Hard News: What I'd really like to know
134 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
IP is a fine idea but what indication has Fonterra given that they intend to remain a NZ based company?
I'm not sure I understand your point, but the very legislation that created Fonterra assures that. You have to be a farmer providing milk in NZ to be a shareholder currently, and while they are looking at ways to introduce more flexibility in that structure that may see non-farmers being able to be partial shareholders, that NZ farmer co-op base will always remain...
And I'm not convinced by these "Fonterra has performed awfully calls" - awful compared to what? I don't see that the old structure would have performed any better (substantially worse I should imagine) and can't see particular alternative structures that would have provided much better returns. Sure, there are arguments that Brands should have been ramped up faster etc, but shifting an industry to an FMCG focus like that is a big task.
-
Gareth, not awfully, so much as averagely (if averagly is a word).
-
dc_red wrote
Re: Fonterra. Given the success you speak of RB, do you have any sense of whether it really requires this, um, subsidy?
Please don't think of this as a subsidy for Fonterra. As much as I have reservations about this fund, the money will actually go to researchers working in labs and not to Fonterra.
It's worth noting that researchers like me have been working on FRST grant money that has not been adjusted for inflation for 7 years and won't be adjusted for the next 4-6 year either. The institutes we work for have had to struggle to maintain any salary increases at all and we have all had to cut costs to try and maintain some output of science in a flat funding environment.
I'm sure some accountant in wtgn thinks they've done a wonderful job of forcing "efficiencies" in science. [I'd love to be in a small room with that accountant for a while so I could explain the damage they've done :)]
Without new money from somewhere science in NZ is looking at very hard times. This money, while you could argue it should have come from Fonterra without any government help, is desperately needed.
cheers
Bart -
Banks hasn't gone up much in my estimation:
we could have seen hundreds of beautiful pre-1940s homes across this city being demolished and replaced with crass modern architecture
Rather than a blanket ban on demolition, how about trying to ensure that if they are demolished, they get replaced with good modern architecture? And what about protecting beautiful post-1940s home? There must be some significant Group houses (among others) in Auckland that would not be any better protected under that.
intended to protect the spacious and tree-filled qualities of sites characterised by generously sized lots, wide roads and lower densities often with period housing.
It could be said that it's some of those qualities that have got Auckland into the sprawling, gridlocked mess it is now.
-
"...Also, it looks like John Banks has actually done something..."
I was stunned at that as well! I just hope he gets his wife to start the car for him in the morning from now on.
Yikes. But yes, he has gone up considerably in my estimation.
As Craig (always ;) so eloquently puts it "I reserve judgement" .I cant help but wonder why ? I know he had issues with a townhouse development on Orakei rd on the waterfront. He has only said there needs to be better consultation , and the building at Greenlane Hospital was up for demolition already so he could have intervened when it actually mattered.Do Mayors really have any pull ?(excuse the pun). Does subdividing large properties for townhouses help or hinder the value of residentials 1 or 2?How will it effect Banks' residential property? Yes, still cynical,sorry. I am trying though.... :)
-
Queenstown's massive growth comes from the viticulture industry and expanding dairying into the lower South Island.
I thought it came from Aucklanders (mostly) mortgaging themselves up the wazoo to own a ski house.
-
If people buy the product thinking the of the Shire but then realise Fonterra is in fact Saruman the White this may prove effective
Could you translate this please?
-
Rather than a blanket ban on demolition, how about trying to ensure that if they are demolished, they get replaced with good modern architecture? And what about protecting beautiful post-1940s home? There must be some significant Group houses (among others) in Auckland that would not be any better protected under that.
To be fair, it appears Mayor Banks didn't have much room to move when this thing blew up yesterday (congratulations must go to the Herald for doing some active journalism and alert Banks to what was going on). He could have let the existing rules be ignored or applied, and he did the latter.
While it's hard to determine exactly what motivates him at the moment, from memory he's usually a straight shooter in as far as I think he believes what he says. Sure, he takes credit for things he was only peripherally involved in but I haven't noticed that he says one thing and does another (unlike those rodents in the CitRat council seats).
So, I think the prima facie case that he hates developers and doesn't want them wrecking Auckland suburbs may well be the reason behind his move.
And like Russell, my estimation has gone up considerably. When he got back in, I consoled myself that he actually did bugger all in his last tenure.
Well bugger me, could it be that John Banks is going to use his obnoxiousness for good instead of evil ?
