As president of the New Zealand Association of Scientists, I endorse Peter Gluckman's principles for effective science advice to government (Nature 507, 163–165; 2014). As he remarks, however, science advisers may encounter a conflict of interest if they are involved in administering public research funding.

Gluckman is the New Zealand Prime Minister's chief science adviser and chaired the panel that last year selected the National Science Challenges. He has been instrumental in publicizing and defending the new funding mechanism for meeting these goals (see go.nature.com/cmgkx1), which the government has signalled are likely to set the default funding strategy for New Zealand science in the next decade and beyond (see, for example, go.nature.com/srrtym).

The community of scientists is concerned about the perceived conflict of interest and loss of trust inherent in combining these roles. They are worried that the challenges will shut out excellent science that does not fit with the goals. Another issue is the perception among Maori researchers that the processes for identifying the national challenges have so far marginalized Maori participation.

It is to be hoped that Gluckman's ten principles will help in future to separate science advisory and funding systems, and that the promised National Statement of Science Investment will address the wider (and no less important) research agenda.