Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill

It is a pleasure to speak to this, the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill, in its second reading, and, of course, from the first reading to now, we have had the launch of the 18-metre Electron rocket on 25 May from Māhia Peninsula. Congratulations to Peter Beck and his team.

As this bill progressed through the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, we recommended several changes. There was general agreement on a lot of items, but we recommended several changes, and I want to especially comment on issues of payloads and launches from New Zealand for peaceful purposes. This was raised with us by Venture Southland, which was looking to insert a peaceful purposes statement.

We looked at this very closely, and officials made three points to us as to why this was going to be problematic with that specific terminology. The first point was that it is difficult to define and deploy payloads that may have a dual purpose. For example, initially GPS had a military purpose, and, of course, now it has got more of a civilian purpose. So it is very hard to tell what might actually go up in a payload and have a range of different purposes. Secondly, the proposed wording was not consistent with our international treaties. Australia, Canada, the US, and the UK do not use that particular terminology, so that was a challenge as well. Thirdly, the case made to us was that there are safeguards in place already with our international treaties, including the Outer Space Treaty, article IV, which requires peaceful purposes.

What we were able to do was to insert a sort of statement of intent, if you like. It is not quite an avoidance of doubt, but a statement of intent, and I think it very fairly conveys the committee’s recommendation. Everyone around the committee was in agreement, but it was just a question of how we did it. The committee recommendation reads as follows: “We recommend inserting clause 3(ba) to list the main obligations in the Outer Space Treaty about not: placing any objects carrying nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction anywhere in outer space; establishing military bases, installations, or fortifications on celestial bodies (natural bodies located outside of the Earth’s atmosphere, for example the sun, moon, and planets); testing any type of weapons or conduct manoeuvres on celestial bodies.”

So I think that fairly conveyed the intent of most people in the select committee for what we were looking to do—that is, we were very clear that payloads from New Zealand are not to be used for military purposes. It is for peaceful purposes. So I think that was very good.

There were a few other things that changed in the select committee. We decided some definition of “high altitude” was going to be important, and a few other things. But I would have to say there was very much general agreement, which is a good thing because, you know, this is projected as a $600 million to $1.2 billion enterprise over the next 20 years, and this is New Zealand’s innovative, high-tech reputation overseas. This is what we carry forward, it is what we do better than anything else, and I think it is a pleasure and a privilege to be able to wrap policy around it as policy makers to make this a successful venture. So with that, I commend this bill to the House.

It is my pleasure to take a call on this bill as well, and to reiterate that Labour supports this bill. We also extend our congratulations—which my colleague the Hon David Parker outlined in his earlier contribution in this debate—to Rocket Lab and Peter Beck on what is a significant advance for New Zealand. New Zealand joins a list of only a few countries—10, in fact—around the world that have reached into space. This is not something that is insignificant, and it is something that we need to celebrate.

We have heard, rightly, a number of celebrations, and politicians are jumping on the bandwagon, or the rocket-wagon, in order to try to achieve some of the fame associated with New Zealand’s launch into the far reaches of space. We have had Minister Steven Joyce, who has been a key proponent of this and is purported to be New Zealand’s and the New Zealand Parliament’s own rocket man. But I would like to pay homage where, indeed, it needs to lie, and that is to go back to the last Labour-led Government and the Minister for Economic Development in that Government, the Hon Trevor Mallard, who was one of the Ministers who had the great foresight to back this project at the very beginning. I think, as Labour’s science and innovation, research, and development spokesperson, it is important to underscore here the need to be investing in the type of science that is going to take this long to see fruition.

It was back in 2007 when the Hon Trevor Mallard attended Rocket Lab’s launch and said it would enhance New Zealand’s emerging reputation as a developer of first-rate technology and components. That is the kind of time-scale that we are looking at in terms of the commercialisation of some of this research. Actually, in many ways, this is a very short time-scale for commercialisation such as this, and we always need to bear that in mind and make sure that we are doing as the last Labour Government did—have the foresight to invest in research and development where we are going to see the long-term gains for the country, because good things take time. So now that we have got the congratulations in order, it is important to look at what this bill does.

