Uncertainty looms over the largest shake-up of our science system in three decades – along with nearly half a billion dollars of planned investment in the capital – with National and Act cold on the Government’s centrepiece policies for the sector. Photo / 123RF
Uncertainty looms over the largest shake-up of our science system in three decades – along with nearly half a billion dollars of planned investment in the capital – with National and Act cold on the Government’s centrepiece policies for the sector. Photo / 123RF
Uncertainty looms over the largest shake-up of our science system in three decades – along with nearly half a billion dollars of planned investment in the capital – with National and Act cold on the Government’s centrepiece policies for the sector.
Labour’s Dr Ayesha Verrall says the policies the twoparties are proposing ahead of the election would “set the sector back by decades” - but a national scientists’ group says it now has its own problems with the major reform programme, which neither National or Act support.
The plan ultimately aimed to create fresh National Research Priorities for our small but fragmented science system, which has long faced funding constraints, and our cash-strapped universities have recently been subjected to widespread job cuts.
Its first objective was to overhaul the workforce, including an expansion of research fellowships and applied training schemes, along with another programme aimed at attracting more international talent to New Zealand.
The third phase, from 2026, involved implementing the changes across the system, ensuring there was funding and governance in place to support more mission-led science, while pushing closer to lifting research and development expenditure to a targeted 2 per cent of GDP over 10 years.
Research, Science and Innovation Minister Dr Ayesha Verrall. Photo / Mark Mitchell
The case for change was strong: the system was designed back in the 1990s, around the time our corporatised Crown Research Institutes came into being, and scientists within it were too often working in silos, amid unproductive competition.
The white paper also flagged a need to accelerate innovation in the system; diversify and scale up its impact; close long-standing diversity gaps; embed Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles; and give more support for its poorly paid workhorses, early career researchers.
These – forming its “Wellington Science City” vision - would focus on health and pandemic readiness; oceans, climate and hazards; and manufacturing and materials, energy futures and biotech.
Verrall said the mission-led investments proposed in Te Ara Paerangi would be “essential” for tackling our biggest social and economic challenges.
“These instruments are used widely around the world in other advanced economies,” the Research, Science and Innovation Minister said.
“For New Zealand to stay competitive, central government needs to back Kiwi scientists and entrepreneurs as they create technologies and businesses that change the world.”
The Green Party said it also acknowledged the need for a system overhaul and largely supported Te Ara Paerangi’s reforms.
National has, however, signalled the plans could change if it’s elected to power next month, with its science spokesperson, Judith Collins, describing the Te Ara Paerangi document as “disappointing”.
“We agree on having national science priorities, and we see significant advantages in working with the science sector and industry to establish those.”
National also wasn’t prepared to commit to another $400m in capital investment without fully reviewing the Science City plans, she said.
“Labour has not involved or included the Opposition into its plans, and it is prudent for us to carefully evaluate these should we have the privilege of being in government following the election.”
National's science spokesperson, Judith Collins. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Collins said there were other ways to build the science sector and commercialise and scale up our start-ups, noting National’s already released policies for biotech that would relax tight restrictions around gene tech.
“This will harness biotech to grow New Zealand’s economy and help our businesses meet their climate change commitments.”
Act, meanwhile, told the Herald it would replace Te Ara Paerangi with “a simpler set of priorities focused on funding internationally credible scientific research for productivity and public good science”.
“Act disagrees that research and science goals should be set centrally by politicians or bureaucrats at MBIE [the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment],” a spokesperson said, adding it would be “hard to imagine” all the Science City’s planned investment meeting the party’s funding criteria.
Verrall hit back at the parties’ positions, saying they represented the “biggest threat to the science and innovation sector in New Zealand in a generation”.
“If implemented, they would set the sector back by decades and derail Aotearoa New Zealand’s transition to a high-wage, low-carbon economy.”
She singled out Act’s stated intentions, amid wider spending cuts, of shutting down Callaghan Innovation and other R&D grants groups, arguing it would disadvantage Kiwi companies and lead to an “offshore exodus” of some of our most promising scientists and entrepreneurs.
NZ Association of Scientists co-president Professor Troy Baisden.
While scientists’ concerns were listened to during the initial stages of Te Ara Paerangi, the group’s co-president Professor Troy Baisden said there was now “little evidence” it was generating policies or reform agendas that’d address them.
“Those that have followed the process are losing hope, and seeing lip service matched neither with funding nor actual change.”
There also appeared to be no coherent narrative around how the National Research Priorities would work, he said, despite an urgent timeline to create and fund them by mid next year.
“Unfortunately, at least three-quarters of Te Ara Paerangi reform agenda remains good, but is not being discussed or supported for implementation by the four largest parties.”
The group was also sceptical about the Science City plans, which Baisden said had become “a point of discussion rather than an easy win”.
While Baisden was pleased to see Labour turn to rebuilding New Zealand’s long-neglected early career support system, he said it’d require much more funding than what had been committed to.
Jamie Morton is a specialist in science and environmental reporting. He joined the Herald in 2011 and writes about everything from conservation and climate change to natural hazards and new technology.
