Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could all conversations be taken outside the Chamber, please?

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The researchers funded by Science Foundation Ireland, SFI, are connected to close to 650 distinct companies that employ more than 90,000 people in Ireland. These researchers also leverage significant research funding from non-Exchequer sources, such as the EU and industry, usually in the order of €80 million to €90 million per annum.

The SFI also supports more than 20 research centres across the country in fields such as the future Internet, food for health, energy, biomedicine and nanotechnology. Virtually all of the blue chip multinational companies in Ireland are connected to SFI in some way, for example, IBM, Cisco, Pfizer, Roche, HP, Intel, Merck, Microsoft and EMC. Many indigenous firms are also connected, such as the Kerry Group, Creganna and Sigmoid Pharma.

The significant investment made through the SFI by successive Governments since 2000 has been complemented by the ramping up in research investments by others in our national innovation system, for example, the Higher Education Authority, HEA, Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland, Teagasc and others. The impact of this concentrated investment has been a major contributory factor in Ireland coming to be internationally regarded as a credible research-performing nation and is linked to why we have nine of the top ten big pharma-life science companies in the world, 15 of the world's top 25 ICT and technology companies and virtually all of the social media giants, with Dublin arguably now being the Internet capital of the world. Ireland ranked as one of the leading countries in the world for research and development investments.

The sustained research investments of the past decade or so are feeding through to the attraction of foreign direct investment, FDI. Last year, more than 40% of IDA jobs announced were in companies with links to SFI research teams, accounting for 4,575 of the new IDA client jobs. This trend has continued in the first quarter of 2013, with the SFI being linked to 600 of the 1,100 new IDA jobs announced thus far. Already this year, major research and technology-related announcements have been made by the likes of McAfee, Yahoo, Nypro and Zurich.

Since 2004, we have seen a fivefold increase in the proportionality of research-related IDA FDI wins, from approximately 10% worth €120 million to an average of €600 million per annum for each of the past four years of the fiscal crisis, typically representing close to half of all new IDA wins. This State investment is also paying off for indigenous firms. Forfás data in the past three years show that the exports, employment and sustainability of research and development-performing firms consistently outperform those of firms not engaged in research and development. We have also seen a marked improvement in Ireland's international scientific rankings, from 36th in 2003 to breaking into the global top 20 in 2009. Despite our fiscal crisis, we have remained in the top 20.

We have caught up and surpassed many of our OECD competitors, but we cannot stand still. Ireland has reached a stage at which it is appropriate to define more precisely the areas wherein critical mass and concentration of our research effort will maximise further returns. This Bill will play an important part in that process.

To date, the SFI has focused exclusively on oriented basic research for enterprise development. Oriented basic research is defined as: "Research which is carried out with the expectation that it will produce a broad-base of knowledge likely to form the basis of the solution to recognised or expected, current or future problems or possibilities". Basic research is expected to produce results that form the basis for future applications, but which are, generally, some way off the commercial market.

The harsh realities of our current fiscal and economic crisis have made us all aware that there are competing and equally compelling demands for Exchequer investment, yet it is imperative that we ensure now, more than ever before, that we achieve the optimum impact from our research investment. Extending SFI's remit to support applied research will be a contributory factor in this regard. Applied research is usually undertaken either to determine possible uses for the findings of basic research or to determine new methods or ways of creating practical applications.

I will briefly refer to the 11 sections of the Bill and I will then elaborate on some of the more significant sections. Sections 1 and 3 set out the definition of terms used in the Bill. Section 2 relates to the expenses incurred by the Minister via the annual financial allocation being made to SFI - to be paid out of moneys voted on and provided by the Oireachtas. Section 4 sets out the revised functions of SFI, which include supporting research priority areas, applied research and science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, activities. Section 5 relates to the provision by the foundation of funding on a wider geographical basis - and seeks to include researchers and institutions based in Northern Ireland, as well as participating in certain international collaborative projects.

Section 6 provides for a consequential amendment to the 2003 Act governing SFI's reporting requirements under its annual reports. Section 7 provides for the repeal of the provisions relating to compilation of the so-called science budget by Forfás. Section 8 repeals the restrictions on Enterprise Ireland, EI, and the IDA in relation to the Shannon region. Section 9 provides for the new provisions for collection of research and development data by Forfás in place of the provisions repealed by section 7. Section 10 facilitates the amendment of the confidentiality provisions applying to El and SFI on the Freedom of Information Acts. Section 11 provides for the Short Title of the Act, and related citation and commencement provisions.

The critical sections of the Bill that are intended to facilitate the realignment of Ireland's research and development policy and that are most relevant to SFI actions are sections 3, 4, and 5. Section 3 provides for the amendment of section 2(1) of the Act of 2003 in respect of the terms used in same, particularly as regards the introduction of a definition of "applied research". It will also enable SFI to refocus its funding towards the priority areas as identified in the recommendations of the research prioritisation steering group chaired by Mr. Jim O'Hara, formerly of Intel. The group identified 14 priority areas of opportunity for Ireland and six underpinning technologies and infrastructure to support these priority areas. The priority areas were chosen on the basis of the existing strengths of our enterprise base, opportunities that exist in terms of the global marketplace and those which are most likely to deliver economic and societal impact and ultimately good jobs for this country. The report of the group was approved by the Government and published in March 2012. The Bill will assist the implementation of some of the research prioritisation recommendations, which involves a process I am currently chairing across 14 prioritisation action group areas.

Section 4 lays out the revised functions of SFI. It provides for amendments to section 7 of the Industrial Development Act 2003, in particular in respect of extending SFI's legislative remit to enable it to fund applied research. Applied research is defined as: "Work undertaken in order to gain scientific or technical knowledge and directed towards a specific practical application." Enterprise Ireland administers a number of research and development programmes involving direct grants to companies to develop and support industry-led, market-focused applied research. However, these El programmes start at a stage in advance of the point where many researchers find themselves, as the possible uses for their basic research results have not yet been explored. Therefore, a gap exists within our existing research ecosystem that impedes the pursuit of the potential applied research opportunities that often arise from oriented basic research. By extending SFI's remit to include applied research the Bill will take the outcomes of the oriented basic research funded by SFI closer to market, increasing the potential of our research to yield commercial opportunities, jobs, and other societal benefits.

At this juncture I will refer to some recent misinformed commentary in various media on research prioritisation and the extension of SFI's remit into the applied research arena, for instance, that such actions signal a so-called death knell for fundamental basic research in Ireland and that the Government is no longer committed to science, technology and innovation. This commentary does not reflect what is actually happening. On 25 February 2013, we had the largest ever research announcement of its kind in this country, involving seven large-scale research centres, supporting 800 researchers, and representing a total investment of €300 million over the next six years, €200 million of which will be provided by the Exchequer via SFI and a further €100 million coming from more than 150 industry partners. At the end of January, we also had €60.8 million of new SFI investigators awards across a range of fundamental research areas, primarily the life sciences, ICT, mathematics and energy. In November 2012, SFI also announced €30 million in key research infrastructure awards. All three of these significant research announcements by Government, through SFI, are underpinned by talented basic research scientists. All of the above is of direct relevance to supporting basic research excellence in this country that is directly relevant to our economic and societal development. One can add to those examples the fact that SFI's budget for 2013 was maintained at very close to 2012 levels, as was the basic research funding allocation of approximately €35 million being provided to the Irish Research Council this year.

To return to section 4, this section also includes a new function to enable SFI to promote and support awareness and understanding of STEM. That was originally a function of the discover science and engineering, DSE, programme initiated by Forfás in 2003, the objective being to heighten STEM awareness so as to increase the number of students studying the physical sciences and mathematics; promote a positive attitude to STEM careers; and foster a greater public understanding of the physical sciences, engineering and mathematics, and their value to society. In March 2012, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, transferred responsibility for delivery of the DSE programme from Forfás to SFI on an administrative basis. The Bill now puts SFI's science awareness activities on a proper legislative footing. Where appropriate, SFI will consult the Minister for Education and Skills on STEM related issues. The House will be aware that I am Minister of State in both of those Departments.

Moving on to section 5, under the Industrial Development Act 2003 as it stands, SFI at present does not have the power to directly fund research groups outside the Republic of Ireland. Section 5 will grant additional powers for SFI to provide funding to researchers and institutions based in Northern Ireland, thereby advancing opportunities for collaboration between research groups North and South. This section will also allow SFI, subject to the Minister's consent, to enter cost-share collaborative research arrangements with international partners in areas where Irish researchers have real potential to achieve added value from such arrangements. International collaboration on research brings together resources, pools knowledge, enhances scientific excellence, and thereby achieves greater success in addressing research problems and delivering greater efficiencies. It opens up access to external non-Exchequer funding, facilities and networking opportunities for Irish researchers that would not otherwise be available. When opportunities arise, it is important for Ireland, through SFI and other national funders, to be ready and available to participate in international programmes in areas where Ireland has research strengths.

