Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES debate -
Wednesday, 18 May 2005

Digital Hub Development Project: Presentation.

I welcome Mr. Phil Flynn and Mr. William Burgess of the Digital Hub Development Agency. I apologise to them for the delay in starting this part of the meeting. We had to report back to the joint committee on the very important trip we took to Chile and Argentina on behalf of the Oireachtas. We received the presentation in advance and I thank the witnesses for it. I would like them to do a synopsis of the presentation and the committee members can then ask questions.

Before we begin, I want to point out that members of this committee have absolute privilege, but this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. The committee cannot guarantee any level of privilege to witnesses appearing before it. Under the rulings of the Chair, committee members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Mr. William Burgess

We welcome the opportunity to discuss the digital hub project. This is a unique and inspiring project and those of us involved are very enthusiastic about it. It is unique as it brings together a number of key strands. It is not just an enterprise issue as it also involves education, community development and a plan for urban regeneration. Despite many challenges, much has been achieved. I am glad to report that the corporate governance, management and financial control of the agency are in very strong shape. That has been verified by a number of audits by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

As chairman of this project, I am lucky to have a very strong board, which is one of the most relevant boards for any agency in the State. Board members include Mr. Sean Dorgan of IDA Ireland; Mr. John Fitzgerald, the city manager; Mr. Dan Flinter, who recently retired from Enterprise Ireland; Dr. Don Thornhill, who recently retired as head of the HEA; and Mr. Peter Cassels, who has been a great help with the community aspect. Other board members include: Mr. Paul McGuinness, of U2 fame; Mr. Paul Kavanagh, a well-known entrepreneur; Mr. Jackie Harrison of IBEC; and Mr. Joe Murphy, who is in the SME sector. Between us, Mr. Flynn and I have around 60 years experience in the IT industry. This project will continue to benefit from a powerful set of well-skilled and focused players. The members of the board are very well engaged in this process and have been a great support to the executive management.

Mr. Phillip Flynn

The presentation is entitled "Creating an epicentre for the development of digital enterprise in Ireland". Some members of this committee have seen elements of this presentation before. We are located in the centre of the city, next door to St. James's Gate. We occupy about seven acres of land on both sides of Thomas Street and James's Street. It is a unique location as it an old marketplace and an area of great cultural heritage. There is a vibrant local community there and lately it has become culturally diverse as there are 50 nationalities living in that area of the city. There are about 20,000 people living there in total.

The committee members received a briefing paper in advance of this presentation and I hope they had a chance to look at it. We take our mandate from the Act which established the project in July 2003. There are many functions mandated to us under that Act. The slide in front of the members suggests that the core of the project is about the enterprise development of digital media and creating an innovative cluster of enterprises in one site. The success of that development has had a catalytic effect on urban regeneration by reaching out to all of the schools in Dublin 8 and beyond and developing new learning programmes that will help to breach the digital divide. It will prepare the people of the community for the enterprises that will literally be on their doorstep. We want to demystify the technology and make it easily accessible to them.

We also want to be the catalyst for the sector on a national level. It is an emerging sector which all analysts see as having great growth potential for the Irish economy. This is the digital decade, as Bill Gates once said. The enterprises are about the provision of products and services for a digitally connected market. We are trying to attract a representative sample of enterprises that operate right across the digital content value chain. That chain includes those who work in digital creation, management, delivery and those who consume digital products. The enterprise cluster itself is a significant attraction and a help to small indigenous companies. The networking and partnering opportunities that neighbouring companies offer for business development is quite significant and has proven to be very successful.

We also wish to create a test bed so that new products and services can be developed on site. For that to happen, we need to have a world-class telecommunications infrastructure and ours is one of the best in the country. We also need a community of people who can engage with those products and services and such people are connected to the project. We have excellent research projects on site. The location is in the city centre, which is an attraction in its own right. The project is backed by the Government, which is viewed very positively by the enterprises. We can bring a specific focus on digital media because that is what we are set up to do. The creative environment there makes for a very attractive buzz factor of which people wish to be part. There are significant social and community benefits, including the regeneration of an area that was allowed to run down somewhat in the final decades of the last century. The digital hub is addressing all of the important aspects of that regeneration such as enterprise learning, living, retail and cultural aspects.

The digital hub development board is attempting to address skills through a programme called the Diageo Liberties learning initiative, which offers significant opportunities for children at all levels in the education sector — primary, secondary and third level — to become familiar with the new digital tools and to allow them to develop and see the possibility of developing careers in this domain. We are focused on creating sustainable jobs in the knowledge economy that is now a reality for all, across the generations. We hope that by running an innovative project like this, we can develop programmes that will be a reference for other initiatives throughout the country.

With regard to our progress, the chairman, Mr. Burgess, and I have been with the project for just over two years, the period for which it has been operational. The board has refurbished a number of previously derelict buildings onsite, which now house some of the companies we have attracted. Committee members can look at the slide photographs of those buildings, which convey the diversity of the 49 companies we have managed to attract to date — companies located across the value chain to which I referred.

