Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Thursday, 7 Feb 2013

Vol. 220 No. 11

Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) (Amendment) Bill 2012: Second Stage

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

I am delighted to be back in the Seanad. I watched the Order of Business outside and could not but be taken by the vim and vigour of those who contributed. I applaud them for their energy, given the work they have had to do in the past 24 hours.

The purpose of the Bill is to extend the remit of Science Foundation Ireland to enable it to fund applied research in addition to its existing remit to fund oriented basic research. The Bill also provides for other amendments to the functions of the foundation, including the refocusing of the research themes to be funded by it, covering both oriented basic research and applied research, towards areas that have the greatest potential to deliver a sustainable economic return through enterprise development, employment creation and quality of life.

The Bill provides for certain amendments to existing legislation relating to Forfás, Shannon Development and Enterprise Ireland. These are unrelated to the proposed changes to the remit of Science Foundation Ireland but are included as they are all within the framework of the Industrial Development Acts. The amendment relating to Shannon Development is a necessary one to the Industrial Development Acts to provide for new arrangements for the promotion of enterprise opportunities in the mid-west region.

Before I describe the provisions of the Bill in more detail, I propose to outline the background to Science Foundation Ireland, its role in the national research and innovation system and the broader role of research and innovation in the overall strategy for economic recovery and growth. I will also outline the rationale for the changes proposed in the Bill and their contribution to this strategy.

Science Foundation Ireland was established under the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act 2003. Under that Act, the main function of the foundation is to "promote, develop and assist the carrying out of oriented basic research in strategic areas of scientific endeavour that concerns the future development and competitiveness of industry and enterprise in the State". The Act specified information and communication technologies and biotechnology as "strategic areas of scientific endeavour". Sustainable energy and energy-efficient technologies were subsequently specified, by means of regulations, as comprising an additional strategic area of scientific endeavour. Science Foundation Ireland provides grants to researchers and research groups that are based in higher education institutions on the basis of competitive calls for proposals with selection on the basis of international peer review. The foundation's funding programmes support research teams led by principal investigators, the clustering of research teams with industry engagement and larger-scale groups of research teams to address a more limited number of strategic thematic areas in collaboration with industry partners.

The preparation of this legislation provides the opportunity to remind ourselves of and articulate the reasons the Government funds research and development. It is accepted internationally that the private sector does not fund research and development at the optimum level for economic and societal benefit. The reasons for this include the fact that research and development, particularly basic research, is inherently risky. The commercial returns are often insufficiently clear for the private investor. Another reason is that the societal returns from investment in research and development sometimes outweigh the direct returns to the private investor. If the private investor does not capture all of the returns generated from the investment, this may act as a disincentive for the private sector. These reasons apply in Ireland as they do elsewhere. It could be argued that Ireland, as a small, open economy, can take advantage of discoveries made elsewhere and avoid significant investment in research and development, particularly basic research. However, if we are to absorb and take advantage of externally generated new knowledge, we must have the capability to understand and use it. Therefore, the economy must conduct research and development itself. As the global economy and society are constantly changing and developing, there is an ongoing need to address societal, environmental and economic challenges. If Ireland is to maintain and enhance its position in the global economy, our economy needs to keep pace. Our past and current economic successes provide no guarantee of success in the future. Therefore, we must continue to invest appropriately in creation and innovation if we are to be able to compete in the global marketplace.

There has been significant public investment in science, technology and innovation in Ireland since the late 1990s. This was initiated from a low base. Before then, Ireland had not invested significantly in research and development and our international ranking for quality of scientific research was well below OECD standards, on a par with some Third World countries. The lack of high-quality research personnel performing industrially relevant research was deemed to be an impediment to attracting large-scale knowledge-intensive industrial projects to Ireland and to developing indigenous internationally competitive, high-growth firms. While the economy had grown substantially during the 1990s, with substantial employment growth and improvements in prosperity, there was a concern in the late 1990s that Ireland was no longer a low-wage economy. The movement of manufacturing to lower cost economies was evident. It was clear that Ireland had to make the transition to higher added value products and services that allowed us to sustain and increase incomes. A key part of this process involved recognising the importance of knowledge creation and innovation in sustaining and enhancing competitiveness. National policy was developed to focus on building new sources of competitive advantage with a view to sustaining growth and jobs in the longer term. This involved repositioning Irish enterprise higher in the value chain, thereby requiring more highly skilled and knowledge-based employment. The key to Ireland's continued success was to ensure the enterprise development agencies, Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland, successfully promoted the establishment and development of firms with a competitive advantage based on knowledge, technology, innovation and related skills rather than on maintaining traditional activities and approaches.

