Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

To be clear, no one is against the idea of entrepreneurship being supported by institutions. Rather, the concern is with how it is worded in the Bill. Had paragraph (IV) read "supporting entrepreneurship", none of us would have raised a question. The paragraph sends a strong message, one that effectively permeates and affects the rest of the Bill, as Senator Norris stated. Under this paragraph, a technological university must promote "an entrepreneurial ethos" in the performance of its functions.

We must be open to taking on constructive and helpful amendments like this one. That is good practice in academic work and in our role as legislators. Since we are speaking of universities, let us be clear in our definitions. All academics would respect that. "Ethos" means the fundamental character and is used to describe the guiding ideals, beliefs and focus of a community, nation or entity. In "ethos", we are saying that this is to be the guiding principle or character of the university. That is a significant and weighty word to attach in this space. There are important distinctions between entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial and innovation. My colleague has referred to international universities and I know of longer definitions, but one of the simpler distinctions is that, while innovation is about the creation of new capacities, ideas and knowledge, entrepreneurship is about the use or exploitation of capacities, knowledge and ideas. They are different. I do not say "exploitation" in a negative sense; I am referring to use. The other definitions of "entrepreneurship" are narrow, for example, the activity of setting up a business or businesses and taking on financial or other risks in the hope of profit or success. Entrepreneurs do important work in society, but it relates to identifying a business or other opportunity to profit or benefit from knowledge or ideas.

Within our institutions of learning, we also need to value innovation, which is about driving new ideas and looking at new ways of thinking about things. That is why "creative" is included in the simple definition proposed by my colleague. This is important.

I referred to the Centre for the Creative Arts and Media in Galway and we have discussed the institutions of law and the role of the humanities in our institutes. If we want to ensure that the new technological universities are empowered to explore and drive ideas in ways that may have benefits that are not about profit, but rather other forms of benefit, and expand our collective knowledge, they need to be mandated to do that. If they are charged with the fundamental ethos of being required to determine at all points how something can be translated into business or profit, it will be concerning. There are points at which entrepreneurship and innovation are deeply complementary, but we should acknowledge that there are other points at which they are contradictory. For example, it may be entrepreneurial to say that, since an institute can make more from a particular medication or product, a low-cost or no-cost alternative should not be proposed. If we are driven by a business logic, we will look to where that benefit can be found as opposed to the wider benefit.

This is a constructive and simple amendment. It gives our universities freedom and support. I imagine that they support it, and I hope they do. I also hope that the Minister of State will take it on board.