Deputy Morgan spoke last. I understand that there was a sharing arrangement with Deputy Cowley. There are 12 minutes left in this speaking slot, and Deputy Cowley has the floor.
Industrial Development Science Foundation Bill 2002 [ Seanad ] : Second Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
Acting Chairman
I am glad to support this Bill. Is Bille iontach é seo. It is good and badly needed. It is well known that we have had a good run over the past few years, and that was very much built on our knowledge. However, the national development plan shows a commitment to building a knowledge-based economy – a good thing – and balanced regional development, which is important. We have the national spatial strategy to inform that. It is obvious that we were good at attracting industry, companies and so on to this country. The Science Foundation Ireland pamphlet, Built for Science, points out that more than 1,200 overseas companies have bases in Ireland, including leaders in engineering, technology, pharmaceuticals, and software design such as Abbott Laboratories, Dell, 3Com, Pfizer, ABB, Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, IBM, Pratt and Whitney, Wyeth Medica and Intel. It further points out that, as a member of the European Union, Ireland was recently named the most global nation in the world.
This is interesting because it shows that we were successful in attracting foreign industry. By 2000, over 40% of Ireland's trade with the rest of the world was in research-intensive products and services. However, the funny thing about all that was that most of that research was not generated in Ireland but abroad. It was acknowledged that we had a technology deficit. Now we have competition from accession states such as Hungary and the Czech Republic. They have learned quickly that companies are attracted by low corporate tax rates, investment incentives and a high-quality workforce. These countries, not Ireland, are now attracting industry. We have to change our spots and be like Switzerland, using our talents to be at the races and ensure that we make progress from here on.
I see this Bill as a step in that direction. It is about developing new models of excellence in research and innovation capability so that we can continue with such investment from outside Ireland and build on it. We have all these companies based here, and we must ensure that they stay and continue to help our economy generate more scientific knowledge. We need knowledge in many different ways, both at home and abroad, and I will come to that presently. It is a powerful progressive force, and it is interesting that there is major investment in research.
That is also necessary. There are currently many calls on funding – that is a total understatement – but we must do this to retain our competitive advantage. It will help not only industries in Ireland and ourselves but the information, technology and learning centres. The main focus is on the new buzzword of biotechnology. It all boils down to the asset base we have in our people. It is about supporting them and advancing our scientific, cultural and technological ability. That goes right across the board and, when it comes to having people able to do research, we should as much as possible have our own people there, with our own indigenous focus. That involves maintaining standards in our schools and ensuring that they are encouraging people to study science subjects, in which there has been a worrying decrease. Every incentive should be provided to ensure that it happens.
If we are to attract world-class research, we need to have our third level institutions properly supported. Great work has been done by Enterprise Ireland and so on. It is a matter of building on all that. Of course, there are now moves to start charging third-level fees, but anything that would detract from our educational base is not desirable. We must continue to attract people to take part in third level education and maintain our teaching standards, not just at third level, but at national school level.
There must be proper monitoring of schools. Wherever the school may be, there is a need for monitoring to ensure that standards are maintained across the board. We must ensure that there are laboratories in schools, for there are many without them. We need proper libraries and a proper knowledge base allowing students access to science-based subjects. They must be encouraged to go ahead with such subjects, which must be seen to be relevant. Some of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world are based in Ireland. We almost have a monopoly on them. Allowing them to research in Ireland is keeping us on the right economic road. Investment in technology is welcome.
However, while this serves us as a nation, much of the profit goes outside the country. We must ask ourselves who is served. We must use our brain-power to help ourselves. The saying down my way is "God helps those who help themselves." We must do that. We must use innovation and this Bill to cut through the bureaucracy of 11 health boards and Government Departments – in the context of the lack of co-ordination between them – to fast-track to a solution which will serve our needs. We must be innovative to find ways to avoid reports which simply tell us that another report is needed. We need to fast-track forward for effective solutions.
I mentioned the national development plan, the commitment to balanced regional development and the national spatial strategy. If we help the regions, we help ourselves. However, should we support regions which are over-grown and where growth is not wanted? We do not seem committed to balanced regional development. A review of the national development plan would show that we are still developing Dublin and its hinterland. Half of the graduates from the west must go to Dublin to get their first job. The alarm bells are ringing at the CSO regarding the over-population of Dublin.
There are problems in regard to increased population and everything that goes with it, including the explosion in car numbers. It is costing Dublin in hold-ups and costing people in terms of stress and heart disease, as they wait in traffic trying to get to and from work. At the same time, vast areas of the west need development but also need infrastructure to allow that to happen. That infrastructure – proper roads and railways – is not being provided. There is no commitment to the west in the context of the current roads allocation or to a proper road or railway system into County Mayo which would promote regional development instead of central development around Dublin.
We are depriving ourselves of a bright future by over-developing one part of the country to the detriment of others. It is interesting when one considers the figures. One would be better to have an ass and cart, something which may see a revival around Dublin. There may soon be a call to open the bus lanes to asses and carts because more progress around Dublin would be made in that way, and it would also do a lot for the animal population.
The average car journey to the city now takes about an hour. Many people are travelling 100 miles per day and taking two to three hours just to get to and from work. The census shows that the population of the Dublin commuter area is almost half of our population of 3.9 million, and development reports suggest that will continue. The west lacks infrastructure and it is important it is brought there. Developing the regions will help Dublin too.
With regard to innovation, there is provision in the Bill to promote development and assist the carrying out of oriented basic research in strategic areas of scientific endeavour that concern the future development and competitiveness of industry and enterprise in the State. The Bill also deals with other areas regarding economic and social benefits, long-term industrial competitiveness or environmentally sustainable development, as may be prescribed from time to time by the Minister. The Minister should direct that this innovation and research be used for the benefit of necessary, balanced regional development. Otherwise, the Bill does not make sense.
In section 30, the Bill deals, as a primary object, with the promotion or development of new or improved industrial processes, methods or products and, in particular, such processes, methods or products that are likely either to involve the use or development of local materials, agricultural products or other natural resources to offer the prospect of expansion in existing industry, promotion of new industry and an increase in industrial employment, or to enhance the viability, competitiveness or strategic importance of existing industry in the State, and is carried out, wholly or mainly, in the State, and wholly or mainly sponsored by one or more industrial undertaking in the State.
While it is time for proper innovation, it is time that such innovation was applied to things that really matter. An energy centre is needed in north County Mayo, where there is gas and wind power, and a power station connected to the national grid which needs to be connected to gas. What about providing support there instead of in Dublin? The spotlight should be put on the west, the most economically deprived area of the country. If the focus is put on the west, people will be encouraged to come west and the traffic problems in Dublin will be solved.
I wish to share my time with Deputy Moloney.
Acting Chairman
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am delighted to speak on this important piece of legislation which is a small Bill in comparison to many we have passed through the House. However, it represents a hugely significant change in the basis of our industrial development policy. The concept which underlines all current European industrial development policy is innovation, namely, our ability to compete by changing how we do things or what we do, or by organising ourselves to do better what we have always done.
We are an innovative people. Our economy has been shaped by the innovative ideas we have applied to industrial development. The establishment of IDA Ireland and Shannon Free Airport Development Company provided a model for similar initiatives in many other countries. I expect that this Bill will be regarded as an equally significant milestone in our economic development.
We have been successful through the IDA and other agencies in developing our country as a major centre for manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, fine chemicals and electronics. This has happened as a result of a gradual process of skills evolution. Some 40 years ago, we were assembling components made elsewhere. As our skills and educational standards grew, we developed to the stage where we are now fully involved in all stages of high-tech manufacturing. However, we must keep developing our role as a high-tech nation. Standing still is not an option. The next stage is that we become the developers of a new generation of technologies, those on which future industries will depend.
This strategy requires a major commitment to building our national research infrastructure. Research and development has been a sadly neglected aspect of our national infrastructure until very recent times. Our national spend on research and development has traditionally been negligible in comparison to many of our European partners. The Bill before us signals a fundamental change in our appreciation of the importance of research and development as an element of national infrastructure. In concert with other initiatives by the HEA, the IDA and Enterprise Ireland, it aims to put us firmly on the map as a research performer.
The objective of Science Foundation Ireland as stated in section 7(1) is to create a standard of excellence in oriented basic research, and to significantly develop our capability to conduct research by attracting world class researchers to Ireland. These scientists will conduct the basic research on which future technologies will be built. As stated in section 7(3), these scientists will be particularly involved in biotechnology and information and communications technology. Such technologies are both relevant to our existing research skills and also to our current and potential industry base. However, technical innovation is more than good ideas. This Bill is part of the development of a wider system of economic development. It must be seen in the context of a wider plan to develop our national technological competence. This wider plan involves our universities and colleges, our industries and the agencies that support both. We are unusual in Europe in that our universities are major public research performers. Unlike almost all of our EU partners, we do not have national research institutes with the exception of Teagasc.
Developing university competence through Science Foundation Ireland has many advantages but it also requires careful management. Our universities must develop their capability to recognise the good ideas that arise from this research and make them available for commercial use. We must also support the industries and entrepreneurs who wish to convert these developments into viable enterprises. We have made some good progress in this area but more needs to be done. There is still a widely held view in industry that universities are difficult to deal with in regard to research and intellectual property. They can demand high levels of equity from start-up companies and high rates of payment for licensed technologies.
It goes without saying that universities and individual researchers deserve a reward for their part in new technology development but this reward must be fair and should not be a disincentive to those who wish to use the output of research. That would be entirely against the spirit with which the SFI funding has been provided. I urge the universities and Forfás, therefore, to implement a system that will ensure the efficient and equitable use of the output of the research funded by Science Foundation Ireland and other national agencies.