This bill is in many ways a very open piece of legislation that sets up a framework around which this activity in New Zealand can be regulated. It facilitates the development of a space industry and its safe and secure operation. It implements certain international obligations that New Zealand has relating to space activities and space technology, and I think one of the interesting things about this legislation is that it puts into our legislative books in a very clear way international obligations that go back to 1968. The bill puts into legislation obligations that New Zealand picked up from its ratification in 1968 of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies—the Outer Space Treaty. That goes back to just after the time that humans first set foot on the moon, and how long and how far we have come under that.

One of the issues that has, of course, arisen since the ratification of that treaty and where we are here in 2017 is what uses humans are going to put outer space to. That is something that the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee did hear when it heard the submissions on this legislation: for what purposes were people being put into space? There was a submission that it should be explicitly contained in the legislation that this was to be only for peaceful purposes, but some of those international treaties that we signed right back then really did put in place the fact that that was the purpose. The advice that the committee received was that that did not need to be explicitly outlined in this legislation because it was inherent in our international obligations.

So if we have a look at the Outer Space Treaty, the nations that did sign that treaty agreed not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction, store such weapons on celestial bodies or station such weapons in outer space, establish military bases, installations, of fortifications on celestial bodies, or test any weapons or to conduct manoeuvres on celestial bodies. These are important things and we need to understand why it is that we are putting in place this regime.

The other thing that the legislation had to consider carefully was managing New Zealand’s liability that arises from its obligation as a launching State, as actually launching things through airspace to the levels that reach the outer space limits that are defined in this legislation or allowed for in this legislation—I will return to some of the definitions when we get to the Committee stage of this legislation—does carry with it risks. We have had discussions about airspace risks at a much lower level. We have talked about how we are going to regulate the use of drones in this country, and, likewise, how we are going to exercise control, for safety purposes, in those upper limits. We do this around airspace in terms of our aviation levels, but what are the safeguards that need to be put in place when we come to outer space as well? The bill goes on to talk about the need to establish a system to control certain high-altitude activities that take place from New Zealand, and then also to preserve New Zealand’s national security and national interests.

So these are things that needed to be put into place, but this is the very dry part of what the bill does. What the bill also speaks to is the kind of country that we can be—the kind of country that does invest in research and development; the kind of country that does believe in innovation—and that is the kind of Government that Labour Governments have always been. We saw that with Labour backing this project right in the beginning, right back in the early 2000s, and we are seeing the fruition now. We are going to see it again in future decades through the fact that we also need to be planning for a workforce and an economy that are ready for this kind of high-tech future, and we need to be making sure that New Zealanders have the skills that can take advantage of the economic development opportunities that can arise from this.

We have already seen some very nimble organisations in New Zealand taking advantage of the Awarua space station down by Invercargill. We saw Venture Southland approach the European Space Agency when it needed a southern launch zone, and it pitched our part of the world. We have obvious strategic advantages in terms of being on the other side of the globe and in what we can offer. But we also have niche opportunities in the value chain that exists around space exploration, and this legislation does set up a licensing and permitting regime that will control those activities.

But all that will count for nothing if we cannot give young New Zealanders—who were, rightly, excited at watching New Zealand become one of 10 countries that have launched a rocket—the kinds of skills and education that they need to be equipped for the future. We do not know exactly what that future is going to look like. When we look at the treaty that we entered into in 1968 that talks about setting up military bases on celestial bodies, we see that that is not what we are grappling with in this legislation.

So what we have to do is make sure that we are building an education system, a training and a skills system, that does equip people for that future, and that is exactly the kind of fresh thinking that Labour has been doing through its Future of Work Commission. We know that of the new entrants entering primary school now, 65 percent are going to undertake a job that does not exist today, and some of those jobs could well be in these kinds of industries. So as well as putting in place these kinds of regimes to control and regulate and make sure we are operating safely in our space industry, we have to be thinking more broadly about how we as a country prepare for this future. Thank you.

