National Board for Science and Technology Bill, 1976: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Economic Planning and Development (Professor O'Donoghue)

This legislation deals with an area of some significance for the future progress of the country, namely the role which science and technology can play in future economic and social developments. More specifically, the legislation is designed to facilitate the co-ordination and the promotion of science and technology both in the public sector and throughout the economy as a whole.

The origins of these proposals go back to the early 1960's when a conjoint exercise was undertaken by a research and technology survey team appointed by the Minister for Industry and Commerce and working in association with OECD experts. The aims of the exercise were to examine the existing state of research and technological development in the Irish economy, to forecast the likely growth of these activities and to propose means by which science and technology could be applied to Irish economic and social development. The report which emerged, now commonly referred to as the Lynch Report, recommended, inter alia, the establishment of a National Science Council.

I digress to say that I was pleased to see that development because I happened to have been a member of the team which prepared the Lynch Report and I have a certain personal interest in its subsequent progress. This council was set up in 1968 to advise the Government on science and technology and to promote co-ordination in scientific and technological activities in the country. Since that time the council has carried out important and valuable work under a number of headings. As a result, however, of its observation and experience during the course of its work the council became increasingly concerned that the national effort generally was not satisfactory; that there was a need for greatly improving the means whereby the contribution of science and technology to economic and social advances might more effectively be integrated into the totality of Government policy. Arising from these conclusions the council undertook an examination of existing organisational structures for the performance, dissemination and use of science and technology in the public sector of the economy.

Following the council's examination, a survey of science policy for Ireland was undertaken by OECD between 1971 and 1973. In its report, the OECD recommended new mechanisms for the formulation and implementation of science policy and these were adopted by the council and subsequently submitted to and approved by the Government. The main features of these new arrangements which are provided for in the legislation which I am presenting to the House are: a new National Board for Science and Technology, and a science budget.

In adopting these proposals the Government has taken account of the clear correlation between science and technology and economic and social development. It is no coincidence that the countries which are the furthest forward in the development of science and technology are also those which are the most prosperous and have the highest living standards. In order to emulate their achievements, the reduction, and the ultimate elimination of the science and technology gap between us and other developed countries has to be tackled. This will require the proper organisation and rationalisation of our own national effort in science and technology. It will necessitate the formulation of an appropriate policy at national level and the creation of mechanisms for the implementation of a policy which is effective and has a real cutting edge. Such a policy must cover all areas of science, covering the most disparate elements such as nuclear research on the one hand and food technology on the other, and must also take account of the importance of fundamental research, which deserves attention not only for its own sake but also as the foundation on which applied science is built.

Science and technology are dynamic and in a constant state of evolution. In the same way the related institutional mechanisms must be adapted and continually readapted to the changing needs of society. The resources available to us for scientific and technological endeavour are of necessity limited. It will be part of my function to improve this situation as far as possible. Nevertheless it is inevitable that there will always be some limitation on funds and this situation will make it essential that our resources are so deployed that the community receives the best value from their use.

Science and technology, as indeed all public activity in Ireland, was originally organised on a sectoral basis for good historic reasons. It is beyond question that the contribution of the main institutes, notwithstanding limited availability of resources, has been immense. These institutes were nevertheless founded, for the best of reasons at the time of founding, on a sectoral basis. It is a fact, however, that sectoral divisions, arising from the development and diversification of the economy, tend to inhibit the emergence of an overall fully integrated policy for science and technology.

It is now time for a coordinated approach across sectoral boundaries. Such an approach can only produce increased benefits through rationalisation and concentration of resources and the interdisciplinary and inter-institutional build-up of expertise.

It is also a fact that some of the areas of greatest economic promise fall largely between existing institutions and their development requires expertise and facilities which are largely scattered. As an instance, I would refer to the marine area. We need a means for ensuring that major gaps in our national coverage of science and technology, many of which overlap traditional economic sectors, are effectively filled. This brings in the promotional aspect. Allied to these needs for co-ordination and promotion is that of persuading the public and national policy makers and decision makers of the importance of the economic and social role of science and technology, so ensuring that their potential for contributing to national development is taken fully into account.

It is the purpose of this legislation, to produce results by establishing more stable and permanent institutional arrangements for the formulation and implementation of a comprehensive national policy for science and technology and for harmonising and integrating the various strands which make it up.

I now come to the first of the two main features of the new arrangements, namely the National Board for Science and Technology. The main responsibility of the board will be to secure from the national effort in pure and applied science and in technology the most effective contribution towards economic and social development. This end will be achieved by inter alia, providing, or promoting the provision of, the necessary mechanisms to achieve the various objectives of the national policy for science and technology. I can hardly do better in this regard than quote from the recommendations of the OECD in their review of national science policy for Ireland, who, I am happy to record, were in turn quoting from a document of our own National Science Council. A national policy for science and technology should:

...draw together all the various threads of scientific and technological activity in the community into a composite and integrated whole which would then be directed towards securing the optimum contribution towards economic and social development and the attainment of national goals. It would, in particular, attempt to secure the most worthwhile contribution from scientific and technological activities in the public sector; it would seek to identify priority areas for such activities; it would indicate where there are gaps to be filled in such activities; it would suggest how to secure an advance across the whole spectrum of activities in the public sector; and it would recommend where incentives and other stimuli might be applied so that the private sector would also make the most effective contribution possible.