One of the other issues we should consider is whether the industrial development agencies are organised appropriately for the new phase in our development. We are now reshaping our national infrastructure towards technology generation. This ambition should be reflected in the confidence of the boards of those agencies charged with making this change. Perhaps the Minister might keep this in mind in the re-appointment of boards of Enterprise Ireland and other agencies when they become vacant.
The Bill is a significant step in developing our research competence. The technology infrastructure the Government is building through SFI and other initiatives will hugely develop the innovative capacity of our country. I confidently expect that future historians will see this change in economic strategy as a major development in our economic history.
The extent to which partners in academia and industry work effectively, not just in developing intellectual property but in subsequently commercially exploiting it for the benefit of the developers, the companies which have invested in it and the economy, is a key success factor. Investment in SFI and other research programmes has the potential to generate significant wealth for the economy but only if the fruits of research and development are commercially exploited. An integrated approach across the State agencies – Forfás, Enterprise Ireland, the IDA, Science Foundation Ireland – will be necessary to encourage commercial exploitation of research and development seeded here.
On an international stage our universities, individually, are not that significant from a research and development perspective. Greater co-operation and collaboration is needed across the university sector to ensure they become world-class players. The tax system should be adjusted to support multinationals here to engage in research and development and support expansion of the indigenous SME sector. Our nearest neighbours and competitors for research and development projects, the United Kingdom, offer tax credits, as does Canada, Israel and other competitor countries. Our tax system is deficient in not offering research and development tax credits to companies and if we want many of the very large companies to remain here in the long-term, we must give them an incentive to do so.
This is an excellent Bill which will have a significant impact on our industrial development in the years to come. I ask the House to contribute to our new national innovative spirit by supporting it.
I thank Deputy Ryan for sharing his time and welcome the opportunity to say a few words about the Bill. A number of different factors have played a significant role in helping to generate the consistent economic growth we have enjoyed during the period of the Celtic tiger. Our membership of the European Union was an important factor but one of the most important factors was the level of technological advancement this country made over the past number of years. Having a technologically proficient and well educated population which could be easily trained meant that multinational firms from all parts of the world flocked here.
The benefits those companies provided to this country continue to this very day, with hundreds of thousands of Irish workers being employed by non-domestic multinational companies. Times have moved on, however, and economic and technological trends change. That is the nature of the work in which they are involved. Technology depends on innovation and, as such, needs to continue to develop. It is that continuous development which gives it its edge.
With Ireland so dependent on technology, it is essential that we, as a nation, continue to develop with it and seek out new ways of developing it. We cannot afford to be satisfied with our current lot. If we stand still, we will be left behind. That is the reason the Bill is so important. We may not reap the benefits of its passing immediately but we will be in a position to gain advantage in the decades to come. For that reason I welcome the Bill and commend the thinking behind it.
Science Foundation Ireland will allow us to do precisely that. The work of the body will position Ireland so that we will be ready not only to adapt to new technologies and innovations but, hopefully, lead that charge. The main function of the foundation will be to promote and develop world-class research capabilities in strategic areas of scientific endeavour and by concentrating on information and communications technologies, as well as the importance of biotechnology, we will be well positioned to deal with two of the hi-tech industries that are most likely to represent the largest areas of growth and development in the future.
By placing greater emphasis on research and development we will help to alleviate some of the problems the economy is currently experiencing. We will be less vulnerable to global market changes as we have been and can be in the future. That is an issue we have to deal with in the current climate. We will be less production-orientated and so will be in a position to avoid some of the pitfalls that can arise.
It is fair to say our economy is clearly suffering from the global economic downturn, and such initiatives have never been more important. This less than favourable external environment has tested our economic competitiveness and it is important to be aware that with the accession of the ten new member states into the EU, that competitiveness will be further tested in the future. It is clear, and our competitors are aware, that we are no longer a low-reach economy. Multinational companies will be able to find cheaper labour elsewhere – we are witnessing that particular trend in recent months – while at the same time benefiting from being inside the EU.
With such hurdles in front of us the Government has taken the shrewd and extremely far-sighted approach encapsulated in the Bill. Science Foundation Ireland will allow us to reposition Irish industry, and with that Irish labour, further up the economic value chain. The best way to achieve such a feat is through awareness of the importance of knowledge creation and innovation. This will help to sustain and enhance the level of our competitiveness and will position us to supply services that few, if any, countries will be able to provide.
We also need to increase Ireland's attractiveness as a location to carry out the work of research and development. This was the position outlined by the technology foresight study undertaken by the Irish Council for Science Technology and Innovation in 1998. Science Foundation Ireland also promises to do this, and much more, and has already had a degree of success in meeting these objectives since its establishment in 2000. This month we have seen the awarding of €42 million to three new centres for science, engineering and technology, while last March the foundation selected nine distinguished scientists from around the world to receive the Walton visitor awards.
Science Foundation Ireland's role is to ensure that Ireland not only adapts to new technologies and advances, but also leads the way. We are attracting top researchers and scientists who will help make this a reality and will soon see the benefits of this programme. Not only will we be kept better informed of technical innovation here, we will be leading in innovation.
Under such circumstances it is not implausible to imagine that rather than being content to have foreign multinationals setting up and playing such a major role in our economy, Ireland may, in the not too distant future, become the home territory for advanced technological multinational corporations. That is a wish we could see realised. Irish companies and their technical innovations could lead the way and we could again blaze a trail which would make the Celtic tiger look like a growth blip. While this may be a long way off or even appear far-fetched to some given the current economic climate, the establishment of Science Foundation Ireland and the powers vested in it under the Bill will establish the conditions to do precisely this.
How we fare in the future will depend on other factors. It must, however, be remembered that the seeds for future success are always planted in the present, which is what the Government is doing through this Bill. Provided it is properly nurtured, Science Foundation Ireland will help improve the economy in a manner which will ensure the entire country will be able to reap the fruits in the not too distant future. I welcome the Bill for the reasons I have outlined. It is important we meet the challenge now rather than wait. The Government has shown foresight in recognising that change is on the way. By fostering progress in research and development, promoting technological advances, securing further investment and giving encouragement, we can meet this challenge. I welcome the Bill and commend it to the House.
I welcome the opportunity to speak to this Bill which is important for the future of the country. Its importance hit home to me this week with the announcement of job losses in my home town of Navan. Innovations such as this one are important in planning and safeguarding our future. No one will doubt the importance of creating a knowledge based economy or disagree that investing in excellence in basic research will help secure our future economic growth. Science Foundation Ireland will lead to much more industrial development.
Recent job losses in Navan are high on my agenda. I hope this Bill will help the town in future. I ask the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Hanafin, to relay the problems facing Navan, which I will spell out, to the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, and request that she examines the serious problems affecting Navan and County Meath generally.
This week a furniture factory in the town announced it will close in the coming weeks, while another factory, Case New Holland, one of the few located in the large, almost empty industrial park, announced the loss of 20 or 30 jobs. Navan and County Meath are vulnerable, particularly as many jobs in the region are tied to mining, carpet making and furniture factories. This Bill which covers areas such as innovation, new ideas and scientific research offers ways forward for towns such as Navan which are vulnerable due to their reliance on older industry sectors. I hope Science Foundation Ireland will help such towns by creating job opportunities.
The Minister outlined the degree of expansion in our national industrial base and the large numbers of new jobs created in recent years. I understand she mentioned a figure of several hundred thousand new jobs being created in the past ten to 15 years, which I do not dispute and is welcome news. During this period, however, the industrial base of County Meath has not budged and remains extremely low. Thousands of houses have been built for commuters working throughout Dublin who are commuting to the capital's industrial base. Although these people have jobs, they have no life as they must travel for two or three hours every morning and evening. This is not good enough. Research is needed to find ways to develop new jobs in alternative locations throughout the country and help counties like Meath establish a proper industrial base which reflects their current populations
County Meath which has a population of more than 130,000 has a rates base of less than €9 million, whereas Fingal County Council has a rates base of €30 million to €40 million, which is a major difference. The reason for this is the size of the industrial base of both county council areas. Money is needed to develop the infrastructure of the county and quality of life for the new and longer established residents of County Meath.
While I do not wish to stray too far from the contents of the Bill, lack of employment and a poor industrial base, if not improved, will have grave consequences for County Meath. Government policy is to blame. To allow massive housing development to continue without pumping money into the county at the same time constitutes poor planning, omits people from the planning process and is unfair to the county which helped solve the housing problem of Dublin. We are now suffering as a consequence. I ask the Minister of State to bring to the Minister the message that County Meath badly needs change. She should also direct Science Foundation Ireland to examine ways in which it could encourage research and investment in the county.
The lack of a spatial strategy for the past seven or eight years caused problems for County Meath and other counties around Dublin. Now that it has finally arrived seven or eight years late, the spatial strategy has failed to help solve the problem by omitting County Meath. The gateway towns leapfrogged Dunshaughlin, Navan and Kells and landed in Cavan and Monaghan. I ask that Science Foundation Ireland, which will direct Government policy on research, investment and other areas, take a broad view and examine the issue of resources for each of the counties to achieve a proper balance. County Meath has been left in limbo due to a lack of investment.
Why am I so concerned about the spatial strategy? When it was published, the Taoiseach stated that all investment relating to transport, industry, health, education and other sectors would follow the guidelines laid down in the strategy. This is worrying for regions not covered by the strategy, regardless of the content of later Bills such as this. It is a matter of concern which needs to be corrected. I hope the Department will take a more balanced approach rather than pursuing exclusively the spatial strategy.
To return to the Bill, research and development is the way to secure our future and that of our young people. We have done well during the past seven or eight years. The reasons for this are varied. The rainbow Government as well as the current Government played a significant role in this respect.
The Deputy is dreaming.
I do not believe in dreams.
Does the Deputy even remember the rainbow Government?
I will be here long enough to see the end of this one.
We created the boom.