Well, it gives me some pleasure to rise this afternoon. Listening to the tenor of the debate and knowing the speeches that have gone before in the second reading of the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill, it amuses me somewhat—as I am sure it does others—to hear the members of the House all competing over who can take the credit.

I think that on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee there has been a wonderful openness to learning about, literally, the space that this bill occupies, because it was new space to all of us. There were terms that we did not understand and required quite a lot of clarification about, I might add, and there were treaties I had no idea existed—quite a few of them—and they all needed to be encompassed in our understanding of where we fitted into the world of space and high altitude.

We are now one of 11 countries, it is my belief, currently able to launch satellites into space, and New Zealand needed to—I know there were a lot of jokes, a lot of jokes about, you know, this was space age, and this bill was coming before us and this was out-of-space travel, and all the rest of it. But the reality is this is a great investment in a future sector that is going to continue to grow our GDP. Yes, there need to be skilled people. Yes, there need to be people like Peter Beck who are willing to take a punt and be extraordinary in progressing a project such as this. On the select committee we tried to get the nuts and bolts tightened down, and there was a great attitude across the select committee to doing that.

But I have to say that it is a very supportive Government that sees that our third-largest exporting sector is now the tech sector. That is a $16 billion contribution to GDP, and there are more than 28,000 firms and almost 99,000 people. Would it not be great if we got to 100,000 people because our space industry was going literally gangbusters and, in fact, the large number of launches from the Māhia Peninsula that are projected actually go ahead?

I have been given a short opportunity this afternoon. The members of the committee have already enunciated well the debates we had—not really debates; the settling of issues that we did in the committee—so I rest my case and certainly support this bill.

Kia ora. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I rise to support the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill. I was born in 1981, and I am always disappointed that in the 21st century, there are no hoverbikes, there are no hover-skateboards, and there are no flying cars. It does not really feel like the 21st century we were promised from science fiction growing up. But I can say, at least, that New Zealand has a space programme in this, the beginning of the 21st century, which I think is so fantastic and wonderful, but also, for a new generation of New Zealanders, it is, hopefully, inspirational too—science, engineering, mathematics, and entrepreneurialism are all things that Kiwis can aspire to. Growing up simply to be an All Black was my greatest ambition, but, sadly, it did not turn out to be the case. But a whole new generation of Kiwis are going to be inspired to think that they could be launching rockets or satellites, or undertaking world-leading science, so it is fantastic.

The Green Party has supported this bill all the way through. I remember meeting Peter Beck and the team many, many years ago, and recounting the story that most New Zealanders had not heard of, say, 4 or 5 years ago—that in a warehouse just outside Auckland Airport we were building rockets and we were on track to becoming only the 11th space nation on the planet. More incredibly, we were going to become the only space nation that had reached orbit entirely privately, without a Government-run space programme. It is wonderful that so many more Kiwis know about it. It was great to see the successful test out at Māhia Peninsula. It is such an incredible thing.

This was one of the most enjoyable bills, I think, to work on in the Foreign Affairs, Defence, and Trade Committee. I thank the submitters, the other members of the select committee, and the chair.

The bill has been improved in the select committee process. There are three parts I would like to pick up in particular. The first area where I think it has been substantially improved—and I would really like to acknowledge the Hon David Parker for his consistent work in this area—is in terms of making it clear on the peaceful uses of space. When you look at clause 3, you can see three new key points being put in, confirming that it is prohibited to place any object carrying nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction in space, to establish military bases, installations, or fortifications on celestial bodies—that is, asteroids, the moon, etc.—or to test any type of weapons or conduct manoeuvres on celestial bodies or in space. It has been very clearly reinforced with the updated bill coming out of the select committee that the intent of this legislation is to promote the peaceful use of space, which is consistent with our international obligations, but it is also what New Zealanders want. We are, quite rightly, proud of our nuclear-free tradition in New Zealand, and it is clarified in these amendments to clause 3.

