Professor Dervilla Donnelly and Mr. Cecil Keaveney, we are discussing today the annual reports 1994 to 1999, inclusive. Members and witnesses' attention is drawn to the fact that as and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act, 1997, grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the sub-committee's proceedings, notwithstanding this provision in legislation, I remind members of long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. We requested a statement from you, Professor, but no statement was forthcoming so we will proceed to ask Mr. Purcell to introduce the accounts.
Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
Mr. Purcell
Thank you, Chairman. This is the first time for the institute to come before the committee and because of internal problems in the institute, we have the unusual situation where the person who would normally be called to account for the financial activity of the institute for the years under review, that is the registrar, effectively the chief executive, is not present for the very good reason that he has been under suspension on full pay since October 1998. The suspension followed a series of disputes with the council at the institute and the holding of a disciplinary hearing. I am aware that the registrar commenced High Court proceedings in February 1999 seeking to confirm him as registrar but as far as I know, the case has not yet been heard.
The absence of a registrar function clearly has implications for the governance of the institute. In his absence, a council sub-committee, called the administrative and finance committee, comprising the chairman of the institute, the directors of the three constituent schools, and the finance officer, was established to take administrative decisions, approve expenditure, sign cheques, etc. I understand that the sub-committee normally meets on a weekly basis.
This is not the ideal organisational form for the institute, Chairman, but to date, it does not appear to be having a significant adverse effect on its financial management. One can understand that people who should be doing other things, probably what they were employed to do, are now carrying out duties that they would not be doing in normal circumstances, but it has not affected the keeping of records or the maintenance of accounts. Having said that, we should not forget that the institute is still paying the registrar while he is not providing any service and, to date, this has cost it in the region of £160,000 which can only be categorised as nugatory expenditure. For that reason, I am bringing it to the attention of the Committee.
Before I pass over to members, Professor, I welcome you to the meeting. It would appear that this registrar is being paid £55,000 a year for effectively having to do nothing.
Professor Donnelly
That is correct.
I realise the case is before the High Court and one frequently talks about sub judice, but do you have any indication of how long this process will continue?
Professor Donnelly
At this point in time I do not know. I would expect it to be completed rather soon but it has gone on for quite some time, as Mr. Purcell stated; in fact since October 1998. What has been uppermost in the mind of the council and the governance of the institute is that the registrar's case should be treated fairly from the point of view of the registrar. Justice must be done. Perhaps I could quickly go through the situation and what has happened.
Yes, if you would.
Professor Donnelly
It was in October 1998 that the council decided to suspend the registrar and it sought permission of the Minister for dismissal but in January 1999 the Minister requested the institute to undertake an independent hearing at which the registrar would attend. In February 1999, the registrar instituted proceedings seeking to prevent the institute and the Department from taking any action that would prevent him from fulfilling his duty as registrar. In spring 1999, the Dublin institute and its legal agent sought to have an independent chairman appointed to look into the situation. The institute appointed a chairman. This was not acceptable to the registrar and in June 1999, the Minister recommended Bernadette Cronin and the council of the Dublin Institute of Advanced Studies accepted it. She sought to undertake the job but it took until July 2000 before it was put in place. On 19 July, the registrar issued proceedings and they were filed in the High Court. He was not successful and so the independent investigation took place on 20, 21 and 22 July 2000. The result came through in September 2000 and these findings were considered by council in December 2000. Those council members who played a part in the independent investigation did not attend at council during the decision of council. Council's resolution was then conveyed to the Minister and that is the position at present.
I am a little confused about the term "independent".
Professor Donnelly
It was a senior counsel who acted as the chairman for the investigation.
The investigation was into what? A disciplinary action taken by the institute against the registrar?
Professor Donnelly
Against the registrar.
But the independent investigation was chaired by a senior counsel——
Professor Donnelly
And agreed by both parties.
Members of the management of the institute are also on the independent inquiry but they did not sit in on the decision.
Professor Donnelly
No.
I am a little confused about that.
Professor Donnelly
Sorry, perhaps I went a little rapidly.
I was not quite clear.
Professor Donnelly
Those who attended the independent investigation - if they were members of council they did not attend the council meeting when the decision was made. The report was made to council. In fact, it was Professor Lewis and myself.
You absented yourself from the——
Professor Donnelly
We absented ourselves from council, otherwise it would not be seen to be fair.
Yes, on the decision of the independent investigation, but who suggested it was appropriate that members of the ruling council, given the closeness and, presumably, the smallness of the institute, should be placed on a so-called independent inquiry into the registrar?
Professor Donnelly
No, they gave evidence to senior counsel.
So they were not part of the investigative team.
