Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I also welcome this legislation, for which I have often called. During our debate on the OECD report, I trenchantly spoke about some of its pluses and minuses. It is important that the issue of which I was most in favour has been addressed by the Bill and the issue to which I was most opposed in the OECD report has been ignored by the Government.

The Bill brings the institutes of technology under the remit of the HEA by removing the Department's power in that regard, as other speakers have said. The most negative aspect of the OECD report was that it recommended doctoral level research to be confined to universities, which was an appallingly bad call. I welcome that the Government ignored it and that, in his Budget Statement, the Minister for Finance announced that such research would take place throughout the third level sector. I look forward to that crucial provision. Why is it important? Through it, we can tie research, technology and development to the commercial world. We can take research and apply it, particularly to the marketplace. The value of such research is that it can be advanced to the point at which it can be commercialised. This should be done in universities and institutes.

For 15 years I have been complaining about how little we spend on research and development. While the figure has been improved time and again, our spending remains low in European terms. The seed capital provided by the Government to third level education is important, but approximately €200 million of that is provided to universities while only a couple of million euro is provided to the institutes of technology. This is unfair and lacks equity. Will the Minister of State address this matter?

If we are to translate research to the marketplace, we will do so here. If we are to progress the innovation agenda, it will occur in the institutes of technology. Creating products from ideas is crucial. I referred to this issue yesterday morning, that is, how we must move from call centre-type employment to added value-type employment. Adding an intellectual capacity to what is happening in the field of research would accomplish that. Currently, companies approach institutes seeking help to develop their ideas into products, but the institutes do not have the space or facilities to provide that help. We are all losing out as a result, for which reason the institutes should receive more support.

Each institute of technology has an incubation section. While there is collaboration across that sector, it requires greater investment. This money will grow. It is the parable of the talents, namely, instead of burying talents, we are allowing them to be invested in and to develop. The importance of such nurturing is crucial. What does it give us? I have discussed the proposals with institutes of technology and have read their documentation and the research they have carried out. I have seen their plans and witnessed their innovation and vision. If we allow them to develop along the lines they have suggested a lot is to be gained by our economy.

One sentence in the Minister of State's speech summarises the proposals. She said the Bill would allow greater managerial freedom to respond to the opportunities and challenges of supporting regional and national social and economic development. The rest of the speech was not necessary because that sums up how the institutes of technology can be developed. If that is allowed to happen they can provide a constant output of doctoral level graduates, which is crucial to the world of research and development. We do not yet understand that research must take place at every level. While solid research has been carried out in colleges and universities in recent years the level of research must grow. Most has been at graduate or post-graduate level but our economy now needs doctoral level research to progress and the institutes of technology can give us that.

The institutes of technology can also strengthen the regional and sectoral involvement in the innovation infrastructure of the country, which is crucially important. They can enable industry-led technology to guide the collaboration of industry-led technology and to focus on medium-term research and technology issues. People can come with an idea and it can be progressed to the point where it can be brought forward to the market place.

Institutes of technology can also establish themselves as drivers for cluster-based research, involving institutes, universities and industry, which is almost exactly what the Minister for Finance said in his Budget Statement last December. They can also create a focal point for the innovative integration of research, teaching and industry. When they are tied together there is extraordinary synergy and innovation, giving them the opportunity to move things forward.

They will also maximise the commercialisation opportunities for publicly-funded research programmes, for which we, as taxpayers, pay. The programmes I mentioned were mainly commercial and industry-led. They are hugely important but would it not also be excellent if State-led, publicly-funded research programmes were also developed? The opportunities in this sector are boundless. There is no limit to the march of the institutes of technology, if we give them the space and the necessary seed capital. We should allow them to flourish by integrating their work with other institutes, with industry and with local initiatives focusing on social and economic needs.

I have studiously avoided talking about the Bill because it is, in the main, something with which we are all in agreement. I want to look beyond the Bill and consider the next stage in the process. We must allow it to bridge the gaps among research, education, teaching, knowledge and epistemology and tie them all together in a pragmatic way, as advocated by Senator Fitzgerald, and in a way that is academically based.

I will finish by referring to two issues of concern to which the Minister of State referred. I read through the legislation and share her concern over security of tenure, about which a number of people have spoken to me. The Minister of State said they did not have anything to worry about. I have carefully examined sections 13 and 14. Section 14(3) makes it clear that the appropriate sections of the Vocational Education (Amendment) Act 1944 shall apply to all those in a college who were appointed prior to the commencement of the subsection. Section 13 states that new appointments will also be covered. Can the Minister of State confirm that for the record? People are concerned about it. I want to be sure that if there is any problem afterwards I can point out those sections and tell people I was given assurances that they had nothing to worry about. I would not want academic appointments to institutes of technology to be less well-protected than those in the university sector.