As a Green Party MP and as a passionate environmentalist, an area it was great to see progress on in the select committee was the issue of orbital debris. This is in clauses 9, 17, 25, and 33. As members well know, we have got some 500,000 pieces of space junk greater than 1.5 cm orbiting the Earth, and more than 20,000 that are significantly larger. If members have seen the film Gravity, they can see the risk potential in the future. It is quite clear that decades of the other 10 countries’ space programmes have left a huge amount of space junk—orbital debris—in space. It was, I think, a bit of an oversight that the launch permitting regime this legislation enacts was not cognisant of the risks, once you had launched your payload into orbit, of what could happen to the other parts left there that were intended to return back to Earth. It is great that this now must be considered by the Minister and a plan must be presented.

The third area was the debris protection area. This was an area where I raised the Green Party’s significant concerns in the first reading. This—I think it is Part 3 of the legislation—dealt with the impacts if there was an accident—for example, if a rocket exploded over the sea or over land after launch. In my first reading speech, I noted the concern that the legislation was so specific that it said that individuals could not photograph or report—and they literally could not sketch it—any debris that they came across. This seemed counterintuitive. It seemed to be breaching our human rights, and the fact that a human rights report was not done on this part was, we thought, an oversight.

After hearing the submissions in the select committee—I would like to thank the Journalists’ Association, which presented, and some human rights experts—and by questioning officials we got to the bottom of it. As part of this legislation, we signed the Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) with the US Government to protect US intellectual property when it comes to their rockets. But, more importantly, the rationale given by the TSA, which was signed by the New Zealand Government, and why these quite stringent requirements were in the debris protection area provisions of this legislation, was that if there is an accident, there is some sensitive technology you would not want terrorists or rogue States, for example, to come across.

Quite bluntly, by building these rockets and reaching orbit, we could, if you put a nuclear weapon on top of it, have an intercontinental ballistic missile. If the componentry of said rocket was found by elements that would want to do harm through shooting intercontinental ballistic missiles around the world, it could be incredibly detrimental for world security. So while there is some impingement on human rights in that you cannot sketch the debris you come across, we do think it is reasonable as part of the movement to consider and promote the peaceful uses of space to make sure that we do not see people launching—as we see in North Korea and other countries—rockets.

An area I was focused on in the select committee—and I am glad that we have clarified it in the legislation—is that this is not impinging on media reporting. A debris protection area is not automatically going to be enacted if there is—hopefully not—an accident, but a Minister must proactively decide whether a debris protection area is, in fact, needed. We have clarified in both the explanatory text and the legislation that it is not preventing the public or media from viewing or taking photographs of space launches or reporting outside the debris protection area. This is simply to stop the key components to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles from being shared around the world, and we do think that is an entirely reasonable position. So we looked into that, and we came back.

Basically, it is an incredibly exciting time for the country—we could be developing a space industry. I want to acknowledge the considerable, incredible work of Rocket Lab. It is tremendously exciting, and fantastic for the area where we used to go summer camping on Māhia Peninsula.

The key question now—whether we have a thriving space industry going forward or not—is clearly in the Government’s court. This Parliament is coming together to set up the permitting regime, and there is still a huge number of questions that have been kicked off to the Government to decide on regulations in terms of insurance and liability issues. We heard in the select committee the example of Australia, which tried to stimulate a space industry, but, because of rules that industry participants considered to be too stringent and punitive, it has not got one. We need to make sure that we do not do that here in New Zealand; that we find the appropriate balance to encourage innovation and fantastic new industries and potential new industries, as we have here.

So the ball is very much in the Government’s court. It has not said publicly or to the committee where it is falling on those areas, but I would urge it strike the appropriate balance.

All in all, I would like to stress the Green Party’s support for the bill. It has been improved in the select committee. Thank you to everyone who played a role. It is an exciting time for New Zealand in the 21st century.

It is a pleasure to take this short call on behalf of New Zealand First on this, the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill. By way of brief explanation to start with, the bill, essentially, codifies many of the international treaties that we are already signed up to and puts them into legislation. On top of that, it seeks to govern space activity from New Zealand by way of regulating launches with a focus on safety and—as some of the members have suggested, and I will get into a bit more detail later on—in terms of how we manage the debris that will invariably be created from those launches as those satellites or rockets come back to Earth.

