Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute on this legislation, which is probably one of the most important Bills that the House will debate during the lifetime of this Dáil. It probably does not receive the recognition it deserves. Decisions made on foot of it will decide the country's future for the next generation.

The Bill focuses on three aspects, those being allowing Science Foundation Ireland, SFI, to fund applied research; to promote public awareness of science, technology, engineering and maths, STEM; and to improve collaboration across the island of Ireland and Europe. Developing ties within the scientific community is important at European level in terms of drawing down funding and sharing expertise. At the international level, developing ties allows Irish researchers and the country as a whole to be recognised.

The legislation relates to a number of other issues, for example, the announcement regarding Shannon Development, but I wish to focus on the legislation itself. In terms of public awareness, the Bill is going down the wrong road because of the failure to date, mainly on the part of the scientific and technological community, to articulate to the public a greater understanding of what it does. Public awareness of research is vital if we as policy makers are to ensure that we make the right decisions about our focus in future. There is an onus on any researcher who is in receipt of public moneys to explain how those funds are being spent and how society benefits as a result.

My fundamental problem with the legislation is that it focuses on how to benefit the economy, full stop, rather than how to benefit society as a whole. The failure to recognise the nuanced differences could, in the long term, systemically damage the focus of the Bill on developing the economy. I will presently cite a clear example.

In fairness, SFI has rolled up its sleeves and engaged with Members of the Oireachtas and the public to try to improve awareness. Another organisation that is doing a good job in this regard is Enterprise Ireland, which is concerned with applied science. Recently, each Member was invited to Enterprise Ireland's high-potential start-up showcase in the Mansion House in Dublin. Anyone who attended could not but be impressed by the cutting edge new businesses that were based on research carried out in this country. It justified how our money was spent. When the showcase is held again next year, every Member should be obliged to attend to see exactly what is happening. A great deal of applied research is being conducted in Ireland. It is led by industry and small indigenous businesses, but they can only reach that level if the building blocks of basic research are in place. There is a significant weakness in communicating the importance of building a solid foundation of science and innovation for the types of enterprise that presented at the Mansion House.

There is an onus on the Oireachtas to establish a statutory committee that deals with the issues of science, technology and innovation specifically. It would provide a national platform for a debate on these issues. Consider the public's significant concerns about biotechnology, genetic engineering, wind turbines - the flavour of the month - and fracking. Two weeks ago, we attended a constructive debate in the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland on Dawson Street about the issue of fracking. A number of international experts provided us with detailed presentations. It is disappointing that such a debate could not be held at a committee of the national Parliament. It was the Government's failure not to establish a dedicated committee.

This recommendation was made in a report of the Joint Committee on Education and Science more than one decade ago. It was drafted by none other than the current Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, and myself.

At that stage we believed we were one of the few parliaments in Europe that did not have a specific committee to deal with science, technology and innovation. We believed that was restricting debate on new technology and some of the issues I raised, but also that it was reducing the potential public profile of mathematics, chemistry and physics, which would impact on young people taking an interest in those subjects at second level and, hopefully, going on to study them at third level. Unless we have a significant increase in, first, the understanding of science, technology and innovation within society and, second, have more people getting third level qualifications in the area then it will be a significant limiting factor to bringing investment into this country in the medium term.

It is the sexy issues such as astronomy that get young people interested. It may not be the area that will create a huge number of jobs in the medium or long term in this country but if we can get young people interested in particular aspects of science and they start to study it they will become the researchers of the future, not necessarily in astrophysics, but because they are in that sector and they have the education and understanding it will make this country far more competitive and bring in investment.

I commend the focus of Science Foundation Ireland in terms of the key targets for investment where it wants to direct research in future. We all accept that we have finite resources and we cannot research everything and anything. We have some of the best wind resources in the world yet we are not putting substantial investment into the area. The silver bullet in terms of wind energy would be to find a mechanism to store it. If we could do that, then we would be at the cutting edge internationally. Proposals were made to the Minister’s predecessor on the conversion of wind energy to methane gas. Sadly, the individual concerned has left the country and gone to the United Kingdom where a far more sympathetic approach was taken to the research. The individual did not have a string of scientific degrees and he was dismissed in this country yet the research is being actively undertaken in the UK. That brings me to blue sky research, which I will address in due course. People are pigeon-holed and, sadly, that acts against us bringing investment into this country in the medium and long term.