The European Commission's proposals for research and innovation funding for the period 2014 to 2020, Horizon 2020, include allocation of co-funding for member state collaborations, subject to "clear financial commitments of the participating countries, including prior commitments to pool national and-or regional investments for transnational research and innovation". Therefore, as part of Ireland's efforts to maximise our drawdown from EU research funding, it will be necessary to be in the right position to engage in EU common-pot arrangements, where appropriate.

I will turn briefly to some of the other matters dealt with in the Bill, in sections 7, 8, 9 and 10. Section 8 repeals the restrictions on Enterprise Ireland, EI and IDA vis-à-visthe Shannon region. By so doing, the Bill will facilitate the reorganisation of enterprise development functions in the Shannon free zone. In 2011, in recognition of the severe financial difficulties that Shannon Development faced following the collapse of the property market, the Government agreed to review the future role of that agency. Deputies will be aware that Shannon Development engages in property transactions and, unfortunately, the crash has severely impacted upon the company's ability to raise revenue in this way. Following careful consideration of this matter, the Government agreed in principle in May 2012 to separate Shannon Airport from the Dublin Airport Authority and to merge Shannon Airport and Shannon Development into a new aviation-focused entity which would lead to the optimisation of enterprise development arrangements in the region. The Government decision also provided for the transfer of Shannon Development's functions relating to indigenous enterprise and foreign direct investment, FDI, to Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland, respectively, and directed that a plan for the delivery of those functions by these agencies be developed.

In September 2012, when seeking approval to draft the appropriate amending legislation to enable IDA Ireland and El operate in the Shannon free zone, the Minister for Enterprise, Jobs and Innovation, Deputy Bruton indicated he was happy to take this step in advance of any further legislative changes that would be required to create the new entity. Subsequently, in late November 2012, the Government considered further proposals submitted by Deputy Bruton and the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar. The Government confirmed its earlier decision that a merged, State-owned, commercial entity be established, NewCo, by 1 July 2013, comprising the Shannon Airport Authority and a restructured Shannon Development to exploit its combined assets as a catalyst for the development of sectoral opportunities, particularly within the aviation sector, including the creation of an international aviation centre of excellence centred on the airport. The process is ongoing and involves the drafting of comprehensive legislation to create the new aviation-focused company. I assure the House that this is a priority item for the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, working in consultation with my Department. Progress on this exciting project is being monitored by a high level steering group.

Sections 7 and 9 provide for reform of the legislation governing the collection of research and development data by Forfás. The Science and Technology Act 1987 provides for the preparation by Forfás of a science budget on a periodic basis and obliges bodies funded under the science budget to supply to Forfás such information in such form and at such time as it may require. The data, collated and published biannually by Forfás as the science budget, measures overall expenditure on science and technology in the Government sector. However, the areas of expenditure measured do not align with current international practice for the monitoring of science, technology and innovation, STI, expenditure. Consequently, the resulting survey is neither a useful policy tool nor an effective use of staff resources. Therefore, deletion of these provisions via section 7 is proposed for administrative efficiency.

Through section 9, Forfás will continue to compile, on an annual basis, a major component of the science budget, known as government budget appropriations or outlays on research and development, GBAORD. This is an internationally comparable metric carried out using harmonised concepts and definitions from the OECD and is required under an EU Commission regulation relating to statistics on science and technology.

Section 10 affords an opportunity to align the legislation governing SFI and El with the Freedom of Information Acts, specifically by facilitating amendment of the confidentiality provisions that apply to both agencies. While the FOI Acts apply to both agencies, at present section 16 of the Industrial Development Act 1998 in respect of El, and section 17 of the 2003 Act in respect of SFI, prohibit disclosure of confidential information by board members, staff and other specified persons. Through this Bill it is proposed to make these sections subject to the FOI Acts, thereby allowing for disclosure of confidential information in accordance with those Acts.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity finally to discuss this Bill, which we have been prepared to do on a number of occasions recently. The Minister of State's opening remarks reflect the strength of this sector, a strength which has not happened by accident but which has been developed over many years. One of the high points of our economy in the last few difficult years has been the science, technology and knowledge-based sector. It is probably difficult for people to understand how important it is and there are many who would query the level of investment in this sector. However, the level of job creation that comes through, albeit on a delayed basis, justifies that investment. If one gets to see the companies in operation or some of the research centres, such as the CRANN Centre in Trinity College, Dublin, with its world-class knowledge and equipment, one can understand the importance of this sector.

The Minister of State noted that the majority of IDA-assisted investment is in research-intensive areas, moving on to products that would not have even been envisaged when many of the companies which are now reorienting their investment in this country set up in Ireland many years ago. It is right that we should celebrate it because it is a national success story of which we should be proud and which will lay the foundation for future success. It has been a constant bright spot even in very dark times. This has happened because of a consistent commitment, for over a decade, to building a national research and innovation system almost from nothing. Most importantly, there was a consistent political commitment across the House to building our research infrastructure on the basis of very challenging world-class standards. We chose not to accept second-best in terms of our research and demanded ambition on the part of our research community.

It is hard to believe that 16 years ago the entire dedicated research budget of the Department of Education was zero - there was not a penny. A handful of grants were awarded by the IDA in its earlier guise, Science Foundation Ireland and the Research Council did not exist and there was no national research strategy. As a country, we languished near the bottom in almost every area of serious research activity. Of the millions that have been allocated to support research since then, the most important point to remember is that every single cent was awarded on the basis of internationally-reviewed competitions. Irish Governments placed their faith in the expertise of our research community and did not try to control their work or their innovation. In that short period, we have gone from being ranked alongside developing nations to being one of the top 20 countries in the world in terms of the impact of our research. Our universities have a cadre of research teams which do not just compete with the best in the world but actually are the best. They frequently redefine what is best. Many of the world's most important companies now see Ireland as a place where their future products can not just be manufactured, but where they can be inspired.

In its formal review of our research and innovation performance, the EU has pointed out that the Irish research and innovation system is characterised by strong, high-quality performance, while acknowledging that there is probably a time-lag between our recently-developed capacity and full economic benefits. However, the review states that, "From a dynamic perspective, in the last decade, the Irish research and innovation system made good progress in all dimensions, from R&D investments to scientific and technological performance or shifts towards more knowledge intensive activities. Ireland outperformed not only the EU average or the United States, but also the average of the reference group of countries with similar research characteristics". It is always possible to cherry-pick statistics to help one to criticise actions but the overwhelming evidence is that Ireland's research system is delivering. It is respected in a demanding world and has delivered faster than many would have expected at the inception of this period.

We should acknowledge the work of the individuals, teams and institutions both here and internationally which have delivered so well for our country in such a short period.

In seeking to alter this system, it is the duty of the Government to justify changes fully, which should only be implemented on the basis of international best practice and a full impact analysis of what we will lose by diverting funding into new streams. Given how central research is to the most successful parts of our economy, our economic future and, most importantly, to employment creation, it should not just come up for debate in this House once every few years with a relatively empty Chamber. I therefore welcome the chance to highlight the work of the research community and the opportunity to discuss State research policy and the role of funding for scientific research in particular.

One will never see a gathering outside the gates of this House or Government Buildings demanding funding for research but that is no reason for us to consider it so rarely or to miss the fact that tens of thousands of jobs are involved, both directly and indirectly. The extent to which this Dáil is being marginalised on major policy is clear again with this Bill. It is a significant Bill relating to an important public body and it changes the remit of Science Foundation Ireland, SFI, and narrows its focus. Changes like this were always intended to be made by legislation and not by ministerial or executive decision. Nevertheless, the SFI 2013 annual plan and its agenda 2020 state explicitly that it is operating the new policy. If SFI is implementing the main changes contained in this Bill, why are we going through the charade of having Dáil vote on them?

In principle, Fianna Fáil supports this Bill but I must make it clear that I have met many people in the research community concerned about the manner in which discussions have been held around this in the past year. There have been many consultations but it is widely believed that these consultations have had little or no impact on policy. Many reassurances have been given but these have yet to be translated into any concrete action.

There is an issue surrounding the Minister of State's interview on the Science Calling blog, which is a cause of particular concern. The full audio interview was placed online and within an hour or so, it was removed, and the promised transcripts have yet to materialise. The journalist running the blog has refused to explain what happened. A difficulty with the Government's research policy is a lack of explanation, and this was a chance for it to be outlined. The list of questions covered all important issues, so I ask that the full text of the interview be released so we can see where the priorities are.

