David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and I welcome the opportunity to discuss the role of research in contributing to knowledge in the economy. Even though it has a number of concerns, my party will not oppose the Bill. The Minister of State will see the concerns as genuine and may be able to address them in his response. I recognise that the Government has safeguarded, to an extent, funding for research while other public services have experienced severe cuts. I give credit to the Minister of State where it is due in that regard. The legislation will allow us to maximise the money spent.

The role of research in a modern economy is crucial. A strong research and development sector is an essential part of a modern knowledge economy. The future sustainability of our economy will be based on research and development of skills, knowledge and products. Therefore, Sinn Féin is supportive of the measure and recognises that the responsibility for this goes beyond the role of SFI and the third level institutions, although they unquestionably have a vital role.

It is striking that one of the areas of development is computer technology and the Internet. However, computer studies is not a core subject for schools or included among subjects for the junior certificate and leaving certificate examinations. I have raised these matters on many occasions at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. The Government should give serious consideration to this point.

I also support the extension of the role of SFI to support applied research. It is undoubtedly welcome. We are also very much of the view that a balance must be struck. To some degree, we are concerned that the focus on applied research may undermine the work in oriented basic research. One scientist claims that the work of Peter Higgs in identifying the particle that has become known as the Higgs boson might not have been supported if the focus was solely on applied research, as commercial interest at the time would have been limited. Pure mathematics, which is the starting point for many of the areas of applied research, may not be supported to the degree it should be. I ask the Minister of State how he intends to maintain a balance between the oriented basic approach and applied research. This is essential to ensure the long-term nature of research is not lost to the short-term return.

At the release of the research prioritisation plan, Jim O'Hara, the chairman of the steering group, called for the delivery of specific economic outcomes from investment in research. To date, the Government's economic plans have been short on economic outcomes and targets. Our various jobs strategies, the same proposals and investments reheated and re-promoted, have failed to deliver the jobs we need in any real way. Can the Minister of State outline how we will measure the success of investment in research? Will SFI monitor patent applications, jobs created, the value of the product and the benefits that will accrue from it?

I acknowledged that not all investment in applied research transfers to productivity and product. However, as much it does, we should seek to measure it. Questions must be asked. How will the Government ensure the State is not subsidising investment without a return? How will the Minister of State safeguard a return for public investment? Will SFI look for an equity stake? Will it seek a return on investments made? Will it retain ownership of patents?

Under section 4 of the Bill, SFI also gets additional responsibility for the promotion and support of awareness of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Given the lack of facilities in schools and the lack of computer science at junior certificate and leaving certificate level, how does the Minister of State see this being supported and rolled out within the existing SFI budget?

Under section 5, we welcome recognition of the need for partnerships with institutions and researchers in the North. More could be done to promote cross-Border research partnerships. I would like to hear the view of the Minister of State on how this can be further developed.

Finally, I am concerned and perplexed at the inclusion of section 8. It differs entirely from the remainder of the Bill and refers to the Government proposals to change the remit of Shannon Development. A separate and comprehensive Bill should have been developed on this matter for the full consideration of the Oireachtas. This should have been debated on its merits, which would have been a preferable way to enact legislation. I give the Bill a qualified welcome but I have some concerns. Given the day that is in it, a qualified welcome is the best I can do.