In 1998 the Irish Council for Science, Technology and Innovation undertook a technology foresight initiative which sought to identify emerging technologies that would be central to national economic development in future years. The report of the initiative recommended that the Government establish a fund to enable Ireland to become a centre for world-class research excellence in strategically important areas such as ICT and biotechnology and their underlying sciences. The Government accepted this recommendation and subsequently established Science Foundation Ireland to administer this fund. Science Foundation Ireland's investments in human capital in strategic areas of scientific endeavour are complemented by investments under the programme for research in third level institutions, which is administered by the Higher Education Authority. This investment is aimed at developing high-quality research capabilities in higher education institutions, including research buildings, facilities and equipment. This public investment has had a significant impact in the past decade or more. The human capital, infrastructure and systems that have been developed from this investment are feeding through to attract foreign direct investment and commercialisation. In 2012 more than 40% of IDA Ireland's job announcements related to companies with links to Science Foundation Ireland research teams. Such companies accounted for 4,575 of the new IDA Ireland client-win jobs that were announced last year. The researchers and research teams that are supported by Science Foundation Ireland are connected to more than 600 companies employing more than 90,000 people in this country.

Ireland is ranked 20th globally in terms of our research capability. This represents an improvement on our ranking of 36th in 2003. We are performing very well in specific fields. We are ranked third in the world for immunology research, which is a key area of relevance to the life sciences sector. We are ranked sixth in nanotechnology and eighth in materials science, both of which are key to Ireland's life sciences, ICT and energy sectors. These high standings result largely from the excellent research carried out by various teams that are funded by Science Foundation Ireland. Such global rankings are seen as a key element in the attraction of Ireland for these sectors as a location for foreign direct investment. The impact of our research investment can be seen in the figures for research and development expenditure by the business sector. Expenditure on research and development by the business sector trebled from €600 million to €1.8 billion between 1997 and 2010. In 2004, less than 10% of IDA Ireland's investment wins were in research, development and innovation projects. They were worth €120 million. We have seen an almost sixfold increase in this regard, to the point at which the comparable figure for 2011 was €700 million. This national investment is also paying off for indigenous firms. The exports, employment and sustainability figures of research and development performing firms consistently outperform those of firms that do not engage in research and development.

The areas around which public investment has been oriented to date were appropriate for building a broad base of capacity and expertise in strategic areas underpinning science and technology. Ireland is now looking to build on the strengths that have emerged from the investment to date in science, technology and innovation and to target future investment in areas that link directly to current and likely future economic and societal needs. It is appropriate for Ireland to define more precisely the areas where critical mass and concentration of effort will maximise returns.

As a small country which is very dependent on the global market, it makes strategic sense that we should, to a significant but not exclusive extent, focus on those areas of research with the greatest potential for development of applications to generate economic growth and address problems in our society. In addition, given the harsh realities of our current fiscal and economic crisis, there are competing and equally compelling demands for Exchequer investment and we need to ensure now, more than ever, that we achieve the optimum impact from our investment.

In 2010 a high-level Government-appointed steering group, chaired by Mr. Jim O'Hara, formerly of Intel, was established to identify priority areas of focus for Irish research for the future. This exercise was comprehensive, involving extensive research, analysis and stakeholder consultation. The report of the group was approved by Government in February 2012. The group identified 14 priority areas of opportunity for Ireland and six underpinning technologies and infrastructure to support these priority areas, on the basis of existing strengths of the enterprise base, opportunities in terms of the global marketplace and those which are most likely to deliver economic and societal impact, and, ultimately, jobs. The aim is to align the majority of public science, technology and innovation, STI, investment with the 14 areas of opportunity identified in the report, as well as the underpinning technologies and infrastructure. The report also acknowledged the important role of research for policy and research for knowledge and recommended that the remaining funding be channelled to support these two areas. A number of measures were also recommended to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the STI system.