While I would not put it as strongly as claiming all the credit, the boom can be attributed to the foundations laid by the rainbow Government and other factors, all of which should be acknowledged. There is no point in Members on one side of the House claiming all the credit.
Scientific knowledge is the key to where we go from here. We cannot sit back and ask why Ireland did not perform well. We have to continue to drive forward and push for innovation, new ideas, greater knowledge and so forth, which is the objective of the Bill in establishing Science Foundation Ireland. Even in bad economic times such as now, it is extremely important to invest taxpayers' money and the time of our experts in developing our future. The new foundation and similar boards provide a basis for strategies and have an important role in pushing forward this agenda. The composition and selection process for these boards is important, as is the monitoring of their performance. I will return to this issue.
Many young people are worried about whether the country will provide future opportunities for them. Job security is no longer guaranteed. The right to free, third level education is in doubt. I hope the Minister will stand her ground on this issue. The Minister of State may not agree with her party colleague, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on this issue which will have serious consequences. Initiatives such as the establishment of Science Foundation Ireland will be worthless if we decide to go down the road of bringing back third level fees. The booming economy was brought about by the education system. Many of those who helped create the Celtic tiger were educated at a time when parents had to pay fees, for which they suffered considerably. We cannot return to that because, if we do, it will make much of the work we are doing worthless.
Young people of my age and those who are older are worried about the future of the country. There is a bad economic climate at present. Although we must try to be positive, we must also try to address people's concerns. The cost of living is constantly rising and people's quality of life is deteriorating. Support structures, such as child care and care for the elderly, are as important as this Bill. It is one thing to move forward and to put money into research, but if we do not improve people's lives, we will defeat the purpose of the Bill. We must have a general policy. It is the job of the Government and of the Opposition benches to put those fears to bed and to fuel confidence in our young people who helped to make the Celtic tiger. This Bill only covers one area, but more work is required. I hope our economic development remains high on the agenda. Spending money on research will help to deliver the results and the value for money we need.
I agree with the goals of the Bill. A modern economy cannot exist without having the best facilities, services and technical support money can buy to back up Government industrial policy. Apart from securing our future, this Bill gives us an opportunity to change the way good people are selected for State boards, bodies and agencies. I am not saying they do not do a good job because that would be wrong. A good job is done, but it is time for change and reform. I am not saying that all State boards, bodies and agencies are fixed by political appointment. Good people have been chosen for the interim board, although they may be political appointees. That must be done when the board is set up on a statutory basis and appointments are made on a full-time basis.
Many taxpayers view State bodies and agencies as a chance for the Government to give jobs to the friends of the party. It is important that the process is transparent.
The Deputy's party was good at it when it was in Government.
As the Minister of State said, I am dreaming. I was not here during that time, but I will do some research.
Deputy Durkan will remember that.
He can speak for himself; I am part of the new breed. While the rest of the country suffers from hospital bed closures and home help and other cutbacks, which are now the order of the day, life for the elite who work in association with the Government is better than normal. We have accepted pay rises, for example, without justification or results. I do not have any problem accepting a pay rise if there are results. We need to clarify for the people the hours we work and what we do during that time so they can understand why we are getting a pay rise.
I am not saying that money can be saved by not appointing State boards. However, we and the taxpayers deserve to know what the money is being spent on and what has been achieved in terms of value for money. The House, the Minister and the Government must confront this issue. This Bill gives us the first chance in the new economic world, which we refer to as the world of cutbacks and broken promises, to be as transparent as possible and to ensure value for money. The appointment of the board should be transparent. We should move away from the idea of jobs for the boys and show the people that it is wrong. More work must be done for the betterment of everyone. The Government should take this on board. No one can argue about the need for the new board, but the appointment process must be examined. The process was right for the appointment of the interim board. While it will be all right if the same people are appointed on a full-time basis, we need experts.
The Bill has many words, but it is short on goals. For too long Governments and Government agencies have taken credit for everything good, but they duck and dive when problems arise and blame outside factors, such as the downturn in the world economy, oil prices or men from Mars when they have failed to produce. Although this has happened over the years, it is particularly evident in the past year or two. It is time for that to change. There is a will in the House to change it if Departments and Ministers allow it.
It is common practice that high-ranking civil servants and others are asked to appear before committees of the House to answer questions on policy and spending commitments. However, the committees are at a disadvantage because they do not have a yardstick or a mission statement on which to judge performance. I ask for that to change. The Bill refers to an annual report at the end of each year. It is not much to ask all Departments and State bodies and agencies to produce a realistic set of objectives at the beginning of the year so that during the year, but particularly at the end of it, Members of the House may inquire, on behalf of the taxpayer, about the mission statement and what it achieved or nearly achieved and if the wrong people are doing the job. It would not be a witch hunt and I trust the House would be big enough to put personalities to one side when dealing with taxpayers' money. It is not the committee system which is not working. It has done a great job up to now. I think in particular of the late Jim Mitchell who was not afraid to try something new and who achieved great results. Inquiries and the way they are handled have been changed forever as a result of his work.
We should not fear change, but embrace it and work with it. It is time for reform. This Bill and the appointment of the board gives us the chance to do that. Before each committee meeting dealing with a State or semi-State body or agency, each Member of the House who sits on that body should have an A4 sheet of paper, not a glossy booklet, which states that the agency or body will achieve certain things and will spend a certain amount of money to achieve that in any given year. That would make the job of the Members of the House easier and would save ridiculous time wasting. The members appointed to Science Foundation Ireland should be appointed by the House. The Bill refers to the Minister, the Minister for Education and Science and the Minister for Finance having a say in such appointments. What is wrong with the House appointing them? If they are the experts I am told they are, we should be involved in the process of appointing them.
The Bill also refers to the fact that anyone who wishes to become involved in politics either at local or national level will be disqualified from the board. That suggests there may be people, who have not declared a political agenda, sitting on the board and using it as a stepping stone. That is not the way taxpayers' money should be spent. Although I would not discourage young and old people from becoming involved in politics, there is a time and a place for it. I ask the Minister to ensure that all potential applicants for these financially rewarding jobs appear before a Dáil committee where their political intentions could be put on the public record. I do not want to be misunderstood. Anyone who does a good job should be paid well. The cream should always rise to the top. However, underperformers should be sacked as they hold everyone back. We are talking about taxpayers' money and our economic future. They could explain to a committee of the House why they think they are qualified for the job and what they hope to achieve in 12 months. If that system works for the committee, there is no reason it cannot be extended to include others. The appointment of this board provides an opportunity to outline the way all boards should be appointed.
The Government is the first to tell us how we must live within budgetary constraints, yet a large part of taxpayers' money is spent on Government services behind closed doors. That must change. There cannot be one law for pensioners and another law for Government advisers. They both receive taxpayers' money which must be accounted for.
This Bill will open the door to great things. Deputy Eoin Ryan and other Members outlined their views on it. However, we must monitor it properly. We must consider how our money is spent and how people work for the State. I hope we will look back and say the Bill was an important part of Ireland in the 21st century.
I chose to speak on this Bill because one of my responsibilities is the information society. In that context, I am keenly aware of the role Science Foundation Ireland is playing in transforming the economy into one where knowledge and innovation reign. When our economy is transformed, we can hope to gain the full social and economic benefits from the development of information and communications technology. There is a key link between the information society and Science Foundation Ireland. We are talking about new connections which challenge the traditional assumptions about what is possible and when it is possible. The advances in information and communications technology are transforming how we learn, how we do our business and how we deliver Government services. New systems are providing a vital enabling framework for progressive development in every area of society, whether it is society generally, education or industry. That information society will be built upon the foundations of research and innovation. The role of Science Foundation Ireland in laying these foundations is recognised in New Connections, the document outlining the Government strategy for realising the potential of the information society.
It is interesting to see how the issue of changing the way we do business arises again and again no matter what age those involved are. This morning I presented prizes in CBS Monkstown for young businesses. The prize-winners were only 6th class students, 30 of whom raised €25,000 for charity, while they were involved in the project. What struck me more this year over previous years I presented prizes was the increased use of technology, even at that young age. We must tap that resource and young people's knowledge and information. We must ensure that we can support it to ensure we can carry on and develop the type of economy we want.
I should have said at the outset that I wish to share time with Deputy Kelly.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
It is evident from what we have said about the competitiveness of the Irish economy that it can be enhanced through greater economic activity arising from investment in research and technological development. This is crucial for our success and will underpin our attractiveness as a world-leading location for e-business and knowledge based economic activity. We recognise the need for the advanced science and technology base if we are to get ICT based investment and develop our skills and knowledge base.
I meet a number of the top computer companies coming to this country. It is interesting to note that whereas we might have the manufacturing end of that market here the research and development area is in other countries. Recently I met with Steve Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft World. We spoke about attracting research and development to this country. Of course, Microsoft is looking at other countries also. The role Science Foundation Ireland is playing, and will continue to play, in heightening investment in projects will help to attract other major companies and that lucrative end of the business to Ireland.
The funding provided for Science Foundation Ireland in the national development plan, which is substantial, will help Ireland become a world class research centre, particularly in ICT and biotechnology. The technology foresight fund of February 2000 will launch €635 million over a seven year period and through that Science Foundation Ireland can ensure that we can reach our potential in this area.
The higher education element is particularly important. Obviously we will only have a world class research community when we have highly trained and experienced research graduates and post-graduates. This must start at the bottom. It is a grave source of concern that fewer and fewer students are taking science subjects. There has been a particular reduction in the number of science students at second level which means there is no hope of subsequently getting them at third level. Funds to encourage schools where all first year students take science and the provision of extra equipment grants can be valuable. We also need to look at seconding into the schools people working directly in local industry in order to highlight the link between science and job opportunities. This should be developed.