This is—and I said it in my first contribution to the House—genuinely exciting legislation. This is legislation that means New Zealand can literally launch rockets into space. It is fun and it is exciting, and it provides so much opportunity for New Zealand going forward. By way of an example, as we have moved into the modern technological age—just a few examples—telecommunications, high-speed internet, navigation formats, place-based information, climate monitoring, and emergency management now are things that are all reliant on our access to getting that technology into space so that we can communicate around the world in pretty much real time.

This is a space of rapid evolution, creating new opportunities for innovation and entrepreneurship in New Zealand. New Zealand First is excited about it and does see significant—significant—economic and innovative benefits attached to it. This bill seeks to facilitate the development of the space industry, as I said, whilst providing the necessary protections to manage the risks associated with it and, as I said also, to meet our international obligations.

I would just like to acknowledge, though, that last month Rocket Lab launched its first test rocket on the Māhia Peninsula, which was, indeed, a major milestone, not just for Rocket Lab but for New Zealand also. It is kind of that highlight, that real tangible and visible evidence, that New Zealand has, in fact, got that space industry. That is not to take away from the efforts of the Invercargill endeavours over the last decade—or maybe, actually, two decades now. It is certainly that visible evidence.

But for me and for New Zealand First—and this is not an indictment on Rocket Lab—we are still really, really upset and we want to hold the Government to account here. We have a Government that gave millions of dollars to a private New Zealand endeavour, and that was wonderful. Then the owners sold it. They sold it to one of the largest aerospace industries in the entire world. To be fair to Rocket Lab, that is where most of the business will come from, so it makes perfect sense, but the indictment here is on the Government that did not make a single cent back from the investment that it put in this company on behalf of New Zealanders. That is the criticism we have.

This should be a celebration, because it does mean a lot for New Zealand, because, as has been said before—although I do question the numbers provided by one of the Labour members earlier—we are now one of only 11 countries currently able to launch rockets into space. As the Green member Gareth Hughes said previously, we are the only country that managed to do it with a fully-funded, privately owned orbital launch pad. It is a credit to them.

The Minister for Economic Development, Simon Bridges, said that “the Government’s interest in space is much broader than rocket launches. For example,”—he said—“New Zealand has the potential to become a niche player in other parts of the global value chain in this area.” I commend him for saying that, but I hope—I hope—it is correct when he used the words “New Zealand”, and I hope he specifically means New Zealand business, because the Government’s record, not only in this industry but in New Zealand innovation and New Zealand business, is slim to none at this stage. We seem to be bought out constantly.

So here’s to growing New Zealand business. Here’s to an exciting New Zealand industry where we can celebrate those young men and women who do endeavour and who want to become part of such an exciting industry, because now it is available to them here in their very own country. That is truly something to be celebrated, and it is amazing.

I too want to take this opportunity to credit the officials and my Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee colleagues, and I have to say we all tried earnestly, as others have noticed, to develop a permissive legislative regime. That is what we were trying to go for here—how we could make this easier—because Australia, for example, got here way ahead of us. It tried to create a similar industry in its own country, but the examples we got from that showed us how over-regulation and too much regulation can just shut down and destroy a fledgling industry. To the officials and to the select committee members who saw that, acknowledged that, and worked towards that permissive regime, thank you, and kudos to everyone there.

We were also keen, as were the officials, to ensure that the legislation did not lock the industry down—or keep it grounded, as it were—around new technologies. The wording of this legislation, you will note, is such that there is no specificity around particular technologies, because the idea, of course, is that we do not know what next year will bring. We certainly do not know what 5 years will bring in the space industry technology race. New Zealand has to be in a position to take advantage of that, and we cannot have legislation inhibiting it.

I want to acknowledge that equal importance has been placed on keeping compliance costs as low as possible. I noted that the legislation in Australia was destructive, literally, but compliance in terms of what it was allowed to do at a regulatory level also became burdensome and contributed to the industry being shut down.