A further problem for us in this debate is that it is taking place without there being any overall strategy on research. The existing strategy for science, technology and innovation has effectively drawn to a close. Most of its targets were achieved ahead of time and it gave a certainty to everyone within the system as to who had responsibility for different activities. This certainty is now gone and the issue should be clarified as soon as possible. The programme for research in third level institutions appears to have been suspended and although SFI's remit is being extended, its funding is falling, albeit not by much. It is a credit to the Minister of State for securing that funding but we are making its responsibilities much wider. Other funders have not made their short-term plans known. With this Bill, a potentially major change is to be implemented, but there is no clarity in the overall jigsaw. Before we complete passage of this Bill, I ask the Minister of State to set out in detail - perhaps on Committee Stage - the intentions for each major research funder and their responsibilities.

As the Minister of State has indicated, there are four major elements to the SFI portion of this Bill. These are that the remit of SFI is to be changed to include whatever the Minister prescribes; that SFI will now fund both basic and applied research; that SFI will take lead responsibility in promoting science awareness; and current practice regarding institutions in Northern Ireland will be formalised. The concerns of the research community are significant with many of these headings and I intend to reflect on some of those concerns before tabling amendments on Committee Stage.

When we are changing the remit we should take the opportunity to pay tribute to the staff and various directors who have served SFI since its foundation. It is an excellent agency and its current director is experienced and qualified, providing energetic leadership with a passion for science. He is trying to teach the country about the importance of research. Nevertheless, I am concerned about the position of director of SFI and chief science adviser being merged. That is probably an unfair and unreasonable demand of Professor Ferguson and his team, as they have enough to do with the ambitions we set and the expectation with regard to funding. This decision undermines the current balance between different research funders. The research community will not openly criticise any researchers and one cannot expect them to do so. Most researchers do not have permanent jobs and I can assure the Minister of State that although the research community may not vocally express unease about the amalgamation of the two roles, it does exist.

From its inception, SFI has focused on particular areas. Initially it was just ICT and biotechnology, and subsequently energy was added. These priorities were set after an independent study and they had broad support. They were written into the legislation to avoid a drift in the focus of SFI and to avoid its work constantly changing with political winds. This reinforced the absolute commitment of Government to allow it be run to the highest international standards and give researchers certainty. A re-examination of these areas was needed and was begun by the then Government in October 2010, when it appointed the research prioritisation steering group. The group finished its work in November 2011 and its report sets out 14 areas which it believes should be prioritised by the entire system. Broadly, these fit within the three areas within SFI's remit, although there are areas which fall outside it. What these areas are is not known because nobody has produced an impact statement for implementing these 14 priorities.

In principle, the 14 areas seem appropriate and they reflect the input of people whose expertise we should respect. Before these should be implemented, however, we should be told what this means in practice and how much of current activity falls outside of these priorities. A core claim of this Government has been that it is demanding proper planning and exact figures before taking decisions, so someone must have done this basic impact analysis and this must be published. A significant change in this Bill is that the core areas to be funded by SFI are no longer to be set out in primary legislation. Under the current law these can be added to but cannot be removed without an Oireachtas vote. The addition of energy in 2008 was also done by statutory instrument and could, therefore, be reviewed by the Oireachtas. The certainty which came from the political commitment not to interfere was a big part of building SFI's credibility.

Under this Bill the Minister is proposing to take to his office, with no limit and no review process, the right to determine exactly what SFI does. This opens up SFI to the prospect of future ministerial interference and a constantly changing remit, which we absolutely reject. Therefore I am encouraging the Minister to bring forward amendments which limit ministerial ability to constantly change SFI's remit. Specifically, he should be obliged to bring all changes to the Oireachtas for a vote and a formal process of public consultation should be undertaken.

We support the principle of the 14 priority areas recommended by the steering group but we do not support the manner in which other parts of the steering group's report have been ignored. Their entire argument was based on the principle that the 14 areas were to be seen as only one of three elements of the public funding system. In particular, it was explicitly indicated that there needs to be direct funding for more general areas - or research for knowledge, as it is called - because a broad range of excellence was essential for the system and the Government must understand that major breakthroughs cannot be ordered up to a set agenda.

The agenda 2020 and 2013 annual plan issued by SFI in recent months confirm that this recommendation has been largely ignored. For each of SFI significant funding schemes, funding is to be restricted solely to these 14 areas. There is a provision for exceptional circumstances but this, by definition, has no general application. In the Seanad and again this evening, the Minister of State pointed to the results of a funding programme in 2012 to give reassurance, but that was run under old rules. There is no ambiguity in the published documents, and funding is to be limited to the 14 areas, bar the exceptional areas. We are seeking clarification in that respect.

A number of programmes have been transferred to SFI over the years which have had a general application. As a result of the broad definitions of the areas covered by SFI, the system welcomed the transfer of these schemes, especially as they relate to new research teams. From this year it would appear that there is to be a complete end to team or centre funding outside of these areas.

This issue goes to heart of whether we will have excellence in our universities, whether our students will be taught by lecturers working at the highest levels to be challenged tot he highest standards possible. We cannot afford to let the reputation of its universities fall. The process will be accelerated if programme funding is closed down outside of preselected areas. Equally, our universities will rapidly fall behind if they are cut off from even knowing about international standards. Funding for 400 science journals has been withdrawn, as Deputy Peter Mathews discovered in a parliamentary question. As a Minister of State in both the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Sherlock should intervene to ensure this knowledge is kept in place. On Committee Stage I will ask the Minister to include in the Bill a provision which reflects the recommendation of the research prioritisation steering group to provide specifically for the need to fund research for knowledge outside of the 14 areas.

SFI was set up as a funding agency for basic research. The definition of this which will remain in the Act even after this legislation is that it provides for a "broad-base of knowledge". The Minister is now proposing to add applied research, which is construed as relating to more practical objectives. It is true that the barriers between basic and applied research are not rigid, but the fact that they are still important is reflected in the proposal to define them separately in this Bill.

The Minister of State has said that people should stop worrying that everything will be fine but we need a detailed explanation of how much funding will now be diverted from basic research to fund applied research. If the funding envelope is the same and a new area is being brought in then it stands to reason that current activity will be cut. No amount of glossy announcements will cover this up. It was pointed out recently in The Irish Timesthat the seven new centres announced last month are all excellent, but that at the same time 27 existing centres are to be closed or merged to fund the new ones. It was also pointed out that one group which was excluded from the final list is actually rated number one in the world in some vital areas. A policy which talks about wanting to be world class but excludes a team which is first in the world is a policy which needs to be explained more. If it is the case that the funding is being diverted to other areas because of the new policy, it will justifiably cause major concern.

This is all about jobs, we agree with the Minister of State on that. We disagree, however, with the implication that current basic research funding is not having an impact because it is not directly linked to enough companies. This misses the entire point that we cannot pick and choose from different elements of a research system; we cannot have excellent applied research if we do not have excellent basic research. We cannot have knowledge-intensive industry by just funding the last part of the process. If the new definition of fundable research is that it must have a direct link to specific companies and job prospects then this excludes research at the frontiers of knowledge. By definition, basic frontiers research has limited appeal for companies; that is why governments fund it. If we look at any of the world's most successful research systems, we see distinct streams of funding without immediate commercial involvement.

When this change is enacted, SFI will no longer have a unique role in the funding system. Before we finalise it the Minister of State should publish a detailed statement of the relative funding streams to be available through different agencies. Only then will people be reassured by his promise that no major areas will suffer.

The proposal to formally give SFI the role to promote awareness and public engagement with science is welcome. Our largest science funder should play this role. However, the objective of having a high level of public engagement can only be achieved if other bodies also participate. For example, the objectives in the Bill involve very significant areas like school curricula and I would like the Minister of State to explain how he envisages this wider role being achieved.

My party believes that significantly improved co-operation between all universities on this island would be to the benefit of all. This can already be seen in humanities and social science research and we should increase this work in the sphere of science and technology. Therefore we welcome the Bill's provision to allow SFI funding to be paid to institutions in Northern Ireland.

In little over a decade the Irish research system has delivered sustained economic and social benefits for Ireland. Every international study has commented on how far and fast we have gone. Ireland cannot be excellent in everything, however, it must prioritise. In doing this, it must avoid a return to the days where faceless officials sat in offices trying to pick winners and losers. We must set our priorities in such a way that we allow those sparks of genius which can revolutionise not just economic sectors but society as a whole.

Ireland has a balanced research system. This proposal will re-balance it and we have a right to see what that means in practice. Overall funding cannot realistically be higher so some areas will lose significant funding. Before this Bill is enacted, the Government must be open and show us its impact studies. It must be honest with those who will lose funding and it must be specific about what exactly will be delivered with these changes. Funding decisions controlled by people outside the system and teams working without political interference are central characteristics of what works. We need reassurance from the Minister of State and Government that these will be respected.