The task force on physical sciences has drawn attention to the amount of work that needs to be done in this area. Science Foundation Ireland has a role to play also. Its role will be more concentrated on third level and will encourage collaboration between the third level institutes and firms to ensure we can reap the full benefits there. Its website points out that building top class research teams between academia and industry is one of the most important steps any country can take in building a lasting indigenous research base and generating ideas, products and jobs based on knowledge. I hope we will not just wait until third level to do this but that we can also do it at first and second level.
The new centres for science, technology and engineering which are being funded by SFI give new and exciting opportunities for such collaborations. One of these, the digital enterprise research centre in NUIG, is working with Hewlett-Packard on the technologies that will underpin the next generation of the world wide web through developing semantic web technology. Such dynamic research interaction between the best human talent in industry and academia will ensure that we are well placed to provide the innovations that will drive my area of interest, which is the information society agenda, forward. Knowledge has the power to become a strong economic tool.
Recently I was pleased to meet some of my own past pupils from Sion Hill who are working in the area of science research. It is interesting that 21% of researchers in Irish industry are women compared to 15% in other European countries. That is encouraging but we need to ensure that this number grows even more. Forfás is considering a review of this area and of the conditions and status of women in science and industry. If the proper interest in science is encouraged at school level and into third level, we will be able to attract people to continue at the higher level needed.
The Young Scientists' exhibition has played a key role in encouraging young people's interest in the science area. While I was never a scientist, I participated in that exhibition fadó, fadó. It provides a great opportunity for young people to share and develop their ideas. It is a pity that recently the exhibition has had difficulty finding sponsors. I hope sufficient sponsorship will be found in order to ensure we encourage an interest at the lower levels of education in taking science further.
Science Foundation Ireland has had a number of successes to date. It has only been in existence for three years but has had quite remarkable achievements. It has attracted some of the world's most prominent scientists to support our research community. It is helping to foster a dynamic research culture which will encourage our best scientific talent to stay in Ireland rather than build their research futures in the US. It is also helping us to move from a situation where our economic growth relies to a large extent on foreign direct investment and import technology to one where the basis for growth will arise to a greater extent from indigenous innovation.
Top quality researchers and universities are pushing researchers to speak a language we can all understand which is something I admire. Last year I presented prizes at an award ceremony in UCD to young science students who made presentations about difficult, complicated research to a lay audience. That sort of effort encourages others. It ensures that people realise there is a direct link between science and society and our everyday lives, particularly in the context of developing our economy.
Our State investment will be well spent. That it is guided by an international merit review is welcome. This means we will get maximum value for ideas, innovations, industrial development and prosperity etc. The information society is moving forward at a great pace. It tends to focus on the use of technology and computers and the accessing of services but it is more than this. It is also about research and development. It is about increasing the number of our researchers, the building of capacity, the promotion of private investment, the creation of links between industry and education and ensuring we have an educated workforce which will enable us become the competitive country we want to be.
Science Foundation Ireland is well positioned to do this. Its record over the past three years has proven this. By putting the foundation on a statutory footing we will enable it to go even further independently to develop Ireland as a powerful knowledge base. I wish the foundation well in its work.
This Bill will establish Science Foundation Ireland on a statutory basis. After a decade of prosperity Ireland is no longer a low-wage economy and must make that transition to higher added-value products and services that allow us to sustain and grow incomes. Our competitiveness has suffered over the past few years. One of the ways of tackling this is to acknowledge the importance of research and development in sustaining and enhancing competitiveness.
Science, technology, research and innovation are the key words of the future. SFI was set up initially under existing industrial development legislation as a subsidiary of Forfás. The purpose of the Bill is to establish the foundation as a separate legal entity. The programme for Government undertook to put SFI on a statutory basis. SFI's role is to establish Ireland as a centre of research excellence in strategic scientific areas related to economic development.
SFI has been charged by the Government to invest in the scientific and engineering fields underpinning biotechnology and information and communications technology. This legislation establishing SFI on a statutory basis marks a milestone in the ongoing development and growth of first-rate scientific research in Ireland. In setting up SFI the Government committed to building an eco-system of world-class research in this country. By establishing the foundation on a statutory basis the Government is providing SFI with a solid foundation to ensure this commitment is achieved.
SFI will help third level institutions recruit and retain scholars capable of building internationally significant research programmes in the fields that underpin biotechnology as well as information and communications technology. SFI will foster related programmes across all levels of Irish education so that students can learn more about the excitement in these fields and about why it is worth considering careers in them.
SFI will encourage and join governmental, educational and industrial efforts that strengthen our scientific, engineering and entrepreneurial cultures and promote the resulting technological innovations throughout the world. Information and communications technology is the core of the knowledge society. Scientific and engineering research today requires the use of systems and processes that information and communications technology research has produced. Research in biotechnology could be as essential to social and industrial development in the future as physics and chemistry were after the Second World War.
SFI offers the possibility of significantly enhancing our scientific, engineering and economic growth and becoming a vital partner in building a research system recognised and distinguished around the world for its excellence. Sustained economic growth and prosperity depends on establishing a culture of scientific and technological innovation, a high level of research and development and a globally-competitive, knowledge-based economy. Meeting this challenge will require us to make science and engineering careers attractive to students. We must provide incentives to encourage graduate students, post-doctoral researchers and no-tenured researchers to stay active in research and engineering in Ireland.
SFI will work with Irish universities and institutes of technology to seek out and bring to Ireland researchers and research teams in science and engineering who are acknowledged as world leaders in their fields. Ireland is a relatively small country with a small population and has used its best talents to achieve significant results in the past ten years. It has used its size to provide agility, flexibility and adaptability, qualities much valued in this post-industrial age.
Ireland can compete globally when its Departments, agencies, universities, institutes of technology and researchers all work together. SFI offers the prospect of acting as a catalyst for Ireland's future economic and social transformation into a knowledge-base economy in the same way that Enterprise Ireland and the IDA helped to support the development of the economy to its current level.
Establishing SFI on a statutory basis is essential if we are to sustain this transformation, a transformation that, if maintained and exploited, will yield untold benefits for future generations of Irish society. I am happy to compliment the Government on recognising the importance of research and development. Everybody knows that this is the way forward. In the past number of years we have attracted different types of industry, and now is the time to lay a strong foundation in research and development.
Everybody who is in business, who is competitive and who has vision knows that there is only one way forward and that is research and development. I welcome the Bill and commend it to the House. I look forward to a bright economic future for our country.
I welcome the Minister and the Bill to the House. The Minister has outlined the background to the establishment of SFI from it small beginnings as a sub-division of Forfás in 2000. Establishing Science Foundation Ireland on a statutory basis is a radical but welcome departure as the country seeks to build a global knowledge-based economy.
It is obvious, as the Minister has pointed out, that the reason for the establishment of SFI is that if Ireland is to maintain its recent economic success, it must continue to raise the level of excellence and quality of the industries located here. This is because Ireland can no longer compete on a cost basis with other, cheaper economies around the world. We can only compete on skills and quality. SFI will contribute to improving standards in both areas by attracting first-class researchers to live and work in Ireland.
These researchers will also support the development of a thriving eco-system of world-class research in Ireland that will lead to new discoveries and innovations and also be attractive to industries which need these scarce skills. In using the budget allocated to SFI to attract a critical mass of excellent researchers to research laboratories and third level education institutions in Ireland, SFI offers Ireland the prospect of competing and winning in the global race for knowledge in both biotechnology and information and communications technology.
In recruiting these leading researchers, SFI also aids efforts to continuously raise skill levels and competencies. This is a critical requirement if we are to have the personnel and skills required to meet the demands of the next phase of our country's development. The establishment of SFI complements similar departures in successively legislating for the establishment of the IDA and Enterprise Ireland, organisations which have played a major role in recent times in the development of the economy and society.
SFI activities will be complementary to the work of the IDA and Enterprise Ireland in their efforts to move Irish companies up the value chain. The funding allocated to SFI is a vital component of the €2.54 billion investment in research, technological development and innovation in the National Development Plan 2000-2006. The overall allocation to Science Foundation Ireland is €635 million. Most knowledge-based economies and societies, such as Finland, which has a history and population similar to our own, are built around world-class research institutions, skills and abilities.
Correctly exploited and utilised, innovation and world-class research can be harnessed to the benefit of future generations in Ireland. Accordingly, the establishment of the SFI and the funding allocated to it are an investment in the future growth of the economy. If we do not follow through on these investment requirements, we may fall behind in our efforts to establish Ireland as a leading player in the global knowledge based economy. I am impressed with the progress made to date by the SFI, which is still in its infancy, and I understand that by the end of March this year it had made financial investments amounting to around €200 million.
Dr. William Harris, director general of Science Foundation Ireland, realises that we are in a race to take a prominent position on the scientific map of the world. With a budget of €635 million to make this happen and a compass in his hand, he is working out the co-ordinates and has been doing so for some time. He believes that Ireland's sustained economic growth and prosperity will depend on establishing a knowledge based economy, a high level of research and development and a culture of scientific and technological innovation. It is obvious that Dr. Harris realises our position and the competition with which we must deal. If we fail to attain the next level, our ability to compete will be greatly diminished.
It is obvious that Dr. Harris has thought a great deal about economic and social change and takes the view that matters evolve and change over time and that few of them remain static for long. He believes that a country's greatest asset is its people and its educational system. In the past, people worried about coal, steam and big factories and never thought about people being more than machines. Ireland is a well educated nation and an economy which recognises that it is stuck between the US and Europe, an ideal position from which to compete. It has positioned itself through good relationships between the Government and the industrial sectors and has identified successful revenue and riches that will ultimately benefit the social structure.