So the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee took careful consideration and it made the time. We heard good submissions and, as the Minister said, the committee’s report includes many sensible recommendations that will help ensure that the bill achieves its objectives and will strengthen the functionality of this bill. I had three particular pieces from the legislation that I wished to talk about. My intention was to take a short call, so can I instead end by congratulating the committee and everyone involved, and very much supporting this legislation going forward. Thank you.

Unfortunately, I was not on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee when the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill was being debated and was going through the select committee. However, I do feel I am qualified to speak on this, having attended the launch of a space shuttle out at Cape Canaveral some years ago. I would have to say that when I watched that shuttle roll on to its back and head off over the Atlantic Ocean, I had no idea that some years later we would be having launches here in New Zealand.

Having the 18-metre Electron rocket head up into space a few weeks ago is really testament to our great development in New Zealand. I think we saw a good example of that, of course, on the weekend with New Zealand’s foiling yachts, which are leading the world. We spent less money than the other teams and, to date, we have the most advanced boat on the water, and I think what we are seeing with this Electron rocket is also a great advancement. But to deal with this, and the matter at hand, we need to have the relevant legislation that covers off all the possibilities in the future of an industry in this country.

The select committee has done some really good work in this area, getting all of—they might seem dry sorts of details, but defining what “high altitude” is and what outer space is is actually quite important in order to meet our obligations in an international world. Peaceful purposes, not putting military installations on celestial bodies, and those sorts of things really come home when we look at what is happening in the Korean Peninsula, as well.

So it is a very important bill. It marks a very important step forward in New Zealand’s technological future, and I commend it to the House.

The next call is a split call. Dr Kennedy Graham—5 minutes.

Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker; I do not need the full 5 minutes. This is simply to reiterate the Green Party’s policy of supporting this bill right through, presumably, to the third reading, for the reasons that have been already advanced.

I call Adrian Rurawhe—5 minutes. Tēnā koe.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. It would be remiss of me not to at least mention in passing that this is a very important time of the year for Māori, mostly known as Matariki, but where I come from we call it Puanga. Of course, it is all about the revelation of the stars in the sky that indicate a particular time of the year, and we call it, in a modern context, our Māori New Year. I wanted to talk about that as one connection that I have to outer space and the importance that we place on the celestial bodies.

I was trying to think of how I could discuss this issue from a Māori world view. I went through the submissions and there was one submission that caught my eye, from one Mr Jimmy Pohe, who lives in Māhia Peninsula and whose family has whakapapaed to that land where Rocket Lab will now be launching its rockets. Mr Pohe had some concerns about the impact of Rocket Lab on his and his whānau’s ability to go fishing and to collect kai moana. What Mr Pohe asked was that in no way should Rocket Lab be given exclusive use of the coastal area. In my reading of the bill that is not going to happen, and so I just wanted to acknowledge Jimmy Pohe for, first of all, putting in a submission, and, second of all, to allay any concerns that he may have.

I want also to acknowledge Rocket Lab, and we have had a number of acknowledgments to Peter Beck in particular. He is obviously a man of great ability and tenacity to, along with his colleagues, get this project to where it is today. I want to acknowledge them.

Going back to my Matariki/Puanga kōrero, we see this as acknowledging the past but looking forward to the future. I just want to connect those two things together. This is definitely about looking forward to the future. I want to recognise all of the speakers who have focused on that, because looking forward to the future with this Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill will provide New Zealand and New Zealanders with huge opportunities, particularly around employment and just the opportunity to be participating in this very exclusive sector, I would say, with only 10 other countries involved.

There was one other thing that caught my eye, and it was in one of the documents that I read, which is that they may be sending human ashes into space. I am assuming that they will go up and then come back down again. It would not be a good idea to be adding to the orbital debris that already exists in space, I do not think. It did make me think about one of the sayings that we have in Māori, “E ngā mate kua wheturangihia.”, which basically means “Those who have passed on and become celestial beings.” It would give a whole other meaning to that—a literal meaning. With that, I want to commend the bill to the House. Of course, the Labour Party supports this bill. Kia ora.

