Vol. 526 No. 4
75 Mr. Connaughton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when she will publish the interdepartmental report on biotechnology; the reasons for the delay in publishing this document; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26669/00]
The report of the interdepartmental group on modern biotechnology was published earlier this week. At its meeting on 10 October last, the Government noted the report of the group and approved its publication. Our Department's original intention was to publish the report in full on the departmental website and to produce a print version of the executive summary. It was subsequently decided, however, that this unfairly disadvantaged those with an interest in the report who did not have access to the Internet and as a result a print version of the complete report has now been produced.
The Minister of State really does think we are simplistic.
The subsequent time lag in publishing the report resulted from the normal requirements of the printing process. The Members present do not appear to appreciate that the report has been published.
Do I not appreciate that?
I undertook to ensure a copy of it was passed to the Deputy.
I am grateful for that.
The Minister of State should be in the comedy club. He said in reply to the previous question that we should not stick our heads in the sand. I am delighted this report has been eventually published. It flies in the face of the Minister of State's colleagues, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Walsh, and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, who stated that there should be no field trials of genetic modified plants, that this area was a mass experiment.
Why was the question of genetic cloning and genetic engineering of humans and animals not included in the report? What action is being taken in this area? When will a report on that matter be published, given that it is not covered by legislation and the system is open to abuse if a person takes an action on this matter?
We acted immediately on this report. It went to the Government in July – it was circulated to the Departments at that time – and responses to it came back in September. It was submitted to Cabinet on 10 October and went for printing on 26 October. It came back from the printers last week and was published immediately. Anyone who says we have not acted on it and made the information publicly available has not given fair recognition to the effort that has been made to ensure the information was brought forward.
It is important to note that key recommendations of the interdepartmental group are contained in this report. Based on those recommendations this country should take a positive but precautionary approach to GM issues at EU level and at international fora.
The Minister of State should tell his colleagues that.
My colleagues are fully aware of that. They sat at Cabinet when the report was presented and they are represented in this report by senior management members in each Department.
That represents a U-turn by Fianna Fáil.
The recommendation is that this group should continue in office and should make recommendations to ensure there is a co-ordinated and integrated national attitude towards biotechnology and genetic engineering and not only should the nation have a singular attitude towards—
I remind the Minister of State that his reply is limited to one minute.
My apologies, I forgot that. We wish to ensure that we are consistent in terms of the international situation and that we are able to take our own view based on the information available at any given time.
I may have missed it but will the Minister of State tell the House what he intends to do regarding the report now that it has been published? Did he consider including a representative of the EPA in the membership of the interdepartmental committee or did the EPA make a submission in respect of it? Given the importance of the issues, is he concerned about the decline in the number of students taking science at third level?
We are worried about the number of students taking science at second and third level. A major science awareness programme has been in place for the past three years to ensure parents, students, teachers and the public are aware of the importance of science in our country. Science research and innovation are vital for our future. As a result of that, we have included in the national development plan a provision for the allocation of £2 billion for that area to ensure that the economy can be sustained and grown in the future. As to what we propose to do with the report—
How will that £2 million be allocated?
The amount of £2 billion is available for research, technological development and innovation which shows that £2 billion—
Is that £2 million?
No, £2 billion, or £1.96 billion, to be exact, is provided under the national development plan for research, technological development and innovation.
Will the expenditure address the decline in the number of students taking science at third level?
At least £550 million of that amount has been allocated for science at third level.
The Minister of State has exceeded the time allocated for his reply.
I am concerned that the Minister of State appears to be unaware of the international dimension within which this industry operates. Will he accept that without at least an EU, if not a global, framework within which this industry should operate, national legislation in this area will be useless? We are a small economy that imports and exports, but without a legal framework within which this industry can operate at least at EU level and preferably at a global level, this report will be useless. Has the Government initiated any moves regarding EU directives in this area or has the EU put forward a response regarding putting in place an appropriate framework for the industry?
Why was the EPA not a member of the interdepartmental group, given that it has responsibility for the deliberate release of GMOs? Will the Minister of State implement the recommendations of the report of the Joint Committee on Education and Science on science and technology in education that affect his Department?
We have put more money into science at primary, second and third levels than any previous Government, and we will continue to do that. We have also done the same regarding industry and we will continue to do that.
The Minister of State should answer the questions put.
I am answering all the questions that were put. As to why the EPA was not included on the interdepartmental group, I do not know. Each Department was asked to nominate people to the committee. It was a matter for another Department to decide if one of its subsidiary organisations was nominated. The nominations were put forward by each Department and the Government accepted them. We had a very high powered team.
A question was raised about the EU regarding this area. The EU has not led in this area. Each member state is taking certain action and discussions are taking place at EU level. We are confident that Europe is beginning to give serious consideration to this area. We must operate within EU directives and ensure our legislation, when brought forward, will be compatible with Europe in the interests of the safety and security of our people.