Dr. Harris also has rightly asserted that this century will be driven by the ability to have well educated people who can use information and knowledge. This is tempered by his experiences with the National Science Foundation in the US. He believes that the creation of an engine room or power source pumping out new talent and identifying new scientific, technological and industrial fields is critical for economic survival. This century will see an era that will create an empire of the mind as opposed to one built of copper and steel. All our systems have to work well. Government has to work well and cannot be centrally driven. Dr. Harris believes that we need a Government that is agile, a private sector that is entrepreneurial and a university system that is flexible and entrepreneurial. All these have to work together in the construction of the new empire of the mind. He believes that Ireland has the potential to compete at that level if it can get these piers to connect.
Significantly, Dr. Harris has stated:
Our role at SFI is to be a catalyst and make those things happen. In the US the National Science Foundation was established and was one of the principal government tools that helped shape the colleges and universities to create the research processes that are now the best in the world. It is that research system that has helped to fuel the industrial enterprise that still exists.
It is good to know that Dr. Harris believes that the universities in this country are well prepared and that there are individuals here willing to promote things with a passion.
Speaking at the IMI conference in Killarney in April 2002 he said:
Allow me first to give you the brief on the Science Foundation Ireland. SFI has been charged by the Government to invest in the scientific and engineering fields underpinning bio-technology and information and communications technology. It is predicted that the market for bio-technology industries will rise to £250 billion by the year 2005 and support three million jobs in Europe. Research in bio-technology will affect health care, pharmaceuticals, environmental management, agriculture, green science, economic goods, and food and drink businesses. It includes fields such as DNA chips, genomics, bio-sensors, drug delivery and bio-remediation. The other area of SFI's investment is information and communications technology or ICT. This includes broadband, wireless and mobile transmission. It includes parallel processing systems, engineering for reliability of data transfer and wearable sensors. It also includes computer modelling, distributed networking, computer-based training and human language understanding.
He further pointed out:
Thanks to satellites and fibre optic cables, ideas leap among people almost like lightning. Nowadays, through a terminal, a satellite and a decent battery or a plug in the wall, ideas can jump from an island to anywhere and likewise attract. The only limit now is the worth of the idea, the intelligence that uses it and the innovation that it creates.
We all believe that this country is well positioned to succeed in a knowledge driven economy, and again Dr. Harris believes that we have nurtured the wealth of talent available in our young population. It is good to know he believes we have taken advantage of having an English speaking population at a time when English is used to run world markets. We have also leveraged our free market democratic system, which promotes innovation and initiative. EU membership has been vitally important as well as the tax incentives that have helped to attract a decade's worth of multinational investment and encourage the development of a unique relationship with US companies. Equally important are the innovative State policies spearheaded by the Tánaiste's Department and Forfás. Successful industrial investment marketing efforts have been led by Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland.
Dr. Harris argues that Ireland has another important advantage in terms of its size. Other sources of competitive advantage are rapidly drying up. Included here is the geographical position, which has been weakened by electronic commerce, reduced tariffs and lower barriers to foreign direct investment. The new technologies of the late 20th and early 21st centuries have shrunk the advantages that accrue to mere size. Ireland's small size should allow for efficiencies, partnerships and synergies not possible in larger countries.
Dr. Harris correctly points out that what we do now will set the way in which we develop for at least a generation. Complacency, slow decision making and failure to keep pace with change have cost nations before. We must not let that happen. Due to the fact that we cannot afford to do everything at once, we need a national strategy. We should apply every possible resource at our disposal to build our education, research and technology base for speed, knowledge and competitiveness. The entire education system from primary level through postgraduate level is important as it is a systemic issue.
In section 12, I notice something to which Members have referred in respect of previous legislation. I refer to the way Members have strictures placed upon them, an issue about which Deputy English spoke. Perhaps the Tánaiste will outline the rationale behind this? I echo what she said earlier in the week about recognising the importance of Science Foundation Ireland. I am delighted it is being established on a statutory basis under this Bill.
The Minister of State, Deputy Hanafin, said that young people depend on computerised systems. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, to relay to the Tánaiste that it is of utmost importance that money is invested in education at primary, secondary and third levels. We are facing a future where it is essential to have research, innovation, new ideas and technology. People are dependent on technology. When Members walk into their offices the first thing they do is check their e-mails. I encourage the Tánaiste to invest in this area as much as possible. I welcome the Bill and hope it will help future generations. I commend the Bill to the House.
Writing in The Irish Times this morning, the Tánaiste said, among other things, that Ireland's sustained economic growth and prosperity will depend upon establishing a culture of scientific and technological innovation, a high level of research and development and a globally competitive knowledge based economy.
This Bill, which underpins Science Foundation Ireland by statute, is probably one of the most significant Bills to come before this House in a long time. This agency has been operating as a sub-set of Forfás for some time. I took the opportunity of briefing myself again on the work of the agency. I read the papers given by Dr. Harris to the IMI last year and to the Bank of Ireland colloquium at another stage. He talked about his vision for research in Ireland. There is no doubt that any industrialised nation which has moved rapidly from a low-wage economy into a high-wage economy, needs a strong research base. I am around long enough in the educational sector to recall when researchers were only given the crumbs off the table when everybody else was looked after.
I remember when I was chairman of the governing body of Dublin Institute of Technology that the acting director at the time, Michael O'Donnell, had to go from one company to another looking for £1,000 here, £5,000 there, for bits and pieces of research, whether for the engineering department in Bolton Street or the chemical engineering area in Kevin Street. I recall the breakthrough when Cathal Brugha Street set up its food research centre in the late 1980s. That was a time when it was impossible to persuade the Department of Education as it then was, of the worth of promoting research. We depended to a great extent on companies at what would be regarded today as the low end of the technology sector, using assembly-line work in particular. I recall listening to two people for whom I have a significant regard who were speaking separately on different occasions, Ed Walsh who was then president of the University of Limerick and Danny O'Hare who was president of DCU. They both spoke in terms of desperation about the impossibility of persuading anybody in Government at the time of the importance of investment in research. Quite frankly, it was only when the European Social Fund was found to be an important mechanism for obtaining funds for postgraduate work and latterly, postgraduate research, that we began to see any kind of progress in that area.
Our industrial policy was in recent years grounded firmly in the ICT and pharmaceutical sectors. We are now reaping the rewards of that policy which was pursued by the previous and the current Government. Our colleagues in the other House raised many of the issues which we are discussing here and I read the Minister's response to them. It is important that significant amounts of money are invested into the high end of research. The Minister mentioned it in her closing speech at the end of Second Stage in the other House. She said that we must not go back to the stage of switching the tap on and off. There must be an uninterrupted policy of support for research otherwise that policy will not work. The postgraduate and postdoctorate researchers will go elsewhere – to the United States and to other parts of Europe. They will be given support through fellowships and from industry to carry on research. It is important that we continue to do the work which entices our graduates to stay here or to return if they have left, and also to encourage other non-Irish students to come and work here. We must broaden the knowledge base and ensure that research workers come to the country from abroad. That is part of the policy of Dr. Harris and his foundation.
I wish to sound a note of caution. Universities are undertaking a lot of fine research in Trinity College, DCU, the University of Limerick and elsewhere. It would be folly in the extreme if we were to neglect the need for applied research in the institutes of technology sector. That is an area where there can be fine heads of research but without research assistants and technicians it is like building a table without legs. The Minister noted in her speech that turf wars can break out when money becomes available and people fail to see the big picture. It is not the first time there has been a turf war between the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. It is important that sufficient resources are put into the institutes of technology to ensure that applied research is carried out.
It may well be the case that if that were done, we would not see the constant demand from institutes of technology to be upgraded to university status. In a newspaper today, Professor Skilbeck's report is referred to on the question of whether Dublin Institute of Technology and WIT should be accorded university status. I am aware that this is an unpopular opinion but I firmly believe that Dublin Institute of Technology – and I am more familiar with Dublin Institute of Technology than with WIT – has a unique role to play in Irish education. It does not need to be labelled as a university in order that it can carry out high-end research and valuable teaching.
I believe in the binary system of third level education. The strength of the third level sector has been a strong university sector and an equally strong non-university sector.
What about fees?
I will talk about fees in a moment if the Deputy wishes. The mistake made in the United Kingdom was when the binary system of third level education was all but abandoned. Every polytechnic became a university at a stroke of the Prime Minister, Mrs. Thatcher's, pen. There is a proliferation of some universities that simply have not achieved the level of academic excellence that is required from that sector.
Our institutes of technology have a high level of academic excellence. I was a member of the National Council for Educational Awards for five or six years and I saw at first hand the work being done in those institutes. The Cork Institute of Technology drove the industrial policy in that area along with the microelectronics division of UCC. Athlone Institute of Technology has had a significant impact in its area as has the Dundalk Institute of Technology. I acknowledge that Deputy Keogh knows more about WIT than I do but I am aware of the significant advances made by WIT. Under the current and previous national development plans there has been a lot of investment in the institutes of technology sector.
Unless the opportunity for science education at primary and post-primary levels is provided, we will not have science students at third level. The new primary school curriculum places an emphasis on elementary science. There is at least one other teacher on the other side of the Chamber who, because of his rural roots, might remember that there were beakers and all sorts of other science gadgets in a cupboard in the school classroom. In the late 1950s—
No, I would not remember that far back.
—emphasis was placed on elementary and rural science. It is a great pity that, with the evolution of the curriculum over the years, that was by and large abandoned. We moved then to environmental studies, which were fine but objectively did not add much to the body of education knowledge. It is a great pity that only in recent years has there been any pump-priming by way of grants to upgrade laboratories in post-primary schools. Unfortunately, as I said to a colleague earlier, many post-primary schools still use the same Bunsen burners we used when we were in school. That reflects our lack of investment in and support for science. The debate about the lack of students pursuing science is not unique to Ireland but it needs to be addressed.
We must look at the reasons why physics and chemistry, in particular, have such a low take-up among post-primary students. One reason is the shortage of teachers specifically qualified to teach physics, chemistry and higher level mathematics. We need to think of ways to address that although I do not know if incentives for teachers would work. I was looking at programmes in the UK and US which adopt that approach and they seemed to work – an additional allowance is paid to teachers for qualifications in science subjects. I am not sure that is the way to go here but we should examine it.
