Joyce Steven: Advanced Technology Institute Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Joyce Steven: Advanced Technology Institute Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 28 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6878. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister of Science and Innovation) 
: 
 Mr Chair— 
Chris Hipkins 
: He didn’t call. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I just did. [ 
Interruption 
] Quietly. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Getting up and hanging the tummy over the desk isn’t good enough. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Ah I hear the quacking of a duck. 
I am very pleased to take a call on this bill the Advanced Technology Institute Bill and I would like to make a couple of comments at this point if I could. One is that I want to thank the Education and Science Committee for its sterling work in relation to this bill. It has dealt with it very promptly which is great because I think this is a crucially important initiative for New Zealand and getting it under way as quickly as possible is something that we as a House should be proud to do. Therefore for those who have been supportive I appreciate that support. 
The main purpose of the bill of course is to establish this new Crown entity and this is the meat of the bill in terms of the clauses that take us through the structure of the Crown entity and what it does. I suppose more formally what it does is a very simple thing which is to help get New Zealand’s best ideas out of the lab and into the market place more quickly and to get New Zealand firms and New Zealand science and innovation working much more closely together than has been achieved in this country to date. 
I would say that we have some marvellous examples of innovation in this country and it is a privilege for me to get the opportunity to see so many of those wonderful examples of innovation around the country. There are plenty of companies that are doing very well but there are plenty of companies that would do better if they had a better understanding of how they could work with what is a very complicated innovation sector which this country has built up over many many years and had that opportunity to work more easily with it. That is the role of Callaghan Innovation—a high-tech HQ to support our innovative businesses primarily in the manufacturing and services sectors and particularly the high-value manufacturing services. 
I must say that I am a bit confused as to why the Greens are opposing the bill. It seems strange. They talk about high-value manufacturing. They talk about cleantech. Then here we have this magnificent initiative which is reasonably broadly supported around the Parliament yet suddenly they have pulled out yet again and said: “Oh no that is not for us.” So one has to wonder. It is a little bit like  
The Hobbit 
. We know that  
The Hobbit  
is a weightless export and one has to wonder why they opposed that as well. 
There have been a couple of questions raised in the debate on a previous part about the management of appropriations and how the appropriations will be set. The reality is of course that the appropriations are set by the executive once the bill is passed and of course are reviewed by this House at the select committee in the opportunities that are presented by the financial reviews. So that is the opportunity that comes in that regard. 
But there is some interest—and I acknowledge the member from New Zealand First Tracey Martin—in terms of exactly where Callaghan Innovation lands in terms of the “make or buy” argument. That is going to be very carefully and it is being very carefully worked through and everybody is very cognisant of the issues. On the one hand you have research organisations slightly nervous about how it might impinge upon their particular area of expertise and then on the other hand you also have people who I think quite rightly point out that it has to do significant things itself in order to have skin in the game in terms of its involvement in the research and science sector. So it is going to be a reasonably fine line to draw and I suspect that it will evolve over a series of years rather than being a case of on day one here is the final for ever allocation of what this organisation does itself and what it purchases—or more important how it directs firms and other providers. But it is definitely the purpose of the exercise not to unnecessarily duplicate what already occurs. I think that is a very important aspect of it. 
I see it as for example somebody whose company comes in and says: “Look we really do need some specialist with applied mathematics expertise.” I would see Callaghan Innovation very quickly directing that person and wanting to see them build that relationship wherever that person works in the innovation system in New Zealand. That can help that business and it will be successful. 
It has of course evolved across a range of industries in that high-value space: the food and beverage manufacturing area agricultural technologies digital technologies health technologies therapeutics and also the high-value wood products. It is going to have to have very good relationships. Take high-value wood for example with Scion as well. These are the important things that Callaghan Innovation will be doing. 
I also want to acknowledge before I stop the family of Sir Paul Callaghan for their support for the use of his name. We take that very seriously and there is a lot of discussion going on about how best to embody Sir Paul’s approach to science and innovation in the organisation. That is very much front and centre.