Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 7 seeks "to promote the development of public research for the public good which addresses social and environmental needs". There is an error in the location in which it is proposed to insert amendment No. 8. I will speak to the general point of that amendment but might not move it. Amendment No. 9 is an alternative to amendment No. 7, which also inserts a new object into the Bill, requiring "frontier and basic research" which might serve the public good.

I am conscious that some elements of the Bill lead to a concern that our research and innovation landscape may become too focused on serving the commercial interests or the business interests that operate within our State. We mention that Enterprise Ireland is involved in the development of the five-year strategy, which is a privilege not given to many of the other key bodies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency or any of the other bodies with which the agency may partner. Enterprise Ireland, I think, at two points in the Bill is given a special and privileged role to play. It may have much to contribute, but there is a concern about imbalance in those regards. It is really important that the public good - not simply the public good in terms of tax receipts from large multinational corporations but the public good in its wider sense - is at the forefront of the purposes of research and innovation and the designing of research and innovation. To ensure that research and innovation which specifically addresses our social and environmental needs be to the forefront and that they be designed to serve the public good is really important. I mentioned the most innovative idea or the most important piece of research. For example, some of the actions we can take in respect of climate are not ones that will necessarily be profitable for anybody but they will be immensely important for the public good. Some of the policies and some of the research on social cohesion may not generate receipts for the State in terms of money but are absolutely priceless when one can support community development or find new ways or new approaches to bring society and community closer together. These are some of the areas that are really important for the public good. It is really important and it has been deeply illustrated by the Covid crisis that we need to have more medical research that is focused on and has the goal of the public good at its centre, rather than solely or predominantly having profit as its centre point and chief arbiter. We saw that in the appalling failure to share research and innovations in respect of the Covid vaccine with the global south. There was a lack of focus and a lack of mandate in respect of the public good, even though so much of the research that developed the vaccines came from public money.

Amendment No. 9 is about supporting and promoting "frontier and basic research for the public good". I will not elaborate too much on that, but something that was put very eloquently by Senator Malcolm Byrne and others is that we need to support frontier and basic research because that is what creates the next level of applied research. You give and support space for people to explore and to look at ideas. This reaches back to the question of stipends and funding. There is and has been an over-reliance in Ireland, particularly in the space of PhD workers and PhD stipends, on those who can get commercial subsidy or commercial supplements or who can be funded by industry. It is not always about what can be applied or monetised but it is about frontier and basic research that pushes forth not just our knowledge but also our understanding in ways that may prove to be of great benefit at a later point.

There is a misplacing as regards amendment No. 8. It is an important point. It had been intended to insert the amendment after the line "to promote and develop the reputation of the State internationally as a location that is favourable for undertaking research and innovation". The problem with the language that is there at the moment - and I know we cannot change it at this point - is that it refers to the reputation of the State being based on being "a location that is favourable for undertaking research and innovation". That is not the same as the reputation of the State for doing research and innovation, producing important research and producing innovation. Being favourable as a location for doing it directly sends a signal that Ireland may be a favourable location from a tax perspective, and we know that Ireland is a very favourable location from a tax perspective for undertaking research and innovation. However, we should not rest our international reputation solely on that and not seeking or having the ambition in this new agency and in its objects that Ireland would have a reputation internationally for research and innovation, not simply for being tax-favourable for those who may wish to undertake it. That message about the reputation reflects a paucity of imagination and a paucity of ambition as to what we should look for from this new agency. I hope that, regardless of this wording, the agency will seek to promote and support Ireland's reputation internationally for actually delivering research and innovation. I referred to the placing of this amendment. I know we will not have an opportunity to address it again. The phrase is placed in the wrong point of the Bill, so I will not be able to move amendment No. 8, but I wanted to signal the issue.

I will pass over to the Minister of State or anybody else who wishes to speak.