To come down to the particular, the functions of the board are set out in, section 4 of the Bill. This section begins with a composite statement of the board's functions, that is, to act under the Minister as a body having responsibility for the furtherance of science and technology. It makes provision for continuance, obviously in a more expanded and comprehensive way, of the old National Science Council function of advising the Government on policy for science and technology. It authorises the board to promote the co-ordination of investment in science and technology, taking due account of the position in the private sector. It enables the board to provide and administer grants and other financial facilities. This provision is a very important and indeed an essential part of the promotional activity of the board in relation to the filling of gaps not hitherto covered.

Section 4 also provides for the general function of promoting research, covering the whole gamut from the purest level to the most applied. It highlights in an explicit way the relevance of the work of the board to economic and social development by authorising it to promote the application of science and technology to these objectives. It again refers explicitly to the very important question of the development of natural resources and authorises the promotion of this objective through the application of science and technology. The board is also authorised under this section to promote the appreciation of the value of science and technology in our society. This is seen as a very important function designed to enable science and technology to flourish and to make their maximum contribution to the public good in a climate of acceptability and of appreciation of their importance.

The particular functions of the board are also set out in section 4. The most fundamental of these will be the preparation of a national programme for science and technology. I must emphasise that it is not intended that this programme would be a static blueprint which would rapidly become obsolete. It is intended that it will be a continually revised and updated agenda for all activity relating to science and technology in the public sector. It will, in this way, serve a number of uses. The board itself will require a basic point of reference for its own activities. This will be provided by the national programme. It will serve as a master plan which can be used to determine the direction of Government activity in the area of science and technology; it will act as a guide to individual institutions in the public sector, assisting them to formulate their own policies and to accommodate their own courses of action with overall national objectives; it can be an information source for institutions and firms in the private sector and assist them in making their own activities complementary to and compatible with programmes in the public sector; and it can be instrumental in helping to create an informed public awareness of science and technology in our national life.

Section 4 also provides for a number of other functions of the board. It includes the all-important function of the coordination of activities related to science and technology by the various institutions and also the promotion of participation by them in such activities. There is provision for the board itself to engage in activities but this is subject to approval by the Minister. One of my own principal concerns in this regard will be that the board should not undertake activities which could more appropriately be carried out by another institution. This section also contains the proviso that, the board shall not engage in or promote any activity of a primarily military relevance without the prior approval of the Government.

A very important aspect of work in science and technology is the dissemination of its results, whether conducted here or elsewhere. It is vitally important that this aspect should receive continual attention and the board is therefore enabled under this section to disseminate literature and information of relevance or to promote its dissemination by others. A related provision to this is the one giving the board the function of organising seminars, conferences and so on. Since science and technology do not recognise frontiers, provision for collaboration with bodies abroad is also included.

I should like to refer specifically to the saver which appears in paragraph (b) of subsection (4) of section 4. This provides that the teaching functions of any educational institute, college or school shall be deemed not to be restricted by any provisions of the Statute. It is important to say in this connection that the board will, of course, be interacting with such institutions to the maximum extent possible. This will arise in a number of ways. for example, in relation to research activities from the fundamental level upwards; by way of the involvement of academics as members of the board, as members of the various committees which will assist the board or in carrying out tasks for the board in relation to international activities and related matters; by the participation by eductional institutions in collaborative work both with the board and with industry under programmes organised by the board; by collaboration between the board and educational institutions in the matter of training and research, for example, under the oil scholarship arrangements. In sum, it is envisaged that there will be the maximum inter-action between the board and educational institutions to the advantage of both.

The concept of a science budget is new to this country but is quite well known on the Continent of Europe. Part of the board's responsibility will be to evolve a policy covering all aspects of scientific and technological activities and to present the Government with an overall and coherent basis for decisions influencing, inter alia, investment in scientific research and its extension into technological development. I think it would be in order to again quote the OECD on this aspect:

Choices should properly be made at national level. Priorities should be established and respected by all sectors of scientific and technological activities funded with public money. Coordination should be improved and strengthened. All this requires that quite specific recommendations, e.g. recommendations accompanied by figures, should be presented by the board to the Government.

These are the considerations which have led the Government to decide that there should be a science budget.

Section 5 of the Bill deals with this matter and directs the board to prepare a statement based as far as possible on the national programme for science and technology which the board is to devise and keep constantly under review under paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of Section 4, and including, in particular, the requirements and proposals of all institutions in receipt of money from the State and giving in addition the board's observations and recommendations on such requirements. This statement will be submitted to the Minister for Finance and will, of course, be available to other Ministers, and will be submitted to the Government. The final details of the financial allocations approved by the Government in respect of each institution will be published together with a commentary by the board on the general position of national policy for science and technology, both from the points of view of conception and of implementation. These together will constitute the science budget for each financial year or such other period as may be found desirable from time to time.

