Burns Brendon: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Burns Brendon: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:672;Page:18395] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am delighted to take a call tonight. I commend my friend and colleague Grant Robertson for his impeccable timing in respect of the introduction of this Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill because just today I received a letter from a constituent raising some very important questions about royal society—a gentleman who lives in France as it happens who is a strong believer that there should be a change in the way of succession to the throne in Britain. He has written to members of the British Parliament—the House of Lords indeed—and asked a question as to whether there could be any move by the House of Lords in respect of a change of succession there. Obviously this bill relates to a change in a very longstanding limitation on the membership of the Royal Society. It has been limited to those from the science faculties and background and it is proposing an important change to allow those with a humanities background to become fellows of the Royal Society. I suppose there is a parallel. 
There is an important question being asked about whether there is a New Zealand connection here because Lord Alf Dubs of the House of Lords has been asking questions in the House of Lords as recently as January of this year as to whether any consideration would be given to changing the rules of succession in Britain. Those rules of course mean that only a male can ascend the throne and that a Catholic cannot ascend the throne. The interesting thing that emerges from this—and it is a bit of a test perhaps for members of the press gallery as to whether they listen to Parliament at night—is that Lord Dubs tells us in correspondence and questions to the House of Lords that discussions about this very issue of succession are proceeding under the chairmanship of the New Zealand Government. Lord Alf Dubs of the House of Lords on this issue of royal society if you like is suggesting that the New Zealand Government is taking the lead in respect of opening up for debate the question of succession in terms of whether Britain will continue to have only male heirs to the throne. This is an issue that might be of some consideration given events as recent as last Friday. 
I would be interested in the research that Mr Robertson has done on the Royal Society of New Zealand and in whether this issue might have popped up. I know that it is a little peripheral to the Royal Society of New Zealand and the bill he has introduced but I know he is a very thorough member. I know he takes a great deal of time and care with his research. He has shown that with his most recent contribution to the Committee noting that he was really disappointed that he could not discover the exact date that the Royal Society of New Zealand was created on some day back in 1867. He was very very disappointed that he was not able to give the Committee the specific date. 
I just wondered whether in the course of his research he had come across anything that indicated an involvement of Lord Alf Dubs of the House of Lords who had a bill in the House of Lords I believe some years ago and is now asking questions in the  
Hansard  
of the House of Lords as recently as January this year suggesting that New Zealand’s Government is providing the leadership as the Commonwealth nations consider whether there should be a change in the Act of Settlement which goes back some 300 years. One of his supporters noted that in fact there does need to be change. 
This is why we are considering this bill today. It might have been appropriate back in 1867 on some unspecified date when the Royal Society came into being that only those from a scientific background were able to join the Royal Society of New Zealand. We obviously need to make a change because as one of those taking part in the question session in the House of Lords back in January of this year noted if there had not been change on things that were instituted some 300 years ago we would still be jailing people for stealing bread. We would still be hanging people and would have a whole range of other things such as jailing children and hanging people for stealing sheep. The member for Kaikoura might make a contribution in that respect. But I ask the member in the chair Grant Robertson who is the author of this bill given his prodigious knowledge his research and his contribution whether in the course of his research he has seen anything that suggests that the Royal Society—