There are other matters related to Shannon Development and funding for the Shannon area. I cannot let this opportunity pass without mentioning the proposals on Shannon Airport and expressing my concerns about the impact those proposals will have on other airports. The favouritism of this Government for this project will have an effect on Ireland West Airport in Knock, Kerry Airport and Cork Airport. Further legislation will follow and we will rigorously oppose it unless it is fair.

Research indirectly supports tens of thousands of jobs and there are jobs that will be common in ten years time that we do not even know about today because of the work being done in the research community at present. We must protect what we have and build on it. If this is the motivation behind this Bill then I welcome it but I ask the Minister of State to engage with us in his reply on Second Stage and on Committee Stage so we can get the information that remains outstanding or that we may have misrepresented.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I find myself in the unacceptable situation today where I agree with the Minister of State on two separate Bills. It does not happen too often but we support both this Bill and the Bill on symphysiotomy. Even a stopped clock can be right twice a day.

We welcome this Bill because it recognises and reflects the role of scientific investigation in society and the economy. Thomas Davis, a founder member of the Young Ireland movement, coined the phrase "Educate that you may be free". This phrase rings true today but we might say now "Innovate that you may prosper". Innovation, learning and research are critical to the development of any society and the economy. That is why we are so hard on the Government on education cuts because it is impossible to create a smart economy if we do not invest in education.

We welcome this Bill because it will update the remit of Science Foundation Ireland to reflect the continuum between oriented basic research and applied research. This continuum can be seen across a number of fields. The Government's action plan for jobs promotes investment in big data. The value is not only found in data warehousing but also in data analytics. The development of complex algorithms to draw information from huge data sets finds its basis in pure mathematics.

I am reminded of the 2010 Nobel Prize winners for physics, Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov from the University of Manchester. They won their award for the development of graphene, the world's thinnest material. At one atom in thickness, it is a two dimensional material. With its conductive power, this material will revolutionise production and products in a way we cannot fully realise at present. The discovery of this material was not the result of economic demand; the researchers sought to challenge themselves to see how thin they could make a piece of graphite. This was discovery for discovery's sake.

The connection between basic research and application is a process that must be supported along the continuum from discovery to development. The Minister must ensure all of these steps are supported along the process to ensure no gaps emerge.

Often it is the cross-fertilisation of innovators from different sectors that creates the most interesting and applicable innovations in science.

I hope that SFI does not shy away from basic research to support some of the immediate returns on applied research. The Minister is cognisant of the need for support for, and the balance in the funding of, both. The Minister should build safeguards to allow, where possible, a return of investment of public moneys.

I welcome section 4 which gives SFI the ability to promote and support the study of education and engagement with science, technology, engineering and mathematics. However, it cannot be left to SFI alone. I note the Government's commitment to ensure that every second-level school has access to broadband within two years. However, we are still short on the same target for primary schools. The study of computer science or IT has been an option in the North of Ireland at GCSE or A Level for the past 25 years but this is not available for the junior certificate and leaving certificate.

The success of the CoderDojo project in this State has shown a huge hunger and the ability of young people for learning of this type. If the Government is serious about promoting stem subjects, it will require investment. My party would support investment, not only at graduate and post-graduate levels but also at primary and second level. If we are to make the ICT sector a major employer, it must be an equal option for students in Oldcastle, Navan, Ballymun, Ballyfermot, Derry and elsewhere.

With regards to the all-island nature of technology and science, I welcome section 5 that provides for SFI to work with and disburse funds in the North of Ireland. An island the size of our own needs to use its resources wisely and productively. The transfer of research and learning does not recognise an arbitrary line on a map; neither should we. Research development across the island must benefit all the people of the country and the economy. We have skilled researchers in Queens University Belfast and the University of Ulster who can contribute who can contribute in partnership with institutions in this State. As always, working together we can be stronger than the sum of our parts. Maybe this is a piece of research that needs to be done on the move from basic research into applied research, the move from the theory of the benefits of unity to the practical benefits of unity.

I understand that section 8, as applied to section 11 of the Industrial Development Act 1986, lifts the prohibition on Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland from providing support and grants to enterprises within the Shannon Free Zone. This section jars with the rest of the legislation and it seems to be a separate matter. While I recognise that the Government has plans with regards to the future of Shannon Airport, I am concerned that this measure should really be taken forward as part of a full suite of proposals for the development of the south west in a coherent fashion, not merely in a fractured fashion in this Bill.

Section 9 appears to follow the collection and collation of information by Forfás. I support this provision in so far as the collection of such data is important for the evaluation and monitoring of Government policy and performance. The old management adage that one cannot manage if one cannot measure is important here. We, as legislators, cannot manage fully if we cannot measure. Openness and transparency should be watch-words for democracy in Government and I have previously asked the Minister to outline how this information would be made public. On a number of occasions, I have sought information on the success of IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland in job creation in specific sites and the stock answer is that such information is commercially sensitive. Interestingly, when these jobs are announced the information is not deemed to be commercially sensitive. It is only if the jobs are fulfilled that it is deemed to be commercially sensitive. It is that measuring ability that is key in this House. I would also hope that the Minister will ensure that information gathered by Forfás is available for scrutiny.

I hope the Minister reflects on the points I have raised. There is much in this Bill that my party will support. However, the Minister needs to ensure that a balance between orientated basic research and applied research is reached and maintained. I believe that this is the intention of the Minister and I wish him well in the legislation.

Michael Kitt (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call on Deputy Catherine Murphy who is sharing time with Deputies Boyd Barrett and Tom Fleming.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have mixed views about this legislation. I will try to highlight the areas that I support and those about which I have concerns.

Science Foundation Ireland is focussed on three distinct areas and this Bill is intended to significantly widen them. That would be all right if there were resources guaranteed to go with it. That is one of my key concerns.

It is a good idea that the legislation will enable SFI to provide funding on an all-Island basis. That is a positive development. I view the collaboration with international partners as being positive. Sometimes those international partners are based here. I myself see it, for example, in the relationship between the multinational companies in north Kildare and Maynooth college and, indeed, in other industries that have sprung up that are less high profile but that have surprised some of us with the numbers of those employed. The international collaboration or collaboration with multinational companies can be fruitful.

The Bill is the biggest change to Science Foundation Ireland since it was established in 2003 but not all of the proposed changes have been welcomed by the science and research community. As I stated, the international collaboration is to be welcomed. Hopefully, the funding to be accessed will be directed to the right areas that will not only provide a return for those industries but create off-shoots as well because that frequently happens.

One of our greatest strengths, which dates back to our investment in free second-level education and elevated into third level, has been that for a small country we have a capacity for high-quality research. Given that the size of our universities relative to some of those in some of the bigger countries are small, we have punched above our weight in terms of output. Down the decades there has in this area been a sensible approach in how we have gone about this compared to other countries.

That is where the concerns about the proposed changes have come. It seems that the intent is to steer the State towards more research funding projects that are focused on delivering jobs. That is at the core of it. In fact, whereas we all want to see jobs delivered out of any investment that is made, sometimes that desktop approach to this may well end up stifling creativity. Google, for example, allocates a certain amount of time for its work force to try things out. That kind of approach to research can deliver returns that are not about necessity being the mother of invention but about providing that creative space. I am concerned that the objective is becoming much too narrow.

I certainly want to see the greatest return in terms of jobs for any investment we will make but we might not be going about it in the right way by limiting the amount of research. There is the potential of limiting rather than expanding the amount of research even though we are expanding the number of areas on the spectrum. I will explain what I mean.

Science Foundation Ireland has a budget of €152 million in 2013, which is broadly in line with what it was last year. It is important that remains stable and can be added to. Whereas up to now Science Foundation Ireland had three areas of responsibility, it is now being increased to 14 areas. That would be acceptable if the Government were adding to the resources. I wonder if the research prioritisation steering group when increasing it from three to 14 areas realised that the same pot of money would be involved. There does not appear to be any guarantee that the funding will go beyond the €152 million that has been allocated.

I am nervous that we will have a scattergun approach by broadening the number and maybe having less focus in terms of the research that can be conducted. One of our great strengths is in the area of renewable energy, mainly because we have the raw material. A business in my constituency, Wavebob, was researching marine sources of energy. That seems to have folded in recent weeks because there was not sufficient funding to keep it going. Such research was at an embryonic stage and would have needed five to ten years. By limiting the amount of time in which to do that research, it may well have cut it off at the knees even though it could have been very beneficial in the long term given that we have such great natural resources. That highlights my concern. We are becoming less focused and stretching the money to cover a much broader range of areas even though I agree they may be viable areas for research.