Among other advantages anticipated from the preparation and submission of the science budget will be the enabling of the requirements for science and technology to be presented for the first time as an entity, rather than as items scattered across various departmental Votes. It is expected that more informed and effective decision-making by Government will result. Worthwhile debates will also be facilitated in both Houses of the Oireachtas by the presentation to them of the science budget and I look forward to the contributions of the members of this House in this respect.

I should emphasise that the system of voting money for activities in science and technology will not be changed. Funds will continue to be voted under the relevant Departmental Votes as at present. The Dáil will, however, as a result of its consideration of the science budget from year to year, be in a much better position to offer informed comment on the provisions for science and technology within these Votes. Equally, this House, on the basis of the information put before it in the science budget will be enabled to make a more meaningful contribution to the development of a national policy for science and technology.

The science budget will, of course, also be a useful and valuable reference source, not only for the board itself in its work but for all other organisations and for the public generally. An important function of the board is covered by section 6 which provides for a continuing review of the effectiveness of public investment in science and technology and also for the publication of the results of this review.

Another important function is provided for in section 7. Information will be the life blood of the activities of the board. For the purposes of carrying out its work, particularly under sections 4, 5, 6 and 8, the board will require ready and adequate access to information. There is provision, therefore, in section 7 for the obtaining by the board of such information as to enable it to carry out with full effect its function of advising the Government and individual Ministers, or co-ordinating and of making recommendations on financial allocations. It will also facilitate the board in the exercise of its planning function in relation to preparing a national programme and the promotion of, or participation in, pilot activities.

Section 8 gives the board general authority to institute and conduct research into, and studies on, problems relating to science and technology and to publish or disseminate these results.

Section 9 provides for the appointment of the chairman and members of the board. Views vary as to the ideal number of board members. The OECD have recommended that the number should be less than the original membership of the National Science Council, which was 16. If we endeavoured to cover all possible interests, a much larger number than this would very likely be required. The best course would seem to be to strike a compromise between comprehensiveness and effectiveness and with this in mind ten members plus a chairman have been decided on.

It should be emphasised, incidentally, that the board will be assisted by a number of committees. Provision for these is contained in section 23. This section, in fact, empowers the board to delegate some of its functions to these committees but all acts of committees will be subject to the approval of the board itself.

Sections 10 and 15 are standard provisions in relation to membership of the board, qualifications for membership and meetings and procedures of the board. Special mention should perhaps be made of the spelling out in section 14 of the kind of interest which is obliged to be disclosed to the board by members.

The main financial provisions are contained in sections 16 and 18 which provide respectively for the provision of funds for the board out of Oireachtas grants and the use of these funds by the board in the course of their work.

The remaining functions are standard in relation to most State-sponsored bodies and it is hardly necessary for me to go into detail at this stage so far as they are concerned. Special mention might perhaps be made of section 25 dealing with the prohibition on the disclosure of confidential information and also of section 27 dealing with staff. This section authorises the board to appoint their own officers and servants. Their remuneration and allowances will, however, be subject to the consent of the Minister for the Public Service.

As Minister responsible for national policy for science and technology and for co-ordination, all science and technology and all scientific and technological activities will be my concern. Equally they will be the concern of the new board at its own level. The work of the board can be categorised into four main aspects. These will be advising the Government, co-ordinating, making recommendations on financial allocations, and promotional activities.

I cannot emphasise strongly enough the positive nature of the approach which the board are intended to adopt. Their purpose will not be to invigilate or to inhibit but rather to encourage and to assist in the most positive way. This positive approach will involve consultation, the formation of links, co-operation, joint action, inter-institutional and interdisciplinary activity and the smoothing out sectoral and demarcation problems, either by acting as arbiter or the bridging of demarcation lines and the organising of team efforts. Above all, the National Board for Science and Technology is intended to prepare the way for new activity seen to be important for economic and social development.

Mr. Staunton

Fine Gael support this Bill introduced by the Minister. I should like to speak very briefly about the history over the last year or two of this Bill, originally introduced by the previous Minister for Industry and Commerce, Mr. Keating. During the tenure of the last Dáil a committee was established to consider the details of the Bill. We had a number of meetings which were of a very sensible and vocational nature, rather than political. I am pleased to say that through those meetings there was a consensus in broad terms and I hope that the deliberations of the committee helped somewhat in the final production of the Bill which the Minister has now introduced.

I should like to preface any further remarks by congratulating the Minister, as is customary, on his appointment by the Taoiseach to the Cabinet and to wish him very well in what is obviously a very important and fundamental area of national activity. I mean that quite sincerely.

The issue on which we are speaking is a very vital one in this technological age, especially in a country such as ours which historically, has not been blessed in this area.

We have had a great tradition of learning and of university education. To a great extent this has been in the arts. In this age we are dependent on future economic well-being if we want progress in the social area. An emphasis on science and technology is vital because it is self-evident that success lies in that area. It is even more vital in the sense that in recent years we have been much more successful economically than we have ever been. During the past 18 months or so we have had a huge increase in the level of exports of manufactured goods.