-
I know this is some complicated revolving fund, but it is a lot of money, however you slice it -- but for my $0.02, I would like to see the Government (any government!) lift the Marsden Fund by a factor of four of five. There is a huge number of good ideas going unexplored because such a small faction of Marsden proposals get funded -- and in many cases, these projects take advantage of existing infrastructure (either physical or intellectual), so increasing this fund would also do a wonderful job of better utilizing many existing resources in the university and research sectors.
I am a New Zealand scientist working in the US, so I have seen both systems from the inside (very much from the inside, as I have participated in the process of handing out money by the NSF [National Science Foundation], and regularly review proposals for other agencies). Whatever other failings the US may have (and however much my American colleagues may grumble about the tight competition for money) New Zealand could do much more to fund the sort of open-ended research the Marsden is designed to support.
The fraction of successful applications for Marsden funding is currently tiny, and doubling or tripling the fund would not significantly lower the quality of funded applications, and adding more money would draw more applicants in from the sidelines, many of whom have good projects, but do not apply since the chances of success are so low.
-
This money, while you could argue it should have come from Fonterra without any government help, is desperately needed.
Fair enough, Bart. But I suspect the phrase "expectation" that private parties would stump up with matching funding was chosen with some care. Serious question, because I've not found any answer -- exactly what does that mean? Is there some arrangement of stick and carrot to make sure the promises translate into cold card hard cash, and what happens if they don't?
Sofie:
I'll be cynical enough for both of us -- you bet your buns I'm suspending judgement on John Banks' Pauline conversion into John Betjeman sans the teddy bear campiness, Methinks it's not excessively cynical to suggest that he wants a second term this go-round, and realises that this is a fine populist issue to latch on to. And I almost choked on my tea this morning to see Brian Rudman having more than one kind word to say about Banks (who previously was Satan Incarnate, but without the charm).
And at the risk of being a tad bitchy, why is it that local body politicians who live in the ugliest houses are always so eager to lecture everyone else on good taste? (Don't worry, I'm not going to post pictures but I sure hope he's no longer living in the wodge of Maini Vice lego he used to occupy. Wasn't even so tacky it reached the level of perverse cool.)
-
And I may also be a died in the wool latte drinking urban dweller
Heh. The meaning of that is changed quite a lot from the more traditional 'dyed in the wool'.
I'm sure some accountant in wtgn thinks they've done a wonderful job of forcing "efficiencies" in science. [I'd love to be in a small room with that accountant for a while so I could explain the damage they've done :)]
I see a test tube in his future. "Just consider yourself lucky we didn't adjust this for inflation over the past decade either. Now hold still..."
-
Well bugger me, could it be that John Banks is going to use his obnoxiousness for good instead of evil ?
There was a very good Daily Show Clip with John Oliver about Bush visiting Africa and 'doing good work'.
Oliver was spewing because "for all this time he's been capable of doing good works, and he's just been messing with us!"
It's here: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=163043&title=bushman-of-africa
Fair enough, Bart. But I suspect the phrase "expectation" that private parties would stump up with matching funding was chosen with some care. Serious question, because I've not found any answer -- exactly what does that mean?
I don't know in this instance, but there's a dollar-for-dollar matching arrangement for some donations in the tertiary sector, and the University of Otago has sucked over $25 million from the private sector as a result.
I presume any sort of serious research funding would require some sort of matching investment from private sector in some way before the cheque was signed.
-
Why cant we have a proper discussion on the big issues facing New Zealand? Why?
Because that would require a media who could devote the required amounts of time and intellectual effort to learn about those issues. And that just doesn't make sense for media owners - they'd rather have higher profits than good journalism.
-
"So, yes, I think a bit of B&W about the weather isn't totally out of order from people whose livelihoods are intimately connected with it."
Maybe they could sacrifice a goat too while they're at it?
Weather happens, and it's no good bitching and whining about it. And if they prepared properly for the inevitable bad weather (definition may vary depending on specific industry), maybe they wouldn't need to bitch and whine so much?
-
Heh. The meaning of that is changed quite a lot from the more traditional 'dyed in the wool'.
Especially if you've a fondness for classic detective fiction. Though, in context, I rather doubt any politician is going to find the inventively nasty murder of Flossie Rubrick, MP, "one of the most formidable women in New Zealand", on a high country sheep station restful bedtime reading. :)
-
I thought I’d have a guess at answers to some of your specific questions
Sorry for the wall of text
What are the most promising areas of research?