Professor Donnelly
No.
This is where we are getting confused. Sorry, what you are saying is that people gave testimony in relation to what is essentially an internal row——
Professor Donnelly
Yes, that is correct.
——and they were not present for the decision making.
Professor Donnelly
That is correct.
I did not fully grasp that. Can we ask politely, given that the person concerned is still being paid, what this dispute centres around? Can it be depicted as a clash of personalities or is there a specific——
Professor Donnelly
I would prefer not to discuss the case. I consider a lot of this sub judice, but I do not think counsel would consider - it is not a clash of personalities.
Without going into the specifics of the case, Professor Donnelly, we would be anxious to bring it to finality on the basis that £160,000 has been paid over the period. I would not like this to go on indefinitely.
Yes. The matter is still before the courts. The professor said that the High Court proceedings issued circa July 2000 were unsuccessful.
Professor Donnelly
That was his case when he did not wish to appear before the independent investigator, Bernadette Cronin.
The High Court then ruled that he was obliged to appear before the——
Who was the senior counsel?
Professor Donnelly
Bernadette Cronin.
He appeared before the investigator. Are the findings of that investigation clear?
Professor Donnelly
The resolution of council has been presented to the Minister.
The Minister for Education and Science has those findings.
Professor Donnelly
That is correct.
Were they favourable or unfavourable in terms of the institute rather than the employee?
Professor Donnelly
I think we should await the view of the Minister. The resolution has beendirected to the Minister and I would not like to comment on it.
How long has it been with the Minister?
Professor Donnelly
December 2000.
If it has been with the Minister since December 2000, that is nine months as it is now September 2001. What is happening, Mr. McDonagh?
On receiving the council's resolution, we sought in the interests of natural justice a submission from the registrar. We received the registrar's submission in due course in February 2000. We have since sought the Attorney General's advice and on foot of the Attorney General's advice that issue is now being considered. We expect to be in a position to have papers with the Minister for his consideration in the near future.
The Attorney General's advice took approximately seven months.
We are treading through this area carefully.
We are trying to tread through it carefully as well.
In that case you are correct.
We are only asking why there has been such a long delay.
We have maintained close contact. The Department has resolutions coming from the council and in relation to the appointment of independent counsel, etc., sought the Attorney General's advice on every occasion. Having regard to those advices in the past and having received the council's resolution, one of the parameters laid down is that we sought again the registrar's submission so that he would have an opportunity to put his case directly to the Department and the Minister. The Attorney General's advice has been sought in that as well and we are finalising papers now for consideration by the Minister.
When you say you are finalising papers now, does that mean it will brought to finality by December of this year?
This will be brought to the Minister's attention in the near future.
I said finality.
That will be a matter for decision by the Minister at that stage. I cannot pre-empt what consideration the Minister may wish to give to it.
We do not want to trespass on what a Minister does or has not done. This committee is concerned that £160,000 was paid out and the person was not making any contribution to the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. We want to know when the issue will be brought to finality. The process has taken over three years with considerable expenditure to the State through the use of taxpayers' money. We are concerned that this matter should not go on indefinitely. It is timely that the institute is before us today because we would not have been aware of this situation. It is also timely that we say to the officials of the Department of Education and Science that the committee is extremely concerned about this situation and we want it brought to finality.
This is very ironic when one considers that the institute is meant to represent some of the best brains in the country, yet it does not seem to be able to resolve this essential conflict among its staff. Is this a disciplinary issue in terms of the relationships within the institute which has some of the most best brains in the country? I presume it is not a sacking offence.
Professor Donnelly
It was a disciplinary hearing and he was suspended as the duties were not being carried out.
Would you classify it as a serious management issue for you and the council?
Professor Donnelly
It is.
In terms of whatever was allegedly ——
Professor Donnelly
I do not wish to speak about it because in my view it is sub judice.
Is it before the High Court now?
Professor Donnelly
Yes. There is a case from the registrar.
From the registrar. If certain things had not happened, I presume the disciplinary issue would not have led to a dismissal. I presume if legal action had not been taken by the registrar, the actions of the person who was disciplined would not have led to a dismissal.
Professor Donnelly
The council resolution has been passed to the Department.
That is where it lies. I hope the Minister will make a speedy decision on it. However, it seems ironic that a high powered institute such as this one cannot resolve these matters with the registrar.
Professor Donnelly
They are very good physicists.
In cosmic studies.
Is the professor suggesting that physicists make poor managers?
Professor Donnelly
No.
The professor has a pointed sense of humour.
Professor Donnelly
We are lucky to have the scientists we have and the Celtic studies and humanities. It is an unusual institute. It is a gem. Ireland will gain a lot from it even with the present people as it has in the past.
