Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science debate -
Tuesday, 23 Apr 2024

Scrutiny of EU Legislative Proposals

An Cathaoirleach

Are the minutes of 10 April agreed? Agreed.

I welcome, from the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Mr. Joseph Moore, principal officer, and Ms Mary Twomey, assistant principal. The officials are here to brief the committee on COM (2024) 27. I will invite Mr. Moore to give a brief opening statement of three minutes. This will be followed by questions from members. Each member will have a two-minute slot to ask questions and for the witnesses to respond. The committee will publish the opening statement on its website after the meeting.

I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. The officials are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise, make charges against a person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of a person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed by the Chair to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction. I invite Mr. Moore to make his opening statement.

Mr. Joseph Moore

I thank the Chair and members for the invitation. We understand the committee is seeking a short briefing on the European Commission White Paper on dual use. The White Paper is part of the economic security package published by the European Commission in January 2024. The economic security package includes a number of work strands to progress the implementation of a common framework to ensure Europe's economic security.

The White Paper is a Commission consultation paper on dual use. Dual-use technologies have the potential to be used for both military and civil purposes. The Commission is seeking the views of European stakeholders on how research and development in technologies with dual-use potential are supported at a European level.

Under the multi-annual financial framework, MFF, there is a dedicated framework programme to fund research and innovation at European level. The current one is Horizon Europe. Horizon Europe is the largest EU-funded research and innovation programme ever.

It has a budget of €95 billion over the seven-year period 2021 to 2027. It exclusively funds research for civil applications. This is complemented by the European Defence Fund, which supports research for military purposes. The European Commission is seeking to assess if the current approach is still appropriate in light of the changing geopolitical context. The White Paper explores options to facilitate cross-fertilisation between civil and defence research and development activities, as well as to create greater synergies between EU programmes. The White Paper acknowledges that enhancing the support for technologies with dual-use potential at EU level brings both opportunities and challenges. It sets out three options for consideration. First, building on the current approach, where Horizon Europe has an exclusive focus on civil applications, incremental adjustments could be introduced to promote investment and technologies with dual-use potential within the legal provisions of the existing EU programmes. The second option involves removing the exclusive focus on civil applications in selected parts of the next framework programme for research and innovation and facilitating cross-fertilisation of civilian and defence research activities, and the third creates a dedicated mechanism to support research and development with a dual-use potential. This mechanism would have its own budget and its own rules for participation. However, it would add complexity to the EU landscape for research and development supports.

It is appropriate for the European Commission to consult its stakeholders on the proposed options. The appropriate time for member states to engage on this issue will be when the Commission brings forward its proposal for the next EU framework programme on research and innovation during 2025. Ireland has favoured retaining the civilian focus of the framework programmes and maintaining a clear separation between civilian and defence research. The Department is currently consulting the national research and innovation community to help inform Ireland's position on all aspects of the next framework programme. The Commission consultation is open until 30 April. We are encouraging the research and innovation community to respond to that consultation.

I am happy to take any questions committee members may have.

An Cathaoirleach

The first person up is Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I thank the witnesses for attending. We are dealing with an issue that is very live at this point. We have all seen multiple questions asked in the Dáil and Seanad regarding dual use and ensuring we have a sufficient number of criteria and checks to make sure we definitely are not supplying anything - while it may have civilian application - that may possibly end up as weapons of war that are being used particularly in Gaza against the Palestinian people at this time. What is the Department's view very specifically regarding this communication?

Mr. Joseph Moore

This is the preparation for the next framework programme for research and innovation. The Commission is consulting with stakeholders across Europe. It is aware, as we have said, of the changing circumstances. It has the right to propose the next framework programme and we look forward to engaging with the Commission on what will be in it. We do not know what will be in it at this point-----

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

Therefore, the Department does not have a position at this point.

