David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Essentially, it is engaged in firefighting rather than proactively considering the necessary strategic changes and development. I hear that message loud and clear. There are real lessons to be learned. I hope the Department will also accept that because it is very important for all us that that is the case.

We are also very mindful of the huge amount of talent in the third level sector. I will discuss Waterford Institute of Technology in a moment. I have visited Telecommunications Software and Systems Group, TSSG, in Waterford a number of times. I have also visited ArcLabs. I was blown away by the incredible cutting edge research and development and technology in those centres. Such talent should not be lost and it is not lost on me. Sometimes it is portrayed as that by those who seem to have an issue with people asking genuine questions. The work that is being done is amazing and I share Dr. Love's enthusiasm and respect for the huge level of talent we have in the third level sector.

I will return to the Waterford issue because it is important but I will first quickly contextualise it. The matter first appeared on the radar of the Committee of Public Accounts when the accountable person, the head of the institute, made what seemed to be genuine mistake when, in answer to a question at a meeting of the committee in 2015, as to whether he was a director of the FeedHenry company, he said "No". Subsequently, he wrote to the committee stating he had made a mistake and confirmed that he was a director. However, he did not disclose that he was also a shareholder but we subsequently got that information. He then asked the governing body to do a report and examine whether he had acted appropriately. It then did a review and the individual in question then asked the HEA to validate this internal review. Then, coincidentally or not, protected disclosures were made to me and information came to light that people had broader concerns connected with research and development in spinout companies. This led to the deeper dive, as described by Dr. Love, that resulted in the HEA review. Mr. McLoone was appointed to be the person to conduct the review. He met many more people than Dr. Love may have expected.