Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The proposed amendment No. 7 is in keeping with the policy intentions of the Bill, and we were minded to include a very similar amendment which came up on Committee Stage in the other House. The Department sought legal advice to ensure that the proposed wording did not create any unintended consequences. The advice was that the insertion of this wording may, taken at its highest, impose an additional limiting restriction, which I know is not the intention. The research performed by the agency has already been assessed in terms of economic, social, cultural and environmental development and sustainability impacts which are all in the interests of the public good, so the intention of the amendment is already covered by the existing provision. The proposed amendments bring in a less tangible or defined limiting provision as to how this public good would be determined or measured. The existing intention of examining impact in the functions of the agency at section 9(1)(l) is far more quantifiable and defined, and this intention is already captured in the existing provision.Including this text could potentially create an unworkable level of complexity in the provision whereby additional reporting requirements would have to be introduced as an added layer of assessment with an extra layer of administrative burden attached. The role of the agency in contributing to the public good is set out be reference to its objectives in sections 8(c) and 8(d) and by reference to the economic, social, cultural, environmental and sustainability impact of the research as the assessment and success criteria. It is, therefore, not necessary to reference this concept as worded in the proposed amendment, which could potentially have unintended consequences. For that reason, we do not propose to take the amendment.

For amendment No. 8., the provision already in the text of section 8(e) aims "to promote and develop the reputation of the State internationally as a location that is favourable for undertaking research and innovation". Promoting the reputation of Ireland internationally for upholding an excellent standard of quality of research and innovation is already contained in the objects at section 8(a). The provision as already written here already supports this intention and aligns with the provision in the functions at section 9(f). The intention of the amendment is, therefore, fully captured already in the existing provision. We do not propose to accept the amendment.

With regard to amendment No. 9, as explained during the Committee Stage debate, we ran into issues with listing in the heads of the Bill. There is a risk that lists will be read as being some kind of priority order. That is not the intention. There is also a risk of imposing unintended limitations of falling behind the often rapid developments in the field. Our approach is to use the broad enabling provisions in the objects rather than listing factors to give scope for all disciplines, all types of research, all career stages and for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. We recognise the interdependence and mutually reinforcing roles of frontier and basic research and applied research. The frontier and basic research we fund today provides the foundation for the applied research of the next couple of decades to come. The existing text achieves this balance more effectively. The agency will be funding all types of research and listing these two types separately does not add anything or enhance the existing provision. For that reason, we are not proposing to accept the amendment.