Shearer David: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
Shearer David: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19338] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 This is a rather unusual entity in a sense—although not in the period we are talking about—because of course the Foundation for Research Science and Technology no longer exists. It has been merged with the Ministry of Research Science and Technology. So although we are debating it today it is no longer in existence. It has been pushed together with the ministry in a restructure to make it look as if the Government is actually becoming more involved with and more dedicated towards science and innovation. 
I have to give the Government credit. The Ministry of Science and Innovation is a terrific name—it is a terrific name. It is just a real shame that the ministry does not live up to that name. It came in during that plethora of reforms last year which was trumpeted as being the step change for research and development. The Ministry of Science and Innovation was meant to be the new way forward; it was supposed to lead that change. To some degree we actually saw an increase in funding for research and development. The Government put $56 million a year more into it—$56 million. When we took into account the total spend that was a little less than 5 percent. When we took into account inflation it was a lot less than that particularly as inflation is running now at nearly 5 percent or more. 
The most important thing about that money and where it went to was that it went to giving businesses a handout to do more research and development. It did not encourage a real change in the culture of those companies. The research and development in our private sector is woeful—it is absolutely woeful. We do not spend a figure anywhere near the OECD average when it comes to research and development inside businesses. So although the Government trumpets the merging of these two entities as the new dawn of research and development the reality is quite different. 
I will give another example of exactly what this really means. We would expect that for a new entity like this ministry the Government would search the world for somebody who would lead this new entity into a completely new field and really bring about major change in our research and development. But that did not happen. When we looked for the leader of the Ministry of Science and Innovation the advertisement was open for only 2½ weeks and it did not look overseas for the best person despite the fact that the Minister of Science and Innovation talks about the triumphs of Denmark. The Prime Minister talks about Taiwan and what it is doing. The Minister has just come back from Israel where he has been looking at research and development. I expect he probably flew there on a commercial flight; I hope that he flew on a commercial flight to Israel in order to look at the research and development. 
These countries put from 3 to 4 percent of their GDP into research and development and they have science and innovation places that are world leading. Why cannot we have world-leading places just like that? The answer is that this Government certainly does not have the commitment to research and development that it talks about. It talks the talk but it does not walk the walk. 
When we look at this year’s Budget despite the fact that in January we were told that it was about innovation and savings we can actually see a $12 million decrease in the overall spend in science and innovation—a $12 million decrease. The top-line headline in the Budget is that $36 million has been reallocated. That will set the world alight! It will really set the world alight that we have reallocated $36 million! 
Research and development in New Zealand is the driver of our innovation. It could be the driver of our economy—a new smart clean green economy—but this Government has enabled research and development to languish and go backwards. Thank you.