As we were present on the site and, of necessity, had to have the best telecommunications infrastructure possible to serve the companies, we saw the opportunity to extend that infrastructure into the local community and its 16 schools. With the assistance of Smart Telecom and Diageo, which I acknowledge, we have put broadband into all the local schools and the eight local community centres. It has been a great success and has been much used and appreciated by the teachers, students and citizens of Dublin 8.

We have a number of literacy programmes. While I will not go into all possible detail on these programmes, they are run under the umbrella of an overall programme known as the Diageo Liberties learning initiative. We are indebted to Diageo for its significant sponsorship. To date, the company has given us almost €3 million over a four-year period to run these programmes. School programmes are one example, such as the successful digital storytelling programme, whereby children are given tools such as cameras and allowed to create their own stories and publish them on a website, as well as engaging their parents and grandparents in that process.

In the community space, we have assisted in putting computer rooms into all of the social housing that exists in the area. All the flat complexes involved have a flat donated by Dublin City Council for computer use. We have managed to get hardware providers to donate computers and the board provides technical support and training programmes for the citizens of the flat complexes.

In the enterprise space, we are only now beginning to develop programmes. These programmes will specifically focus on the skills that the enterprises need university graduates to have as they seek to employ them. In particular, we focus on the computer gaming sector. We run a gaming competition which simulates a real commercial gaming environment. As a result, we send a winning Irish team to an international competition at the University of Abertay, Dundee. We began running that competition last year and this is its second year.

We do a significant amount of showcasing of products and services of the companies on the site and the developments taking place in the digital arena. This is of significant benefit to the companies because it allows them an opportunity to promote and exhibit their latest products and services.

The result we point to with some pride is that we have 49 operational companies with approximately 450 high quality employees — the knowledge workers that, as an economy, Ireland will want to focus on. A 2,000 strong community is connected to the hub though the community centres and the programmes with which we engage. In addition, we have already established connections to world-class research projects. Flexible office infrastructure is what we offer the companies, which means we can move flexibly as they grow on the strength of commercial contracts they may attract. If they seek to reduce in size due to the volatility of the industry, they will also need a flexible response on the building site.

Broadband is an area of great concern to the committee. In Dublin 8, the digital hub has a world-class broadband services infrastructure that is second to none. We are moving increasingly to establish connections with other cities and programmes similar to ours, to help in advancing the enterprise goals of the companies located at the hub. We have successful learning initiatives, which were acknowledged to have surpassed expectations by the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, in reply to a parliamentary question some weeks ago. We run over 20 programmes, in which 6,000 participants have engaged.

What is significantly different on the enterprise cluster side is that we have great strength in both foreign direct investment and indigenous enterprise. Indigenous enterprise is a matter of great concern that was raised in the enterprise strategy report, Ahead of the Curve: Ireland's Place in the Global Economy. Enterprise Ireland has recently reorganised to ensure that the indigenous enterprise that we successfully create in start-up can also achieve scale, and that we increasingly reduce our reliance on foreign direct investment in the coming decades. Foreign direct investment has served well but we must also ensure that we have a strong indigenous sector. Of the 49 companies in the digital hub, five resulted from foreign direct investment and 44 are indigenous companies.

For the future, we are, to use a saying, starting from the centre. We are starting from the fact that a seed cluster has been developed which is now 49 companies strong. We need to grow from that centre and spread in a concentric circle, to develop every element of the project in tandem so that, by the end of the decade — or by 2012, which is the real goal for the project — we will have developed from the 450 employees at the hub today to perhaps 2,500 to 3,000 employees working for perhaps 150 to 200 companies. However, this depends on the disposition of the cluster. The underlying premise of the project is that innovation and creativity, applied in this manner, will drive economic and social regeneration for an area that badly needs it.

I welcome the delegation and thank Mr. Flynn for his wide-ranging introduction. I echo the comment in regard to the media. The committee is effectively discussing the loss of €40 million of taxpayers' money. However, when the committee discusses such important issues, very little attention is paid by newspapers such as The Irish Times, the Irish Independent and the Irish Examiner, and by RTE. I recall the occasion when the digital hub facilitated us in Thomas Street for the launch of our report on broadband. Not one of the national media organs to which I referred thought it right to turn up at that important presentation, which was astonishing given that it is one of the——

I understand Jamie Smith of The Irish Times was there.

I did not know that. I did not see any journalists. It is worth noting that when the committee begins to discuss an important issue, people bail out.

My questions will focus on two areas, the issues surrounding MediaLab Europe and the property portfolio development of the digital hub. At the time of the collapse of MediaLab Europe earlier this year, I referred the matter to the Chairman of the committee, Deputy O'Flynn, the Chairman of the Committee of Public Accounts, Deputy Noonan, and the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Comptroller and Auditor General thanked me for my correspondence and stated he had referred to circumstances surrounding the setting up of MediaLab Europe in the context of the development of the digital hub in his annual report on the Appropriation Accounts for the year 2000. He also said that in the light of the scale of the loss to the Exchequer arising from the closure of the company, his staff had already carried out some preliminary work on the State's management of its funding of the company. He has observed that it is too early to say whether the examination will result in an issue for inclusion in his annual report for 2004 and that this decision will be influenced to some extent by the Committee of Public Accounts.