At the moment we are not producing sufficient graduates to fill the positions in the IT sector and have had to go abroad to recruit people. Clearly we will not get research without the people available to do the research. We need to encourage others to come into that area. We need to look at this in the context of the entire education system. There is inadequate IT provision at second level or even prior to that. This will stunt our growth when it comes to researching areas included in the 14 or even in the three areas Science Foundation Ireland has been funding since 2003.

I welcome some of the provisions of the Bill, but while there might be more areas covered we might end up getting less out of it because we are stretching a very limited budget. I would be concerned that we will not get the kind of quality research or give things the time they require not only to be researched but also to be properly tried and Wavebob is such an example.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Calleary said one would not get gatherings outside the front of Leinster House on issues such as science funding. Having read the Bill and listened to the debate on it, I believe there probably should be gatherings outside Leinster House. I do not claim to be an expert in the area, but then I suspect most of us speaking in this debate are not experts in the area of scientific research. Therefore we can only go on the views put forward by people in the research area and affected by this debate. Having done that, I am more than concerned about the implications of the Bill and unless someone here can give me a very convincing argument to the contrary, I will be appealing to Deputies to oppose the Bill. There is not much to welcome in it and the thrust of it is deeply alarming.

It is not just I who believe this, most importantly in so far as I have gathered an opinion on it, I have gathered it from people in the science area. Dick Ahlstrom wrote in The Irish Times:

The Government is causing serious and possibly irreparable damage to Ireland’s national capacity to conduct scientific research. Its persistent demand that any State investment in science must deliver a return on investment has placed it on a path that could erode the undoubted reputational and qualitative gains in science that have been made here over more than a decade.

It has angered members of the science community, particularly those involved in exploratory or so-called “blue-skies” research. They fear their disciplines will no longer receive support in the absence of a commercial payback.

The Minister of State has obviously not read the digest - he can shake his head all he likes. I believe these eminent scientists rather than what he has said for all his head shaking. If the Government wants to establish an applied research centre, it should give it extra funding. The €150 million budget, which has already been cut slightly, is supporting nine centres similar to the additional ones the Minister of State is proposing to set up. It is also supporting smaller research clusters and the Charles Parsons Energy Research Programme. If the same amount of money is now to fund an additional six large-scale - as the Minister of State described them - research centres, something has to give. What will give is the basic research and there is already evidence this is happening.

The Government has stated mathematics is very important but the school of mathematics in Trinity College, one of the schools of mathematics with the best reputation in the world, is being refused funding by SFI because it does not fit into the new commercially oriented bringing science closer to the market approach being adopted by the Government. Do we think Einstein would have come up with the theory of relativity if he were working for a multinational? I do not think so. Would Copernicus or Galileo have learned about the proper movement of the planets if his policy objectives and priorities had been set by the feudal state of his day? I do not think so. Messing around with the objectivity of science and setting out its priorities in the way the Minister of State has done is wrong. What should be done by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, the IDA and other such agencies, is to provide extra funding for applied research in the area. The Minister of State should not mess around with basic objective scientific investigation and exploration. His case is not convincing unless it is accompanied by extra funding, which it is not.

The key provision set out by the Bill is bringing scientific research close to the market. It should not be brought close to the market and it should not be dictated by what the market wants. Of course we all want jobs and investment which can deliver jobs, and we also want research in areas such as renewable energy, although serious areas of research are missing from the 14 listed. We should expand on these. Why is only marine renewable energy included when we could develop so many other renewable energy areas? Recently I spoke to people working in science about the fact that working generators in the area of cold fusion now exist. This is very experimental and is on the cutting edge of science. The Minister of State's narrowly focused demand for commercial return linked to what multinational want, or mapping 14 areas which he believes are priorities, will mean pulling funding from more experimental areas of research. Government backbenchers can laugh all they like because I take much more seriously what scientists, mathematicians and astrophysicists say.

If the Government is serious about backing research and creating more jobs it should provide extra funding instead of reducing it and spreading it over a wider area at the expense of basic research. In the end there will be no effective applied research, which the Minister of State claims he wants, if basic research suffers. Applied research is constructed on top of basic research. If basic scientific research and endeavour in areas such as mathematics, which we already see are suffering as a result of this emphasis, is not supported then everything on top of it will not happen. We will become prisoners of multinationals.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

And vice versa.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is already happening. Evidence exists that it is already happening. I oppose the thrust of the Bill. It is another way of dealing with the fact that the Government is cutting funding for science research.

Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I generally welcome the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) (Amendment) Bill 2012. The Bill will formally sanction the foundation's active involvement in applied research. The original Act permitted investment in basic research only. Researchers have some concern as they try to gauge how the Bill will affect their ability to draw down State support for frontier science and I hope the Minister of State will allay the fears of the sector.

The Bill will alter the long-standing restrictions which prevent disbursement of State research funds to a scientist or a scientific research project based outside the jurisdiction. This has meant legislative prohibitions on the Government deciding with its political counterparts in the Northern Assembly to co-fund research, buy equipment or make a joint bid for EU funding which in itself may have involved investing in other institutions. It is advantageous if the high cost of these devices can be shared on a cross-Border basis, with the return being access to advanced equipment. Given that the EU and the United States support cross-Border initiatives, joint funding would probably help leverage additional international support. It would also mean North South groups could in turn join UK or EU-led groups to pursue research.

The planned opening of the seven new research centres is welcome and the sharing of a combined six year budget package of €200 million in State funding and €100 million in support from private sector companies demonstrates a strong commitment by the Government in support of scientific research even at a time of constricted budgets. The envisaged amount of €150 million is sizeable. Science Foundation Ireland expects it will lead to approximately 800 research jobs. Some of these will be filled through the closure or amalgamation of 27 pre-existing research centres, all established over the past ten years. The high-quality research coming from these has helped Ireland build an enviable world reputation for science.

In the new model each of the new centres must involve academic and industrial partners working together. The research pursued must match one or more of the priority search areas identified as valuable to Ireland either in terms of job creation, economic return or societal benefit in areas such as information and communication technology, Internet-based services, the pharmaceutical industry, medical technology and energy. In the IBM global location trends report published in December 2012 Ireland's position as an international investment location was underlined by its top position in a number of significant categories. The country ranked first in the world for inward investment by quality and value, first in Europe for investment in the pharmaceutical sector and second in Europe and fourth globally for the number of investments per capita. These statistics bode very well for our future, which will be dramatically advanced by the Bill enabling Science Foundation Ireland broaden its programme to cover the 14 research priority areas identified by the research prioritisation steering group.

I am glad to see renewable energy is a priority area. We have spent far too long trailing behind Denmark and Germany which have utilised to a huge extent the potential they have in renewable energy. Realistically we are in a much stronger position, at the edge of the Atlantic Ocean, where we have the best elements in the world. In many respects we are reneging from the benefits. We could be leaders in this and follow the example shown by continental countries. We are in a much better geographical location to take advantage of it.

In Germany, more people are working in wind energy than in the motor industry, even though they were always to the forefront in car manufacturing. As we know well, Germany is the home of Mercedes Benz, Volkswagen, BMW, Opel and Porche.

We have a huge potential to develop our energy capacity. The challenge for this country is to discover how much of our wind capacity we can realistically capture onshore, near-shore and offshore. As Deputy Boyd Barrett said, we should not omit the onshore aspect. The Bill refers to the marine sector but we should amend it to include all aspects and areas where there is a potential to exploit wind capacity. The more we can capture and export such energy, the better our future employment opportunities will be, along with our chances of recovery.

Europe is already struggling, and will do so in future, to provide its energy needs and security targets. Likewise, we need to exploit and develop all 14 areas identified in this Bill to the maximum in order to generate more jobs and expedite our economic progress into the future.

Tom Barry (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Paul Connaughton and Deputy Joe O'Reilly.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Tom Barry (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. As a research graduate in biochemistry in University College Cork, I do understand the area. I must criticise the contribution by Deputy Boyd Barrett because I do not like people who make assumptions based on what they read in the newspapers. He said that nobody in the House understood this matter, but I am afraid to say he is completely wrong. The only person who did not understand it was himself. I have had to listen to that waffle and it was hard to take. If someone does not understand a particular topic the best practice is to listen. However, a waffler would put wooden legs under hens, which is why we had to listen to that hot-air production. That is all I heard tonight from Deputy Boyd Barrett.

I fully understand the importance of Science Foundation Ireland. In the early 1990s, I was involved in basic research on homology modelling, where three-dimensional protein structures were generated on silicon graphics computers and software. A computer-generated three-dimensional model was then evaluated against the actual physical structure of that protein. We purified the protein in Cork and sent it off to the University of Brandais in America to obtain x-ray crystallography of it. It all sounds interesting and it was. The protein itself was called aspartate amino transferase.