Any research if done really well has the prospect of producing economic and social benefit. The problem with this question is it seems such an obvious question and it seems like it’s easy to answer. But the reality is the history of science has shown that it is almost impossible to predict which area of research will produce the greatest benefit.
BUT
Two things are clear
One, ,if you fund really high quality of science you are more likely to get benefit, and the best method to determine quality is peer review.
And two, if you get a reasonable number of researchers together working in roughly the same field they will make faster progress than one researcher on his/her own.
In NZ we already have a reasonable number of pretty decent plant and animal scientists so a good option to get best results is to expand on those existing general fields.
My guess, and I’m a plant developmental biologist, is that if we can figure out how plants grow that will open up areas of tremendous value to NZ and humankind as a whole.What products are pending?
Don’t really know for sure because I don’t know everything that is being done in science in NZ, there are some new plant varieties and some new animal breeds. There is some research beginning on trying to identify compounds in our crops that “improve health”.
Which private-sector companies are most likely to pony up matching funds?
Zespri (kiwifruit), Prevar (apples and pears), Fonterra (dairy) don’t know the meat companies but they might pony up some dosh, a wool company, winegrowers association … after that you are starting to get into pretty small grower groups, the kind that can really only afford $20-30k for a specific project. It’s an issue for NZ we just don’t have big companies that have the money to invest.
Who will own the intellectual property in the killer products we want to create?
Hmm well the cynic in me says anyone other than the scientist who invents it. But seriously IP is pointless unless you have a commercial outlet. No point in paying lawyers $50-100k to patent something you can’t sell. So what happens is the inventors (or the research institute that employs them) start the process off and then looks for a partner to pay the bill for the patent and pay for marketing the product and as that deal is struck the royalties get divided up.
To be honest where the IP is held is not the question, rather the question is “how much money makes it back to NZ?”
Some fields have more issues with this than others. For example a new drug discovered in NZ might make it to pre-clinical trial stage in NZ but we simply do not have enough people in NZ and enough money to get a drug further than stage one clinical trials. So you need a big business partner to pay the US$500 million needed to get the drug to release point – guess how much money gets back to NZ in that deal.
By contrast a new apple variety can be developed entirely in NZ and then licensed for growth anywhere in the world with revenue making it back to NZ fairly directly.
You could argue that we should only work on new plants but new drugs make more money so a small slice of a new drug might be worth more than a large slice of a new apple.
Why has forestry been specifically left out?
Not sure. Trees are plants too and the same basic research that improves apples can improve trees. But some of the forestry goals are different. Also the forestry industry is a bit different too. Maybe there will be a special forestry fund too – yeah right.
Aren't biomaterials very important too?
Don’t know.
Do we need another one of these funds?
How about another 5 or 6. Seriously, I personally believe there is no better way to improve the NZ economy than research. We are too damn small to compete on any commodity in any field. Our only chance is to be better smarter more innovative. The only way to do that is with a robust research community, filled with the best and brightest minds all keen to work hard.
That we don’t have that now would be somewhat of an understatement. There are some who think that NZ science is nearly dead, strangled by bad funding, overwhelming bureaucracy and mismanagement. Not me of course I’m an optimist – really I am.
What about basic research?
/rant mode on
Basic research is critical. Every damn piece of progress we’ve made in the last 10000 years has stemmed from basic research. Especially the progress over the last 200 years. In the last 50 years you can look specifically at the performance of US basic (NSF) and applied research (eg USDA, and yes I know some very good USDA researchers) and in nearly every case it’s the basic research that makes the big changes economically and socially.BUT
It takes years, more than 3 years. And since our politicians don’t give a rats arse about anything longer than 3 years they don’t care. And since the managers who run our funding organisations and research institutes generally think that 5 years in one company is a long time, they don’t care.
Yes you have to put money into applied research but you must must must fund basic research or you will end up paying some other country to use their cool discoveries instead of having them pay us.
/Rant mode offSorry just a bit angry about the way basic science in NZ has been gutted over the last 15 years
And why does the fund have such a terrible name?
Have a look at the FRST and MRST web sites and see the bad acronyms. Apparently research in NZ can’t be funded without a bad name.
-
Maybe they could sacrifice a goat too while they're at it?