Given that MediaLab Europe was the flagship of the digital hub project, does the delegation agree that a series of disastrous decisions was made by the general management team of the project and, in particular, the Taoiseach, whom many citizens consider primarily responsible for the €40 million spent? What is the total State expenditure so far on the project? We have been given a figure of €60 million, of which some €40 million, apparently, relates to the investment in MediaLab Europe which was closed in early January when the State was requested——

I am advised that the matter of MediaLab Europe is being considered by the Committee of Public Accounts and that, therefore, this committee is prevented from discussing it. When Deputy Broughan raised this matter some time ago, I gave him the answer. Today's meeting is concerned with the Digital Hub Development Agency board——

It is like discussing Hamlet without the prince. It is a pointless exercise.

The Deputy's last question is relevant in so far as it relates to the Digital Hub Development Agency board.

I will try to confine my questions to the digital hub project. I recognise the role of the Comptroller and Auditor General in this matter.

I would like to be able to allow the Deputy to ask any question he wishes but I am prohibited from doing so.

I am interested in the general level of expenditure and the agency's plans following the demise of MediaLab Europe. The digital hub area of the Liberties boasts a national university on the same site, the National College of Art and Design. Within a few hundred metres is one of the oldest universities in Britain and Ireland, Trinity College. Another few metres around the corner is the Dublin Institute of Technology. There are, therefore, three national universities either within the area of the digital hub or on its fringes.

When MediaLab Europe was established in the digital hub area, it seemed astonishing to many that we had to go to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for the necessary research and intellectual backing when these resources were available in the immediate area. This seemed particularly odd, given that the Taoiseach comes from Dublin. I have visited the digital hub four or five times to observe the various activities taking place there and have always received a warm welcome from the chairperson and chief executive officer. However, it seems to members of the joint committee that the MediaLab Europe aspect was a disaster. High flying executives such as Nicholas Negroponte were paid €500,000 a year but the complement of 70 to 100 staff only managed to register 12 patents in five years.

An internal report produced shortly before its demise, MediaLab Europe: A Strategic Plan, depicted a chaotic situation with allusions to a situation like Hell, inmates running the asylum and so on. What is the net loss from the MediaLab debacle and what can be done about it at this stage? How can we resurrect the jewel in the crown, the intellectual cutting edge of the project? In considering this issue, we should examine how to involve universities in Dublin and throughout the State. I understand 70 people lost their jobs, 45 of whom were let go at the time MediaLab Europe closed. This has been a disastrous catalogue of events for those researchers and staff.

The delegation has told us the digital hub project has a total territory of nine acres, two of which have been developed after five years. As a Dublin Deputy, I warmly welcome the fact that the project was sited in the old industrial area of the Liberties. It was a far-sighted move to locate an important project such as this in an area in need of regeneration. I have witnessed the agency's close interaction with the schools in the area and commend its achievement in laying on high speed broadband in the locality.

All of this is impressive. However, it is a pity the Taoiseach was not much more ambitious and that there has not been a real attempt to create something akin to the digital districts in Seoul or Kuala Lumpur. In comparison to those achievements, the digital hub seems only a small beginning. It is to be regretted that the Taoiseach was not more ambitious in regard to the remit of the project. I have said in the Dáil that his major concern at the time was the Abbotstown project. He was asleep on his watch in terms of the development of the digital hub project.

On the last occasion they came before the joint committee members of the Digital Hub Development Agency outlined some of the developments in regard to property. We were told there were four short listed property consortia and that the agency envisaged a development consisting of 52% digital media, 7% learning, 6% retail and 25% residential space. The four companies pursuing the contract were Bennet Construction and Jarvis, HBG Ascon, Manor Park Digital Hub Limited and Pearse Contracting. It seems, however, that the agency had a preferred bidder and went through the entire bidding process but could not come to a satisfactory arrangement. It seems that, as the guardian of the public purse and the local community, the agency could not reach agreement with any of these contractors on the development plan. The question arises as to why the companies were short-listed. Were any other companies which might have been able to satisfactorily implement the agency's remit interested in the contract?

The delegation has mentioned that the digital hub project currently has 450 jobs and that 49 companies are in situ. It is heartening that a good number of those have been operating there for several years. Delegations from some of them have told the joint committee that in the area of information technology, Ireland seemed to follow Silicon Glen in Scotland and then Silicon Valley in the United States. It is encouraging that we seem at long last to be tracking Scotland in this sector and coming up with some interesting innovations of our own. I commend the delegation for this and wish the project well.

The idea is brilliant but Deputies' concerns relate to the manner in which it is executed and the impact on taxpayer's money. Why was MediaLab Europe involved in the way it was, given that we have our own indigenous resources? How does the agency propose to manage the project into the future to ensure all its property is developed within a reasonable timeframe?

I read in the latest edition of New Scientist that broadband is being rolled out in Ethiopia. The project began in Addis Ababa with approximately 30,000 households and is expected to incorporate up to 300,000 by the end of the year. This would place Ethiopia ahead of the Irish experience under the aegis of the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey.

The agency has broadband enabled schools in the Liberties area. Did it give any consideration to doing this for all the households in the Dublin South-Central constituency? I understand this is precisely what has been done in the equivalent district in Seoul, involving the installation of a fibre optic lead to every house to provide a high speed broadband network. Has the agency considered this in the context of kickstarting broadband enablement in lower income areas in Dublin? It would be a very interesting innovation.