Mr. Joseph Moore

No.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

We can all guess where the Commission is going. We have all seen the conversations in the public domain regarding joint security and defence from a European point of view and even beyond that. We have heard Ursula von der Leyen and others talking about the European weapons industry. There is huge fear out there. The Irish people are still very much wedded to the whole idea of neutrality. As much as we know this is a tech hub and we are aware of the importance of the tech and IT sectors, I do not think anyone would be in any way supportive of anything that would lead to parts - though some parts may be absolutely necessary - of weapons of war being provided through or by Ireland, or by companies that have a footprint in Ireland. When this happens, what can we do from a point of view on ensuring Ireland's position? It is all well and good having those checks that are happening, whether we are talking about enterprise and others if others are engaging from a point of view of research that allows for the development of parts of these weapons of war.

An Cathaoirleach

Will Mr. Moore provide a brief reply? I am only giving people two minutes because we have other witnesses waiting outside.

Mr. Joseph Moore

For the current framework programme, Horizon Europe, Ireland's position was that there should be a civilian programme. That position was maintained in the final regulation. We have had success in articulating the civilian nature of the research and innovation programme in the past. Based on the consultation we are carrying out with stakeholders, our position is likely to be that we would favour a civilian nature to the next framework programme. That is the position we would articulate. It is important to note that people apply for funding for research and innovation; nobody is obliged to seek funding under the programme. The awards are made on a competitive basis.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

We need to be very careful in regard to the drift that is happening in Europe at the minute.

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

I am conscious that we will be going into another session shortly. I thank the witnesses. We are talking about significant funding and we want to ensure that Ireland gets a fair share of that. Since the last Horizon funding framework, Brexit has occurred. I am interested in hearing from the witnesses the impact of that and how Ireland may be impacted. I am conscious that a lot of the funding was provided in partnership with a lot of universities, etc. in England.

Mr. Joseph Moore

Obviously, the UK was part of the previous framework programme. It has been associated to the current framework programme since December. Our stakeholder base collaborates with member states across the Union. Our strongest collaboration would be with the larger countries, such as Spain, Germany and France. Our researchers have managed to develop collaborations with researchers in those countries, notwithstanding the fact that the UK has left the European Union. The UK remains a partner under the framework programme. In terms of the strength of the collaboration, the UK is No. 8 with Ireland. Researchers have diversified their partnerships across Europe, which is a good thing. They have not, however, neglected the UK collaborations.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

The witnesses seemed to suggest that Ireland was waiting to see what our position would be. I would hope that Ireland would have a very clear position between the options presented. Can the witnesses clarify whether Ireland has a very clear and strong position in respect of the first option, namely retaining a separate civilian focus for Horizon rather than the military focus of the defence fund? Is it the case that Ireland is supporting the first option? Of course, I hope the committee will promote that option.

Mr. Joseph Moore

Under the current framework programme, it is a civilian programme. That is what the-----

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

Under the three options in the White Paper-----

Mr. Joseph Moore

Our understanding is that this will help to inform the Commission's proposal for the next framework programme. Nothing has been decided at this point.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

At this point, is Ireland providing input? This is a discussion paper. I know how the Commission works. Ireland has an input. Is Ireland feeding back? Ireland has very specific obligations in terms of neutrality. We also have very clear obligations in respect of the Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Mines Act and other areas. There are serious concerns. Horizon used to be about smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Of course, we need that Horizon funding to tackle our climate crisis and the many social problems in Ireland. If that is redirected into defence and military, that takes from those purposes. It also creates specific issues for Ireland as a neutral country. Why has Ireland not taken a clear position to say that we want Horizon to retain a civilian purpose? Why are we not conveying that back?

Mr. Joseph Moore

At this point in time, the Department has not made a submission to the Commission's consultation. Our position is that we will engage with the Commission once it comes up with its proposal to do whatever it proposes to do. We have promoted the consultation among our stakeholders and we are engaging with stakeholders to prepare a consultation for the next framework programme. Our position will be that until the Commission makes a proposal, we do not know what it is going to propose. Of course, the Commission has to make a proposal to member states. We, as a member state, will have the opportunity to-----

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

We have chosen not to make a submission on the White Paper and not to give input at this point, which seems to mean that we are allowing this to slide and we are in or out of the final proposal, rather than trying to influence the proposal from the Commission.