BITE, the Ballymun initiative for third level education is an attractive project and there is a good relationship between it and the RDS science council. Ballymun first year, junior certificate and senior cycle students receive grants of approximately €1,000 per student to help them to study science; the grants are given to the school and then passed on to the students. That grant aid is supported provided the students go on to study science at third level. One swallow does not a summer make but I attended a graduation ceremony at Christmas and was impressed that 25 out of 40 graduates, more than half of whom were women, were studying science-related subjects. Whether that is a flash in the pan or can be replicated I do not know but it is worth looking at. Science in schools must be made interesting. The Young Scientists competition has done tremendous work in this area. I compliment Aer Lingus and Esat, the previous and current sponsors respectively.
The national development plan stated that the Government would support the establishment of a children's science centre and I hope that commitment stands. I visited such a centre on the west coast of America some years ago and it had an interactive children's science museum. It was packed with children of all ages engaging in experimental work which was exciting for them. It ranged from experiencing a simulated earthquake to solving murders using DNA and blood samples. There was also a virtual moon landing. We need to provide opportunities to young people to allow them to get excited about science and research.
Last Friday week I met Professor Susan McKenna-Lawlor of NUI Maynooth at a function. She is an enthusiastic participant in the space technology programme. One would have to be a dreadfully sad person not to enjoy her retelling of her experiences in virtual space. If it were communicated in our schools that such activity is going on in Ireland and that we participate in such programmes, it would make science hugely attractive. The work in which Professor McKenna-Lawlor and others are involved should be better funded and broadcast more widely. Our involvement in the European space programme is limited enough but we are making a significant contribution to the programme through research.
The work of innovation centres should also be promoted. I go back to my experience in the Dublin Innovation Centre associated with Dublin Institute of Technology and what happened when the Plassey Technology Park was set up in Limerick. It is history at this stage but that development and campus companies in universities and institutes of technology should form part of the body of research and apprenticeship which is available to students.
Regarding the Bill, unless we are able to continue to invest significantly in high end research we will fall behind rapidly. I was looking at the list of Ireland's 100 top companies and while I did not have the chance to go through it in detail, of the top 50 I glanced at I would regard 20 as belonging to the sector we are talking about – one which would benefit greatly from resources. I refer to the communications technology, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and food industries. We must continue to invest in order that we will remain at the leading edge. It was interesting to see some forward planning when the Taoiseach opened the WestPark development in Shannon Airport.
He had a team with him.
A winning team.
Like the Bull McCabe and his team on a fair day.
Deputy Durkan may be treating this frivolously—
Would one not have been enough?
—but I heard the same approach when Citywest was suggested. People thought Citywest would be a series of warehouses in a field in west Dublin, conveniently placed there by the then Minister of State with responsibility for technology, who is the leader of the Labour Party. Of course that business park should have been located in the Blanchardstown area—
Or Coolock.
—as recommended by a high level group. That might have ended the argument about a stadium at Abbotstown – Citywest could have been located there, where it would probably have been more appropriate.
It is history.
We will rewrite that too.
My point about WestPark is that it is important to plan ahead. While there is a downturn in the global economy at present, as surely as night follows day, that cycle will turn. We need to be ready to benefit from that. We played catch up for a long time in that we simply did not have the infrastructure. That is why, in many ways, I can be as critical as anybody opposite at our tardiness in promoting greater infrastructure, whether broadband or in other areas of IT. Unless we have the courage to go out on a limb and invest in high quality infrastructural services, we will be left behind. These companies will simply wind down their operations here until such time as they get an opportunity to go elsewhere.
I welcome the news in today's newspapers regarding the decision by the Minister for Education and Science to invite the OECD to carry out a root and branch investigation of the Irish education system. Many of us are around long enough to remember that when Sean Lemass's Government was drawing up its policies for a new Ireland, it turned to the OECD and used the recommendations in its reports to develop a world-class education system and to lay the foundations for an enlightened industrial development policy for this country. It is now opportune for the Government to allow a serious examination to be undertaken of our education system to identify the gaps, to see how it is being delivered and whether it is targeting the correct groups.
I was invited by Deputy Finian McGrath to comment on the fees issue. As I said elsewhere, I am one of those people who is in favour of the restoration of fees for high earners and those who can afford to pay them—
That is what I call bravery.
—as one way to deal with the question of access to education, but it is not the only way.
Civil servants tell Ministers that things like that are "courageous decisions".
As a former Minister, Deputy Durkan knows where courageous decisions can lead Ministers. This is an important initiative and I hope, irrespective of other side shows, it will be undertaken by the Government. If it takes a year or a year and a half, it will be work well done.
The Bill is welcome. It is important we have an agency headed up by a person of world renown such as Dr. William Harris because credibility is important. Academic excellence is also important and this will be achieved by the enactment of the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Bill.
I thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for the opportunity to address the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Bill. This debate is very appropriate and I welcome hearing the views of Members. I will, however, present a different view from that of the mainstream political parties.
It is important we look at the purpose of the Bill. It provides for the establishment of a body to be known as Science Foundation Ireland which will be an agency of Forfás. The Bill also provides for the amendment of the Industrial Development Acts 1986 to 1998 and the Shannon Free Airport Development Company (Amendment) Act 1986. These amendments are merely concerned with the updating of certain grant instruments and related financial limits.
If one looks closely at section 2, which contains definitions of terms used in the Bill, one will see that the new body, Science Foundation Ireland, is referred to in the Bill as "the foundation". Earlier, a number of Deputies referred to Science Foundation Ireland, which is a good title, but I have a major concern with the term "the foundation" being used in the Bill. For many of us, foundations, particularly in the EU and America, are often associated with extreme right-wing groups. That term has negative connotations, particularly given the mood of Irish society which would have nothing in common with a lot of these foundations. It is essential when discussing this issue that we understand that the debate is about science and having a solid base for science. I would hate to think a group of private individuals could, in some way, misuse this organisation, or this term. However, I will be optimistic because I know most people feel the same way as I do, although I know there are people in the Government, particularly the Tánaiste, who have views which are similar to those of people like George Bush which would not be held by the average Irish person.
Section 4 provides that expenses incurred by Ministers in the administration of this Bill shall be sanctioned by the Minister for Finance to be paid out of moneys to be provided by the Oireachtas. We have to be on our guard and be conscious of the hand of the Minister for Finance. We cannot allow a situation in which the Department of Finance could stifle growth and development in the economy, particularly in relation to science. This is something at which we will have to seriously look over the next couple of months. To develop the economy and the idea of science and research, we will have to ensure funding is provided. Sadly, I do not have confidence in the Minister for Finance at the moment. I also have major concerns about the Cabinet. We must be cautious about section 4 to ensure the moneys are provided by the Oireachtas.
On the broader Bill, we all accept that science is vital for the future economic development of the country and that it is the way forward. Twenty years ago science was not treated with the same respect and researchers were often dismissed as being very academic people locked away in laboratories involved in academic work. I never accepted that view, particularly in the education system. There are many new creative ideas in the primary school science curriculum. Let us not forget that, in the past, some primary school teachers were very effective in teaching children science in primary schools, long before the new or revised curriculum. I remember seeing many young children doing experiments. I pay tribute to those teachers who, 30 or 40 years ago, saw the future and had the initiative to develop these ideas.
I saw this in practice recently in the north inner city school in which I taught before I was elected to the Dáil where a group of children were involved in a project making rockets and in experiments in science. The Taoiseach visited the school, Plas Mhuire boys national school in Dorset Street, on that particular day. The most interesting thing was that these young children had major literacy problems, yet all of a sudden their eyes were opened by science. It was part of the curriculum in which they shone. They were so good at building and launching their own rockets that we asked them to launch them for the Taoiseach. It was a tremendous day and I know the Taoiseach was impressed by the reaction of the pupils and by the innovation taking place in the school.
In regard to the debate on science, the need for science graduates and to make this Bill a reality, we have to focus on second and third level students. Deputy Carey mentioned the question of fees. He is making a big mistake because we need to invest in education and support our students, science students in particular. We are having difficulty getting young people to do science courses and it is important that we do not put any obstacles in their way because science, as I said before, is for the future and it is the engine room of the economy.
Not only should we realise the value of science but we should use it in the development of disadvantaged areas, particularly disadvantaged schools. A high percentage of our young students do not get the chance to do science in third level institutions, which we will have to face up to. Why are so many young, talented pupils from poor backgrounds not getting to third level? We have to target resources. There is no conflict of interest when one speaks about this and third level fees. We have to make the investment in pre-school, primary and secondary school projects and fund poor children. It is at this level that one begins to develop their interest in science and the future. We have also to ensure that children get an even break and get involved in projects.
We have all studied the research on science and jobs in recent years. Many of the experts are now saying that we have taken our eye off the ball in terms of wealth creation and land and property. If one does not have science and planning of scientific development in the education service, one will not have trained staff and scientists to come up with new ideas for creating wealth. Land and property are no longer sufficient to create jobs; science is needed. I compliment people like David McWilliams from TV3 and The Sunday Business Post, who has written many provocative articles on the economy, looking to the future and looking for new ideas.
We must also listen to young people, which we do not do enough. Young people come up with many wonderful scientific ideas. Recently, a constituent of mine came up with a fantastic idea relating to music. He went to all the different public bodies looking for funding and could not get it. I even raised the issue with the Minister, Deputy Harney, but nobody seemed to want to know and the doors were slammed. I do not accept this. If young people have ideas, particularly in respect of science and development, we have to listen to them, be creative and be open to their ideas.
