Hon Dr WAYNE MAPP (Minister of Research, Science and Technology) Link to this
The reason I am taking this initial call is that I am very conscious that the Education and Science Committee reported back to the House that it had received three submissions on the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill, and also that it did not consider it necessary to make amendments to it. The issues have been well canvassed in the first and second reading, and I understand that with the leave of the House we may be able to proceed directly to the third reading after the Committee of the whole House. I am sure the people of Wellington will be looking forward to our expediting the business through the Committee of the whole House and through the third reading. Thank you.
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) Link to this
It is with great pleasure that I rise again to speak on the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill. As members have said before, it has meandered its way through our Parliament for a number of years, and we hope tonight to put it to bed, so to speak, so that we can all move on. As we know, the practical work has been ongoing. The Carter Observatory effectively is already being operated by the Wellington City Council, so in many ways we are simply rubber-stamping a situation that is already in existence.
The bill, as we have canvassed many times before, is a sensible one. In today’s world the idea of a national observatory, as set up under the 1938 Carter Observatory Act, is pretty much a thing of the past. Most of the functions of what we might call a national observatory have been moved to the Mount John Observatory down in Canterbury, and I know that the University of Canterbury is very willing and eager to allow other universities and other academic institutions to use that facility, and that is very welcome. That means that the Carter Observatory now has more of a tourist and visitor focus, rather than a highly scientific role. That does not mean that it does not have a scientific function. It has an incredibly important role in providing visitors, students, and others who are involved in science with a place within the Wellington region to examine the stars and to ask those most basic of questions: who are we, how did we get here, and what is the nature of the universe? Those questions have been occupying the minds of the human species for time immemorial.
The transference of the Carter Observatory happened with the agreement of both sides of the House, and the Wellington City Council as well. In 2008 the Government of the day, the Labour Government, put more than $2 million into the upkeep of the Carter Observatory. The Wellington City Council, I understand, spent about $1.4 million on the observatory. My understanding is that, as a result of a shortfall, Nathan Guy, through the Lotteries Commission, put another $600,000 into making the observatory a real feature of Wellington City and the Wellington region as a whole.
The Education and Science Committee canvassed the various arguments and aspects, as Colin King knows. Under the leadership of Allan Peachey, we talked about the bill at some length. We invited submissions. We received three. The submissioners wanted to make sure that what we were doing was both robust and the right way to proceed. I do not think we have any qualms that that is not the case. We are moving in the right direction, and those submissions, as I recall, backed the move and our recommendations that it go forward.
It has been a long journey for this bill. I am pleased that it has got to the stage where we might see it properly put to bed tonight—see it go through its third reading and be finished. I think that the original recommendations that Dr Bessell set out in his report were basically the right ones, although I think he actually wanted to maintain the idea of a national observatory. We have moved beyond that. We felt that a national observatory in the form of the Carter Observatory was not the right way to go.
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) Link to this
Labour supports the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill. We agree with dissolving the observatory and moving all of the functions and the assets over to the Wellington City Council. The report by Michael Bessell in 2005 said that the Carter Observatory was unable to fulfil the functions of a national observatory because of resourcing issues. It has now become more of an educational and tourism facility. I saw on the news tonight David Perks of Positively Wellington Tourism, the Wellington tourism board, standing outside of the Carter Observatory as they were celebrating Wellington being named the most popular winter destination. The Carter Observatory will complement that and other facilities such as Te Papa and Zealandia: The Karori Sanctuary Experience. This has become a good asset for Wellington City in terms of supporting the tourism industry here. It also provides a fantastic educational facility for school groups to come down to the observatory. It provides lesson plans for teachers and it provides support for them. So this is a good bill.
I will talk about the facilities. There are a number of conference rooms so that groups can have meetings for up to 100 people. There are various-sized rooms. But there is a point, and it is the one Te Ururoa Flavell raised last night. We accept that the observatory is transferred to the Wellington City Council. The question I have, and I wonder how well it was considered, is the role that local iwi play, whether they have any role at all, and whether there was any consideration given to the needs of the local iwi. They may have a role to play, they may benefit in some way from the observatory. There are at least half-a-dozen tribes in the area: Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Taranaki Whānui, Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Ruanui, and Ngāti Mutunga. I wonder whether any of the members of those tribes were involved in this decision or had any input whatsoever. It would be good to think that they in some way benefited from this facility that is on their land and in their city.
In terms of the observatory moving to an education and tourism facility, I believe that it is a good idea. I do not think in a city such as Wellington that having an observatory with all the lights and everything around makes for the best conditions for an observatory to flourish. If we look overseas, we see that there is an observatory stuck on the top of the highest mountain in Hawaii. It is away from all the cities and lights so that it gets a clear view of the night skies. The Wellington skies, particularly on a day like this, are not the best for viewing the night skies. There would be a number of nights during the year when it would be difficult for people using telescopes to get a clear view of the skies. So as I have said, dissolving the Carter Observatory board and transferring the assets of the Carter Observatory to the Wellington City Council is a good idea.
I do think we need to consider the fact that iwi probably have not had a big say in this decision. It does not look like they are going to really benefit in any sort of way through having this facility in Wellington City.
