John Halligan (Waterford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will deal with two issues I wanted to address in my first response. Is there transparency in the decision on INFANT funding? Science Foundation Ireland has provided detailed written feedback from the international review process to the INFANT centre and UCC, as a lead partner. In addition, SFI met the centre and UCC leadership to provide feedback in July and this information pertaining to the review of the new research proposal is confidential to INFANT. I am not privy to it given the strategic importance of research and the high level of industry collaboration involved.

The Deputy asked why one review panel recommended refunding for INFANT and another did not. That is not the case. The review consisted of a detailed written review by the international experts on the progress of the individual SFI research centres and the proposals for future research outlined in the applications. I am told the international reviewers conducted an on-site review and subsequently wrote a report with a recommendation and scores. The final review process then consisted of an international oversight panel, whose job was to provide quality assurance for the review process and to review the normalising scores of the different international panel reviews of the various research centres. This is important as an on-site panel reviewing the research centres comprised different reviewers. The oversight panel was then charged with ensuring conformity and consistency across all reports and making the final funding recommendations to the SFI executive board.

I was disappointed when I was informed of this matter. I have visited the centre and it is an excellent facility. It is interesting that UCC has not made a comment on this. Is there transparency in the decision on the INFANT funding? To my knowledge, there is. If one review panel recommended funding and the other did not, that is as the case may be.

See this speech in context