Results 13,761-13,780 of 26,685 for speaker:David Cullinane

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Consultancy work was undertaken by Aceno using institute staff and no issues were found.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Professor Donnelly referenced that when he appeared before the committee previously. The report continues: "However, the Institute was unable to provide any documentation related to that review when requested".

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: The review means that one should do certain things. Records must be kept of meetings or telephone calls. Is that the view of Mr. McCarthy?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: A review is a review. However, the report states there is no documentary evidence to support the fact that there was a review.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: I hope Professor Donnelly is clear that I am fully aware of that.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: It is not for me to make a judgment on whether the review took place. I am saying that the Comptroller and Auditor General can only work on the basis of supporting documentation. He did not find any documentation and so cannot comment when no documents whatsoever exist. Would that be fair?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Can Mr. McCarthy even conclude that a review took place?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: So that Mr. Donnelly is clear, I am not saying that, the Comptroller and Auditor General is saying that.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: I am willing to accept that the review took place. I am not disputing that and I want to be fair to the individual who carried out the review. One thing we are trying to achieve in this process is that any review is properly documented in the future. We are not in dispute. I am not accusing anybody of saying they did a review that was not done but unfortunately the Comptroller and Auditor...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Was Mr. Donnelly a shareholder and director in that company?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Was he also the vice president for research at that time?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: The report goes on, at paragraph 3.37: "On 29 November 2010, an official from the Research Office emailed FeedHenry Ltd outlining his concerns at the changes sought." Somebody from the research office obviously had a concern and contacted the company to communicate that. Is that correct?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: The paragraph continues: "The official's view was that the institute should receive the previously agreed 15% share of the equity." Was that all done? Is there documentation to support that?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Can I ask Mr. Donnelly if the committee can see that documentation? I will let him answer in a second but I just want to know first because I am not yet finished with Mr. McCarthy. Can the committee receive that documentation?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: The paragraph continues: "The official also signalled that the Commercialisation Committee would commence an oversight role from 1 December 2010." Can Mr. McCarthy tell me was that ever done?

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: In paragraph 3.37: "The official also signalled that the Commercialisation Committee would commence an oversight role."

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: That was the first time the commercialisation committee would have-----

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Paragraph 3.38 refers to the vice president for research and that refers to Mr. Donnelly, does it not? Yes. The paragraph reads: "Although the Vice President for Research was not included in the correspondence concerning the proposed change of terms, he [Mr. Donnelly] emailed the Secretary/Financial Controller, later on 29 November 2010, in support of the company's proposal for the...

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Mr. Donnelly is the vice president for research of the institute and a shareholder in the company and he emails the institute to say he is in favour of the reduction in equity of the institute.

Public Accounts Committee: Special Report No. 104 of the Comptroller and Auditor General: Waterford Institute of Technology - Development and Disposal of Intellectual Property in FeedHenry (24 Jan 2019)

David Cullinane: Would Mr. Donnelly let me make my point? I will then ask for the opinions of others. Would Mr. Donnelly not see that as a blatant conflict of interest?