Mr. Joseph Moore

We would say that the Commission has the right to make a proposal to the member states. As a member state, we will engage in discussions with the Commission on a technical level and reflect whatever position our stakeholders want.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

One of the things in the proposal is that there are critical technology areas identified which must be able to be used within Europe. One of these is artificial intelligence.

An Cathaoirleach

I ask the witness to respond to that. The Senator has had three minutes now.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

I appreciate that. I have a specific question. Is there a danger that Irish research would be used for artificial intelligence in autonomous weapons?

An Cathaoirleach

I ask Mr. Moore to give a brief reply.

Mr. Joseph Moore

The researchers themselves will determine what areas they research in. At this point in time, we do not have a large engagement on any defence research activities under the framework programme. Each researcher would make up his or her mind on whether to engage in that.

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

The policy will set that.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

The time is very short for what is a very important discussion. I find this proposal deeply concerning. It is not the direction in which Horizon Europe should be moving. It would create a competitive disadvantage in Ireland if we had to competitively tender in this sort of dual-use area, quite apart from the moral implications. I recommend that the Chair and committee consider making a submission as part of this process because there may not have been time for the Department to intervene yet given that it has not seen a concrete proposal. It is, however, within the committee's rights to make a submission and make our own views at this point clear.

I have two specific questions. It is not for the Department or civil servants to take a position on what Ireland's position will be. In his opening statement, Mr. Moore stated: "Ireland has favoured retaining the civilian focus of the framework programmes and maintaining a clear separation between civilian and defence research." That is also my opinion. The Department has a new Minister. Has this issue been discussed with him yet and has he made his position clear? Whatever the Minister directs will be the position of the Department.

Mr. Joseph Moore

It has not been discussed at this point in time with the Minister. We had a preliminary meeting with the Minister last week on a whole range of issues. This is very much the start of a process by the Commission. It is not as if this issue will not come back to member states for further discussion.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

The Department had a previous Minister who has now moved upwards. Was it discussed with the previous Minister, now Taoiseach, and, if so, did he make his position on the matter explicit?

Mr. Joseph Moore

It was not discussed explicitly with that Minister.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

If it was not discussed with either Minister, how is Mr. Moore in a position to state that Ireland has favoured retaining the civilian status? Is that based on historical precedent?

Mr. Joseph Moore

Yes. For the last framework programme, which is now Horizon Europe, when the proposal was made we did a consultation with our stakeholders. We issued a position paper as a Department once we knew what the proposal was and in anticipation of the discussion we would be having with the Commission. It was on that basis we were able to say our stakeholders favoured a civilian approach and that was in fact the outcome of the actual discussion with the Commission and the other member states.

Deputy Marc Ó Cathasaigh

While I do not necessarily like to create work for the secretariat, I suggest a second action, namely, that we write to the Minister and ask him to make his position explicit.

An Cathaoirleach

We will go into private session after this.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

I welcome Mr. Moore. How much is in the European Defence Fund for the seven-year period?

Mr. Joseph Moore

It is €8 billion.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

If the programmes are merged, they will have access to more than €100 billion. Is that correct?

Mr. Joseph Moore

Yes, if the allocations remain the same. That is part of the issue that there is a European Defence Fund under the current MFF and there is a research and innovation programme. They are two distinct programmes.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

If the programmes are merged, presumably military defence funding will have access to a greater pot. Is that fair to say?

Mr. Joseph Moore

I do not think it would happen like that. To be very clear, the research and innovation programme is designed to facilitate research and innovation. The European Defence Fund has a much different context to it.

There is a research element to it but, as the Commission highlights, there is a concern about dual-use research activities and how to better cross-fertilise the use of the two.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

That is okay. In terms of the politics of this, is this being urged by the Commission? Is the policy to review it being urged by the Commission because of pressure from more eastern countries on the European Commission?

Mr. Joseph Moore

I do not know. This is part of the overall economic security policy but I suppose the Commission is not unaware of the changing circumstances for many other member states.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

If the Commission were to put forward a proposal that Ireland does not like, what would the consequence of that be? Will it be through qualified majority voting? How will that issue be determined?

