However the Dunedin Labour MP seldom gets the opportunity to put her party Space spokeswoman astronaut helmet on ... at least not until this week, when the government unexpectedly took urgency to push through all stages of the Outer Space and High-altitude Activities Amendment Bill.
It is rare for a government to push through an entire law change in 24 hours — pandemic safety requirements or Budget-critical law changes are recent occasions.
Security is another reason for haste, and Space Minister Judith Collins said that law change was needed to manage "risks to the national interest posed by the misuse of ground-based space infrastructure". All very James Bond.
She later expanded on that, saying that during the past five years "there have been several deceptive efforts by foreign actors to establish and/or use ground-based space infrastructure in New Zealand to harm our national security." Eek!
It turns out that the existing law does a good job of covering things happening at high altitude or in actual orbit, but a rubbish job of ensuring that the terrestrial operators of that high tech were authorised, risks were properly assessed, and that enforcement powers were available when needed.
"By introducing a clear and modern framework for ground-based infrastructure, we are enforcing New Zealand's reputation as a responsible spacefaring nation," Ms Collins concluded ... and who wouldn’t want to live in one of those nations?
Certainly not Ms Brooking, who agreed that this country’s ventures to infinity and beyond — especially those which emanate from nearby Awarua — needed to be regulated so that they were in the national interest.
But ... and there is always a but ... she was not happy that the law change to protect "ground-based infrastructure" such as satellite tracking stations and telemetry systems was rocketing through Parliament.
"I understand there may have been some prior consultation on aspects of it, but in general nobody has been having any public discussion about this Bill, and so there may be parts of it that have inadvertent, unintended consequences," she said.
Given that "taking it seriously" entailed debate taking up all of Tuesday and a decent chunk of Wednesday, Ms Collins’ view may have steadily become less favourable as things progressed.
What Ms Brooking wanted — and given the circumstances it seemed a not unreasonable request— was a post-enactment review of the law.
Her proposed amendment to add one was ruled out of order, but Associate Defence Minister Chris Penk (subbing for Ms Collins) left that "thoughtful suggestion" firmly anchored to the launch pad: "The Minister for Space feels — and I, in her place, am happy to relay but also support the notion — that we don't need to specify a mandated review mechanism, be it in front of the intelligence and security committee or, indeed, the foreign affairs, defence and trade committee as per the original proposal."
Thus stymied, Ms Brooking moved into fresh fields of inquiry, such as the Bill conferring the minister with the authority to stop providing electricity or internet services to any offending space infrastructure: "are there any examples of that sort of thing happening anywhere else in the world?" she wondered.
Mr Penk said the idea, essentially, was to "buy a bit of time" while someone figured out what to do next. Options which the legislation said, "may include, without limitation," — which offers quite the toolbox to utilise.
"It's deliberately not excluding the range of conditions or actions that might be taken — noting, of course, that in this highly technical realm and with developing technology, it might well be the case that there are conditions or actions that might be necessary in the future that we're not able to contemplate now," he added, opening the possibility of all kinds of science fiction ideas being placed in a future Space Minister’s hands.
Which sounds preposterous — but so, too, and not too long ago, did the idea of New Zealand having a space industry. Hence, eventually, the Bill became law.
Hard quiz
You know that Tuesday was a big day because Dunedin Green list MP Francisco Hernandez had dug out a tie.
He had to wait a long time to display his sartorial splendour, but eventually he got to ask Q12 — just his second primary question in the House — to the Minister of Universities, on the establishment of the new Waikato medical school.
As it turned out, the minister was not in the building, so Mr Hernandez instead quizzed Health Minister Simeon Brown — which, one suspects, Mr Hernandez was quite pleased by.
It was a good quizzing too, as Mr Hernandez asked pertinent questions such as: will it build a strong, more diverse work force, as claimed; will it generate new doctors faster than the proposal to increase class sizes at Otago and Auckland universities, and — quite frankly — just why does the government think building a new medical school is a good idea when there are two perfectly good ones already, which have the capacity and willingness to expand their rolls?
The answers were not that pertinent sadly, Mr Brown favouring sloganeering — such as "we're getting on with it and we're delivering"; "this is a great day for New Zealand"; and "Just say yes. Get on the side of the positive news this is for our country, rather than keeping on complaining."
However, keeping on complaining is exactly what Mr Hernadez is likely do. Firstly, about the still unreleased business case which underpinned the decision — which the government said on Monday would be proactively released, and which as of late yesterday was still not public.
And secondly, when it finally does see the light of day — and it should have done when the post-Cabinet announcement was made — if the arguments in it do not seem to back up a final decision which has huge ramifications for the University of Otago.
