Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 26:

In page 22, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following: “(f) specify the proposed allocation of total resources (both financial and persons) of the Agency between particular academic disciplines, fields of research or groupings thereof,". I will speak briefly to this. This is in the annual plan of the new research agency as well as the existing requirements that should be included in the plan such as performance targets, reporting arrangements, the allocation of resources and so on. I will not list them all. The Minister has already included all that. We are proposing to include a requirement to specify the proposed allocation of total resources, both financial and persons, of the agency between particular academic disciplines, fields of research or groupings thereof.

The purpose of this is in line with the discussion we had on the previous grouping, namely to try to ensure a diversity of focus when it comes to what research we are funding so that it does not all get skewed in particular directions that governments or that industry or business might want. These are legitimate concerns. I was just flicking through the Bill again and noticed that in preparing the corporate plan, for example, in one of the earlier sections, there is a requirement to consult with the Minister, an tÚdarás, Enterprise Ireland, the Industrial Development Authority Ireland and such other bodies or persons as it considers appropriate. It is indicative of something I was saying earlier. Certain organisations are specified - IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland. They have to be specified but that is not so with other disciplines. They are not specified. Why the hierarchy? It is a very legitimate concern that research could become a slave of a particularly narrow idea of economic success or efficiency or of benefiting some narrow notion of economy. Thinking about the very big picture, that has worrying implications. Let us consider the amount that goes into researching weapons, for example. It is enormous and if that money was not going into weapons, could be used to develop cures for diseases or into the arts, humanities or making children’s theatre, as Deputy Farrell said. Somehow making money for arms companies sucks up a huge amount more of global research than it should. That is not completely alien in this country either. We are trying to dig up the connections between our higher education institutions and Israel and its arms industry. Our student boycott, divestment and sanctions groups are uncovering the connections that exist between our third level institutions and a state that, in my opinion and the opinion of many people, is currently committing genocide. It has a very developed arms industry and does its absolute best to develop connections with higher education institutions all over the world to further its military and political agenda with horrific consequences for the Palestinian people. It is a legitimate concern to wish ensure this sort of thing does not happen and that our research priorities and what we fund do not become skewed in particular directions and that we would at least have transparency in respect of what we are funding and where the agency is deploying its financial and human resources to ensure that sort of diversity and spread of research priorities to make sure that it is not being skewed in particular directions.

See this speech in context