Unfortunately, there has been an overwhelming preponderance of activity by multi-national companies. I do not want that remark to be interpreted as an inference that it is not welcome. Of course, it is extremely welcome and we are delighted that these companies with a scientific background have chosen this country as a location. But of greater interest still to this country is the type of indigenous native development based on Irish skills and know-how and on true fundamental science and technology within our own land. We have not been blessed with that type of development, and the co-ordinative approach of this board to cover the multitude of areas in which there is a degree of activity at present is very welcome.

It is welcome as well in an educational sense because there are undesirable aspects to recent attitudes where education is concerned. We have made great strides in education but one of the side effects of this has been an apparent desire among a great many people, parents in particular, to have their children educated in the arts and to see them graduate as doctors and teachers and get into this area rather than into the scientific field. This attitude has been manifested in the various debates about third-level institutes and whether they should have the entitlement of calling themselves universities or national institutes or technological institutes. In Norway and Sweden their institutes of technology rank as third-level institutes on a par with other third-level institutes. We will have to graduate to this stage if we are to be sensible about development here. Where education is concerned we will probably turn full circle on the wheel fairly soon and reach a very sad awakening when we see that there are so many people graduating in arts through universities who, despite qualifications on paper, are finding that there are far more graduates than there are jobs available in the traditional area of activities, such as in teaching, medicine and other fields. There will be a rude awakening when people discover that education in the scientific and technological field is where our future lies. For that reason, on a personal level, I welcome the introduction of this Bill. I speak for Fine Gael when I say that our party is pleased with the introduction of the Bill.

It is important that the board, when established, should be practical in approach. When considering areas of research and development and advising the Government on areas which should be funded to a greater extent there should be a very positive effort to relate the scientific work to the market place. The use of public funds will demand that this should happen. Too often, for the layman — and I speak as a layman — science is baffling. By definition it has to be baffling to a layman and there tends to be an uneasy feeling among lay people that possibly the work is so esoteric that it is in the clouds and does not relate in any sense to the future well-being of the country. This feeling is especially strong when we are talking about public funds and taxation. It should be a concern of the board to have an abiding interest in relating whatever work is done, regardless of how obscure it is — and there is a need for obscure work at times — to the economic well-being. I have no doubt that has been said before, but it is no harm that it is on record in the Oireachitas regarding the establishment of the board.

I am glad to see that section 6 refers to this to an extent in that it allows for the review of the effectiveness of public investment in science and technology. I trust that this will be taken as a very serious section of the Bill and will lead to satisfactory debates in the Oireachtas from time to time when the science budget is debated.

From the Minister's speech it seems that the private sector may not be getting the recognition that I would like to see it getting in terms of attitude. In the Minister's speech, he quotes from the OECD recommendations which, in turn, are quoted from a National Science Council definition:

It would, in particular, attempt to secure the most worthwhile contribution for scientific and technological activities in the public sector.

Later on in the same quotation it is stated:

It would recommend where incentives and other stimuli might be applied so that the private sector would also make the most effective contribution possible.

The use of words like "also" here is a denigration to a degree of the private sector. In talking about a mixed economy which is balanced between a contribution from both the public and private sector I would hope that the board will be established against a background where, certainly, there is scope for major activity in the public sector, but there is equal rather than inferior scope for the private sector. I referred to the quotation by the Minister from a previous publication but the fact that he quoted it would imply his endorsement. I should like to see the public and private sectors as twin allies in this development. It is a fundamental point. In the State sector when boards such as this are established, there is a danger, if they feel that they have a mandate from the Minister or from Government to deploy their resources and to address their main consideration to a particular sector of the economy, that this could be damaging for the future activity of the board. To those interested in the well-being of the private sector it might not be entirely desirable. It is worth clearing the air on that particular point. Perhaps in this debate the Minister would be good enough to refer to it.

I am glad to see that the Minister in his speech is very keen that this board should guard against the assuming of functions already performed in other areas. I am certain that the Minister, by the definition of his function in Cabinet, will be very aware of the extent of duplication, that he will be working through the next few years to co-ordinate, in so far as it is possible, and doing a lot of necessary work in a very vital field. In another capacity I would be very glad to debate with the Minister certain aspects of western development which do not relate in any sense to the topic which we are discussing here. But that is for another day.

We agree in principle with the establishment of a small board of ten people. The woolliness and the clouded thinking that can result from the larger type of committee is very undesirable and this is a very acceptable number of people. The Minister, in his speech, refers to the question of native resources, indigenous areas. If we are establishing a priority for the use of funds, either directly by the board or by the various scientific semi-State bodies when they apply to the board and the Government, obviously these are the areas on which to concentrate. He is clearly aware of the main scope. In talking about indigenous areas we can have regard to human factors such as the extent of the labour pool and considerations in relation to the type of development we should attract here.

There is no reference whatever in the Minister's speech nor, indeed, in the previous Minister's speech, or the deliberations of the Committee, to the administrative structure of the board itself.