I commend the delegation and everybody involved in the agency. I would like an update on anything that can be done at this stage in respect of MediaLab Europe and on the agency's plans for its property portfolio.

Before Mr. Flynn responds, I would like to inform him that under the terms of reference established for this committee, we are not allowed to discuss any matters under investigation by the Committee of Public Accounts, which include MediaLab Europe in terms of its operation. However, there is nothing to prevent Mr. Flynn answering the question regarding the loss and replacement of the anchor tenant. I am obliged to remind the joint committee of this restriction and would not like to be accused of ignoring Standing Orders.

On a point of order, how do we discuss the circumstances surrounding the loss of the anchor tenant and the possible liability to the Exchequer if we cannot mention the issue? What are we doing here?

I have a letter from Mr. John Purcell, the very distinguished Comptroller and Auditor General. He does not say they will definitely include an investigation of MediaLab Europe. This is the relevant committee to invigilate all aspects of digital and communications development.

We have been advised by the clerk to the Committee of Public Accounts that this is a matter under investigation by it. I would love to discuss it but my hands are tied. I must be guided by the secretariat and the joint committee's terms of reference. I would like to get answers to the other very important questions posed by Deputy Broughan.

I would also like to make a comment.

Does the Deputy wish to do so now?

Yes. With all due respect, the joint committee has been sitting for almost two hours and this is the main business of the meeting which we should finally address. I thank and compliment the journalists who have remained for this particular section. It is ironic that there is huge interest when discussing the matter of a figure of €1,000 or €2,000 in one direction or another. However, there is no interest at all from some sectors when millions of euro could be at stake. We must be aware of this at all times. We should also remind ourselves that some of issues which have gone wrong in society might not have done so had the same degree of emphasis been placed on major issues as some place on those which are minor.

I have no difficulty with the concept of regeneration which is a good idea. Its origins and motives are immaterial at this stage. I have had the pleasure of visiting the digital hub and distinctly remember the debate and discussion which took place at the time of its inception. Many people raised questions about the concept's financial viability and how it might proceed. Some of those concerns were well placed and soundly based. A concept of this nature carries a plethora of economic, social, community and educational issues which must be combined. It requires a considerable degree of expertise which the Digital Hub possesses as well as commitment and money.

I do not wish to get involved in the discussion that will take place at the Committee of Public Accounts. However, a question needs to be asked, to which no reference has been made. If we cannot query the financial viability of a concept of this nature, there is not much sense having a discussion or debate about it. Unfortunately, that is how it works. I am a former member of the Committee of Public Accounts.

We are dealing with the Digital Hub Development Agency board, not MediaLab Europe.

We are dealing with the concept of the digital hub. I spent 14 or 15 years as a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, a fact about which I am very proud. The viability of the digital hub is an issue for discussion here and has been raised by Deputy Broughan.

The anchor tenant is gone. To what extent are efforts being made to find a replacement? What has been the cost to date of the tenancy for the anchor tenant? What will it cost to replace the anchor tenant? Why was the development of the digital hub abandoned entirely? Is it because there is a question mark over its viability? Was it impossible to find a contractor who would agree with the terms laid down in the contract? Is it because of the disenchantment of the developers who originally indicated an interest in the concept? If the original concept was good, this part should have been good also and stood the test of time. It has not done so because otherwise the developer would have been in place by now and we would have known all about it. We are entitled to know. We were told at the beginning about the economics of the anchor tenancy and the benefits this would have for the entire concept. I have no difficulty with this but we need to know the answers. We are aware of what the issues were at the time and the questions raised by Members of the Houses.

We also need to know about anticipated costs. This country has been damned with cost overruns. Concepts have failed to achieve particular targets or stay within specific guidelines. I am not referring to issues such as a trip by parliamentarians to Argentina but to major projects such as the construction of tunnels, roads, motorways, the Red Cow roundabout and the port tunnel. These are the issues which concern me as a public representative.

This is not the Committee of Public Accounts.

I did not interrupt anybody else and do not intend to interrupt those who will speak after me. If they wish to take that route, I will be happy to entertain them also.

I thank the Deputy for injecting some humour into the meeting.

The Chairman can thank me for the backhanded compliments afterwards. As the line committee, it is incumbent on us to inquire into these issues and compare one to another in respect of the various projects promoted by the Government. It is the duty of each member of this committee to raise questions about those issues. It is everybody else's duty to get involved in asking them, whether inside or outside the Committee of Public Accounts. This also applies to other line committees aligned to the various Departments and duly elected members of the Houses.

I have no doubt whatsoever about the expertise of management at the digital hub. However, I sometimes have a sneaking feeling in the soles of my feet that their hearts are not always in some of the projects or concepts involved. In that situation, no matter how good the expertise or original concept, a problem will arise if any one of a group of senior managers has doubts.

I want to make clear the joint committee's terms of reference. The orders of reference for the committee were approved by the Dáil on 16 October 2002. Under section 2(a)(vii) of the motion, the Dáil specified: “Provided that the Joint Committee shall not, at any time, consider any matter relating to such a body which is, which has been, or which is, at that time, proposed to be considered by the Committee of Public Accounts, pursuant to the Orders of Reference of that Committee and/or the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act,1993”. This specifies the constraints under which the committee operates for which I apologise to members.