While this was pioneering protein structural three-dimensional development, from an amino-acid sequence, the work was also supported by industry. Schering-Plough in Brinny, County Cork paid for the computer software and hardware. This type of basic research has contributed in part to our understanding of how drugs interact with certain proteins. It also has relevance in the agricultural sphere where we are developing fungicides which bind to certain pathogens. When there is a resistance these particular agents will not bind properly, if there is an active site mutation. We have to understand how that happens.

One starts off with basic research, which may sound abstract but it creates the foundation layer which gathers important data for the building blocks of subsequent research and solutions. It is therefore common sense to take that basic research to the applied level, working with companies which produce drugs or fungicides that create health and wealth benefits for our country. I do not know how Deputy Boyd Barrett could not understand that.

However, applied research is also vital and, in my case, the industry recognised the value of research and contributed towards it. Science Foundation Ireland will evaluate projects for research where there is a potential for that research to yield commercial opportunities and jobs it will back it. The economic benefits of applied research are huge and collaboration with industry is important. We are fortunate in this country to have a large number of world leaders in all sectors, from IT to pharmaceuticals, which bodes well for research. The multiplier of return on every euro for research and development is very high, and represents good value for money.

Under the competent stewardship of the Minister, Deputy Bruton, and the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, research and development has been one of the priorities of this Government and is featured in the action plan for jobs. In fact, an independent steering group on research prioritisation - chaired by Mr. Jim O'Hara, a former manager of Intel - presented a report to the Minister, Deputy Bruton, at the end of 2012. It was published in March 2013.

The task of this steering group was to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the research, development and innovation space in Ireland and, on foot of this analysis, to develop evidence-based proposals for Government policy on public investment in research and innovation. Some 14 areas were identified for this.

The objective is the alignment of public investment in research with emerging market opportunities and translation of this investment into outcomes that will bring benefits to the people of Ireland through jobs and other sustainable economic activity.

This Bill also makes provision to enable Science Foundation Ireland to promote and support awareness and understanding of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. This is a topic which is very close to my heart and I have worked with the Minister, Deputy Bruton, on this for quite a while. I believe it is essential that we promote children with an aptitude and ability for science, IT and mathematics from an early age. This means recognising those children and making sure that they do not slip through the system. Our best and brightest must always be developed.

While our school system is rightly constantly endeavouring to raise the general standard and help children who are finding it difficult, there is an absolute requirement that we foster and develop the brightest of our children to their potential. Sometimes I feel that the resources being allocated to our brightest students - because they are fewer in number - are being sacrificed to improve the general average. I hope this practice will not continue.

Science Foundation Ireland was established to promote basic research in strategic areas and has worked very well the main areas which are information and communications, technologies, bio-technology and sustainable energy. The final area of sustainable energy is something that we really need to concentrate more on. It seems that we are not embracing change fast enough and I wonder at times how much a litre of petrol or diesel will have to cost before we really concentrate on providing viable alternatives.

These alternatives will not happen without doing our homework and putting in the basic and applied research. The renewable heat incentive or RHI in the UK is the world's first long-term financial support programme for renewable heat. Launched, in November 2011, the scheme for the non-domestic sector provides payments to industry, businesses and public sector organisations. The RHI pays participants of the scheme that generate and use renewable energy to heat their buildings. By increasing the generation of heat from renewable energy sources, instead of fossil fuels, the RHI helps the UK to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet targets for reducing climate change. They will be expanding the existing scheme to cover additional technologies and will also offer a domestic scheme for individual households, which accounts for almost 80% of use.

It is clear that the focus of this Government is very much on promoting research and development in various sectors. We have to take advantage of our high-skilled economy and the industries which are based here that require innovation and research. This Bill allows flexibility within Science Foundation Ireland to target projects from a basic level right through to delivery at an applied level. It fosters better commercial and productive engagements between research institutions, commercial entities and the Government. This is a triad which needs to work together. The obvious results of this are well-paid, sustainable and rewarding jobs for our highly skilled workforce.

Paul Connaughton (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to speak on this Bill. The extension of the remit of Science Foundation Ireland, as provided for in this Bill, is most welcome. To date, the foundation has promoted and supported awareness and understanding of science, technology, engineering and mathematics and has enabled collaborative funding of research. The focus now has switched to turning good research into good jobs. A core part of Science Foundation Ireland's current work is the provision of research funding to individual and group researchers in third level institutions across Ireland. The foundation now will be able to fund applied research, which will bring these good ideas closer to market stage, thereby increasing the potential for job creation. Best practice is at the core of what Science Foundation Ireland does and with this in mind, I welcome the foundation's aim to be the best science funding agency in the world. World class standards are precisely what are needed at this time.

The remit of the Bill before the House mirrors the remit given to the Government on a broader level, namely, to ensure that each cent of the nation's resources that is spent is spent wisely and where it is most needed. Moreover, it is to ensure that money is invested where it will bear most fruit for the Irish people and will provide much-needed jobs in this economy. While the Government cannot create jobs in the retail sector, it can support that sector and more importantly, develop and bring forward the research that could lead to the development of new products and services with global potential that could create high-quality jobs in Ireland and, in turn, put money in the pockets of retail customers. For the past ten years, the focus of Science Foundation Ireland has been on information and communications technology, biotechnology, sustainable energy and energy-efficient technologies. These areas have unlimited potential, which can be unlocked by world-class research followed by targeted funding to bring these ideas to market. The creation of an international centre for aviation excellence at Shannon Airport also is to be welcomed. This Bill provides that the Minister can prescribe strategic areas of opportunity for economic and social benefits, long-term industrial competitiveness and environmental sustainability. I note the areas which come under the remit of the Bill do not include the food industry and I believe that given the significant role science plays in the development of new foods such as probiotics, this area could come under the remit of Science Foundation Ireland, especially given the potential for such scientifically-advanced foods to expand on a global scale, as well as the availability of the necessary skill set in Ireland to lead the way in the development of new health-enhancing foods.

Mathematics is at the core of much of the work of Science Foundation Ireland. I believe Ireland's future will be well served by the decision on the part of the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn, to allocate additional points for higher-level maths in the leaving certificate examinations, thereby ensuring that Ireland's brightest and best do not forego maths as they seek to finalise their second level education. In years to come, the proportion of the Irish population who have completed second level maths to higher level will increase rapidly and in turn this will mean the country is better placed to harness the value of scientific advancements. However, while one must do all in one's power to equip current second level students with the mathematical knowledge necessary for the future, one must not overlook those who already have passed through the system and who chose not to study mathematics to higher level even though they had the ability to so do but who preferred to put their focus elsewhere in the leaving certificate exams. Science Foundation Ireland could, as a promotion of mathematics, fund courses on a pilot basis in which former students could study mathematics at night at higher leaving certificate level. I believe such courses would prove popular. I also would give mathematically-minded parents the opportunity to study maths in order that they can help their children through the higher-level course. I believe this is a matter Science Foundation Ireland could discuss with the Department of Education and Skills and which would pay dividends in the future. The focus of Members must be consistently on the future and I believe this Bill is indicative of the Government's forward-thinking approach and it can and I believe will make a difference in putting Ireland to the fore in terms of scientific advancement and in helping to ensure that good science translates into good jobs.

Joe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There can be no doubt but that a clear link exists between high-quality, well-funded research and development and job maintenance, job creation and inward investment, as well as quality of life. Consequently, the case for research and development and investment therein is now well understood and well made. While many people thankfully understand this point, in so far as they do not Members as legislators have a moral responsibility and a leadership role in ensuring Ireland is investing in this regard and they must market such investment to the taxpayers as being worthy. I believe it is broadly understood to be worthwhile in any event.

This Bill will facilitate the broadening of the remit of Science Foundation Ireland to enable it to fund applied research and this is to be welcomed. It will allow diversification and research focused on jobs and on thematic areas that will create jobs, which is extremely important. My constituency of Cavan-Monaghan is a stunning example of job creation and employment that has arisen through good research and development in the agrifood area. In this context, I have in mind the successes and diversity of product of companies such as Lakeland Dairies, Glanbia, Carton Brothers, Abbot Ireland, Baileys, Terra Limited, Monaghan Mushrooms and so on. While the list is endless, this is a region in which there has been good product diversity, a value-added element, good research and development and funding therein. I appeal to the Minister to give continued priority to funding in the agrifood sector and in this area, in which our domestic produce has been turned into indigenous jobs that were created here. I believe this is critical as there is a rich return from investment in this area. Further research is necessary in this regard and Enterprise Ireland and Science Foundation Ireland should continue to invest there. For example, in the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan that I represent, County Cavan has the largest pig farming sector in Europe, that is, the largest pig farms in Europe. I believe there is merit in investing and working with that sector directly and in investing with that sector in research into diversity of food product arising therefrom. Moreover, the work of Teagasc in the area of agriculture is to be applauded and merits continuous support.