There are generalisations about the extent to which the board are empowered to establish administrative structure. It would be interesting to hear the Minister dwell briefly on what he feels, now that we are on the point of establishing such a board, what he sees as the initial administrative detail, and where we might go from there or where Government thinking lies at present in the sense that under the Bill the board have the function of engaging in certain areas of activity which require finance. It would be interesting to hear to what extent the Government see this as an initial option which would be implemented by the board.

A small point of detail in section 25 relates to a matter of considerable significance. We are talking about the question of prohibition of disclosure of confidential information. In the normal area of activity, if we are talking about the Departments of Local Government or Social Welfare, this is not a major issue, but in relation to science and technology deliberations in thinking and fundamental research can lead to astonishing development in certain areas. I am glad to see that there is a section dealing with this point but section 25 (2) is entirely inadequate and I do not remember in our committees deliberations having got this far. I think we were unseated in Government before we got to section 25, but subsection (2) provides that a person who contravenes subsection (1) of the section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £500. I do not know what is the relevance of £500 in this age, having regard to the type of confidential information which we are talking about, the Minister might give some consideration to raising that amount, possibly quadrupling it. Having regard to the value of confidential information in this important area, the sum of £500 is entirely inadequate.

I wish this board, on behalf of the Fine Gael Party, a useful contribution to Irish economic and social life in future and wish the Minister well in his own function.

Mr. Mulcahy

I would like to welcome the Minister and to say how pleased I was to see the comprehensive lead in that he gave to the discussion. I think that this Bill will have far-reaching effects on our country as a whole and the National Science Council, which has worked on it over a decade and interacted with the OECD group, must be congratulated on giving us the outline which has now emerged in the form of this Bill.

The first aspect that I would like to address is the notion of the science budget. Some of the commentators who remarked about the condition of the fiaclóirí of the Minister might recognise now that the science budget incorporated in this Bill give him the teeth that, amongst other things, he will need in carrying out his portfolio as Minister for Economic Planning and Development. As he said in his introduction, the science budget is a feature of the way things are run in other countries. It is going to give us a chance to look at total expenditure across the scene without necessarily interfering with the autonomy of the various groups who will be carrying out the related work.

This is a very important principle of organisation. I might draw attention to the fact that it is the same principle that the emerging industrial development consortium is based upon. In other words, you do not necessarily have to set up a new body corporate at all times to get things done. Sometimes you can, through proper and intelligent organisation of existing units, make better use of their power by providing co-ordinating mechanisms. In the case of science and technology there is so much of the unknown in it, because you are dealing with research. There is room in this case for a new body corporate containing the specialists that are required and therefore we have this new board. It might be useful for the House to recall some of the points made by the National Science Council in their January, 1973, report where they indicated the nature of the problem which this body is now being set up to deal with. They said:

In essence the problem is that Ireland has in large degree an industrial structure which is not conducive to the profitable assimilation of science and technology and the development of an Irish research and development capacity. To deal with the coherent weaknesses of this situation and to offset the potential constraining effects on future industrial development, it is ait this stage possible to recommend that future policy should as far as possible embody action in relation to the following:

The development of more specialised industrial sectors within Ireland which would have a genuine deep-seated comparative advantage——

I will be coming back to this point of comparative advantage in a moment.

——over foreign competitors in domestic and overseas markets.

Have a high value added content from Ireland's point of view.

Be organically connected to Ireland's resources, natural, human and material.

Be based to the greatest extent possible on science and technology intensive operations.

The strengthening of our resources of scientific and technical manpower and their location to the best advantage in industry.

The strengthening of scientific information services on a national basis.

Encouragement of mergers and deeper integration of Irish owned firms in areas where scale is important in exploiting science and technology.

I do not make any real excuse for reading that into the record because it does indicate the extent of the problem and all we can do is wish the board well in dealing with those various issues raised by the NSC. Now the science budget, as I said at the opening of this part of my address, will give the co-ordinating mechanism and will provide the instrument which will allow us in this House and the Dáil to address the extent to which we as a nation are dealing with those problems that have been outlined for us by the National Science Council. You can see that in those statements the industrial aspect is highlighted and in agreement with my colleague, Senator Staunton, I would hope that the emphasis of the work of this board will be towards the application of knowledge already known rather than pure research. But I am not excluding the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake in terms of pure research.

I think that the Industrial Development Consortium idea, which I am sure we will have a chance to debate later, will contain people who are paid by the State on a full-time basis to pursue these policies, to develop them and to take the action required. They will come together periodically under the person who has the ultimate power to energise that system, that is the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy, and clearly the Minister who is present here tonight will be working side by side with him. The NBST will fill a big gap that exists at the moment in our ability to address the problems of co-ordination and will provide the analytical work required to be carried out in relation to the overall view of what is required in the economy.

We have the IDA working in the industrial sector and we have the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards looking at other aspects of the application of technology in particular sectors. I have always felt that to some extent the work of these bodies did not appear in a coherent plan, and we now look forward to this coming from the Minister and his instrument — the Board of Science and Technology.