What you mean the weather Gods of the Manawatu aren't appeased by drunken Massey students torches old couches and rioting in the streets? (God, I love social stereotypes -- even if its a hell of a job trying to get latte stains out of the white boat shoes.)
-
Hi Craig
But I suspect the phrase "expectation" that private parties would stump up with matching funding was chosen with some care. Serious question, because I've not found any answer -- exactly what does that mean?
Research funding in NZ is really unbalanced. In most countries industry funds a decent chunk, in NZ that portion is way below average and the govt (ie the taxpayers) pay for most of it. The govt has been trying really hard to get industry to stump their share, hence the recent tax break.
This is another part of the equation. My guess is projects will only be funded if they have an industry partner. And my guess is industries wanting their field to get funding will be expected to have contributed to the fund. Ok if you are Fonterra not so easy if you are the avocado growers association.
But your question is valid we won't know what it means until we see the devilish details.
cheers
Bart -
don’t know the meat companies but they might pony up some dosh
Historically they haven't been too keen, hence why MIRINZ had to merge with AgResearch.
-
What you mean the weather Gods of the Manawatu aren't appeased by drunken Massey students torches old couches and rioting in the streets?
I don't think they do that to change the weather; rather its some form of fertility ritual (Orientation is the new Bacchanalia!)
And we haven't had a decent student riot in years :(
Shit, I'm beginning to sound like I belong here. Right, I'm off to Wellington for the weekend, to eat real food, visit real bookshops, and soak up the atmosphere of a civilised town...
-
And we haven't had a decent student riot in years :(
The sad decline of standards in our society. Tut-tut.
Shit, I'm beginning to sound like I belong here. Right, I'm off to Wellington for the weekend, to eat real food, visit real bookshops, and soak up the atmosphere of a civilised town...
And where the over-excited first-years vomit decorously, in the gutter like civilised human beings. (Though I'd like to see this advisory issued: Do not go to a toga party commando style. Especially if your self-esteem is going to suffer when a wardrobe malfunction results in pointing and hysterical laughter.)
-
"Wait until you see our science R&D policy." Mr. Key
I suppose they are working out the details :-)
-
<quote>__intended to protect the spacious and tree-filled qualities of sites characterised by generously sized lots, wide roads and lower densities often with period housing.__
It could be said that it's some of those qualities that have got Auckland into the sprawling, gridlocked mess it is now.<quote>
While I don't mean to slag of Auckland in particular (I have to slog past some appalling new terrace houses and then through the brain-meltingly awful 'Panorama Heights' on walks to my favourite Wellington lookout), I have to agree with Tom here. We are living in a fantasy if we think that we can simply keep on 'aspiring' (still hate that word) to a nice suburban house and section. It's a carry-over from the colonial dream that the working classes could live like kings in the new land in the South Pacific, while in Europe the norm even for the well-off is a long-lease apartment.
Bizarrely, the pursuit of a private detached house at any cost has led to absurd cost-cuttings. It's incredible that we have such poor building design standards - no insulation or double glazing to speak of for instance.
Unfortunately I don't see things getting better. The long rises in house prices (despite the recent stagnation) is likely to continue as a long-term trend and it will simply be a normalisation to match world trends. Of course because of our national mythology, affordable housing will be a political cause celebre and the populist solution will be really crappy housing or grants for everything. Neither is really tenable.
(Insulation I care about even when I'm not looking at my power bills - Scotland has the thistle, Wales the leek, England the Rose... and Aro Valley has as its emblem mildew.)
And of course, compact cities rather than sprawling suburbs are much more efficient.
Another peculiarity in NZ versus Europe is that European suburban sprawl was facilitated by good public transport, which on the whole we don't have here. For example, a lot of the early advertising for London's tube traded on Ebenezer Howard's 'garden city' concept for an ideal mix of work in the city and evenings and weekends in the almost countryside. In America the car facilitated this, and that is again something untenable in the long run.
We'll have to get used to dense housing, probably apartments, and we'll have to start demanding good apartments, not dreaming about suburban bungalows.
OK, rant over. If Don Martin were still alive, no doubt he could come up with a good onomatopoetic word that combined 'Grrrrr' with a sigh of resignation.
-
And we haven't had a decent student riot in years :(
Yes, Morris Street seems so long ago.
(egads, it was long ago - 1991!)
-
The 3 pm news said that Key says National will scrap the 700m fund.
He would use the money to lower taxes apparently. Maybe we do need to do that so that we can afford to buy cheese again.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.