The Bill will allow Science Foundation Ireland to create additional awareness of science, technology and engineering in education. It will enable it to support them on the educational programme, to support people seeking access to them and to support them in the third level sector. I welcome this dimension of the Bill and consider it to be highly important. I commend the Government and the Minister on this and make the point alluded to by Deputy Barry earlier that it is so important at second level to get the potentially excellent science, engineering and maths students and, while not prejudicing the welfare of the weaker students, to ensure those students get the kind of support to enable them to go to the vanguard of research in the future.

In addition to Science Foundation Ireland, Enterprise Ireland also has undertaken important funding of research and development. Public funding is of course necessary because the private sector cannot see an immediate return. The private sector could not convince its shareholders that there would be an immediate return and there also is an element of risk in research and consequently, there must be State support. Significantly, in 2012 more than 40% of IDA job announcements - thankfully there were significant job announcements that year - related to companies with links to Science Foundation Ireland research teams. There was such a link and this amounted to 4,575 jobs last year. Ireland holds 20th position in the world in research capacity, which is not bad for a country of this size. We are third in the world in respect of immunology research, sixth in nanotechnology and eighth in materials science. While these are proud statistics and proud placings, it is important to maintain the priority in this area. I also am glad the Bill will facilitate research and development in Northern Ireland with supportive funding from this State and that we can work on an all-Ireland basis at ministerial level on research projects. It is very important to invest heavily in science, in research and in product development. Moreover, it is important to invest in the area of renewable energies, as has been cited. It is worth noting that 14 specific areas of expenditure were identified in the report. There are also five underlying areas. We should support those areas.

We should support the renewable energy sector. There is great potential in that sector for this country, and the potential to export energy is important. Research is achieving better outputs in renewables from existing technologies, which is more environmentally friendly and less vexatious for neighbours and so forth. That is important. The export potential in that area is enormous.

I welcome the fact the Bill facilitates a renewed focus on education and outputs in our schools, investment in Northern Ireland, investment in applied research and investment across a range of areas that will attract international business and inward investment to Ireland. The investment to date has done that successfully and that should be continued. The Bill is worthwhile and significant. It deserves the support of the House and the work of the Minister in this area is to be commended. I come from a constituency where research and development have been a huge focus for job creation and where the potential for further job creation is enormous, if there is the necessary investment.

John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Bill. As Deputy Calleary said, Fianna Fáil supports the Bill, which extends the remit of Science Foundation Ireland, SFI, so it can fund applied research in addition to its current remit. We have heard this evening about Einstein, Galileo and other historic names from the past, but we need historic names for the future in the area of science and developing new products for the creation of jobs. I do not know much about science. Indeed, when I attended secondary school in Enniscorthy my teacher, the late Mr. Jim Mooney, advised that I should stay away from science for my leaving certificate due to my lack of knowledge. The only thing I learned about was the Bunsen burner. Aside from that, I was a waste of space with regard to science. I took my teacher's advice.

The purpose of the Bill is to extend the remit of Science Foundation Ireland and to achieve the major changes the Minister mentioned in his speech. The Bill provides for a new function to enable SFI to promote and support awareness and understanding of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. It is generally recognised that there is a gap between funding for oriented basic research by SFI and the supports from Enterprise Ireland and IDA to companies for applied research opportunities. As the Minister said earlier, the funding that is being put forward will fill the gap and provide better supports to enable ideas generated by Irish research groups to be further developed and commercialised. I also welcome the fact that there will be an interconnection between Northern Ireland and the Republic. That is a good move. It is important that funding and knowledge are shared. If we can bring that about, we could extend it into the UK and, indeed, into the wider European field so scientific knowledge and the advantages that accrue from it can be pooled.

Scientific research in Ireland has come a long way. Over the last 20 years Ireland has become one of the leaders in this area, unlike our position some years ago. In fairness, Governments in the last number of decades have put science and research at the top of the agenda. That was important for developing job opportunities and encouraging multinationals to come to this country. We have seen the success of the pharmaceutical sector and companies such as the Kerry Group in other areas. These companies create huge numbers of jobs as well as being heavily involved in research and development. They have drawn down huge amounts of funding, which is to be welcomed. I hope that will continue into the future.

Two years ago the then Minister, former Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, appointed a high level group to begin work on a five year prioritisation plan for government investment in research and smart jobs. This group put a great deal of time and effort into bringing forward its conclusions. The group proposed 14 areas which it believed could be of major advantage to this country. They include digital platforms, connected health and independent living, medical devices, diagnostics, future networks in communications, therapeutics, food and health, marine, renewable energies, smart grids and smart cities and manufacturing competitiveness. These areas are very important in this country at present. They are also areas where opportunities can be created in the future.

As my party's spokesman on the marine, I have a particular interest in marine renewable energies. There are tremendous opportunities for Ireland in marine renewable energies. Ireland is one of the best locations in the world in terms of marine energy resources. This sector will seek to generate energy technologies for industry from wave, tidal and floating wind devices. Indeed, I read recently that the coast of Kilmore Quay is one of the major areas where wave energy could be generated. That is in Deputy Twomey's area of the county. It is an area that could be developed and expanded. It is also a major fishing port. Obviously if one intends to develop something in this regard it will be necessary to have discussions and dialogue with the interested parties that already operate in the fishing industry there. However, it appears to be an area we could develop and expand to create job opportunities for the future.

Food for health and functional foods is another area. It is essential to address important issues such as disease prevention, healthy aging and improving population health in general. Ireland is currently ranked second in the world in probiotics research. The Minister must put funding into these areas and prioritise them, because there are opportunities there for this country.

The current SFI function is to promote and fund orientated basic research in strategic areas of scientific endeavour that concern the future development and competitiveness of the industry and enterprise of the State. The areas of the SFI's focus since its establishment have been information and communications technology, biotechnology, sustainable energy and energy efficient technologies. It currently supports 3,000 researchers across Ireland's higher education institutions. That is a tremendous position considering where Ireland was 20 years ago. Our universities and institutes of technology are to the forefront in this regard. The south east does not have a university, despite promises by various Governments over the years that a university would be established there. Unfortunately, it did not happen. Universities such as University College Dublin, Trinity College or University College Cork should have spurs from their institutions in regions such as the south east. Indeed, I mentioned to the new Provost of Trinity College, who is a Wexford man, that the college should seriously consider having a spur and that he should pilot it in Wexford and the south-east region initially. The universities could do more to expand their services rather than having all the students congregating in Dublin and other cities. There should be an expansion of their services, as outreach centres, around the country.

I generally welcome the Bill. SFI has done an outstanding job over the years promoting research and development and helping new companies coming into the State as well as established companies. It is important that SMEs are not forgotten about in this context. We sometimes read about all the funding going to pharmaceutical and other major health and food companies but there are small companies in every county that could do with funding for research and development as well. Perhaps instead of giving them money, experts in the scientific research sector could be deployed to work with them to ensure they expand and develop. I wish the Minister of State well with the implementation of the legislation. I hope the funding will be ring-fenced and used for this purpose. He fought valiantly to make sure this money was made available in the budget and I am sure that he will seek more money in next year's budget to ensure all the expert group's recommendations are implemented and to ensure further down the road there will be new jobs and developments in this area.

Eoghan Murphy (Dublin South East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputies Donohoe and Twomey.

I thank the Minister for introducing this Bill. It is important in the context of the promotion of scientific development and scientific endeavours but it is also important in the context of the wider economy. While economic advantages brought about by scientific exploration are good, we should be careful not to reduce such an important endeavour to a simple revenue raising pursuit. Ireland will not do so because we have a proud history in scientific exploration. I refer to the unfortunate earthquake in Iran and Pakistan. My former employment was in the test ban treaty organisation in Vienna. An Irishman, Robert Mallet, is known as the father of seismology and he is often quoted as one of our great scientists who helped pave the way in this important area of basic research which was then applied after that.

There have been changes in the teaching curriculum and in how we use technology to understand the world around us. We continue to keep science at the forefront in Ireland. The city of science initiative in Dublin was positive, as are the Science Gallery in Trinity College Dublin, which attracts many visitors each year and which has fantastic exhibitions, and the annual Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition and the great excitement it generates. Other countries are learning from us promoting scientific exploration and inquisitive minds at an early age. It is important to be conscious of that and to make sure we are funding this as well as basic and applied research.