This should have been indicated before now.

The joint committee is discussing the Digital Hub Development Agency board.

I disagree with the Chairman. I understand that a few days ago people were brought before the Joint Committee on Health and Children which was invigilating what had happened in respect of a potential loss to the State of €1 billion to €2 billion. Undoubtedly, this issue is also being investigated by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

I understand that but did the Dáil not pass a motion asking that joint committee to investigate the problem?

However, the issue in this case is that the Opposition has been refused the chance or opportunity to debate the matter.

Does the Deputy want me to seek further clarification on the matter?

As the Chairman is aware, the quotation is: "Provided that the Joint Committee shall not, at any time, consider any matter relating to such a body, which is, which has been, or which is, at that time, proposed to be considered by the Committee of Public Accounts, pursuant to the Orders of Reference of that committee and/or the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act, 1993". A quick way to clear the matter up would be to make a telephone call to the Committee of Public Accounts to ascertain if the issue has been listed for a hearing at this stage. It is that simple.

That was confirmed to the joint committee in writing at a previous meeting. I have all day to spend here. Members have been patient with the earlier part of the meeting. However, with respect to those who came here from the Digital Hub Development Agency board to make a presentation, I ask members not to stray from the meeting's purpose. I understand Senator MacSharry wants to ask a question. I ask Mr. Flynn and Mr. Burgess to bank questions. They have already heard some of them. They are forbidden to speak about the collapse of MediaLab Europe, other than by outlining how they intend to replace that operation.

May I make a contribution?

The Senator may. I am in a generous mood today.

The Chairman certainly is.

I welcome the delegation from the digital hub. As Mr. Burgess observed, one could scarcely find a board of its magnitude anywhere else in the world in terms of its firepower, experience and expertise in the execution of the hub's mission and purpose. In addition, the Chairman will not mind if I single out its chief executive, Mr. Philip Flynn, for his work in the past two years. He and his executive colleagues would be the envy of many organisations in this country and beyond, particularly in a matter such as this.

Deputy Durkan stated it was important that some journalists should stay, considering the amount of money at stake or potentially lost with reference to the issue which, for obvious reasons, the joint committee cannot discuss. I had been looking forward to examining what the digital hub could generate by way of foreign direct investment in terms of the rejuvenation of the communities of the Liberties and the Coombe and the stimulation of indigenous activity in the media and digital sectors. One of the previous questions which also immediately occurred to me was how would another anchor tenant be found? What is the position and how long will it take?

The board's presentation slide was described as powerful. I agree. To me, it shows 49 companies which will develop as the future anchor tenants for digital hubs all over the world, not just in Ireland. Many references have been made to the Taoiseach but this issue is not a political football. Any political entity would be delighted with the digital hub, its aims and the fact that it is now on course, despite the initial problems in the development of the properties in the area. A structure is now in place which will take the project forward in a progressive and efficient way.

We have been brought us to this point by the vision of the Taoiseach, his colleagues and others to develop the digital hub, regardless of whether an individual anchor company leaves. A wide variety of commercial realities dictate a company's decision to stay or go or to expand or reduce in size. I have some business experience and I am sure members will agree with me on this.

I congratulate the board on the work it has done and much has been achieved. I want to hear about the operational expenditure of the digital hub in recent years. Some of my research has shown this to be quite small, in the region of €6 million to €8 million. This is most significant, considering what has been achieved. The board has grown partnerships with bodies such as Diageo and others in a magnificent learning initiative in the area.

Overall, we have a piece of infrastructure and a set of tools with unbelievable potential. Given the team in place, we can see clearly from the initial progress made that it will grow and grow. Will the delegation confirm the digital hub's operational expenditure and put a value on its infrastructure in terms of property, telecommunications and broadband?

My last question concerns the establishment of the National Digital Research Centre which was announced recently. How does the delegation envisage its operation and potential benefits?

We will take Deputy Broughan's questions first, followed by those from Deputy Durkan. If some of the questions are interrelated, the delegation may refer to them in the answers.

Mr. Burgess

As there are so many questions, we will answer them between us.

That is not a problem.

Mr. Burgess

There is much for us to absorb. First, I thank Deputy Broughan for his ongoing interest. He has a close knowledge of what is happening in the digital hub.

I am open to guidance from the Chairman but I believe I can make some comments on MediaLab Europe. The first is not very helpful but I wish to make it quite clear that in terms of corporate governance, the board of directors and lines of reporting, our anchor tenant reports directly to the Department and is separate from us. Hence, any connection we have with it is on a strictly informal basis.

We have no knowledge of any questions in terms of expenditure. That is a matter which is specifically——

The digital hub has no involvement with tenant relationships.

Mr. Burgess

It is not even a tenant. The landlord is the Office of Public Works.

The digital hub has no connection whatsoever.

Mr. Burgess

It was a neighbourly relationship, albeit a strategic one.

It was a partnership relationship.

It never had a representative on the board of the digital hub.

Mr. Burgess

No, we never had one on the board.

