Mackey Moana: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mackey Moana: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19860] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 Unlike my learned colleague Chris Hipkins I cannot claim to have popped in and out of academia my entire life and I suspect that my contribution may be a little more lowbrow than his but none the less I hope I am able to add to this debate on clause 10 of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. The role of Companion of the Royal Society is a very important role. The Royal Society is of course to be commended for the recognition of those people who advance the cause of science and education in science—those who work with the public and carry out that function of almost being an intermediary between the general public and members of the academic community who work in the area of science and now of course in the area of humanities when this bill is passed into law. 
I take on board the concerns of my colleague Chris Hipkins about the awarding of titles but I do think that under clause 10(1) of this particular bill the wording is appropriate. I myself am an ordinary member of the Royal Society and as such I have the right to vote and to nominate Companions of the Royal Society. I suspect that when we come into this role in Parliament it becomes more evident— 
Chris Hipkins 
: Who is being elitist now? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am not. I am an ordinary member I tell Mr Hipkins. 
Chris Hipkins 
: A common member? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am an ordinary member of the Royal Society and very proud to be so. I note that when we extend the ambit of the Royal Society out to the humanities Mr Hipkins himself may suddenly become eligible to also become an ordinary member of the Royal Society and enjoy being part of this amazing organisation whose history around the world goes back hundreds of years and which has been responsible for the enlightenment of humankind. I strongly recommend to any of my colleagues who want to join the Royal Society that they should do so. It is an eminent and very worthy organisation. 
In terms of the companions as politicians we should know better than most the importance of communication around issues of science and issues of technology. We need think back no longer than the issue of genetic modification and I think of the inability of politicians at that time to be able to grasp an issue that was incredibly divisive and inflamed passions on both sides of the debate. I hope we have learnt from that and realise that issues of science and technology will be commonplace in our country from now on. We will have to debate them as politicians. We do not necessarily need to understand them down to the same level that the practitioners do. But this is where the Companions of the Royal Society really do show their worth. I note there are relatively few Companions of the Royal Society as opposed to other classes. I hope that over time and as a result of this debate where we are discussing in detail the workings of this very important organisation we can promote the role of companions—promote the role of those people who can be the intermediary between those who are carrying out the technology and those who ultimately want to feel safe that that technology is OK and that it will not cause any damage. These people play an incredibly important role and it is perhaps a role that has been undervalued in the past and a role that I hope will see more people introduced into this area of companions. 
I remember that when we were in Government we set up the Science Media Centre which ended up being tendered to the Royal Society so the Royal Society carries out this role. The centre’s role is to act in the way that a companion of the Royal Society would act. Say if we want to get issues around science and technology out into the mass media we have to appreciate that maybe those journalists who are running the stories might look at something and think: “That’s very complicated; it’s going to take me a lot of time to get my head around it— 
Kris Faafoi 
: What are you saying about journalists? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I was not just looking at Kris Faafoi when I said that. Then they may go with another story. This unit has proactively gone out and told the media that when they want a story they should go to the Science Media Centre and it will give them the people to contact. It will tell them who to get in touch with and give them all the background. That has worked very well. It has resulted in some of the daily news shows having a regular spot for science and technology because they know they can get that information. This is the kind of role Companions of the Royal Society carry out and they should not be undervalued. 
I look at some of the names of people who are on the list of Companions of the Royal Society and I see Mr Jim Salinger’s name. I want to talk more about him. He was the principal scientist at NIWA. He was the person whom Jim Hickey would go to on a regular basis. Jim Hickey would say what was happening and that he wanted to understand it more. He would ask Mr Salinger to tell him more about it and Mr Salinger would provide that help. Unfortunately a couple of years ago Mr Jim Salinger was dismissed from NIWA. It was a decision that I personally very very strongly disagreed with. Mr Salinger was actually a member of a team that won a Nobel Prize. He is one of the few Nobel Prize - winning New Zealanders we have and he won for his role in the science of climate change. He is incredibly well known on the international stage and incredibly well respected. We were very lucky to have him as our principal scientist at NIWA and I personally very very strongly disagreed with the terms of termination of his employment from NIWA. I registered my disappointment personally with the Minister of Science and Innovation at the time. I said that something needed to be done about this because Nobel Prize - winning scientists who are prepared to be principal scientists at our Crown research institutes do not come along every day. We cannot afford to burn them off because of what ended up being personality clashes and disagreements over things that I think in the broader scale of things were minute compared with the contribution he made to science in New Zealand. 
Mr Jim Salinger is a very worthy Companion of the Royal Society of New Zealand. He has worked tirelessly particularly with media outlets to make sure that science was easily understood and when one reads the reason why he was dismissed it was for doing his job. It was because he had not sought approval from a manager to talk to a weatherman even though NIWA had a relationship with the organisation concerned and even though it had an agreement that he would do that. The weatherman rang him and asked him about something. He had a discussion with the weatherman and was then told it was not appropriate to do that without going through a manager. I think that that is bureaucracy gone mad. For a Government that says it hates bureaucracy this Government did nothing to step in in the case of Jim Salinger to keep that Nobel Laureate in our Crown research institute. 
The other person’s name I saw on the list is very interesting: Helen Hughes a former Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. I did not know she even existed until last week on  
Back Benches 
 when she opened a can of the proverbial on Peter Dunne regarding 1080. Helen Hughes I have since learnt is a formidable woman. She is an environmental champion from a long time back. She carried out the role of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment when it was not quite as high profile a role as it is now and as anyone who watched  
Back Benches 
 last week would have seen she is a passionate advocate for the environment. She is pragmatic in the extreme when it comes to issues like 1080. I invite members to watch  
Back Benches  
from last week if they have any concerns about 1080 to hear what she said which was pragmatic which was true and which was evidence-based. Helen Hughes even just based on her performance last week on  
Back Benches 
 is the kind of person who well deserves to be a Companion of the Royal Society and who under the amendment to section 12 of the Royal Society of New Zealand Act in clause 10 of this legislation will be the kind of person who I hope we will see continually promoted. 
Also I believe that Shaun Coffey who is the chief executive of Industrial Research Ltd is also a Companion of the Royal Society. I mention him— 
Chris Hipkins 
: As long as he doesn’t move it all to Auckland. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: —as long as he does not move to Auckland. I mention him specifically because I have been so impressed with the work that Industrial Research Ltd has done. I used to work on the Industrial Research Ltd campus when I worked for the Institute of Environmental Science and Research and then for AgriQuality. We were based on the same campus as Industrial Research Ltd. We all used to mix together and talk about what it was doing and it really is at the cutting edge of science and technology. It is doing the stuff that Sir Paul Callaghan talks about which is the stuff that perhaps not many of us know about but will bring enormous wealth to this country. Again I urge the Government not to mess with Industrial Research Ltd and not to make ideological decisions about the future of that organisation. Again Shaun Coffey is another person who has done a very good job. Industrial Research Ltd promoted the What’s Your Problem New Zealand? Competition where it put up a prize and said it would invest in something. Scientists and innovators were asked to go out there and come back with what they thought would make money. The competition induced an enormous response from the scientific community and showed just how much potential is out there if we are able to properly invest in science and innovation. Industrial Research Ltd had the money to invest in only a very small proportion of the ideas that came through—