It is a great privilege to stand and support this bill before the House. It is a very good thing that New Zealand’s legislative framework is enabling technology to advance. Who would have thought that here, in New Zealand, we would see this sort of legislation coming to this House and going through, thankfully, with support right across this House.

We are one of just a handful of small developed nations where innovation is incredibly important. It is important because we do not have the scale of large nations, like the United States of America, Europe, Great Britain, and right through Asia. We are a small nation of 4.7 million people, and so we have to be smart, we have to be agile, and we have to be innovative, and it is good to see that we have a Parliament that supports this sort of work.

It has been estimated that this bill will enable companies such as Rocket Lab to function and bring to the New Zealand economy, over the next 20 years, up to $1.5 billion worth of economic value. That is tremendous. Not only is it going to enable jobs to be created but it is going to put us on the leading edge of this wave of technology and innovation, which is where the world is going. It is incredibly important that we, as a nation, grasp hold of these opportunities.

We are very thankful for the vision, the hard work, the tenacity, and the push-through that companies like Rocket Lab have brought into our innovation and technology space, because it sets a standard, and it sets a precedent for other people to follow. It is great to see this bill, which is going to open up more opportunities for New Zealand to work effectively in this space and to be there with other leading countries of the world. I am very happy to support this bill to the House.

It is a pleasure to support this Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill on behalf of the Labour Party. I was not on the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, unfortunately, and I consider that a great shame. I think I would have quite enjoyed hearing the submissions and having a conversation about New Zealand joining, perhaps not quite the space race—I think the space race is probably over—but the exclusive club of countries that have the capability to deploy into space. I think it is incredibly exciting. Although I have no particular expertise—I have heard other members stretch a pretty long way to suggest they have expertise. I watched Star Trek a couple of times when I was young, and I think that is about as close as I can get. But I do think it is incredibly exciting.

We in New Zealand are in urgent need of more industries that are high-skilled, high-technology, and high-value. Despite the fact that Rocket Lab has been developed in recent years, which is something to be applauded and celebrated, it is true that productivity in New Zealand is lamentably weak. In per capita terms, the last two quarters have seen GDP go backwards and that growth is anaemic and is based purely on the very rapid population growth that we have got in New Zealand, and it is only by focusing on industries like this that we are going to see real GDP growth—real economic growth that actually benefits people.

Growth that is based on population growth does not actually benefit anybody. It does not build houses. It does not put roofs over people’s heads. It does not increase people’s wages. It does not put food on the table or pay the bills. It is just kind of growth for growth’s sake. What we need is a focus on high-technology industries that actually add value, actually grow the economy, and actually offer higher-quality jobs that pay decent wages. Obviously, you know, it is not just the world of space technology that offers that, but this is exciting. This, I hope, will actually inspire youngsters to get involved in subjects like science, like technology, like engineering, and like mathematics to maybe aspire to perhaps be part of this industry.

What this bill seeks to do, of course, is not just allow Rocket Lab to continue doing what it is doing but to facilitate the development of a New Zealand space industry and ensure its safe and secure operation. That is exciting—that maybe we might see other competitors or at least other businesses entering this field and offering a new range of jobs that do not exist in New Zealand currently, so that we can see some real growth in the future. We do need to see a change. You know, we have had 9 years of a National Government and we have got this very low-growth, low-value economy—low skills, low wages. This is an opportunity, I think, with the passing of this bill, to see a shift—you know, the kind of step change that was promised. We saw lots of ambition when the National Party was in Opposition, but that ambition has not really come to much. This legislation is, perhaps, an opportunity to see the kind of growth that New Zealand urgently needs.