A question of co-ordination of course always raises some hares because bodies do not like to be coordinated — they like to be as free as possible and anybody looking over their shoulders tends to be looked at with some suspicion — but I think it was Herman Kahn who said that "people work better when they are watched". This body might be able to do that with some sensitivity, as the Minister indicated in his introduction. Let us take the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards. Let me say at the outset, this body do excellent work and require a great deal of resources to provide the type of experimental work that is required — the hands-on machinery type of work that we need and have been lacking here for some time — they have been doing excellent work in this area, but nevertheless recently it has come to our knowledge that in a special report, an analysis carried out by two eminent professors of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Alien et alia found that although the strategy of the IIRS was very clear and acceptable, they could find very little evidence in fact that it was being put into action. It would seem to me that the work of the IIRS, who would be still operating under the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy — this was discussed in the Dáil — could be looked at by this new board and in their over-view see if the right strategies are being followed by the IIRS and some of these other bodies in relation to our national aims. In this case, “national aims” for me, as you will hear from me at various times, means 15,000 new jobs in manufacturing every year for the next ten years.

The next point I wanted to develop in that regard was the question of research. The point was already made, but I should like to add to it, that the emphasis in the work of the National Science Council should be an applied research rather than pure. I think most people agree with that. We are so far behind in the application of existing knowledge as far as technology particularly is concerned, that it is not funny. Where we have something to boast about is in the area of agriculture, where Foras Talúntais have made the necessary impact on the scene. I must say that I get tremendous pleasure when I hear young farmers on the radio or on telvision discussing, in sophisticated and knowledgeable terms, horticultural principles and how they are working in particular instances. I do not know what the hell they are talking about, but they do, and that is the important thing. They seem to be putting knowledge to work. Our agricultural productivity might not be what we should like it to be, but I somehow or another have confidence in what is going on. However when it comes to the area of technology I am not so sure.

This brings me to the whole question of technology. Economists have been debating for some time how comparative economic advantage works. There seems to be a number of schools of thought. There is the old Ricardo school following the idea that we are subject to nature, and that people in the north of Europe have certain advantages and people in the south have certain advantages. So England produces clothes and Portugal produces wine. We accepted that situation. Then we had a development from people like Samuelson who held that capital investment takes place and accumulates in the right way eventually produces growth in economic wealth and provides the solution in developing nations. Both of these seem to have excluded — not completely, not giving sufficient emphasis — the role of technology and technology if I can quote Professor Jackson the Chicago economist:

"Technology" as a source of comparative advantage is not as some writers and commentators on trade and trade policy seem to believe a free good capriciously and invidiously distributed by nature among the nations of the world. Technology is a capital good, or investment good, produced by the investment over time of material resources that yield their returns over further time.

Technology can be translated from one country to another. Technology, unlike the natural climatic conditions of the Ricardo model, can be both moved from one location to another and accumulated or decumulated. Again Jackson states that:

Technology by its nature is capable of being taught to and learned by large numbers of young adult human being of various levels of intelligence, almost regardless of their native culture.

We can do something about it but it takes time. If technology is transferable we have got to do something special about it. It cannot just happen due to multi-national companies arriving here. We are so keen to get jobs that technology will develop in a somewhat higgledy-piggledy way depending on the particular approach of these firms. These companies can do a lot to help develop technology know-how. I am speaking here from a basis of fact because as a person who worked for one of these companies I had the joy of watching young chaps coming in with nothing other than farming experience, a good education to leaving certificate, learning how to run machines and at that time nobody dreamt that these boys would reach the point where they would make a fundamental contribution to the technology of the tooling that the Americans gave us when they came originally. But this in fact only took about six or seven years. But it did take that amount of time. I think we can plan for such fine periods. I remember one chap arriving outside the door of the factory and he was too shy to come in for interview. His mother pushed him in the door. He is now the plant manager of one of those operations. This is just to show that there is hope there for quick development but not within one or two years. We have to think within the five to ten years planning cycle. This board again I see having a tremendous amount to contribute to this.

I would hope that the board would not confine themselves too much to new knowledge and not enough to the applied knowledge. An example of that that I would have in mind would be that they would be willing to encourage the Department of Industry, Commerce and Energy to set up seed bed industrial estates. Maybe one or two or one for a start, which would be if you like a seed bed of small firm entrepreneural activity. At the centre of this estate there would be full-time people paid for by the IDA say for the first five years or ten years. They would be capable of being seconded out to new small industries getting under way and using different or novel technologies. I think that I have brought this up once or twice with colleagues and with people in both the present and the last Government and all I hear is the difficulties. I think it is about time that we give up being a difficulty stating nation and more of an opportunity taking nation. Again I would hope that this board would provide us with some leadership in that regard under of course the leadership of the Minister. This brings me to manpower development. We were rather slow as a nation in moving towards the development, nuturing and encouragement of younger people to work at technology. The regional technical college system, thankfully, due to the foresight of the Government in the late sixties, are there now to contribute to this. So also is Limerick NIHE, the National Institute of Higher Education and the evolving Dublin NIHE. I would hope that the manpower requirements, which would be the back-up to the development of any technology, will be looked at as part of the function of the board, and that they will not be worried about treading on the toes of the educational system, although that is one way of waking them up at times.