It is in this context that the Bill provides for the refocusing of the research themes to be funded by Science Foundation Ireland towards the priority areas of opportunity. In the context of considering how to accelerate the impact of public investment in research, the question arises as to whether we have the mechanisms in place to maximise the opportunities arising from the research funded by SFI and which is carried out in our higher education institutions. Currently, SFI's remit is to carry out "oriented basic research in strategic areas of scientific endeavour". The definition of oriented basic research in the 2003 Act which established SFI follows an internationally recognised categorisation as set out in an OECD publication known as the Frascati manual. It is defined as research that is "carried out with the expectation that it will produce a broad base of knowledge likely to form the basis of the solution to recognised or expected, current or future problems or possibilities". In other words, this research is expected to produce results that form the basis for future applications. Applied research means "work undertaken in order to gain scientific or technical knowledge and directed towards a specific practical application". Applied research is usually undertaken either to determine possible uses for the findings of basic research or to determine new methods or ways of creating practical applications.

Enterprise Ireland administers several programmes involving direct grants to companies to develop and support industry-led, market-focused applied research. However, these programmes still leave a gap in pursuing applied research opportunities arising from oriented basic research. The programmes operated by Enterprise Ireland start at a stage further from where many researchers find themselves as the possible uses for the basic research results have not yet been explored. Consequently, the proposed addition to the SFI remit is intended to fill this gap. The extension of SFI's remit to include applied research will take the outcome of oriented basic research funded by SFI closer to market, which in turn increases the potential of research to yield commercial opportunities and jobs, as well as other societal benefits.

The Bill also includes a new function to enable SFI to promote and support awareness and understanding of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation transferred responsibility for delivery of the Discover Science and Engineering programme from Forfás to SFI on an administrative basis with effect from 1 March 2012.

Since its establishment in 2003, the Discover Science and Engineering programme has been actively working with companies and higher education institutions, as well as representative bodies such as Engineers Ireland to heighten the awareness of science and engineering and to raise the level of student uptake of the physical sciences at second and third level. The objective of Discover Science and Engineering is to promote awareness and understanding of the importance of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, to increase the number of students studying the physical sciences and mathematics, to promote a positive attitude to careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and to foster a greater public understanding of the physical sciences, engineering and mathematics and their value to Irish society.

There are many synergies and mutual complementarities between Discover Science and Engineering and SFI, particularly in light of the outreach programmes run through the SFI-funded research centres. This transfer enables synergies between the Discover Science and Engineering programme and SFI funding to be maximised and will increase the impact of this programme. The Bill provides power for SFI to provide funding for research groups based in Northern Ireland and also to enable participation by SFI in international funding programmes. SFI does not currently have the power to fund research groups outside the State.

In regard to Northern Ireland, the Bill enables SFI to provide funding for research groups in Northern Ireland under an existing scheme, known as the Charles Parsons energy research awards. The Bill also enables SFI to provide funding for research groups in Northern Ireland where they are in partnership with institutions or companies based in the State for the purposes of the research. Following the extension of SFI's remit to sustainable energy and energy-efficient technologies in 2008, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources agreed in 2008 that responsibility for the Charles Parsons energy research awards scheme would transfer to the then Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, with management of the awards undertaken by SFI. This transfer was completed in November 2009. Under the scheme, seven research groups were awarded grant aid by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in December 2006. Two of the awards were made to groups based in Northern Ireland institutions, namely Queen's University, Belfast and the University of Ulster. While responsibility for the management of all of the awards has been transferred to SFI, for the time being, any payments to the Northern Ireland institutions are made by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. Subject to performance under the terms of the award, the final payments are due to be made to the awardees in 2013. This change will enable SFI to fund these awards directly, as is already the case regarding the awardees based in the State.