This process must be affecting morale within the staff structure.
Professor Donnelly
Maybe not. I am a non-executive chairman but I spend half a day there. I hope that with the assistance of the existing staff we have got over this problem. They are also very committed to their work.
Perhaps we should move on from the legal action and make people here aware of the work of the institute. I imagine many people do not realise what it is and think its staff are eggheads of one type or another. Perhaps you could tell us a little about the history of the institute. I am aware that de Valera established it to enable the State to invest in high powered research in different areas.
Professor Donnelly
It is a unique organisation. It was founded in 1940 under the Institute for Advanced Studies Act of that year. The institute has three constituent schools - the school of Celtic studies, the school of theoretical physics and the school of cosmic physics. The school of cosmic physics has three sections - the astronomy section, the cosmic grey section and the geophysics section. Each school has an independent governing board which is chaired by eminent persons. For instance, at present the school of theoretical physics is chaired by the president of the Royal Society in London, Sir Michael Atiyah. The chairman of the board of cosmic physics is president Gerry Wrixon from Cork. The institute, through its constituent schools, pursues fundamental research. Its main mission is in specialised branches to promote knowledge and they also train advanced research techniques.
The institute is an academic publisher of monographs and books and journals, particularly in the Celtic studies area and in some advanced scientific subjects. It has recently produced its strategy statement on research for the next five years. The mission listed in that strategy statement is that it is providing an environment to which international class researchers and scholars are attracted to undertake fundamental research in Ireland and to provide training in the methods of fundamental research and scholarship for talented young researchers.
As regards the income and expenditure statement, there appears to be a bias in terms of the funding for the school of cosmic physics compared to the school of theoretical physics and the school of Celtic studies. I understand why Celtic studies may not be an area in which the most money would be spent since it has been well traversed by scholars. The institute may not have a lot of work to do in that area and there may be more expense associated with the other areas, such as theoretical physics. Why is there £1.6 million expenditure for cosmic physics compared to £520,000 for theoretical physics?
Professor Donnelly
Cosmic physics is the largest school. It is three sections. One section is the area where seismology comes into it. This is quite an expensive method where they have done quite a lot of work in the area of the oceans. The depth of the ocean has been studied by them. They have done some extraordinary, fundamental work in this regard which will be indicative of possible use to the economy. There is significant potential in the deep sea area around Rockall which was unknown until the institute studied the area. This is an interesting project.
The school of cosmic physics has an income of £290,000. Is this characterised as consultancy income? Is there interestin the private sector in some of the researchpapers?
Professor Donnelly
Yes. Some of the work carried out by the school of theoretical physics has moved into the applied area. However, the institute's absolute mission is to carry out fundamental work. It is often the case that when fundamental science begins to produce a result, the impact is quite significant - much larger than in the case of an institution which carries out only applied work. In such cases, progress is small, effective and quick.
We are always intrigued by Microsoft which appears to have commissioned some research by the institute for which it paid £45,000. What was the nature of that work?
Professor Donnelly
This involved a fellowship in the school of theoretical physics. It was a collaboration between Cambridge University and the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
Is any income being earned through research?
Professor Donnelly
No. Much of the research is funded by the European Communities so there is no income in that sense.
No income is derived from the fundamental research other than a purely academic benefit.
Professor Donnelly
We all know about Einstein who carried out much fundamental work. It was some years before the advent of the laser. However, the laser would not have emerged if Einstein had not been there.
So it is entirely in the realms of the theoretical as opposed to the practical or applied?
Professor Donnelly
Yes.
In terms of the cosmic work, there is no particular reason it is more expensive in terms of seismology, the oceans——
Professor Donnelly
There are 26 people working in the cosmic physics area as opposed to ten or 12 in Celtic studies. Five people are involved in the other areas. The institute is very small.
What is meant by fundamental research in terms of Celtic studies? Professor Donnelly said it goes beyond existing knowledge.
Professor Donnelly
Yes, but many dialects are disappearing in the west. Three people are working in this area and it is important for Ireland that this is saved. The institute is also a publishing company. It is particularly interested in the Brehon laws on which it published a bestseller. The most recent publication was Professor Fergus Kelly's work on early Irish farming whichwas published in 1997. This edition was verypopular.
We would all like the Brehon laws, in particular their provisions in relation to divorce. As I understand it it is a simple procedure. Professor Donnelly is anxious not to return to the sore point of the registrar and his position within the institute. Presumably the hope is that the Minister will speed up his response.
Professor Donnelly
Of course because I have other things to do.
The delays have been due to the essential worry or concern that there would be no possibility of opening up further liability regarding negligence by the council or the administrative staff.
