Latest news with #ScienceSystemAdvisoryGroup
The Spinoff
24-06-2025
- Business
- The Spinoff
Fonterra boss nabbed science and tech advisory role after texting PM
A Fonterra manager with no scientific background was announced as a member of the PM's science and technology advisory council in May. Documents released under the Official Information Act show she had sent Christopher Luxon a text message to tell him she was keen for the gig to 'support this national mission'. When the makeup of the prime minister's science, innovation and technology advisory council – designed to advise the government on where to direct scientific funding to ' drive economic growth' – was announced in May, some scientists expressed concern that half of the six members came from agriculture backgrounds and had no academic scientific experience. One of those was Komal Mistry-Mehta, chief innovation and brand officer at Fonterra, who, an Official Information Act request has now revealed, was appointed after she texted the prime minister to say she was keen to support the 'national mission'. The establishment of the science, innovation and technology advisory council was announced in January 2025, alongside some of the 'most significant science reforms in three decades '. Setting up the council was one of many recommendations made by the Science System Advisory Group, which was tasked with reviewing the science sector in May last year. The review recommended the group be made up of 'distinguished New Zealand scientists who are not institutional leaders, and individuals from the innovation sector and business'. In May 2025, the members of the advisory council were unveiled, including Sir Peter Gluckman, who led the science sector review, and John Roche, a dairy industry expert and former chief science adviser for the Ministry of Primary Industries, who was appointed deputy chair. Roche was also named as the prime minister's chief science adviser, ending a 310-day wait for a replacement for Dame Juliet Gerrard, who left the role in June 2024. Science, innovation and technology minister Shane Reti was appointed chair of the council, and $5.8m was set aside in the budget to fund its establishment and operation over the next five years. Half of the group's six members have backgrounds in dairy, though Roche is the only one with both agricultural and scientific expertise. Craig Piggott is the founder and head of Halter, an agri-tech company which develops smart-collars for cow and sheep herding, and before that he was working as a mechanical engineer for Rocket Lab, while Fonterra chief innovation and brand officer Komal Mistry-Mehta has held a number of high-level jobs at Fonterra, including heading the company's corporate venture branch, and has a background in law. Communications released to The Spinoff under the Official Information Act show that after the advisory council's establishment was announced on January 23, Mistry-Mehta texted Luxon on February 4 to let him know she was keen on securing a role within the council. 'I saw the recent Science & Technology changes and I think it's a positive step forward for New Zealand, and I'm a big believer in the laser focus on growth,' she wrote. 'As someone who is sharply focused on the commercialisation of R&D [research and development] globally, I wanted to reach out to let you know I would love to support this national mission on your council, or in whatever capacity that would be valuable.' Luxon replied eight days later, on the morning of February 12. 'That's awesome, Komal, thanks so much for stepping up,' he wrote back. Six minutes later, he forwarded Mistry-Mehta's text message to Reti, with the note: 'Komal leads Fonterra R&D. She won Young Exec of the Year a few years back.' A couple of months later, on May 8, the day after the council appointments were announced, Mistry-Mehta sent Luxon another text, telling him she was 'excited to get stuck into the council'. He replied 14 minutes later: 'You are going to be awesome, and thank you so much for stepping up for New Zealand.' Reuben Davidson, the Labour Party's science, innovation and technology spokesperson, told The Spinoff that there had been criticism from across the scientific community that the government's approach was 'all about the old economy'. 'A Fonterra appointment confirms that, with a healthy dose of cronyism,' he said. 'Is it about finding the best people for our boards, or just handing out roles to those people who can text the PM directly?' Davidson said. 'We shouldn't need to OIA text messages from the PM to find out how critical board appointments are being made.' The New Zealand Association of Scientists co-president Lucy Stewart told The Spinoff that prioritising the commercialisation of research and development (R&D) was like holding a marathon with short-distance runners, and having no one to complete the rest of the race. The association was 'incredibly concerned' that certain areas of science would be defunded because they were not seen as financially viable, she said, as was seen with humanities and social sciences being cut from Marsden Fund grant eligibility in December last year. The review that recommended the establishment of the advisory council emphasised the importance of science, innovation and technology beyond its role in economic growth. 'One of the current government's five key economic strategies is to exploit the research and innovation system,' it said. 'But the system has much broader roles to play in terms of national wellbeing, and in stewardship of the nation's physical, environmental, social and human assets.' New Zealand has historically been 'not very good' at commercialising R&D, Stewart said, but not for lack of care – 'there's lots of variants of science where it's not very straightforward [to make a profit]. If it was easy, everyone would be doing it.' She said her main concern over Mistry-Mehta's appointment was that if Fonterra was interested in working on science research, they should be investing in it themselves. 'The board is clearly weighted and being asked to do work that leans in a particular direction,' Stewart said. 'They're supposed to set the direction, and if they start deprioritising things – even if it gets changed in the next few years – it's going to be really damaging, and the impacts could be long term.'