The more general power for SFI to fund research groups in Northern Ireland will enhance opportunities for collaboration between research groups both North and South. To leverage best value from Ireland's research investment it is proposed to enable SFI, subject to the consent of the Minister, to enter cost-share arrangements with international partners in areas linked with its mandated priority areas and where Irish researchers have real potential to achieve added value from such arrangements. It is important for Ireland, through SFI, to be ready to participate in international programmes in areas where Ireland has research strengths when the opportunities arise. It opens up access to external non-Exchequer funding opportunities and facilities for Irish researchers which would not be available otherwise.

It is generally accepted that international collaboration on research brings together resources and the pooling of knowledge, enhancing scientific excellence and thus achieving greater success in addressing research problems, as well as greater efficiencies. Participating in international research programmes facilitates inward and outward mobility of researchers, access to transnational collaborative networks, access to research facilities not available in Ireland and commercialising ideas and know-how. There is an increasing trend at European level towards research funding schemes which involve pooling of funding by member states, with or without additional European funding. SFI's participation in these schemes is restricted due to the limitations of the 2003 Act in respect of funding projects outside the State. While some forms of pooling of funding can be carried out under the existing legislation, other forms of pooling are outside its scope. The European Commission's proposals for research and innovation funding for the period 2014 to 2020, Horizon 2020, include the allocation of co-funding for member state collaborations, subject to "clear financial commitments of the participating countries, including prior commitments to pool national and/or regional investments for transnational research and innovation". In these circumstances, unless Ireland participates in such fund-pooling arrangements, Irish researchers will not be in a position to compete for the funds, including the matching funds being made available from the European Union. Therefore, as part of Ireland's efforts to maximise our drawdown from EU research funding, it will be necessary to be in a position to engage in "common pot" arrangements, where appropriate. It is also appropriate that Ireland leverage research being funded by other states and share the economic impact.

In addition, scientific and engineering equipment and facilities are becoming more and more expensive to build and maintain. Globally, particularly in Europe, the solution is to share development and operational costs. Researchers in participating states can use such infrastructure and machinery. If Ireland cannot contribute to such infrastructure, access to it by our researchers may be restricted to the detriment of research here and the intended enterprise consequences. In some of these programmes there may be no guaranteed "juste retour" in respect of an Irish contribution, but participation in such programmes would be evaluated on the basis of Irish research strengths in the specific area.

I will now turn to the other matters dealt with in the Bill. I will deal first with the reorganisation of enterprise development functions in the Shannon free zone. On 27 November last the Government agreed to implement the decision taken in principle last May to merge Shannon Development with Shannon Airport in order to create a new aviation-focused entity with a commercial mandate in public ownership. The Government agreed a number of actions which would be implemented to give effect to this decision. These include the separation of Shannon Airport from the Dublin Airport Authority and the decision to transfer Shannon Development's functions in respect of indigenous enterprise and foreign direct investment to Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland, respectively. The latter decision will act as a catalyst for economic development and job creation as it will ensure indigenous and multinational industry already in the Shannon region or considering locating there will have access to a comprehensive range of supports. By merging a strong independent Shannon Airport with the extensive property holdings, experience and expertise of Shannon Development, we will create a strong new State company which will work with IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland on developing an international aviation services centre in the region. The implementation of these decisions represents a new start for enterprise and job creation in the Shannon region.

In order to bring about the transfer of enterprise functions, it is necessary to remove the restrictions which prevent IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland from providing enterprise functions in the Shannon free zone. Section 8 of the Bill provides for the repeal of section 11(2) of the Industrial Development Act 1986 which prevents Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland from providing and administering grants and other financial facilities for industry in the Shannon free zone. The subsection also prevents the agencies from providing, developing, constructing, altering, adapting, maintaining and administering industrial estates and factory buildings, together with the associated facilities of such estates and buildings in the Shannon free zone. It can be seen, therefore, that this provision is required to give full effect to the Government's decision of last November. It is without prejudice to future legislative developments required to place the new organisational arrangement on a statutory basis. Enterprise Ireland, IDA Ireland and Shannon Development are in regular contact to ensure there will be a smooth transfer of enterprise functions, with no disruption to the level of services provided for client companies.

