilst the Labour members filibustered away for the better part of 12 months and obstructed the process of democracy we did learn one or two things and as it says “humanities” includes English and other languages. It is quite interesting. There was a lot of debate around the process of that because in the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill there was the term “American studies” and we were sort of bemused at why that should be in there.  
When we look at that definition of “humanities” today it included “English and other languages history religion philosophy law classics linguistics literature cultural studies media studies art history film drama and American studies”. So there is a difference and it is quite clear. Although there is English language there is a distinctive difference between that and American studies.  
It is the object of the society to move to advance and promote in New Zealand not only the sciences and technology but also humanities. That is quite a major step forward. When you consider the Royal Society in the context of those 140-odd years—145 years but it could have been 144 years if Labour had not filibustered and tried to obstruct the processes of democracy—it is actually quite a step change. Effectively when you stop and think about the Royal Society our relationship with it here in Parliament has been through the wonderful sessions that we have enjoyed in Parliament itself where it has had eminent people come forward and articulate very very important contributions towards not only modern technologies and science but also what is especially relevant in the context of New Zealand being situated geographically on so many fault lines.  
I am very confident that empowered with this legislation the Royal Society will endure for many many years more. Considering that it has lasted 145 years I am quite confident that it will go on for many centuries. However in time we will see that this will no doubt come together again and there will be further clarifications around what is necessary to keep the Royal Society vigorous focused on the horizon and rewarding those eminent people who make a contribution whether it is to technologies to science or to humanities.  
It will foster in New Zealand within the community a culture that supports technologies sciences and humanities and that is very important. It will encourage promote and recognise excellence within the sciences technologies and humanities. It will provide an infrastructure and other supports that are necessary to the professional needs and development of science technologies and the humanities.  
By doing so it will establish and administer the membership’s codes because when you think of some of our very eminent contributors to technology science and the humanities they do need to be recognised. Anything of that nature really does hold up a role model and example to our younger ones coming on. It was quite significant that inside the Education and Science Committee today we heard that we still do not have enough scientists coming through and we should do all we can to achieve that.  
What we should not do though is stand in the way. We should never stand in the way of the democratic process like Labour did when it used this particular bill to obstruct the structured process of democracy. It was a major dark moment for the Opposition during the 49th Parliament.  
On that basis I take great comfort in seeing that this pre-eminent organisation can now get on with its business with a very well-refined bill. It gives me great pleasure to support this bill and I commend it to the House.