What might be a less well emphasised aspect of the work in relation to manpower development and in relation to the research aspect of the work of the board would be their role in the social sciences. When we talk about science and technology there is a tendency to think about the physical sciences, or technology, as a processing technique in production operation. The social sciences are just as important, if not more so, because eventually any economic unit is made up of people at work trying to achieve satisfaction in the psychological sense and economic satisfaction in terms of the rewards to bring up their families. We are dealing with the socio-technical system. We are dealing with the interaction of the social and the technological systems. This will have to be studied in the same way.

Therefore, I would hope to see some pilot studies coming from the board which will analyse the underlying causes of some of the industrial relations malaise that we have seen developing in the last few years. Also, they might use the findings of the social sciences to look at why it is that our entrepreneurial attitudes in this country are not sufficiently tuned to have people enthusiastic about getting into industry and starting up the small industries which will contribute to those 15,000 jobs.

The penultimate point is the whole question of the staffing of this body. I am concerned that the staffing of some of the new bodies being set up by the State is caught up with the Department of the Public Service. I notice that the board have the right in the Bill to appoint their own staff, subject of course to the approval of the Department of the Public Service. I hope that this does not mean we will have to go through the Civil Service Appointments Commission and that it does not mean that they get wrapped up with this notion of State servants unified into one common category. A body that I have been recently concerned with in this regard have had great difficulty trying to deal with that concept. Hopefully, the Minister has foreseen that obstacle. Obviously he has provided for ways of doing it because I see that built into the Bill is the provision that the board can hire consultants to help out. I agree with this as an excellent way of bringing in expertise that does not reside in the indigenous staff of a particular body, but I would hope that it would not get to the point where, for instance, the National Economic and Social Council would appear to be only producing material that comes from consultants and, at that, mostly consultants operating from outside the country.

Finally, I wish the Minister well with his new board which will be one of the main prongs, obviously, of his power system in relation to planning. By definition the power of this board is the power of planning. Senator Keating stated last week that he hoped I would make the odd point about this and here is an opportunity to do so. What is even more satisfying is that we have a Minister who understands the concept of planning and will, hopefully be able to pull the strings and encourage the various elements of the system in the right order, as only he knows how. I congratulate the National Science Council for having brought it to this point.

Dr. West

I welcome the Bill and echo Senator Mulcahy's telling arguments on the exploitation of applied science and technology. Some central body is required to co-ordinate this effort, a body more powerful and bigger than the National Science Council. I should also like to welcome the Minister as a former colleague. I am never quite clear about university men who become T.D.s, whether they remain colleagues of mine or whether they are former colleagues. The Minister will know it is a rather grey area. I am delighted to see him here and I wish him well. He is one in a long line of university people coming from all the Irish universities who are making an important contribution in political life, that is, besides the important contribution made by the Independent University Senators. He has a long and distinguished tradition which I am sure he will follow.

I should like to make three points in connection with the Bill. The first one concerns the industrial liaison scheme funded by the National Science Council which was taken up by at least two of the universities, TCD and UCG. The idea was to set up research and development, a consultancy service with the support of the IDA, some of the funds for the salary of an industrial liaison officer being supplied by the National Science Council.

As the Minister knows, during the period of the last administration this funding was cut off by the Department of Finance and not by the National Science Council. In the TCD college accounts at the moment there is an entry for December, 1976, of salary owing by the National Science Council which was never paid. It was the agreed proportion of the industrial liaison officer's salary which was to come from the National Science Council. I hope that this can be unblocked retrospectively in any of the cases in which it has been done, as well as the case of TCD. This whole idea is important because, as the Minister and his predecessor know, the universities of their nature are rather slow in taking up the problem of applying the findings of pure science to industry and in enabling the country to reap the benefits of the pure scientific discoveries by applying them in actual physical situations on the ground.

An industrial liaison officer can do a very important job. It is an appointment in the spirit in which this Bill is being promoted. The colleges of technology were unable to appoint industrial liaison officers because the Department of Education, in that case. would pay only half the salary and they were unable to find the other half from their own resources. They do not have great resources of their own. I would urge the Minister to ensure that the colleges of technology will be in a position to develop R and E services, and start this by financing the salary of somebody equivalent to an industrial liaison officer.

The National Science Council played a very positive role in this respect and they are to be congratulated. However, in the natural course of evolution, they should be replaced by a board with wider powers, more finance and a general overview of our science and technology. That is a good thing, but let us remember that the National Science Council did some excellent work. They were impeded by lack of resources and we hope that the resources available to this board will be considerably greater.

I should like to refer to the position of one body which has played a vital role in scientific development and of which I am proud to be a member, that is, the Royal Irish Academy. In many senses the Academy is a private institution which receives some of its funds from Government sources. It has played the sort of role which could overlap somewhat the functions of the board as outlined in section 4, particularly in subsection (3) (g) where it is stated that they are

to engage, where appropriate, after consultation with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in international activities, in science and technology, including, where appropriate, representation of the State at conferences, meetings and seminars.

