Results 12,681-12,700 of 26,396 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: We would all do that and I am getting to that point because Dr. Donnelly knows that I received more than a dozen protected disclosures in respect of WIT, which were passed onto the HEA and which led to an examination being carried out. We cannot get into that because it is now with the HEA and legal people but that examination was carried out on the basis of concerns that people in 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: I can accept that. Of course, the institute has its policy and people can make protected disclosures within the institute. They can also make them outside the institute to different bodies, which they have done. In the case of the report that is not yet published, and might not be published, there were 50 people, but there were people from within the institute who had different views.

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: We will not get into it but-----

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: Twelve or 13, yes.

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 has made that point. In fact, we did make that point when the Department and the HEA representatives were present. We had a discussion this morning during which there was a recognition that people were interviewed. This committee has received an additional protected disclosure that we are now dealing with which might be carried over to whatever will follow from the HEA's...

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 refer back to the report, which is more about clarification and not whether ethically they were right or wrong. It is about the reason the decision was made to do this. Paragraph 3.40 states that at the final negotiation, the equity for the institute was reduced from 15% to 12%. I think Mr. O'Sullivan said that was at the request of Enterprise Ireland.

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: Who made the decision to reduce it?

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 that decision made only by the financial controller or did it go back to the board? Is Mr. McCarthy 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: In future, would it be better if it went to the board?

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 is the point. It would be better for everybody involved if that decision then went to the board. The report also states that the institute approved a pool of 24,000 shares, referred to by the institute as a FeedHenry employee pool, which would reduce it to 10.8%. Who made that decision?

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 financial controller again made that decision. Does Mr. McCarthy know if that was unilateral?

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: Do any of the witnesses know?

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 accept-----

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 sorry, but that is Professor Donnelly's experience. He cannot say that with any certainty. He is saying that is possibly how it happened. We might get a note from the institute which details who made the decision to reduce the equity from 15% to 12%, which it seems was the financial controller, who then made the decision to reduce it further to 10.8%. Did that go to the board?

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: If Dr. O'Sullivan can, yes. On the employee pool to which the 24,000 additional shares were distributed, does Mr. McCarthy know if any existing shareholders benefitted from those 24,000 shares?

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: Does Professor Donnelly know if any shareholders benefitted?

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 looked at the company records and three of the four main shareholders, if I am right, or a number of them, benefitted from these 24,000 shares. Am I right or wrong in 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 it be clarified whether any of the four main shareholders benefitted from those 24,000 shares?

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 a matter for WIT if WIT agrees to reduce its shareholding.

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 have the forms from the Companies Registration Office, CRO. I would rather not put the names into the public domain. The point I made earlier stands but Professor Donnelly might come back with a note on that. I am not asking for names; I am asking about the existing shareholders. He said there were four main shareholders in FeedHenry and then a number of other employees who might have...