One other weakness which limits research in this country that must be addressed by the Government is the flaw in the funding structure of Enterprise Ireland. I refer to agrichemicals and veterinary pharmaceuticals. We are an agricultural-based economy and yet we are not facilitating research in those areas. Such research is currently taking place in other countries because of specific legal restrictions we have put in place. The main reason lies in the way the funding streams are structured in that the vast majority of the research must take place in this country in order for it to access funding. Given that it is necessary to undertake environmental toxicity tests and eco-toxicity tests for both those areas, and no one carries them out in this country, the tests must be done abroad. One also needs to examine the impact in various climates both in the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere and in both northern Europe and southern Europe to get a European licence and then one must carry out the testing in those areas. Only one company in this country carries out clinical trials on large animals. The area is most restrictive in this country and, accordingly, most of the research takes place abroad. As the majority of the research must take place in this country and because field trials must be done outside of the jurisdiction – in practical terms animal trials have to be done abroad as well – that means veterinary pharmaceuticals and agrichemical research cannot take place in this country. The Minister must examine the issue and introduce a change in the legislation to deal with it to ensure that such research can take place. I accept that one cannot have it across the board but it is a niche area. We are at the leading edge in agriculture yet we are tying both hands behind our backs because of the nuances relating to the field trials that it is necessary to carry out.

The main reason I wished to speak on the Bill is that I have a major fear that we are taking the focus very much away from blue sky – fundamental – research and focusing far too much on applied research. When making the announcement the Minister said the objective is to focus scientific research on turning good ideas into good jobs. I commend him on that. We want to make sure that happens and we must have a seed fund in place to ensure that private investment is available so that we can upscale from the novel idea to a manufactured product that will create jobs in this country and sustain companies in the long term. I do not have any disagreement with the approach, but basic fundamental, blue sky research is of vital importance to create the new businesses of tomorrow and beyond and to come up with the novel ideas that will become the applied research of today. If we do not come up with the novel ideas tomorrow then we will not have the scientific innovation to apply to manufactured products or ideas in the future in order to create the new businesses. There is a fear among the scientific community that the Government and the Department are very much focused on short-term justification for scientific research rather than basic research. The reality is that we would not be discussing applied research and Science Foundation Ireland unless the investment was made in the past ten years into basic research that has upskilled researchers and created the novel solutions that could be developed into a new business idea tomorrow.

I wish to give an example of what I am talking about because it is difficult to look at it in the abstract. We all know that computers are getting faster by the day. If someone said 20 years ago that one would be able to carry around a television and a computer in one’s shirt pocket, one would have been locked up, yet that is the situation currently. That is all because we have been able to minimise computers by speeding up processing – micro-processing - through the use of computer chips. In this country today 4,500 people are directly employed in manufacturing computer chips for Intel, which is currently a big employer in this country.

There is a law in electronics called Moore's law, which holds that the size of micro-electronic components shrink every two years through a doubling of density. That process has been going on for many years at this stage but there are limitations to how far one can actually go. There are physical limitations to how far one can go in reducing the size of circuits on silicon chips. There are also financial limitations because the smaller the components get, the more expensive the process gets. I have been told that within the next five to ten years, this process will reach its conclusion and silicon chips will be as small as they can possibly be. What happens to the 4,500 employees of Intel then if another solution is not in place? What will happen if another type of design or material has not been developed which can bring the process forward? We will not have 4,500 people employed here.

In the future, scientists will not be working on the silicon chip because they have been working on that for the past ten or 12 years. An enormous amount of research is going into further developments of the silicon chip at the moment. The scientists of the future will be working on developing some new material that has not been even considered yet. That is what blue sky research is all about - coming up with brand new materials. In this country, we are relying on someone else to do that. We are relying on others to come up with that novel idea and then we will hope and pray that we can piggy back on that and save the 4,500 jobs that we have in this country. We are only focusing on the application of research, that is, on how we can reduce the size of the current microchip rather than coming up with something completely novel and different. That is why it is fundamental that we also put significant resources into basic research so that we come up with those new materials and new ideas. In that way, we will ensure that we can do far more with electronic devices into the future, using completely different materials.

I attended a presentation in Ballinasloe recently, which was also attended by the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy Cannon. We were shown the next generation of tablet that will be used in schools. It was a paper-thin sheet of plastic, powered by a mobile telephone. It is an e-reader that one can dance on, roll up or crumple up and it will continue to function. That is where technology is going. It is moving away from the current materials being used for such devices and towards new materials, such as plastics.

We must look at what will happen in the future. We must encourage scientific innovation purely for its own sake and not just for some other objective further down the road. That is what will develop new, innovative scientists who will be listened to by the international scientific community. It will also lead to investors deciding to move to Ireland because we have the best researchers in the world here. Mixing such researchers with engineers and those who can apply the science will yield innovation, new ideas, new products and new jobs. That is why we need to support basic, fundamental research as well as applied research.

See this speech in context