Choudhary Ashraf: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Choudhary Ashraf: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19424] 
Dr ASHRAF CHOUDHARY (Labour) 
: 
 I think the Hon Pete Hodgson the member in the chair explained the objective of the Royal Society very well. When I look at the objective as it now is in the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill I see that it includes science technology and the humanities. I have been thinking about that. There is one word that is missing and it is something that perhaps Pete Hodgson can put some light on. It is the word “research”. We have science and technology in the definition and now we have the humanities. But what about research? I hope that Pete Hodgson will have some answer to that. Traditionally as scientists we have done the research and developed the science and then we have had the role of technology and engineering in the advancement we have made through research but that word is somehow missing from the objective in clause 6. 
Historically in the over 144 years since the existence of the Royal Society the emphasis has been always on science and technology but not really on the humanities. I always thought that this was incomplete. The objective of the Royal Society has always been incomplete because once we do the science and we do the technology these technologies are actually used for humans. We use them for our environment and we use them in our surroundings so they have to have some impact on the environment that we live in. Clearly we should have had the humanities in the functions of the Royal Society a long time ago. 
We have spent a lot of money particularly in blue-sky research and—rightly so—in biofuels. We have gone into genetically modified food and genetic engineering. We have put money into research and development. But in the humanities area there are linguistics and various languages and there are the social sciences. I know that my colleague there the former Associate Professor Rajen Prasad has done a lot of work in the area of the social sciences and in the child and family area. A lot of research has been done and all of that work has been done on a scientific basis. It is not something that has just happened; it has been done on a scientific basis. Whether we take the humanities in totality or just in part as in linguistics languages and culture—and religion for that matter—I am very strongly of the view that the humanities should all have been a part of the objective of the Royal Society a long time ago. I am delighted even at this time that we are including the humanities as part of the objective of the Royal Society. 
But I still want to know from Pete Hodgson perhaps or from somebody else who can enlighten me why we do not have the word “research” in the objective because technology and the sciences are developed on the basis of research done. If we do not have that we cannot have the technologies and engineering that we have and those of course impact on humans and the environment that we live in. 
In the history of the Royal Society it is a significant milestone if you like that we are including the third leg of the three—science technology and now the humanities—as part of the objective of the Royal Society as we go forward. More and more we are becoming conscious of the impact of technology and the impact of new innovations on humans. Thank you.