Scoop
22-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
NZ Budget 2025: Science Investment Must Increase As A Proportion Of GDP For NZ To Innovate And Compete
A lack of strategy and research funding – by both the current and previous governments – has been well documented, most comprehensively in the first report by the Science System Advisory Group (SSAG), released late last year. If there is one word that sums up the current state of New Zealand's research sector, it is scarcity. As the report summarises: We have an underfunded system by any international comparison. This parsimony has led to harmful inter-institutional competition in a manner that is both wastefully expensive in terms of process and scarce researcher time, and is known to inhibit the most intellectually innovative ideas coming forward, and of course it is these that can drive a productive innovation economy. The government expects research to contribute to economic growth, but policy and action undermine the sector's capacity to do so. The latest example is last week's cancellation of the 2026 grant application round of the NZ$55 million Endeavour Fund 'as we transition to the science, innovation and technology system of the future'. Interrupting New Zealand's largest contestable source of science funding limits opportunities for researchers looking for support for new and emerging ideas. Changes to the Marsden Fund, set up 30 years ago to support fundamental research, removed all funding for social science and the humanities and shifted focus to applied research. This is despite fundamental research in all fields underpinning innovation and the international ranking of our universities. New Zealand has an opportunity to change its economy based on the potential of emerging sectors such as artificial intelligence, cleantech and quantum technologies. Other countries, including Australia and the United Kingdom, already consider quantum technologies a priority and fund them accordingly. But when it comes to strategy, the composition of the boards of new Public Research Organisations, set up as part of the government's science sector reform, are skewed towards business experience. Where there is scientific expertise, it tends to be in established industries. The governance of the proposed new entity to focus on emerging and advanced technologies is yet to be announced. Critical mass requires funding and strategy Scientists have been calling for a science investment target of 2% of GDP for a long time. It was once – roughly a decade ago – the average expenditure within the OECD; this has since increased to 2.7% of GDP, while New Zealand's investment remains at 1.5%. The SSAG report repeatedly refers to the lack of funding, and it would be the obvious thing to see addressed in this year's budget. But expectations have already been lowered by the government's insistence there will be no new money. The report's second high-level theme is the engagement of government with scientific strategy. Government announcements to date seem focused on attracting international investment through changes to tax settings and regulation. I would argue this is a matter of focusing on the wrapping rather than the present: the system itself needs to be attractive to investors. Creating a thriving research sector is also a matter of scale. International cooperation is one way for New Zealand to access efficiencies of scale. And work on building international partnerships is one area of positive intent. But we need to look at our connectivity nationally as well, and use investment to build this further. Countries with greater GDPs than New Zealand's invest much more in research as a proportion of GDP. It means the size of these other countries' scientific ecosystems – if measured by total expenditure – is three to four times New Zealand's on a per capita basis. A matter of scale Per-capita scale matters because it tells us how easy it is for researchers to find someone else with the right skillset or necessary equipment. It tells us how likely it is for a student to find an expert in New Zealand to teach them, rather than needing to go overseas. And it tells us how quickly start-up companies in emerging technologies will be able to find the skilled employees they need. A thriving university system that attracts young people to develop the research skills needed by advanced technology companies is a key part of this challenge. The government's science sector reform aims to increase its contribution to economic growth. But research contributes to economic growth when scientists can really 'lean in' with confidence to commercialising and translating their science. That can't happen if budgets don't fund the critical mass, connectivity and resources to stimulate the transition to a thriving science system. Disclosure statement Nicola Gaston receives funding from the Tertiary Education Commission as the Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology. She also receives funding from the Marsden Fund. All research funding goes to the University of Auckland to pay the costs of the research she is employed to do.