We should never lose sight of the fact that the yearly young scientist exhibition and the young scientist of the year awards serve as an example of our young talent. Every year, most parents, teachers and politicians look in awe when they see the high standard of the work of the students at the exhibition. They also look at the magnificent inventions. I pay tribute to the students' parents and teachers, particularly the teachers who do a lot of work outside school hours on some of the projects. Some of the projects are fantastic, really creative and have major jobs potential.
Some months ago there was a row with the ASTI over wages but it is important that we pull back and say to those in the ASTI, the INTO and the TUI that they have done a magnificent job over the years. We need to ensure that teachers within those unions who have a special interest in our students and in science are valued. We need to protect them.
There is also a downside to this legislation. We have to be conscious of the dangers of using science in a negative way. This leads to more significant moral and ethical questions. We saw the invention of nuclear power 30 or 40 years ago. We have taken a strong decision that we will not get involved with it and I am delighted to see other forms of energy being used around the country. However, the use of science in the generation of nuclear power was dangerous and we have seen it used in a negative way.
Section 7 sets out the functions of the foundation. The main function of the foundation is to promote and develop world-class research capability in strategic areas of scientific endeavour that concern economic and social benefit and long-term competitiveness. These areas include information and communications technologies and biotechnology. It is intended that the foundation will attract research teams and individual researchers of a world-class standard to carry out research in Ireland. This section is important because I like the idea of attracting world-class researchers. Before we do so, we must ensure that we use our own world-class researchers. We should welcome researchers from abroad but not lose sight of the fact that we have many talented people at home.
Section 8 provides for the formation of the board of the foundation, its composition and numerical constitution – 12 members. For such an important development, is 12 members enough? I do not believe in huge committees and boards but we should consider having 15, 16 or 17 members to ensure that the board is representative and includes all strands of society, particularly the scientific strand. I hope there are representatives from organisations such as the teachers' unions. One has to ensure that there is a broad democratic flavour to the board because people will have more confidence in it.
Section 10 provides for the five-year term of office of the chairperson of the board and eligibility for re-appointment. It is reasonable to have a chairperson for five years. It gives him or her time to settle in and ensures that the post will not be held for life. We will have to have constant, new, fresh ideas, particularly from scientific people. We need somebody fresh in the position of chairman.
Section 11 provides for the procedures to be followed by the board in regard to chairmanship of meetings, voting and the number of members required in attendance for a quorum, which is five. This number is very low and I am concerned about this section. We need to have more people in attendance for a quorum.
Section 13 provides for the appointment of a chief officer of the foundation to be known as the director general, and it outlines the term of office and the functions of the director general. It is essential that the right person be elected to this position and that he or she has vision and a top-quality scientific background. I am confident that we will not make the mistake of putting someone in the position without these capabilities.
Section 15 provides for the establishment by the board of committees to assist and advise it regarding the performance of any of its functions and the rules governing such committees. Section 16 provides for the disclosure of interests by members of the board, committees of the board, staff of the foundation or any person engaged by the foundation. It is essential, when putting people on boards, that we have disclosure of interests to make sure there is no clash of interests. We need to restore the idea of ethics in politics and public life.
Section 20 provides that staff seconded to the foundation from Forfás may, by order of the Minister, be transferred to and become staff of the foundation. It is healthy if people of high quality are moving around from different areas, helping, advising and coming up with new ideas.
Section 21 provides the foundation with the authority to prepare a scheme or schemes of superannuation for its staff. It is essential that the staff have direct and positive consultation with the trade union movement and that they be given a decent wage to encourage people of a high standard.
Section 22 provides that the foundation may engage consultants or advisers to assist it in the performance of its functions. Every time I hear the words, "consultants or advisers" a red light goes on in my head. I have a word of caution on this because I have seen consultants' reports which cost more money than the project. We have to look seriously at this idea. Research and professionalism are necessary but I want to focus on the question of public money. We are inclined to bring out reports, strategies and all sorts of things costing millions of euro, yet at the end of the day somebody comes up with a sensible idea and it is implemented. I question that provision in section 22.
Section 23 provides that the foundation is obliged to prepare a strategy statement every five years, the first such statement to be prepared soon after the establishment day. A work programme must be prepared at the end of each year on the activities proposed for the following year. That is an example of good, sensible practice. It is necessary to plan and I like the idea of the five year plan. When I worked at an inner city school we tried a one year plan, then a five year plan to tackle literacy, children at risk and children with discipline problems. The five year plan was good but at the same time we were open to amendments and proposals. It is important that this foundation has a clear plan for the future.
Section 24 provides that the foundation must submit to the Minister an annual report of its activities after the end of each financial year and specifically comment on the oriented base research being supported by the foundation. This is good practice and public service and it is common sense.
I am somewhat concerned about section 26 because the language and terms here could be dangerous in the future, given recent developments, particularly by the Government. The section provides that the foundation may build, purchase or lease the relevant land and buildings required for its functions. It may also dispose of any land or premises which are surplus to its requirements. I hope this is not a door to selling off for its own sake, particularly when it comes to land that could be used properly in the interests of the public, rather than a few individuals. We have to be cautious about privatisation for its own sake, and if we have land that could be used to build houses we should not be afraid to sell it to our city councils.
Sections 27 to 32 amend the provisions in the Industrial Development Act 1986 relating to employment and research grants and raises the threshold levels in respect of those grants. It also raises the threshold for equity provision, investment aids and training grants in this Act. These sections are very important, as is section 36. It amends the Industrial Development Act 1998 to allow staff members in any one of the bodies, Forfás, IDA Ireland, Enterprise Ireland, the NSAI or the foundation, to apply for vacancies in any other bodies. It is important that staff working in the sciences can rotate through different organisations.
I welcome the debate and commend the contributions. Creative people working in the area of science will create wealth and jobs and ensure that we have a bright future. Let us hope that we all have the possibility of enjoying the wealth.
I am glad to have an opportunity to comment on this Bill at this important time in the development of science and technology. It is useful to have the Bill and the debate focusing on these elements for a variety of reasons.
Hear, hear.
I agree with many of the remarks made by Deputy McGrath and other speakers about the need for primary and second level pupils, in particular primary, to focus on the sciences. It is important that they understand them at an early age and see them as a means whereby they can advance their interests and competence, and ultimately earn their livelihood which, like it or not, is the priority nowadays. I have some reservations about the foundation but they are not the same as Deputy McGrath's. The foundation will be successful and will serve a purpose if it is used as a crucible to bring together those with an aptitude and excellence in the sciences to concentrate on the areas that require attention at present. If it attracts people of high calibre and enables them to use their influence to spread the word throughout this jurisdiction it will raise our already high international standard and increase public awareness of this.
That may be a long-winded way of approaching this Bill. In response to Deputy Carey, we lagged behind in the areas of science and technology, then in the 1990s we seemed to catch up because of decisions taken and investments made. We have slipped a bit again and I worry about our competitiveness in that area. Proposals are in hand and preparations and investments are being made to advance science and technology. However, this makes me uneasy because, for example, when mobile phone technology first arrived here everybody looked at it in awe. Then somebody decided that it was the technology of the future. People raised queries about masts and the health risks but it had the capacity to bypass the major investment in ground works previously incurred in development. It has become a significant instrument in enabling developing economies to catch up rapidly as opposed to having to wait as they did in the past.
At that time we were well ahead of our neighbours in the United Kingdom in developing that technology but I am not so sure that we are ahead of them now. We should be because we have come through an era when it was possible to advance the sciences and technology because investors such as Intel and Hewlett-Packard and many others invested here and provided jobs. That investment had the effect of focusing on our competence, highlighting areas where we were capable and others where we were not. In some cases we were able to set in motion events that brought about a rapid improvement to facilitate and advance our competitiveness at an early stage.
There are now clear indicators that this country is not competitive in industrial development for a variety of reasons connected with the construction, development and acquisition of sites and so on. This is a cause of serious concern and if we continue to price ourselves out of the market industries looking for a suitable location will go elsewhere. That would not be a good development from our point view and it is one we have already tried. We have advanced considerably and shown that we could develop well, efficiently and rapidly in this area. The deflation of the dot com bubble caused consternation and maybe lack of investment in this area, particularly in the past couple of years. The glitch in investment will not have an impact now but will be evident in five, seven or ten years' time.
Maintaining an ongoing flow of investment into that area is critical and becoming more so as time passes. I recall a businessman saying to me about ten or 15 years ago that by now all major scientific, electronic and manufacturing investments would be in south-east Asia. I was quite surprised at the time and thought that he had inside information, which he probably did. He was wrong, but there are now indicators that it is more convenient for some industries with high technological requirements to locate in those areas. I do not agree with that for many reasons, primarily because it means that we must buy products back again.
I know that a case can be made that we should not invest in the most basic technology. However, it is not a bad idea, at the same time, to advance the various stages in an area of industrial development to ensure that we have the basic core elements and the second and third stages as necessary. We must supply the investment funding to ensure that we have adequate back-up to our industry there. I am not sure if the Government is fully conscious of the present urgency regarding technological competitiveness. I do not know the answer to that. I am not sure that the foundation is the answer, but it may be, if it attracts the kinds of people suggested. If it does, it may work.
The next important point, about which others have spoken, concerns the head of the foundation. The director general will be a very important person. If the foundation should transpire to be an elevated think tank for people to use as a sounding board, it will not work. If, on the other hand, the director general is successful in using the agency to drive thinking and competition and to provide encouragement, investment and advancement, it can be hugely beneficial. If it transpires, as a result, that this country can advance to international, world-class quality in that area, we will be on the right track. The University of Limerick and other universities and educational centres throughout the country have been doing that for years. If we examine that positive aspect, it can be hugely beneficial to our economy. However, people should not think that by merely throwing the foundation together, we will see a dramatic change in the whole sector and its development. It will not work that way.
