Mackey Moana: Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill — First Reading 
Mackey Moana: Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:658;Page:7401] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I thank Allan Peachey the member who just resumed his seat for reading out the first two chapters of his upcoming autobiography “ 
Allan Peachey: The Man the Dream 
”. It was truly inspirational and we look forward to reading about what else went on at the top field of his primary school when that book hits the shelves in time for Christmas 2009. 
I am happy to speak on the first reading of the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill. I too will start off with two thankyous. The first thankyou has to go to Mr Charles Rooking Carter who gifted his estate to the Royal Society of New Zealand for the establishment of an astronomical observatory in Wellington. As the previous speaker has said thousands and thousands of New Zealanders have benefited from that generosity. The thanks of this House need to go on record as the Carter Observatory moves into the next stage of its existence. 
The second thankyou needs to go to the Wellington City Council because without its support for the ongoing work of the Carter Observatory it would not be able to continue. I sincerely thank the Wellington City Council for its generosity and its recognition of the importance of this institution. We find ourselves in an interesting situation. The Carter Observatory has an exciting future as a tourism and an educational institution but it is also with a hint of sadness that we lose our national observatory in this area. 
As the previous speaker said it is very true that for many young people astronomy is the gateway into science. The planets and the moon are often the first things that young people ask about. They are the first things they see that they cannot fully understand. Because of this natural curiosity we are able to introduce them to the exciting possibilities that exist not just in astronomy but in all areas of science. 
Despite the fact that New Zealand does not do an awful lot of research in this area compared with other countries we need to ensure that we maintain these facilities. If we lose them then we will lose a generation of young scientists of young people who may never really investigate their natural curiosity. For that I want to thank the Carter Observatory for the work that it does. 
We also need to thank the Carter Observatory for the work it has been doing as a private tertiary education provider. Not a lot of people know that the observatory is accredited by the New Zealand Qualifications Authority as a private tertiary provider. It has developed national standards in astronomy. If people look at its website they will find an enormous amount of teaching resources. It has picked up the new curriculum and the National Certificate of Educational Achievement system. The observatory has developed enormous resources for teachers who can go to the website and look at the pedagogy that the Carter Observatory believes they should follow. It outlines the way in which it believes the national standards should be taught. This is an enormous resource for teachers. They do not have to do this work for themselves especially given that not many of our teachers have expertise in the area of astronomy. 
Hon Member 
: We need science advisers. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am getting to that. It is important that we thank the observatory for the work it is doing and that we make sure that it is adequately funded to be able to carry this out in the future. 
This leaves us with the question that was addressed by my colleague David Shearer about the role of a national observatory in New Zealand and whether one is needed. This is where we see once again the real value of the centres of research excellence that were set up under the previous Labour Government. This move opened up possibilities for the University of Canterbury to take on this role with the Mount John Observatory which has combined its work with the research that it is being done at the university. A national observatory should be involved in research. This is one of the reasons why the Carter Observatory was no longer able to fulfil that particular role of a national observatory. But that does not mean there is not the possibility in the future for there to be another national observatory in this very important area in New Zealand. Obviously Mount John Observatory and maybe some other observatories might be looking at doing that. 
I will bring to the attention of members a very important organisation that they may not know about which is the Whakatane Observatory. This observatory in the Bay of Plenty is a gem. Members can look at the website: www.skyofplenty.com. It is a non-profitmaking community facility. It is currently based on council land and let us hope that the Whakatane District Council does not decide to sell that land from underneath it or move it to another area. 
The observatory has three telescopes and two observatories. It performs an incredibly important educational function for students not just in the Bay of Plenty but also from the Waikato the East Coast and all the surrounding areas. Teachers can bring in their students to see these facilities. It has equipment for astro-photography which the students love and also facilities for solar viewing. It currently has a large audiovisual room for the students and it can cater for the large groups of students who come through. The students get the teaching. They get all the education about what goes on at the observatory from the very passionate volunteers who run it. The students are then able to go into the observatory and see through a telescope the wonders that exist out there in the universe. 
I think that this role will become even more important given the cuts in funding for science advisers. The Whakatane Observatory already fills an important role in ensuring that our teachers have access to this education. The people running it are concerned about ensuring that enough money goes into supporting the groups like theirs that can provide that support. 
We are very concerned that the cuts in the funding for science advisers will be absolutely detrimental to the teaching of science at primary school. Today in the House the Minister said that people need to be able to read and write and do maths to do science and that is true. But people also need to be able to do science to do science. If we do not have these critically important science advisers or if we lose them overseas—they are already being poached because they are so valuable—it will be very very difficult for us to get them back. 
Science is such a specialised area. When we look at our primary school teachers we see that they work really hard to cover a huge curriculum. They have to cover every single area and the support they get in very technical areas like science is crucial to the teaching of science. If we do not get this right at primary school level then we will not get it right anywhere else in the system. If we do not have the basics and an appreciation of the fundamentals of science at primary school then it will be too late. This Government purports to value science but everything we have seen since the election has been absolutely contrary to that claim. We have seen cuts in science funding and in the way that science is brought into education. As my colleague David Shearer said as a country we simply cannot afford to fall even further behind than we already have. 
The previous Labour Government was making good inroads into increasing our level of public funding of science and increasing our level of private sector funding of science through the research and development tax credit. This Government said that the tax credit was corporate welfare. That is from a Government that will subsidise heavily emitting polluters by billions of dollars. I ask why that is not viewed as corporate welfare but having research and development tax credits for the private sector is. This Government is subsidising jobs at McDonald’s—jobs at McDonald’s—and it does not think that is corporate welfare. McDonald’s was going to have those jobs anyway but this Government does not provide tax incentives in an area where just about every other country in the OECD provides them. Even if we do not like it the fact is that we are already behind the eight ball and we need to do something because all the investors go everywhere else. This Government says that is corporate welfare. I completely agree with the statements of my colleague David Shearer. 
The previous speaker Allan Peachey talked about how excited he was when he saw a man walking on the moon. I was not born then but I have seen the images and it is very exciting even for someone who was not born at the time. As a scientist one of the most exciting things about man walking on the moon was the incredible amount of resources and funding that went into the science to make that happen. That recognised the value of science. It recognised the value of saying: “This is the impossible. We can do it.” Trillions of dollars have flowed into the United States economy from that funding. That money might not be directly related to putting a man on the moon but it came out of the technology that helped the United States to do that and that initial funding has undoubtedly been instrumental in making it one of the wealthiest countries in the world. 
As a scientist I was so excited to hear the speech made by President Obama in the last few months in which in light of the recession he announced a package of science funding and research and development funding as part of an economic stimulus plan that will be greater than the funding put in place for the space race. How many trillion and trillions of dollars will flow to the United States because of that? We need to learn from that. This stuff brings rewards and this Government is not taking that fact seriously enough.