Pillay Lynne: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pillay Lynne: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19424] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to stand along with my colleagues and speak in support of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill. In doing so I firstly acknowledge the role that the Royal Society plays. I myself along with all of my colleagues—certainly those on this side of the Chamber—have enjoyed the lectures that the Royal Society provides for people who may not be at the highest level of the sciences. Indeed the Royal Society does lecture in the humanities I think it would be fair to say. Many of us have enjoyed going to those lectures within Parliament and we have certainly been enlightened. 
I congratulate the Royal Society which has operated since 1867 on all the good work it does. We are celebrating the research and I will speak very briefly to what Dr Choudhary said in terms of whether research should be included in the objective. I know that Dr Choudhary is a scientist at heart but also by occupation. Research whether it be in science or in the humanities is so important. It has made an improvement in this country and indeed everywhere. It has improved everything. It has improved quality whether it be in any form of health care any form of understanding of where we come from any form of culture or anything to do with the humanities. That research is absolutely vital. This is the time to acknowledge the importance of the research. However I think that extending the work that the Royal Society does in promoting science and technology to include the humanities is a very worthwhile cause. 
I will talk about my daughter. She went to university whereas I did my training on the job as my partner would say because I trained as a nurse. I did not go to university. I have had some influence in the past over my daughter and she has often asked me for advice but I left her to her own devices to go to university and talk about what she wanted to do. When she came home she told me she was going to do a conjoint commerce and arts degree which seemed quite strange to me because she had never shown any interest in commerce but there we go. But it was not until afterwards that she said she had been persuaded by the fellow who was talking to her on the day who just happened to be the head of the commerce department that it would be a good thing to do. At the eleventh hour she changed to a psychology degree which of course encompassed the humanities and indeed some mathematics and other things that went along with it. 
She came home a few months afterwards quite flattened. Someone had said to her that her degree was a BA which meant—and I do not know whether I am allowed to say this in the Committee but I will give it a go anyway—bugger all. That was the description of an arts degree. This was some time ago. I quite eloquently reassured her. She went on to have some very interesting career choices at her very young age and I think that is wonderful. 
I think certainly attitudes have changed and with them the ability of everybody really to recognise the strengths that come from whatever dimension of education. It enriches people’s lives and it enriches what people are able to contribute to their communities and to society; it is very very worthwhile. I think this move to include the humanities in the Royal Society is really just another acknowledgment—the icing on the cake—of how important this issue is.