Mr. Joseph Moore

Ultimately, obviously, the Commission will make its proposal, which will be discussed at a technical level. The European Council will then make its position clear. The partial general approach will taken. Then it will go to the European Parliament. However, there is no coercion, so nobody in Ireland will be forced to apply for funding under that. There are many different calls and many different programmes.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Yes, but it would be a fund that would have a dual-use purpose.

Mr. Joseph Moore

Potentially. That is one of the proposals or options.

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

There is therefore very little we can do about it, if that is ultimately the decision that is made by the Parliament on the recommendation of the Commission.

Mr. Joseph Moore

Well, if that is what is decided-----

Deputy Jim O'Callaghan

Yes, if that is what is decided.

Mr. Joseph Moore

-----but again, there will be no coercion of our research community to engage with it.

An Cathaoirleach

I call Senator Gavan.

Senator Paul Gavan

I have real concerns in relation to this White Paper. Mr. Moore has already referenced the €8 billion from the EU defence budget and a further €10 billion from the start-up entrepreneur programme, STEP. There are also the reinforcements of the European Defence Agency, EDA, through the Common Procurement Act, which I think has approximately €300 million. It does not therefore seem as though the EU is stuck for finances when it comes to militarisation. My first question is, why do we need this White Paper when global military expenditures have now reached an all-time high? I will follow up with two or three questions in order to use my time effectively. Further, is this not evidence that the EU Commission has turned away from targeting climate change and towards a more militarised EU?

I also want to reference how ten Irish third-level institutions are currently taking part in Horizon Europe projects with Israeli Government departments, universities and private companies. Israel is, in fact, one of the main beneficiaries of Horizon Europe, and Israel, according to the International Court of Justice, is carrying out a plausible genocide. There are therefore human rights concerns here. Is it not the case that if options 2 or 3 were to be enacted, Irish researchers and EU taxpayers could find themselves undertaking or funding research that could contribute to serious human rights violations and even genocide? Finally, I want to ask Mr. Moore for a list of stakeholders, to whom I think he referred in his previous statement. It would be helpful to all of us if he could provide that list. Chair, I will use my time effectively and those are the questions I would like to be answered, if possible.

Mr. Joseph Moore

There were a number of issues there. First, it is a Commission White Paper, so the Commission is seeking to inform itself. The Commission is seeking information on how it will make its proposal regarding the next framework programme or other programmes. I cannot really comment on the other defence funding mechanisms or structures that are in place because I am not familiar with them.

In terms of the list of stakeholders, to manage Ireland's participation in the framework programme, we have a high-level group that is made up of different Departments, agencies and the performers themselves. We can give the Senator a list of the members of that high-level group. That is not an issue.

I am not sure that I have answered all of Senator Gavan’s questions, but there was a series of them.

Senator Paul Gavan

There is the issue of the Israeli-sponsored Horizon Europe work. To me, it is shocking that ten universities here are actively helping the Israeli Government even while it is engaging in genocide. Surely, that is entirely unacceptable.

Mr. Joseph Moore

We have previously answered parliamentary questions in this regard. The information that is available on the European Commission's database indicates that there are a limited number of engagements by Irish universities in consortia that also have Israeli participation. We have to be clear about how many of the activities under the framework programme, and particularly under Pillar 2, which involves groups of researchers coming together to undertake research in a specific area. Sometimes, these consortia are quite large. There could be up to 20 or 30 different universities participating in them. From a review of the awards that have been made where there are both Irish and Israeli universities, they are part of a consortium.

Senator Paul Gavan

We are talking about a recognised apartheid state.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Moore to reply and then we will conclude.

Mr. Joseph Moore

The information we have is that these collaborations were entered into some time ago, perhaps two or three years ago.

Senator Paul Gavan

It needs to be addressed.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the witnesses. We will go back into private session.

The joint committee went into private session at 11.45 a.m. and resumed in public session at 11.52 a.m.