Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I always accept Senator Barrett's interventions in the spirit in which he makes them. We must be clear, however. Prioritisation is not the entire funding game. There is a myriad of sources.

If the principle of excellence is adhered to and impact measured there should be no reason any researcher who is doing excellent research with impact within Irish society could not derive funding from some source. I wonder if some of the researchers who have approached Senator Barrett or are writing letters to The Irish Times or tweeting on this issue have read the steering group document. The document is giving birth to 14 action plans and the 13 systemic changes that are necessary. The document also contains a chapter giving examples of policy research. These examples include climate change, related environmental research, bio-energy, population health research and health services research. Those are mere examples. There is a funding mechanism for everybody, so long as the research measures up to the principles of excellence and impact.

The latest ¤60 million round of investment funding announced by Science Foundation Ireland two weeks ago includes many recipients of funding who are carrying out oriented basic research. There is clear evidence of that across a myriad of landscapes which map on to prioritisation, but more than ¤2 million was given to MACSI, a pure mathematics entity operating out of the University of Limerick. If we are imaginative, I do not see why we cannot continue to fund such researchers. They need to start thinking more laterally about engaging and collaborating in an interdisciplinary fashion, think about their own output as it stands at present and find new areas of opportunity for themselves. Some of them need to read the documentation before making false assumptions. I say this with respect, having read some of the public discourse on this issue.