Jo Goodhew
STUART NASH (Labour) Link to this
This bill is the end of an era. I ask whether members know that the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill repeals an Act, the Carter Observatory Act, that was put together in 1938. Can members imagine what life was like in 1938? We did not have people like those characters whinging and complaining, because the people of New Zealand had just voted in a Labour Government. Mickey Joseph Savage was standing here advocating for the people of New Zealand. We had Peter Fraser and Walter Nash. They were building a new society. They were building a better New Zealand.
I ask whether members can imagine those great men of New Zealand, those great men of the Labour movement, who would have wandered up that hill and cut that ribbon. It would have been a proud moment. They would have looked over Wellington and they would never have imagined a day when a National Government would sit on that side of the House and give tax breaks to the wealthiest and nothing to the underprivileged—the underprivileged whom the 1938 Labour Government devoted its life to uplifting. Boy, did they do that!
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) Link to this
Well—[ Interruption] I am on my feet. I say to the member that this debate is about the Part 1 clauses: “Purposes”, “Interpretation”, and “Act binds the Crown”. The member should draw back the debate to those matters.
Talking of drawing back, here we are in 2010. It is nearly 80 years since the Act that we are now repealing was established—nearly 80 years. A lot has happened up at that observatory in 80 years. I ask whether members can imagine the first day man walked on the moon in 1969. People would have gathered at that observatory and celebrated that milestone. The milestones that have occurred in Wellington since that observatory has been around have been numerous—they have been numerous. I can imagine the vision that these men and women of the Labour movement had in mind when they opened the observatory. It would have been world leading, and now here we are, repealing the Act.
But I am not against this bill, because this is one of those unusual bills where everyone is in agreement, and everyone is going to win. The people of Wellington will win because now the young men and women of Wellington—and probably from all around New Zealand—can go to this icon on the hill, look at it, and understand science. They can see where science developed and started, and they, too, can develop a passion for science. Maybe they can come into this Chamber and, with that passion for science they have developed, ratchet up the research and development spend and move this country forward. That is what I am hoping and that is what I am sure will happen.
Tourism is another one of our great earners, and this will be great for tourism in Wellington. I heard on the news tonight that Wellington was voted by people as the best place to go in winter. Obviously they had not been to Napier, because at the moment in Napier it is very fine. People are outside in T-shirts drinking wine; it is pouring down with rain here. How can they vote Wellington as the best place to go in winter if they have never been to Napier? It is beyond me.
With regard to the observatory, one of the other things I like about this legislation is that we are not destroying our heritage. That is what we have done too much of in the past. Those National guys are dismantling our heritage brick by brick. This legislation allows our heritage to remain. An icon sits upon that hill. Generations of people have walked past it to Parliament, they have dreamt, they have developed a passion for science and for politics, they have come to Wellington, and they have known the observatory. I am pleased that it will still be there. It is a wonderful asset to the people of Wellington; it is a great asset to New Zealand.
The important thing is we are not losing. As my colleague Moana Mackey said last night, there is now a national observatory in Whakatāne, believe it or not. Of all places, there is a national observatory in Whakatāne, so we can still study the stars. We are in a unique position here because there is very little pollution in our night skies—or at least there was not, until those members did whatever they wanted to do.
This is one of those great pieces of legislation. My colleague Grant Robertson is rapt with this bill. Grant Robertson is the member of Parliament for Wellington Central and he is rapt with this bill because it adds to the cultural heritage of this city. Grant is the associate spokesperson—or he might even be the spokesperson—on arts, culture, and heritage. This just adds another jewel to his portfolio crown. It is fantastic legislation because of that, as it allows this tourism venture to remain.
Kelvin Davis, another colleague, is the spokesperson on tourism. Who is the spokesperson on tourism on the Government side of the Chamber? I cannot remember; it must be Aaron Gilmore. Kelvin Davis knows the value of this legislation because again, from a tourism perspective, it just adds one more jewel to the crown of New Zealand tourism. When people come to Wellington they can go to Te Papa, they can come to Parliament and have a tour, and they can see the photos of the great people of New Zealand politics like Fraser, Savage, Nash, and Clark.
COLIN KING
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) Link to this
I was very disappointed that I did not get to take a call on Part 1 of this very important legislation, the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill.
I look forward to Mr Peachey’s contribution. He gave a very good contribution in the first reading of this bill and I look forward to his contribution in the Committee stage. If he takes this legislation seriously, then he should be prepared to get on his pins and contribute, particularly as he is chair of the Education and Science Committee. This part of the process is to look at what the select committee did, and to challenge whether any changes truly needed to be made. The select committee came back and said—
I ask Mrs Goodhew to calm down. It is called democracy. I know she may not like it but the fact is that we need to go through this process. Part 2 deals with the repeal of the Carter Observatory Act and the transfer of property and liabilities to the Wellington City Council. It really must be put on record the gratitude that this Chamber has both for the original donation of the Carter Observatory and also to the Wellington City Council when it stepped in to provide a lifeline for this national treasure. We should not be in any doubt that the ratepayers of Wellington have had to pick this up, and the rest of the country can very, very rightly feel pleased that they were prepared to do that. If they had not, then we may have been in a position of not having a national observatory, and also not having an excellent resource for education, an excellent resource for teaching, and an excellent resource for the promotion of science in the Wellington area. I have visited the Carter Observatory on many occasions and have very much enjoyed it. It is with a tinge of sadness that we say goodbye to our national observatory, but we look forward to its future.