It makes sense—I suppose it is something that we in New Zealand have not given much attention to—that there are international treaties and conventions in relation to high-altitude activities that we have not needed to adhere to in the past, but we now need to, and we do so through this legislation. One area that I was interested in—as Labour’s defence spokesman, I was wondering what safeguards are being put in place to make sure that this is not a technology that can be weaponised in New Zealand or can be used for purposes that are not peaceful. I note that this legislation actually specifically denies people the opportunity to “place into orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction, install [any] such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any … manner.” Obviously, in New Zealand there is not too much of an issue with nuclear weapons because we have got a long tradition of being nuclear-free. Even when one person tried to suggest that our nuclear-free status would be gone by lunchtime, that was utterly rejected by the New Zealand population.

The public of New Zealand are very proud of our nuclear-free stance, and so we would have no concerns about deploying nuclear weapons into space. But, actually, in reading this, I am not sure that we cannot send conventional weapons into space. I do not know if there is any point in sending conventional weapons into space. I do not have enough expertise in this area to know whether that is useful or not, but that might be something that would be worth considering at the Committee stage—whether we need to just be clear or whether there is any need to include any limitations on sending conventional weapons into space. Certainly, nobody operating under this legislation will be able to establish military bases, installations, or fortifications on celestial bodies or to test any weapons or conduct manoeuvres on celestial bodies, so there is really no apparent opportunity to use this for military purposes. That is good. I think that we have got a long tradition of being a peaceful, nuclear-free nation, and we would not want to in any way undermine that through this legislation.

I did notice in some of the material that Rocket Lab put out to celebrate the launching of its first rocket that went into space—not into orbit, I understand, but it did make it into space—that it describes itself, I think, and I am paraphrasing here, as a glorified transportation company, because its primary objective is going to be to transport goods and items into space. I know that one of the things that satellites are used for is communications technology, surveillance technology—technology that is used to listen in to people. That might be something that Todd Barclay is interested in—I do not know. But that is something that could be an opportunity for New Zealand to get into—the deployment of satellites and satellite technology into space. Again, it is an opportunity for us to grow that industry and to diversify the industries that we currently have into more high-skill and high-wage areas.

This does make New Zealand, I understand, the 11th country from which it is now possible to launch vehicles into space. What this legislation does is it requires operators who plan to be able to launch into space—maybe to deploy some of that communications and surveillance technology—to get a licence from the Government. So this is for operators who are going beyond the current regulated airspace, which I assume is covered by the Civil Aviation Authority and the legislation that governs that organisation. For those who want to go higher than that regulated airspace, there will be a requirement to secure a licence from the Government.

The bill as introduced provides that where the Minister is satisfied with specified criteria, in consultation with the security Ministers—i.e., the Minister in charge of New Zealand’s Security Intelligence Service or the Minister responsible for the Government Communications and Security Bureau—he or she or the Minister, may grant the launch licence. So it is just putting in place the criteria, the standards, and the expectations so that not just any old cowboy can suddenly rock up and start launching rockets into space. I suspect that would be a difficult task, to just suddenly sort of rock up and start sending rockets into space. It is probably a slightly more logistically difficult exercise than that, but it is important that we get the regulation right. As other members have said, it should be permissive regulation—regulation that has the right safeguards in place but that supports the development of this industry.

So this is a landmark piece of legislation, actually. It really is quite exciting for a little country seen by the rest of the world as being down the bottom of the world, with 4.5 million or nearly 5 million people, which is the size of most cities in the countries that are known as being involved in space technology. I think we should be incredibly proud of this. Finally, we see something from this Government that might actually grow the economy and make ordinary New Zealanders better off. I commend this bill to the House.

Despite what the last speaker, Iain Lees-Galloway, said, the economy is growing. It is a pleasure to take the final call on the second reading of this Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Bill.

I do not have any claims to fame when it comes to high altitude or rockets, or anything like that, and Mr Lees-Galloway did make reference to making sure there are no cowboys in the industry. Well, I know quite a lot about cows, and there is a famous nursery rhyme about the cow jumping over the moon, so who knows? Who knows? But what I am very proud about is the fact that we are going to be the 11th country in the world to be able to launch rockets into outer space. Yes, it will be a huge growth phase and I am extremely proud of it. It is my pleasure to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

Bill read a second time.