Clearly, the concept of having such an anchor tenant conduct research on-site in the digital media area is of extreme importance. We welcome the Department's initiative to look for a replacement. We have made our input known where we believe we have a role to play. For example, given our connections with enterprise, the Digital Hub Development Agency board could play a role in bridging the gap from research to commercialisation, as the Department is aware. I expect that we will see a role for third level institutions within what is envisaged. However, that is merely my opinion. We are not part of the decision-making process in terms of what will be created. We have made our input and hope there will be a good working relationship with whatever organisation replaces MediaLab Europe.

Given the importance of the flagship project on digital media research to the ethos of the district, would it not have been better if the board had a serious ongoing input into the way it wanted the project to proceed vis-à-vis the Bostons, San Joses, Seouls or Tokyos of this world? Would it be better——

The delegation has already indicated that it had absolutely nothing to do with MediaLab Europe.

I am not saying it was involved with it. I have clearly said I hold the Taoiseach to account for the net loss of €40 million.

Why does the Deputy not raise the issue in a question to the Taoiseach?

I have raised it with him on the floor of the House. Like other Deputies here, I sit on a partnership board — the partnership board for the Dublin North-East and Dublin North-Central constituencies which is chaired by Mr. Padraic White and examines all kinds of projects towards local regeneration. I cannot imagine how it would not become involved in something central to its work.

There are a number of questions relevant to Mr. Flynn's development. He has been asked a question by Deputy Broughan with regard to the amount invested. He should tell the joint committee what the Digital Hub Development Agency's running expenses have been for the past three years. As I understand it, the agency has been in place for the past three years. Deputy Broughan also asked Mr. Flynn about the nine acre site, two acres of which are being converted. Will Mr. Flynn tell the committee what is happening to the other seven acres? Deputy Broughan more or less asked when we would see the cranes. Perhaps Mr. Flynn will confine his answers to questions already asked by members.

There is very little information that Mr. Flynn could give by way of answers. The critical questions members of the joint committee have asked cannot be answered. It is the Chair who is imposing the restriction.

I am not.

We should be clear on one thing. I do not wish to waste time doing something about which I should have been informed beforehand. If this issue was sub judice, the committee should have been informed about it beforehand.

We are dealing with the Digital Hub Development Agency board.

We are dealing with the digital hub concept.

Mr. Burgess's manner of answering has been helpful. We should allow him and Mr. Flynn answer the questions. I think they are willing to do so within the parameters set.

I thank the Deputy.

Mr. Flynn

This will possibly be the final point related to MediaLab Europe. The view of the Digital Hub Development Agency on research, about which it informed the Department, is that it should be targeted and focused on digital media. It should also be capable of being commercialised and should flow into the small and medium-sized enterprise sector. These were always the sole concerns of the agency. I am confident that in the outline on the expressions of interest now being sought for the new national digital research centre these points have been taken on board. The matter of governance of that entity, when and if established, has yet to be determined. Expressions of interest have been sought by 31 May. Because we have had approaches from a number of Irish colleges, we know informally that there is considerable interest in the process. Following the expiry of the deadline, a short-listing process will determine the competition for the new centre. We hope and expect to be very closely involved and that governance of the centre will differ from governance of its predecessor, MediaLab Europe. There is not much more we can say about research.

What about the other question?

Mr. Flynn

With regard to property, I am glad the question was asked because it is important. In terms of operational expenditure, as an agency, with our predecessor, Digital Media Development Limited, a private limited company in which the Minister was 100% shareholder until the establishment of the Digital Hub Development Agency as a statutory agency in July 2003, we have spent approximately €8 million.

The Government charged the OPW with the task of acquiring properties on our behalf. The properties acquired for us are located on the six acres of land shown on the map. There were an additional two acres occupied by MediaLab Europe which have nothing to do with us. They are important and available to the project. We are talking about a property portfolio of approximately €50 million. The good news is that the majority is undeveloped which means money has not been spent. While money has been allocated, the asset has yet to be developed. Therefore, we have only spent €8 million on the programmes outlined to the joint committee, the efforts made to attract the companies we have attracted and the work put into the infrastructure outlined.

On how the property is to be developed, clearly we regret the fact that the PPP process had to be abandoned because we were unable to reach a final agreed negotiated settlement with the preferred bidder. Expressions of interest were sought for the project before the chairman and I joined the board. Twelve expressions of interest were received, of which four were short-listed. These were taken through a complex procurement process governed by European procurement procedures. It was a negotiated procedure involving many stages which took time to complete properly, due process being extremely important.

Is the agency back to square one?

Mr. Flynn

We are because the competition has been abandoned. The Minister showed great leadership by intervening following the independent dissolution of the competition and forming a steering committee composed of the OPW and the National Development Finance Agency to manage the Government-led development of the remaining six acres.

To clarify matters, does this mean the OPW is the lead agency in taking charge of the project?

Mr. Flynn

The OPW, on behalf of the Digital Hub Development Agency, the agency with statutory responsibility and a mandate to develop the digital hub, will now lead the development of the digital hub site.

What about the competitors for this development? What do they have to say about the whole concept? Why was the competition wound up?

To add to Deputy Durkan's question, was the agency's inability to proceed the result of the developer being too greedy?