The Carter Observatory board needs to go through a number of processes in order to transfer its assets and liabilities across to the Wellington City Council. It will be very interesting to see what comes out of the final report of the board, in particular, because the Carter Observatory has played a very extensive role in education in this country—far more, I think, than most members would actually be aware of. It is New Zealand Qualifications Authority accredited and it assisted in providing curriculum support for schools. Given that we have lost our science advisers in schools, that support is even more critical for groups such as the Carter Observatory—
Hon Judith CollinsWhy are science teachers not advisers? I think that question sums up National’s attitude towards science. In primary schools we have relied on science advisers because most primary school teachers do not have a degree in science.
I am responding to an interjection. If Mrs Collins does not want me to go off track, then she should not interject. We have a point of order, Mr Chairperson.
I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I ask that you rule on relevance. I cannot find that issue. I have looked for it; it is not in Part 2.
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) Link to this
I was indicating to the member that she was straying outside the debate. The member should desist from responding to irrelevant interjections. Let us contain ourselves to clauses 6 to 12 in Part 2 and the schedule.
I am enjoying this display of ignorance about science in our education system.
I hope that in that final report we will see some explanation about the role that the Carter Observatory has been carrying out and how it intends to continue to carry it out. With the loss of science advisers who advise our primary school teachers on the science curriculum—because primary school teachers do not have science degrees, by and large—it is more important that places like the Carter Observatory are able to come in. I hope that when the final report is prepared and presented we are able to get access to it. The report is submitted to the Minister in charge, and I sincerely hope that if, in that report, the observatory has concerns about gaps that need to be filled with the loss of the national observatory, as it becomes a tourism and educational facility, the Minister will be able to take those concerns on board and will be able to guarantee that any gaps will be plugged. That is why that final report under clause 10 of this bill is so important.
It will also be interesting to see the board’s activities and the areas it has been involved in because science seems to fly below the radar a little bit in this country. Members will be most interested to see the kinds of areas that the Carter Observatory has been getting involved in—and they are many and varied. It is a private tertiary provider; again, not a lot of people know that, but the observatory should be acknowledged for the work it has done in that area.
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) Link to this
Part 2 of the Carter Observatory Act Repeal Bill states that, on and from the day the bill comes into force, the property and all rights of the Carter Observatory board vest in the Wellington City Council. We have heard a lot of people, including me, extolling the Carter Observatory. It is a fantastic tourism centre, a fantastic education centre, and a great asset to Wellington. I congratulate the Wellington City Council on stepping in and coming to the rescue of the Carter Observatory. However, we have not discussed the lack of resources that essentially led to the demise of the Carter Observatory as our national observatory.
A few years ago, in 2005, an astronomer and Australian professor, Mike Bessell, of the Australian National University, was commissioned by the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology to review the Carter Observatory. It is very interesting to read some of the conclusions that he came to. He said that the main reason the Carter Observatory failed in its role as the national observatory of New Zealand was the lack of adequate financial resources. He said that there is general agreement in the astronomical community that the main reason is the lack of resourcing. He went on to compare the observatory with those in other countries. He said that unlike other observatories overseas, like those of Australia and other nations, we have a much smaller percentage of research and development funding available for astronomical research in New Zealand. It is tragic that the loss of our national observatory is due to a lack of funding that we are giving to astronomy and to science generally in New Zealand.
He also pointed out that virtually no science centre or planetarium in the world is able to sustain its operation solely through gate takings, and that a proportion of the running costs in every planetarium or science centre in the world is provided by local or national government. Although it is very well for us to wax eloquent about the Carter Observatory, what we are doing in this part of the bill is transferring what was once a wonderful national observatory into what is now a tourism centre and an education centre. Yes, it is a great planetarium, a great education centre, and a great tourism asset, but the truth is that the demise of our national observatory is because of a lack of funding. The Wellington City Council has committed funding for the next 10 years, but I ask what will happen after that.
It is sad that we do not have a national observatory to replace this national observatory. There is speculation that possibly it could be the University of Canterbury’s Mount John Observatory or that the university’s physics and astronomy department could become a centre of excellence, but, basically, unless we provide proper funding—and I am glad to see that the Minister of Research, Science and Technology is here—we will not have a national observatory or centre of excellence for astronomy in New Zealand. That is an indictment on New Zealand and on our commitment to science.
We need to remember, as we sit here waxing eloquent about the Carter Observatory, that in this bill we are presiding over the loss of our national observatory. We are probably one of the only developed nations that does not have a national observatory, and, according to research, that has come about because we have not provided enough financial resources to fund astronomical research or a national observatory. Thank you very much.
ALLAN PEACHEY