Professor Donnelly
As chairman of the council I have a duty to ensure that the scientists get every opportunity to carry out their work.
The message to the Minister is to speed up.
Professor Donnelly
We have a very good Minister for Education and Science.
I do not doubt it, but the message to him is to speed up.
I do not wish to impinge on the due process which is available to the institute and the individual concerned. However, did Professor Donnelly say this dispute revolved around a clash of personalities?
Professor Donnelly
No.
What was the reference to a clash of personalities?
It was my reference.
That is correct, but I wish to hear it again.
Professor Donnelly
I was asked whether there was a clash of personalities and I said I did not wish to discuss anything of that nature. However, from my point of view there was no clash of personalities.
What concerns me most about such an issue is that we know of similar issues which seem to take a long time to resolve in comparison to other bodies, groups or whatever. The committee has wrestled with such issues in the past. I am conscious of the need to ensure that due process is available to each party, but I do not understand why matters take so long. I accept there is no exposure in this case but in similar circumstances there could be an exposure if time is allowed to dictate the resolution of issues or vice versa. I do not know the best way to go about this, but an arbitration system should be possible in such a situation. This problem is internal to the institute but it has wider implications. I wonder whether, in future, some consideration could be given to approaching such situations in a different manner or, at least, attempting to head off the dispute at an earlier stage. Can this be done?
The Deputy is suggesting this problem should have been headed off at an earlier stage.
Absolutely.
That would appear to be the case on the basis of the three years. The Department of Education and Science has assured us the matter will be finalised shortly.
I appreciate the committee's concern regarding the duration of this situation, but that has been tied up with the issue of due process and making certain that at no stage can we be deemed not to have had regard to due process. A departure from due process could turn out to be more financially onerous on the State.
Reference was made to arbitration. There was an attempt to appoint a mutually agreed chairperson for the independent hearing. It takes two sides to agree, but agreement was not possible. At that stage the Minister had to step in and nominate someone. There was an attempt to injunct the hearing but the High Court indicated that it could proceed.
All the way through there was a limit to the extent to which we could progress matters at the speed which we would wish. It is contingent on both sides agreeing to such speed. I note the committee's concern in this regard and I will bring that concern to the Department in the context of trying to bring this issue to a speedy resolution in terms of the Minister's consideration of the matter.
Has the file been active at all stages or has it gone into decline? Has it hibernated or been sent to hibernation for any period during the past three years?
Professor Donnelly
No.
I would not say it has hibernated. There have been difficulties which took time to overcome. At times it was necessary to seek legal advice while at other times it was a necessity to try to get agreement on things which, regrettably, we did not get. However, the file has not been put away in a cupboard.
That was not the question. I do not mean to be disrespectful, but I was not asking what Mr. McDonagh thought but what the situation was.
No.
It should be obvious. Did it hibernate or was it hibernated?
No. This institution would be small enough in terms of the expenditure in the context of the overall responsibilities we exercise in the Department. There are £3 million involved here. The Department deals with a budget of £3.5 billion. It must be seen in that context.
I disagree. If I was advising the witness, I would not go down that road. As a proportion of the total budget, it could have serious and significant implications for other elements and bodies funded either by the Department of Education and Science or other Departments. That is a dangerous road to take and I would strongly advise against it.
I am not saying we are not conscious of the costs of £3 million or £160,000, but there is a huge range of issues impacting on a daily basis in the Department. One is always balancing the consequential cost of decisions on a daily basis with the priorities. This case has received appropriate attention in the context of the overall workloads emanating in the Department. It has not been by the way; it is receiving attention on an ongoing basis. That has been the position throughout the period.
I am reassured.
I thank the Professor for her contribution. I also thank the officials from the Department of Education and Science. Mr. McDonagh, we will have the Department of Education and Science here again as part of our agreed schedule on Tuesday, 15 January. We anticipate that this matter will be brought to finality by that date. We will return to this matter because it concerns us. While mention was made of the large budget of the Department of Education and Science, in terms of the institute's budget, this is a significant amount of funding which is being expended in this case. We know about and respect the decision of the High Court and we do not want to interfere with due process. However, due process must come to finality some time. As far as the committee is concerned, this matter has gone on too long. I am glad it has got an airing at this committee today because it might help to add a sense of urgency to finalising it. I am sure Professor Dervilla Donnelly and the people who work in the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies would like to see it finalised so they can get back to normality.
We note the accounts. The committee will not meet next week because the meeting with University College Dublin has been rescheduled. We will meet again on Tuesday, 9 October, at 2 p.m. to discuss the 2000 Appropriation Accounts and also Vote 30 for the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources.