Scientists’ Misgivings About Research Council

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30541, 9 September 1964, Page 9

Scientists’ Misgivings About Research Council

Is the National Research Council to be regarded by those in authority as an ineffective body to be flouted at will? Or is it to be an effective body genuinely invested with real authority to advise the Government on technical matters within its scope? These questions are asked in a leading article in the “New Zealand Science Review,” the official journal of the New Zealand Association of Scientists. The article says that the answers will determine the productivity of New Zealand. “They are required without delay, and constitute the most pressing problem for the newly-appointed Minister of Science,” it says. "In New Zealand, decisions at the administrative level on matters involving technical issues are too often a source of astonishment and misgiving to scientist and layman alike,” the article says. “Who makes these decisions? In many cases they are announced by a Minister of the Government, but his advisers (whether political or departmental) usually remain unknown to the general public. “At a professional meeting a few years ago, high-ranking scientists expressed concern at the lack of technical qualification of various administrators who were known to be responsible for advising the Government on matters involving a high degree of technical knowledge. They urged the council of the New Zealand Association of Scientists to press for the appointment of suitably qualified people to such positions. “Inquiry Refused” At the time, the council considered that the problem was a serious one that should be referred to the proposed committee of inquiry into science in New Zealand. But the scientists’ request for a committee of inquiry was refused by the Government which, in making its decision, no doubt acted on the advice of administrators who might themselves perhaps have come under criticism if the committee had been established,” It says. “Administrative decisions of this kind have continued to arouse concern in recent years. In Dunedin, for

example, citizens were angered by the shock decision to close the Nutritional Research Unit which, under the leadership of Dr. Muriel E. Bell, had for many years brought great credit to New Zealand as one of the world’s leading research organisations in its field.

In the farming industry, which is the very basis of New Zealand’s economy, consternation was caused by the appointment of a non-technical Director-General of Agriculture, although highly-trained agriculturists were offering for the position. This experiment coincided with the loss to the department of two of the world’s leading scientists, Dr. I. J. Cunningham and Dr. C. P. McMeekan. The latter has left New Zealand “During World War 11, it was to New Zealand that Britain turned for technical advice to place its farming industries on an efficient wartime footing. Recently, New Zealand requested Britain’s farm advisory services to supply an expert to advise on New Zealand’s farm advisory services. Is there merit in this proposal that the advised shoud advise the adviser? Or has administrative efficiency in matters requiring highlyspecialised knowledge reached its lowest ebb?

“The latest news from the Department of Agriculture is the report of a reorganisation of its agricultural research involving the creation of a reasearch division with headquarters near Hamilton. “While the scientists in Wellington are transferring to their new headquarters in the sub-tropical north, it is perhaps hardly politic to mention that half the sheepfarming industry is located in the South Island, and that Wellington is still close to the geographical . centre of primary production. “Disturbing features of this departmental reorganisation are, first, the planning of the reorganisation without publicity during the period that scientists and others were pressing for an inquiry into the organisation and coordination of science and, second, the implementation of the reorganisation immediately after the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) had assured the electorate during the General Election that the National Research Council would ensure satisfactory organisation and co-ordination of research.”

A postscript to the atricle says that in a letter to the president of the Association, the Prime Minister referred to the National Research Council and stated, “The Government is determined that the Council will be an effective body.”