Feargal Quinn (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Crucially, the Bill provides a definition for section 12 funding, which is, essentially, State money. The objective of this distinction is to ensure that the State has the power of direction and oversight to moneys that are distributed as part of the Higher Education Authority but, importantly, that this does not hold for other moneys. This is quite novel and deserving of attention. I am not sure that the Minister in her statement gave it the attention it deserves. I believe the change being proposed by Senator Barrett is a very fair one. From a business perspective, I agree that income obtained by universities from other sources should not be subject to State operational management. I am interested in hearing the Minister's views on this. This may mean that universities will seek to expand in other areas. Section 8 provides that a university can establish a corporation or company. The overall aim is to encourage a university to establish so-called spin-off firms. The initial phase of a company is vital, with so many failing in their first year.

Having a company attached to a university while it matures is a very sensible approach. I have personal experience of it. Some years ago when the BSE crisis occurred, my company, Superquinn, had a problem. We wondered how we could guarantee where meat was going, and we found a company, IdentiGEN, in Trinity College. It has been very successful, and we were the first company in the world to trace every single sliver of beef from every animal that was slaughtered and know exactly which farm it came from. It put people's minds at rest and our business increased while others were in difficulties. IdentiGEN has since blossomed around the world and is doing very well. Such intellectual property is vital, and converting it into business and job creation is even more important. Section 10 of the Bill will provide for a so-called intellectual property protocol, and this protocol will be linked to the intellectual property protocol outlined by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. Thus, the Bill aims to encourage the commercialisation of intellectual property within the universities and there have been numerous instances of it in addition to IdentiGEN.

The Bill also aims to improve the job situation of universities and addresses pay rates and pensions. Senator Norris also mentioned academic tenure and the Bill aims to clear up the area and bring some degree of protection for academics and strengthen the principle of academic freedom. It is not that one can never be fired, but that one cannot be fired based on their having discovered an unpopular research result or teaching a controversial subject. The Bill also calls for the promotion and facilitation of “the internationalisation of education (including, in particular, higher education), innovation, research and scholarship, both within and outside of the State". We can do much more in this area in creating world class institutions that we have to expand.

I applaud Senator Barrett's work on the Bill which is a sensible step forward. It is particularly important that we continually look at the university sector, aiming to improve it in the context of massive international competition. I was disappointed in the Minister's words. Many years ago, a civil servant told me that when he wrote to somebody with bad news he would begin by saying, “I enthusiastically support what you are doing, however...” The word “however” put the person back. The Minister used the words “difficulties” and “concerns” several times. There is much in the Bill and while the Minister made some good and supportive comments on it, I would have loved to have heard more positive and definite support along with her concerns. The Bill needs and deserves support and can be improved no end if the Minister accepts the Bill on Second Stage and lets it go on to Committee Stage, where all the changes she, and all of us, would like can be made. I urge the Minister to accept the Bill.