On the wider issue of establishing the new company, a high level steering group comprising the Secretaries General of a number of key Departments, a senior ICTU representative and the chair of the Shannon Airport Authority, is meeting regularly to oversee the transitional arrangements in both Shannon Development and Shannon Airport and full implementation of the Government's decision on the establishment of the new company.

The Bill provides for reform of the legislation governing the collection of research and development data by Forfás. The Science and Technology Act 1987 provides for the preparation by Forfás of a science budget on a periodic basis. It obliges bodies funded under the science budget to supply to Forfás such information in such form and at such time as it may require. The data, collated and published biennially by Forfás as the "science budget", measure overall expenditure on science and technology in the Government sector. The areas of expenditure measured are much broader than and do not align with current international practice in monitoring science, technology and innovation expenditure. It is, therefore, considered that the resulting survey is neither a useful policy tool nor an effective use of staff resources. The deletion of these provisions is, therefore, proposed as an administrative efficiency measure. The tone of my speech suggests one is a bridge to another, but it is another part of the Bill. It is not a continuation of the Shannon Development piece but a new part. However, Forfás will continue to compile on an annual basis a major component of the science budget, known as "Government budget appropriations or outlays on research and development", GBAORD, an internationally comparable metric carried out using harmonised concepts and definitions under OECD definitions. This is required under a Commission regulation relating to statistics for science and technology. The Bill requires an institution to supply information to Forfás from time to time for the purposes of the Commission regulation and in respect of research and development funded wholly or partly from moneys provided by the Oireachtas. This will give statutory backing for the collection of data by Forfás for the GBAORD survey and other purposes.

The opportunity is being taken in the Bill to align the legislation governing SFI and Enterprise Ireland with the Freedom of Information Acts. It is important to note that SFI and Enterprise Ireland are bodies to which the Freedom of Information Acts apply. However, section 16 of the Industrial Development Act 1998 in respect of Enterprise Ireland and section 17 of the 2003 Act in respect of SFI prohibit disclosure of confidential information by board members, staff and other specified persons.

It is proposed to make these sections subject to the Freedom of Information Acts and thereby allow for disclosure of confidential information in accordance with those Acts.

I will now summarise the sections of the Bill. Section 1 sets out the definitions of terms used in the Bill. Section 2 provides that expenses incurred by the Minister in the administration of the Bill will, subject to sanction from the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, be paid out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas. Section 3 provides for further definitions of terms used in the Bill, including the definition of "applied research". Section 4 sets out the revised functions of Science Foundation Ireland. Section 5 deals with the provision by the foundation of funding to institutions based in Northern Ireland and to international projects.

Section 6 provides for a consequential amendment to the original Act governing Science Foundation Ireland arising from the extension of its remit to applied research. The 2003 Act provides that the foundation should comment in its annual reports on the oriented basic research funded by it. This requirement is now extended to encompass all research funded by the foundation. Section 7 provides for the repeal of provision relating to compilation of the science budget by Forfás. Section 8 repeals the restrictions on Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland in respect of the Shannon region.

Section 9 provides for the new provisions for collection of research and development data by Forfás in place of the provisions repealed under section 7. Section 10 provides for the amendment of the confidentiality provisions applying to Enterprise Ireland and Science Foundation Ireland by making them subject to the freedom of information Acts. Section 11 provides for the Short Title to the Bill, the collective citation provisions and the commencement of the provisions relating to the legislation.

I commend the Bill to the House.

I welcome the Minister of State and wish him continued success with his most interesting portfolio.

Fianna Fáil established Science Foundation Ireland in 2003. It was initially headed up by Dr. Bill Harris, a visionary dedicated to driving much-needed scientific progress and innovation in Ireland. I wish to focus on the importance of innovation in the context of indigenous companies and the contribution they make to creating employment. At a very interesting meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts last week, the chief executive of Enterprise Ireland, Mr. Frank Ryan, referred to the fact that the indigenous companies being established now are different from those which preceded them. He stated "we understand that in a small economy, exports sustain and create jobs". Last year the country's total exports amounted to €15.2 billion. Clients of Enterprise Ireland exported more in 2011 than at any time in the history of the State. The support and promotion of in-company research and development and innovation, as well as collaborative innovation with others, is central to the development of Enterprise Ireland-supported indigenous companies.