Mr. Burgess

The executive management team and the board of the agency had to be satisfied that we had something to recommend to the Minister that represented value for money. What came out at the end of the process would be the function of the market. We had a requirement that the enterprise base be exclusively digital media. This is included in the terms of the Act, to which we are obliged to adhere. At the end of the negotiations the preferred bidder was looking for flexibility on the type of tenant sought if the demand did not materialise. This was not acceptable but the bidder viewed this as a risk. We were trying to get a bidder to put something on the table and required money back but we could not derive sufficient payback from the marketplace. We have decided on this route whereby the risks will be carried more by the agency.

How long did the bidding process last?

Mr. Burgess

The entire procurement process lasted two years.

For the record, who was the preferred bidder?

Mr. Flynn

The preferred bidder was Manor Park home builders. We had to have a contractual obligation that the offices of the quantum would be made available and restricted to the use of digital media. When that contractual obligation was not forthcoming, we felt we had no flexibility or leeway under the Act.

We can ask about the cost of a replacement anchor tenant without encroaching on the remit of the Committee of Public Accounts. I am sure the delegation will have no difficulty answering the question on the likely cost of replacing the anchor tenant for the next couple of years.

Mr. Flynn

I will have no difficulty in attempting to answer the question in the spirit in which it was asked. As this is a process run by the Department, I have the same information as any member of the committee. I think a figure of €3 million per annum has been voted over a number of years at some level. The expressions of interest being sought will set out exactly what is available to the research institutions but it will be nothing like the funds voted.

Perhaps it is a question to ask in the debate on the Estimates.

An anchor tenant carries certain responsibilities and a certain aura that draws others to the complex. It would be normal to assume that the project leaders would be able to assess the likely cost of the replacement tenant without commenting on the experience to date. It should be possible to give an approximate figure.

Mr. Flynn

It is a good point and serves as an aide-mémoire. The project was initiated on the back of MLE being an anchor tenant. The Minister has admitted as much and the digital hub development has now superseded it. Strategically the new research centre is critically important. It will not carry the burden of being our sole anchor tenant. We now have 49 companies, among which we have some anchor enterprise tenants such as Amazon, a name familiar to everyone here. We also have companies well known in the Irish industrial sphere such as Havok and an American company called TKO Software Limited which is well known in the gaming sector.

What is the current rent roll, as at the end of 2004?

Mr. Flynn

It is €1 million. We are operating at 20% capacity of what we will have when the project is completed.

When is the hub expected to be self-financing, as intended by the Government?

Mr. Flynn

In my best estimate, two to three years' time. Initially, given the way in which it was funded, it was to acquire an asset, pass it to the agency and allow the agency to exploit value from it and use the value garnered from it to fund its activities.

Are the other seven acres a greenfield site?

Mr. Flynn

It is a brownfield site with a mix of protected structures, derelict buildings and open spaces.

The agency cannot obtain any further rents without developing the other part of the site.

Mr. Flynn

That is correct but we do have commitments from the OPW that our interim space requirements will be met by the refurbishment of existing buildings which can be done in the short term.

Is it envisioned to complete the development, now that the preferred bidder is gone and the OPW has taken charge of the project? My understanding is that the OPW was put in charge. Is a period of two to three years envisaged before the entire development will be constructed?

Mr. Flynn

No, the cranes can be on-site by the summer of next year, which is not much later than if we had successfully concluded negotiations with the preferred bidder.

Is Mr. Flynn using the same blueprint as for the private bidder or does the process have to be started again?

Mr. Flynn

That has not been determined. The process we are undergoing is creating an area framework plan that will inform how the sections of the project will be divvied up. One significant difference in the previous model is that we tried to develop the entire lot in one contract. The OPW intends to divvy up the lot in five or six packages.

For the sake of clarification, is it true that expenses for Mr. Flynn's company totalled €10 million to €12 million for the past three years?

Mr. Flynn

The figure of €8 million is the net outflow from the agency.

Is that for running expenses?

Mr. Flynn

There could be confusion as we received €3 million in sponsorship from Diageo which we also spent.

Is the level of expenditure €3 million per year?

Mr. Flynn

It is closer to €2 million.

There is a rent roll of €1 million. When does the agency expect to be self-funding?

Mr. Flynn

We expect to be self-financing in two to three years' time.

What will be the total value of the six acres? Will the new project be given the whole two acres in which MLE was located? Given that only €3 million will be spent on the new digital research centre, will some of the property be used for other developments with the OPW?

Mr. Flynn

Yes, we are already using some of the properties. The building inhabited by MLE is now operated by other companies. The Department and the OPW, the latter being the landlord, have granted us leases to those properties. It will refurbish other buildings on the properties and make them available to us.

Does Mr. Flynn have a global figure for what the big development might cost in terms of added value for the Liberties district?

Mr. Flynn

We can provide an estimate. We have gone through a process whereby those figures were tabled. It is in the order of €150 million to €200 million. That is the size of the property development when one takes account of residential, retail, office and public space. There will also be significant public space.

I welcome Mr. Burgess and Mr. Flynn and will respect the Chairman's advice not to mention MediaLab Europe. No one can question the fact that the digital hub is a good development. Some might have been slow to embrace research and development but being a man of great vision and a great leader, the Taoiseach decided many years ago——

The Deputy is looking for a job.