Legislation such as this has a crucial role in the strategic planning of how we invest and develop our resources in this area. Section 4 contains the meat of the Bill. A few key and important changes will be implemented. The first is the extension of SFI's remit to fund applied research, which is a welcome development. We cannot only be purists and talk about discovery for discovery's sake, although it is important. We have to think of the benefits that the commercialisation of our research or the transfer of that research to the market might have either for people in a social enterprise context or in a commercial or job creation context for the country. That must be borne in mind but I add one word of caution. We do not want to start down the road where funding of research is dependent on a proven or expected application outside the laboratory or foreseeing an application that might be developed and for which there might be a commercial response. We are doing good work in basic research and we are well ahead of the US and other competitors in this area. We must keep on funding that because we do not know what will come of it. There have been important unintended scientific discoveries from basic research in history. People often cite the discovery of penicillin and the development of breakfast cereals, which are important for children. Velcro rubber also emerged from basic research and it is important to bear funding for that in mind.

Section 4 also deals with prioritising research for funding. The Government established a high level group to identify priority areas to divert this funding to as we consider the potential opportunities for the State that are economically sustainable. That not only refers to finance but also to how we live and how we organise. It is my understanding that geothermal energy has not been included as one of the 14 areas to be examined and I find this peculiar. The Minister of State recently visited the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies and I also had an opportunity to visit. I attended an excellent two-hour lecture on geothermal energy and its potential benefits to the State. Extensive research has been carried out in this area, particularly about deep lying, low entropy geothermal energy potential about which the Minister of State will have heard. We have stolen a march on other countries that are looking into this and we have taken good steps. While Ireland is not a global leader, it is heading in that direction. If it is possible to generate geothermal energy on a wide scale, for example, through district heating and other measures, which would be good for the economy and the environment, I hope we do not miss an opportunity because this area has not been prioritised by the high level group. I hope it is not a case of politics getting in the way of us performing basic research into the land we occupy because of perceived insensitivities.

Section 5 deals with the pooling of financial resources with partners in Northern Ireland and internationally. This is a very important and welcome element of the Bill. When we consider co-operation between universities, countries, cultures and people, scientific co-operation has always been at the forefront in enhancing cultures and countries and it has been a way of bringing countries and people together. Great ideas have come from this such as the Hadron Collider in CERN and tsunami warning systems in the Pacific Ocean where a number of countries, institutes and researchers are working together and pooling their resources in the common good. Any funding we can provided in this regard will help other people and ourselves. I compliment the Minister of State on including this welcome section. I look forward to the remaining Stages of the Bill.

Paschal Donohoe (Dublin Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In response to the issue raised in the debate, it is important to note the contributions of people who will be involved in running or guiding the SFI and its new mandate. The words of Professor Brian MacCraith, president of Dublin City University, are apt. He was a member of the steering committee that examined the balance of funding and how the money could be spent in a way that fitted in with the new strategic priorities referred to by Deputy Murphy. He made a clear statement about the future role of SFI and the new mandate the Bill provides for it. He said: "In response to the Government remit, the ultimate outcome is a shift of funding towards the more applied end of the continuum of research funding ... but even though the majority of funding for research is to be earmarked for the priority areas, there is still scope for evidence-based or blue skies research". Professor Mark Ferguson, the director general of the SFI, reiterated this when he clearly said, "Some people are saying that if you're not in an area, you are not going to be funded and everything has gone to the dogs and it is all short term. That is absolutely not true". He went on to clarify the way in which this funding will be used to examine areas that are very much research focused as opposed to areas that are research focused and can generate a commercial benefit in the future.

I endorse the approach the Minister of State and the Government are taking in the legislation for two reasons. If officials in countries that are dealing with the difficulties Ireland is dealing with - some of which are in external aid programmes - were asked what they believe the engines of economic growth will be and what could stabilise their countries now, every one would refer to an export driven performance and that they want to export their way out of the difficulties they are in while supporting the indigenous economy. Not every country will be able to export its way out of the difficulties they are in with the economies they have currently.

The only way in which countries will be able to achieve a sustainable export performance is if all of them seek to sell different services and products to their respective populations. It is essential that this takes place in areas that are sustainable and in which growth can be achieved. The approach taken to the role of Science Foundation Ireland and the areas over which it has responsibility appears to be the correct way to rise to the challenge I have outlined.

Other economies will either be able to perform better than us in certain areas of economic activity, export performance and domestic consumption or they will be able to do what we do more cheaply. The reason Ireland has been able to maintain its extraordinary export performance is the diversity of companies and entrepreneurs available to us. Under this legislation, taxpayers' money will be used to provide for the next wave of such diversity. The Bill does not seek to ignore or prevent research being done for the sake of research but to use the money available to us to prioritise and support areas of pure research and ensure funding is used to create a diverse economy that is capable of pulling out of the terrible difficulty in which we find ourselves. I am confident the right choices are being made.

This issue is not only one of making the correct choices in respect of the funding available for research and development. There are massive competing demands for every cent that we allocate to research and development. Other people will seek to have this funding allocated to other areas that are of equal importance, for example, public investment programmes, social spending, reducing the tax burden and funding hospital services. The clarity provided for in the legislation will allow us to set priorities and make choices in respect of competing demands.

I have referred frequently to digital gaming in Ireland, an extraordinary industry with which the Minister of State is familiar and to which the legislation refers in the context of e-gaming. I will conclude on a hopeful note. A person with whom I spoke recently told me that, given the large number of high-quality Irish start-ups in the gaming industry, the law of averages would suggest that the next Angry Birds, a game that has generated billions of euro in revenue for a Finnish company, may come out of Ireland. He formed this view on the basis of the skill, temperament and native ability of our young people, combined with the excellence of our education system. These advantages must be overlaid with smart choices made by the Government. This Bill is an example of such a smart choice and I look forward to its prompt implementation.

Liam Twomey (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Members of the Government and legislators must realise that we are only working to provide the fabric that binds together other strengths that will make research work. Research and development is complex and varied and no one fully understands all of its various aspects and areas, whether in information technology, the pharmaceutical industry or manufacturing where a substantial amount of research is being done at all times. If everybody were to agrees on the policy to be promoted by government and the universities, something essential would be wrong with policy. This is because scientists work on the basis of differing viewpoints and a diversity of opinion about how things work. The Government's role is to support as best it can policy and governance by providing underpinning legislation that will make everything work.

The research prioritisation steering group is needed to give some form of direction to what we are doing. We cannot go down many different avenues because if we are unsure of the types of policies we are pursuing or matters such as governance, we will quickly lose focus and lose our way in respect of the manner in which research is done and its ultimate objectives.

Much comment has been made about commercialising research. Less than 1% of the research and development budget of commercial organisations such as pharmaceutical companies delivers concrete results. Research does not always guarantee an outcome, even when it is entirely commercially focused.

The purpose of the legislation is to give us some sense of the direction in which we will move and what we hope to get from the money we are spending. The organisations involved in research are diverse and the scope of the legislation extends beyond the university sector. We are trying to bring into our primary schools a certain ethos and attitude towards research and development, science and how we think about the future. Information technology such as the white board is being used in primary schools. Students in many schools do their homework on iPads, which were not even invented when I attended secondary school. I am not especially old but technology is moving on at a rapid pace. My children use iPads and information technology and are completely on the ball.

We need to spend taxpayers' money in a manner that secures the best possible return. A multi-departmental approach is required because many of the issues that arise in science, technology, engineering and maths fall within the remit of both the Department of Education and Skills and Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. The former must nurture scientific and technological thinking at primary and secondary level. Not only must the curriculum make sense, but students must have access to broadband and software. The same applies to the universities where we must raise the bar because we expect to get more from the third level sector. Anyone who attended university, specifically a mathematics, science or engineering faculty, will know that much research at third level is done for the sake of it and is pointless, non-directional and does not deliver anything. This lack of direction must be avoided which will require universities to review what they do. While it is not necessary to treat all research as commercial, it is necessary to have some form of end point and governance systems for carrying out research. Too many masters degrees lack direction and do not deliver much. This is not so much the case in respect of PhDs as the bar is set somewhat higher for doctorates. We must bring the universities on board.

Deputy John Browne referred to the need for a university in the south east. We, in the south east, are becoming a little too hung up on the need for a university in the region. Waterford has an excellent institute of technology. The institutes of technology will have a fantastic role to play in this regard, provided they have clear governance structures and are given a clear role to fulfil in the third level sector in delivering some of the objectives that have been outlined in this debate.

As I indicated, the scope of this legislation extends beyond Science Foundation Ireland and into the university sector, the institutes of technology, the IDA and multinational and indigenous companies. The Kerry Group, an indigenous multinational company based in County Kerry, will spend €700 million in the coming years developing a food research facility in County Kildare. This will provide major opportunities to masters and PhD graduates in science and physics, both with and without experience, who wish to assist in fulfilling the company's objectives for its new research facility. The Government must work with it in this regard.