Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): The Labour Party takes pleasure in joining the Government in support of the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill. I think it is fair to say that whilst there have been activities in New Zealand relating to outer space activities including the Awarua space station near Invercargill it has been the success of Rocket Lab that has triggered the legislation because we have had the ability not just to monitor what is happening in space but to launch things into it.In respect of Rocket Lab I know I am not meant to bring the Speaker of the House into the debate but I am aware that whilst Mr Joyce I think thinks that Rocket Lab is his biggest success those who deserve the accolades are those who have been the innovators and funders of Rocket Lab. Those who funded Rocket Lab at the start were actually—that funding started under the last Labour Government and I think it was the Hon Trevor Mallard who was the Minister for Economic Development at the time. These things do take a while to come to fruition and it is indicative of how if you do have a visionary Minister or Government and you have the right regimes to enable New Zealand innovators to prosper we can diversify our export base of both goods and services that we sell to the rest of the world. Of course Rocket Lab is essentially an export company. It will be providing services to those that want to launch satellites. Those customers will generally if not always be customers from overseas who are paying money to a New Zealand company—it used to be completely New Zealand - owned; it is now partially New Zealand - owned as it has sold some of its shareholding to overseas venture capitalists. I do not criticise it for doing that.In respect of some of the other activities in New Zealand the Awarua space station is an interesting example. That came about because New Zealand can see into parts of the sky that other countries cannot. So when the European Space Agency was trying to monitor its activities it had a need to have a geographic base somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere that could see the parts of the sky that it could not see from its existing tracking stations. Through some very good work actually from the Southland economic development agency—I might have given it the wrong name but the economic development agency in Invercargill—in particular a man called Robin McNeill who is an electrical engineer—Hon Simon Bridges: Venture Southland.Hon DAVID PARKER: Venture Southland—thank you. Venture Southland. It managed to entice the European Space Agency funding to contribute to the cost of the monitoring station there which has been operating since. It ebbs and flows in terms of the amount of work that it receives but he was one of the submitters on the bill who gave the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee some very good advice. As the Minister has already said some of the changes that were made at the select committee reflect that advice.New Zealand's obligations as to what can or cannot be put into space arise in respect of non-military applications from international treaties. The bill does not try to restate those treaties but one of the submissions that we received at the select committee was the desire that it was making it clear that New Zealand was not embarking upon warfare or quasi-warfare through our space initiatives. We are not North Korea. We are putting satellites up—we hope more successfully—but for peaceful purposes not for war purposes. So the purpose of the bill has been clarified to say the purpose is to facilitate the development of a space industry and to provide for its safe and secure operation …" and to "implement … international obligations of New Zealand …" which I have already alluded to. To list some of those for the comfort of people—so without limiting the details of those treaties we note that it is not to "place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction install such weapons on celestial bodies or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner" or to "establish military bases installations or fortifications on celestial bodies" or to "test any type of weapons or conduct manoeuvres on celestial bodies". I think that was a theme that came through from a number of the submitters that they wanted that made clear in the legislation. I think that was already the effect of the legislation given the treaty that I have already referred to but that was made clear by an amendment or a change to the drafting of the legislation that is recommended by the select committee.Debate interrupted.The House adjourned at 6 p.m."