The membership of the board will be equally important. First, one needs people with specific qualifications and flair in the various disciplines. I have no doubt that their commitment will be huge. Their very existence, including both those within this jurisdiction and those who may visit, will give the foundation the ability to build up its reputation as a world-class centre for scientific endeavour, focusing on the importance thereof from the point of view of our competitors.
I started by talking about competition. While I hate saying it, it is important that the Minister recognises this and that it be recorded as often as possible. A few years ago, this country was one of the most competitive economies in the world, but now we have changed. We did not do so without knowing it. We did not change without someone, somewhere, recognising the danger signals. Those signals existed across all types of industry. Slowly and inexorably, they have crept up like mercury indicators showing that we were moving into the danger area. Various Departments had access to those indicators at the time. It does not require a degree in rocket science to work out that, in those circumstances, with the signals warning that decisions needed to be taken immediately, those decisions were not taken. That is one of the reasons we now find ourselves in a less competitive situation than some years ago.
We should be in a better position given that we had a head start. We set ourselves up very successfully in this arena as experts in the field. We have slipped, and there have been various reasons for that. I do not wish to delve too deeply into the politics of it today as there is not sufficient time. We cannot afford luxuries of that nature in future. We must ensure that there is a reaction whenever those red signals light up on the board. If we do not do that, we can have all the foundations, centres of excellence and top scientists we like. The foundation may be used for research purposes, but it may not be the catalyst for investment here that such a centre needs to be.
The foundation will do a fine job, provided we keep inside clearly defined parameters and that we learn from rather than ignore the lessons of the past, as unfortunately tends to be the case in our society. The foundation will be useful for investors and employers generally. They can draw their own conclusions from it, and that too is important. All businesses and investors are very anxious to see forecasts, and they will make their own forecasts based on what they see happening in science and technology in this country when it comes to their decision on whether to invest in the economy. They will come to their conclusion based essentially on the costs and risks involved and the structure and support for the proposal – the back-up in the country in question.
The foundation may be extraordinarily successful. We may become the world leaders to such an extent that we can set up a consultancy. Reference has been made to consultants already. Whatever it is, we should – and, one hopes, will – have the necessary technological and financial wherewithal to ensure that the concept is successful from the point of view of the Irish economy.
Science and technology change with time. No technology has a shorter lifespan than the high-tech and information technology industry within which we all operate at present. It is almost entirely dependent on constant, ongoing research, upgrading, updating and so on. In those circumstances, we must ensure that, when setting up such a body as is proposed in this legislation, it is deeply conscious of the responsibilities placed on it and the need to be able to create the proper climate and identify industry's requirements well in advance.
I was interested in some of the other contributions on the Bill. Deputy Finian McGrath raised the issue of children in inner city schools. I have always felt – it is no harm to repeat it – that every child has an aptitude in one way or another. Some may be academic and others interested in the mechanical and electrical areas or otherwise. It would be a great achievement if we could devise a system which would encourage the children of each era to develop themselves to the best of their ability and to avail of the services and facilities around them with a view to being of benefit not only to their families and communities, but to the country.
Irish people have made huge contributions to science. There have been, and will continue to be, many Irish inventors. If this legislation, innocuous as it seems, works as it should, draws the kind of inspired people to it that it should and is ushered along by the Minister and his successors, it could be successful and not just another shop of excellence which does not penetrate the marketplace in the way we would like.
There are two main purposes to this Bill. On one hand, as the Long Title suggests, it is to establish a body known as Science Foundation Ireland and to designate its functions. On the other hand, it is to amend the Industrial Development Acts in regard to the amounts of grants that the State may give to various semi-State bodies and, through them, to private companies for various industrial and other developments.
Very few, if any, of the contributors on the Bill dwelled on the area of grants, which is a mistake. We should use the opportunity presented by this Bill to lay down guidelines as to the criteria by which and to whom grants are awarded from here on. The State and previous Governments, particularly Fianna Fáil Governments in the 1970s and 1980s, gave massive grants, like confetti almost, to a range of enterprises, companies and multinational corporations with very little control as to what was required of such companies. Many rewarded the State by upping and leaving when it suited their purposes for one reason or another, leaving many workers in the lurch and treating workers and taxpayers with contempt. The future award of grants to private enterprises should be the subject of discussion. As this Bill significantly extends the amount of grants that can be given, this is the opportunity for that discussion.
The current Fianna Fáil-Progressive Democrats Government is terminally inclined towards favouring, supporting and in all ways endorsing the multinational corporation system, and has put huge over-reliance on multinational corporations for the purpose of providing employment in the State. Therefore, we can assume that the grant increases provided for in the Bill will further facilitate the Government's inclination to support, to the cost of other possibilities, multinational corporations. There have been indications in the past six months of the dangers of this approach, with the Government essentially giving hostages to these corporations when it is clear that for rationalisation purposes and to suit their profits, they simply leave.
The bringing forward of this Bill and the setting up of Science Foundation Ireland, even if many of its provisions are already in train, should be the occasion for a debate on how best taxpayers' public funding can be deployed with regard to developing industry and, in this case, scientific research and knowledge. I regret that the possibility to do that has not been availed of in the course of this debate.
The other main point of the Bill is in regard to scientific research. As a socialist, I endorse scientific research—
Good.
—the quest for knowledge and the quest to understand nature, the human body, human nature, our world and our universe. However, to what end is this research undertaken? The Bill is amazingly silent on this. It is an amoral Bill in the sense that it has no regard for the ethics that should guide the scientific research that is provided for in the Bill.
For example, in the past 20 years, countless billions of research dollars and pounds have gone into armaments research and the armaments industry, particularly in the United States and Europe. In other words, massive resources were put into scientific research for the purpose of designing and creating weapons that can destroy, maim and incinerate more people more efficiently and more horribly over ever greater areas of territory. That is immoral and obscene. However, it is an activity on which the Government does not have a view. With the creation of Science Foundation Ireland and the provision of grants for research, etc., will research for those multinational corporations which make up the armaments industry be possible in those circumstances and endorsed by the Government? If we are to take evidence to date, despite the fact that the vast majority of the Irish people are appalled and horrified by the obscene wastage of resources on the creation of horrific weapons of mass destruction, the Irish Government is taking an amoral, if not immoral, approach.
The Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment replied to a parliamentary question recently, in this case to Deputy Michael D. Higgins, on the value of materials exported under military or dual licence in the past year for which figures are available. Incredibly, the first sentence of the reply states: "My Department does not collect statistics on the value of actual exports of military and dual-use goods." The reply goes on to give some provisional figures, which are substantial and growing, in regard to military licences that have been granted by the Government. Will this Bill accelerate that process because we have no built-in ethical standards in regard to the ending to which the funding and the research are committed?
On the armaments industry and weapons of mass destruction, I do not know if the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, can help me but I tried to get an explanation from the Taoiseach recently on the location of the weapons of mass destruction for which thousands of people were slaughtered in Iraq. The Taoiseach and the Tánaiste came into the Dáil day after day and assured us they existed and that this was the reason for the United States and Britain going to war. We now know that was a fabrication but the Taoiseach has not yet come into the Dáil to apologise. Perhaps the Minister of State might like to do it for him.
The development of research for biotechnology is explicitly mentioned in the Bill. I have major problems with that. I welcome biotechnology but the examples of the ends to which biotechnology have been utilised in certain cases in the course of the past 20 years have been extremely dangerous, with significant implications for the future of our environment. I refer particularly to the genetic engineering of seeds and crops and the large multinational chemical corporations like the former Monsanto, Novartis and Ciba-Geigy, which have developed the genetic manipulation of seeds for corn, for example, to resist the weed killer they have also developed. They now want to put these genetically-manipulated seed stocks into the wild with abandon. They are actually doing that, although not in Europe because it is not yet allowed. However, they are trying to get in in other countries.
I would like to ask the Minister of State, or whoever will reply to the debate, if guidelines will be laid down about this type of research in the context of Science Foundation Ireland and the funding that will be given to assist technology. This particular development in biotechnology poses serious threats to the future of our ecological infrastructure by releasing unknown entities into the environment, the results of which are incalculable. These companies are buying up the seed capital of the world. They are buying up control of the seed capital in Third World countries and are enslaving poor farmers and small producers who, for centuries, have developed their own seed stock. They are now chaining them to contracts. They are then putting into the wild a new entity that they, like gods, have created in the course of a few years' research but the long-term results of which we do not know. We do not know how these seeds will react to different climatic changes, etc., and therefore food security for the world is a major consideration. How much time do I have, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle?
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
The Deputy has slightly less than three minutes because we adjourn at 4 p.m. The Deputy will have two minutes remaining when the debate resumes.
I would like to share my time at the end with Deputy Gregory, who will be in possession then.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
Agreed.
I withdraw that request, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I do not wish to share my time with Deputy Gregory.
I wondered about those tactics.
The Deputies should not start fighting.
The multifarious problems posed and the dangers of genetic engineering have unnerved me; I cannot get everything straight at the one time.
I am concerned that these issues are not provided for in this legislation, which is a major problem. The Minister of State is adept at facilitating multinational corporations, giving Dutch Shell our massive gas reserves off the Mayo coast and so on. Unfortunately, we cannot have any real confidence in this Government.
The debate on the Bill has raised the issue of the importance of education for our society and our economy. It reminds us, if we need reminding, of the current debate on access to education and the other side of that debate, the free fees furore which has been going on for the past week or two. Yesterday, I was in a second level school in the north inner city. The school, which I will not name, is one of the best known schools in Dublin. All the children who currently attend the school are from the communities in the adjoining inner city areas. The school is doing its best to provide as high a standard of education as possible for local disadvantaged children. While attending a presentation of certificates on pathways to education in the school in question, I spoke to some of the teachers and asked them about their views on the current debate on free fees and equity.
Debate adjourned.
The Dáil adjourned at 4 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 27 May 2003