Thirty or forty years ago the Government asked the Royal Irish Academy to form national committees in various sciences, and then they were formed in the art subjects precisely to liaise with the international bodies in particular fields. One of the first, if not the first, to be set up at the request of the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, was the National Committee for Mathematics which is an academic body drawing representatives from the various educational institutions, the Department of Education and the Central Statistics Office. The purpose was to be the Irish committee liaising with the International Mathematical Union, the body controlling mathematics worldwide. It was very important that we had such a committee. The committee has appointed representatives to attend international Mathematical Union meetings. I am the current representative and I was at the last International Mathematical Union meeting.

Right across the board there are national committees of the academy and they fulfil an important function. They do a lot more now than just appoint delegates to attend international meetings. They have had a very important influence on the development of the specific subjects in which they deal.

I should like to see the academy's work helped and not impeded by this board. Again, as the Minister probably knows the academy's funding from the Government is extremely meagre. There is another important function which the academy plays, that is, the publication of the proceedings in sections (a), (b) and (c) and, as far as mathematics is concerned, theirs is our only Irish mathematical journal. Why is it so important that we should publish an Irish Mathematical Journal? It is simple. No institution in Ireland could afford to get the proceedings of the academies throughout the world from their income. The Royal Irish Academy get them by exchange for their journal. So it is a considerable investment. We can get the proceedings of academies and institutions around the world by exchange. There is a big net gain to the country by continuing to publish the academy's proceedings. Section (a) deals with mathematics and physics, (b) with experimental sciences and (c) with literature and antiquities.

The Government could be more generous in recognising this important function. They do not recognise this sufficiently in terms of financial support to the academy. The situation is such that the academy is now dependent to a large extent on the exhibition being mounted in the Metropolitan Museum in New York jointly by the academy, Trinity College and the National Museum. The academy is dependent on the revenue which will accrue from this exhibition. Otherwise its operations would be severely hampered. The academy has a considerable overdraft in the bank. I hope the Minister and this board will support it in its important scientific and technological endeavours. It has always been open to change. Professor Dooge, the former Cathaoirleach, is a distinguished academy member and he had considerable influence on development in the technological field and in promoting technological advances and their study by the academy.

Finally there is a point on behalf of the fair sex, and who better to remind me than my distinguished and glamorous colleague, Senator Hussey. The teaching of science in girls' schools, as the Minister knows, still leaves a lot to be desired. What this means when we translate it into wider terms is that half of our population are not in a position often to take part in the advances that are going on because of educational deficiency. I do not wish to label the problems here because there have been great advances in scientific education in girls' schools in recent years, but they still have a long way to go, as they would be the first to recognise. The board can help to rectify this situation by encouraging lady scientists, partiularly by appointing women members to this board and by following the recommendation of the Commission on the Status of Women, which said that women should be appointed to boards right across the board in every situation. This is one of the ways to encourage scientific development, particularly in the girls' schools. In case the Minister has difficulty in finding sufficiently glamorous and intelligent ladies to appoint, I might remind him that there is in existence a national women's talent bank, established as a result of this commission's report, which can advise on suitable candidates for the positions such as positions on the board and the various sub-committees the board will appoint.

With those substantive but perhaps rather narrow points I welcome the Bill and look forward on the Committee Stage to the discussion of the board's operations, particularly the functions set out in section 4.

Professor Conroy

I join in the welcome to the Minister and congratulate him on his appointment. I also welcome the Bill. In the past the wealth of society in a country has depended very much on the development of science and technology in that community or country. This position is perhaps even more marked today. We have the so-called developing or underdeveloped countries attempting desperately to keep up with advances in science and technology. Despite all efforts on their part and aid by various world agencies and so on, they are slipping further and further behind.

We are in the position of a country which, if threatened, fits into the developed category. But we are in a very precarious position, we could very easily slip back. If we once slipped back we would find it very difficult to catch up again. It is a matter of vital importance to us that we develop and take full advantage of advances in science and technology. This is particularly important because we are a relatively small country, though I would not entirely agree with Senator Staunton who suggested that we had not done as much as we might have in science and technology. The contributions of Irish scientists and other people to science and technology have been remarkable and impressive in view of our small size and population. I would agree with him that we have put the emphasis too much on the art aspect of matters. We tended to look upon universities as institutions, related primarily to their arts faculties. Our young people, even today, tend to over-emphasise careers based on an art background. In this regard our schools must take some responsibility, more especially in the past because there is now greater emphasis in our schools on science. It could be vastly improved.

There is the danger here, a danger we have seen materialise in certain other countries, that people have been encouraged to go into the field of science or the technological aspects of life. Everything has been fine for a while and places have been provided for them at the university and technological institutes, but when a slump comes many highly qualified people are left without jobs. We must be careful to match the development of science and technology education and the numbers entering it with the real prospects in society.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

As it has been agreed to allow a matter to be discussed on the adjournment, I would ask the Senator to move the adjournment.

Debate adjourned.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 9 Nov 1977