Shearer David: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Shearer David: Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19883] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 I just wanted to— 
Darien Fenton 
: Your membership’s cancelled. 
DAVID SHEARER 
: Revoked—I have been revoked. I just wanted to make some comments on what Grant Robertson was talking about. He said he could not find any history of a revocation of membership actually happening so I think that the possibility of clause 13 of the Royal Society of New Zealand Amendment Bill being acted upon is very unlikely. Clearly the reason for that is that in many ways these people are self-selecting. To get to that level they have to be of the highest quality. They are judged by their peers. It is interesting in looking through the various types of membership and the way that the activities are carried out within the Royal Society to see the presence of peers judging peers or measuring peers to ensure that we are talking of the highest quality. 
I cannot imagine the possibility that somebody could be in a sense thrown out from that position unless a pretty serious occasion caused that. I could only think that if that was the case it would have to do with science and the way that the person conducted himself or herself in science. I am thinking of people not conducting their research in a way that was in accordance with the highest scientific principles. Possibly plagiarism or something along those lines might cause a scientist of that standing—given that they are of the standing to be in that illustrious group—to have that title taken away. 
I also touch on clause 13 itself: “Section 18(2) is amended by omitting ‘Academy Council’ and substituting ‘Academy Executive Committee’.” Although in some ways this change is administrative and very perfunctory because this council will have the powers to take these sorts of decisions it is worth looking at the structure and at the new structure in particular. The supplementary submission made by the Royal Society to the Education and Science Committee looked at the new structure of the council. It noted that academy council which is the name that has been used until now will be changed to academy executive committee. That change is proposed in the bill to avoid confusion with the council of the society itself and that is provided for in the bill. 
The restructure is noted in the bill. It is set out there and is also set out in the explanatory note. The new structure of the council includes one president and six elected vice-presidents. They each have specific responsibilities in biological and life sciences; physical sciences mathematics engineering and technology; social sciences—which are important in the context of the humanities as we are discussing here—international; education public awareness and outreach. 
To be perfectly honest we are doing some of the job of the Royal Society tonight because anybody who is watching this debate through the various clauses and parts that we have debated in this Chamber will come away with an extraordinarily detailed understanding of what the Royal Society is all about. I think that is a useful by-product; in fact it is more than a by-product. I think it is part of the role of government. 
All of us have talked about the eminence of these people. I reflect on the fact that just recently a poll found that the three most trusted New Zealanders are all scientists and they all—actually maybe not Ray Avery but certainly two of the three—are Fellows of the Royal Society. The point I am making is that the Royal Society is a hugely prestigious organisation and we have talked about this at length before. It is difficult to become a fellow a member or in particular an honorary member. I appreciated Grant Robertson’s explanation about the difference between those types of membership in response to a question he was asked. The Royal Society is a highly prestigious organisation and it is structured in a way to ensure that the highest standards are maintained. 
To go through the new structure of the council as I was talking about before we have the president six elected vice-presidents with their specific responsibilities and one elected representative of the regional constituent organisations. This is one area in which we received a great deal of submissions on this bill and most of those organisations making submissions were unhappy about the inclusion of the humanities in the bill. Those objections came from the regional organisations in particular. They were unhappy with bringing the humanities into the bill as has been spoken of before because they felt it would in a sense dilute the scientific nature of the Royal Society which they believed should very much remain the pre-eminent science organisation. 
The arguments laid out by the Royal Society in its various submissions and what we heard from the Ministry of Research Science and Technology as it was then—it is now the Ministry of Science and Innovation—was that the move forward to bring in the humanities would greatly enhance the Royal Society and not diminish it. In fact in many ways what might be diminished given the eminence and the gravitas of the Royal Society is the humanities which might be submerged amongst the sciences. I think there is more to worry about in a sense of not exactly a takeover but certainly a crowding out if you like of the humanities rather than the sciences. 
As we have argued as we debated many of the clauses in this legislation until now we believe that the humanities can only enhance the work of the Royal Society. In many of the other royal societies across the world where they have made this change it has enhanced the ability of those royal societies to function and to make a really valuable contribution not only to science and intellectual endeavour but to the policy arena as well which ultimately for us as politicians for example is very much appreciated. 
I will come back to the new structure of the council to be amended under clause 13 which states: “Section 18(2) is amended by omitting ‘Academy Council’ and substituting ‘Academy Executive Committee’.” Yes on the one hand that is a rather administrative or technical point but nevertheless it is an important change and is a particularly important change given the types of changes and alterations that have taken place for the various memberships of the Royal Society. 
To wrap up I point out once again that given the nature of the Royal Society as Grant Robertson said it would be very difficult to imagine clause 13 “Revocation of membership or fellowship” ever having to be used. It can happen at any time but like Mr Robertson I have not been able to find a single incidence of this actually happening. If it did happen it would probably make the headlines frankly because the Royal Society is of such gravitas and standing in our community and in New Zealand that it certainly would not go unnoticed. It would be for a very serious academic crime.