David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

From my perspective, a distinction is to be drawn. We may have a disagreement with the departments and Dr. Love, but a choice should be made between innovation and being involved in the commercialising of intellectual property and being head of a department in an institute.

I will again refer to the policy in Waterford IT. It has in place what is called a commercialisation office which manages the interests of the institute. It is to ensure the institute will be protected when there is commercialisation. The policy states the commercialisation office reports to the head of research and innovation. It goes on to state the commercialisation committee is made up of the financial controller and the head of research and innovation. Not referring to any specific institution, but I put it to Dr. Love that there is potential for ongoing conflicts of interest if the head of research and innovation is a director and shareholder in spin-out companies, the owner of the intellectual property policy, the person to whom the commercialisation office reports and a member of the commercialisation committee. I am not satisfied that there is an arm's length separation between the interests of an institution and those of individuals. I accept that there is a review taking place in one institution and we will see what comes out of it. However, before he answers the question, is Dr. Love satisfied that the person who is conducting the review had no role in the past in decision-making related to the commercialisation of intellectual property, as it would be a review of himself or herself? I am not sure if he is aware of the person concerned, but is he satisfied that the person conducting the review does not have a potential conflict of interest?