I certainly am. Let there be no doubt about it.

If the Taoiseach wins the election, the Deputy will be Minister for Longford.

If the Deputy sees the Taoiseach before I do, will he please tell him I am looking for a job?

The matter of research and development is a serious one. Many years ago the Taoiseach decided that Ireland should take the lead and the Government encouraged research and development when many were sceptical. A couple of years ago a man from one of the biggest companies in New York told me he had great admiration for the Taoiseach because he had focused on research and development. We sought industries and pharmaceutical companies. Now the future lies in research and development.

When I visited the digital hub, I was both impressed and flabbergasted at how forward thinking those involved in activities were. The technology was so up to date and advanced I thought I was on the moon or in a spaceship. Mr. Flynn may not have heard of me but I have heard of him and he comes with good credentials and a great reputation. How optimistic is he about the future? I believe if someone makes a mistake, he or she must decide not to make the same mistake again and get up and move on. The digital hub has a great future under the stewardship of its chief executive, Mr. Flynn.

The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and his predecessor, Deputy Dermot Ahern, rolled out broadband as quickly as they possibly could.

He did not do it as fast as in Ethiopia.

Has the Minister been to Ethiopia?

Given recent experience, the Chairman should defer that debate to a more suitable time.

Is that an indication that the Chairman will go there?

In my county of Longford broadband is available in Longford town, Granard, Lanesborough and Edgeworthstown. As we discuss the position in different countries, different political parties and Government policy, let it be known that the only political party to have a policy on broadband prior to the last general election was Fianna Fáil led by the Taoiseach.

That is another untruth.

It is a fact.

Please let Deputy Kelly finish.

We promoted and delivered on broadband.

The Deputy did not know what it was until——

I admit that personally I did not know what it was until the last general election. I was told by my party that I had better learn about it because it was the way of the future and that we would deliver on it to the people.

We are delighted the Deputy has joined the joint committee.

In fairness broadband was a priority of the joint committee. I am sure the Chairman is aware that he was once referred to in Cork as Deputy Noel "Broadband" O'Flynn.

For more than one reason.

I hope they will not call me Deputy Noel "John West Salmon" O'Flynn from now on.

I will give the Chairman a little hint. That is near enough but not exactly what he is called.

There were a number of observations made and I seek clarification for the joint committee. Did the Government invest €60 in the property portfolio? Did Mr. Flynn mention a figure of €50 million?

Mr. Flynn

Yes, the properties are in the ownership of the Digital Hub Development Agency.

Did the Government invest €60 million?

Mr. Flynn

I believe the precise figure is €54 million.

Is Mr. Flynn certain of that figure?

Mr. Flynn

I am fairly certain.

Is that the total value of the assets?

Mr. Flynn

It is the total value of the six acres shown on the slide to the joint committee. That was the original purchase price.

Will Mr. Flynn clarify for the joint committee if it was €54 million or €60 million? He can send the information by email to the clerk.

What is the value of the assets?

I do not know. Does Mr. Flynn have a value for them?

Of course, he does.

It would be in excess of €54 million.

Mr. Flynn

The value of the assets will be dictated by the development about which I spoke. The development has yet to be determined but I do not see any difficulties with it delivering.

Were there other questions that needed to be answered?

By way of a postscript——

Did Deputy Kelly ask a specific question?

I asked Mr. Flynn if he was optimistic about the future of the development.

That is an important question.

I want to ask a broad question about the collapse of MLE. The story was followed with great interest by journalists such as Mr. Smyth and Ms Lillington in The Irish Times. The point was made that the problem with the digital media research platform was it was hard to know what was envisaged. It could not award academic qualifications. Does Mr. Flynn see in the project the possibility that there might be merit in awarding higher qualifications such as masters degrees or doctorates? Would adding an academic forte to the list of tools he had at his disposal be an interesting development? Could there be an academic role at the highest level for the digital media centre?

Mr. Flynn

Absolutely. Already on the Digital Hub Development Agency executive staff is Dr. Stephen Brennan who has a background in research. Academic input is extremely important. It was originally envisaged and hoped MIT would award degrees. Now it is assured that Irish universities will be involved in some form and there has been significant interest among the consortia which have come forward. A world class research centre is envisaged. In combination with Irish colleges it will be in a position to offer doctoral and post-doctoral research programmes and award masters degrees and doctorates, as appropriate.

One of the reasons we asked Mr. Flynn and Mr. Burgess to appear before the joint committee today was to commend them for the work they were doing but also to advise them that many people were making inquiries to the committee on the pace of development of the Digital Hub Development Agency's portfolio. I assure them that the committee will be extremely concerned if the development does not accelerate at the pace at which the committee has been told it will. We will hold a watching brief on progress. While we wish them every success, I put them on notice that if we receive other observations from the general public or other bodies, we will invite them back to speak to us about their difficulties.

We have had an informative presentation and question and answer session. Members have asked a series of questions and no member has been uncomplimentary to the agency. We wish it every success but ask that it accelerates progress in the development of this flagship project, as Deputy Kelly described it.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.10 p.m. sine die.

Top
Share