From my experience in establishing Lir Chocolates, I am aware that innovation lies at the heart of entrepreneurship, be it in a high-potential start-up company turning knowledge into solutions or in established companies that are continually improving their products and processes and thus their ability to compete and win sales overseas.

An interesting issue which has arisen is the banks' lack of ability and capacity to support modern high-tech companies. Mr. Niall O'Donnellan is responsible for dealing with the banks on behalf of Enterprise Ireland. When asked about the banks and their relationship with the new companies to which I refer at last week's meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts, he stated that Enterprise Ireland established a banking relations department in 2008 in response to the credit crunch. Mr. O'Donnellan also indicated that the immediate issue in this regard was access to credit for the companies with which Enterprise Ireland was dealing and which were under considerable pressure at the time. Furthermore, he said that Enterprise Ireland established relationships with the three primary banks, namely, AIB, Bank of Ireland and Ulster Bank. He went on to indicate that when it became involved in discussions with the banks, Enterprise Ireland realised that the Irish banking system was not fit for purpose for the modern SME export sector in particular.

Mr. O'Donnellan pointed out to the committee that there were three aspects in this regard. The first of these related to the fact that the banking system here had not become familiar with the modern technology economy "so software, for example, was a sector that Irish banks would have very little involvement in up to that period of time." It is fascinating that the banks were incapable of helping indigenous high-tech companies to develop their businesses. Mr. O'Donnellan stated that Enterprise Ireland set up workshops with the three main banks "in terms of educating them about the kinds of companies we work with and introducing them to various groups of companies: the Irish Software Association; the IMDA - the med-tech association, and so on." His colleague, Mr. Frank Ryan, also informed the Committee of Public Accounts that Ireland is now viewed differently than was the case previously. Mr. Ryan stated that in the past Sweden, Switzerland and so on were perceived to be high-tech countries and that Ireland has now entered that league.

There has been a dramatic change in the quality of the products being produced here. Ireland is no longer the equivalent of a low-cost company, rather it is a high-tech developed economy which can compete abroad. I am aware, from personal experience, that innovation is the lifeblood of any company. The Bill before the House will allow Science Foundation Ireland to add lifeblood to the growing number of superb indigenous companies operating in the high-tech area. Companies must innovate, relentlessly and on a daily basis, if they are to compete.

I congratulate the departmental officials and all involved in the evolution of Science Foundation Ireland. Anecdotal evidence indicates that Dr. Bill Harris used to fly in from the United States and go straight to work. This meant that staff had to open the offices of Science Foundation Ireland at 5 a.m. on certain days. This is the new Ireland. I wish everybody involved continued success.

I used to deliver Lir chocolates by hand. I recall taking the cheapest means of travel to destinations abroad in order to do so. I was obliged to travel over and return on the same day because I could not afford an overnight stay. Those involved in the high-tech sector cannot operate in that way. They require access to cash and credit in order that they might expand their businesses and travel abroad to meet their customers.

I welcome the Minister of State. This is an important Bill. We can see that Science Foundation Ireland has been very successful in the past ten years. Now is the time to establish new structures better suited to a new era and to new developments in science and research. This Bill will give Science Foundation Ireland the power to fund applied research and to promote and support awareness and understanding of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The Bill will also support collaborative research with bodies in Northern Ireland and other countries. This Bill will steer the direction of Science Foundation Ireland funding.

Under the leadership of Professor Mark Ferguson, Science Foundation Ireland continues to progress and work with researchers in higher education. Oireachtas Members have always received excellent briefing from the staff of Science Foundation Ireland. They provide us with wonderful insights into the activities of Crann or Tyndall in Cork and various centres of excellence and research around the country. The recent publication of Agenda 2020 outlines how Science Foundation Ireland will strategically reflect the research prioritisation developed under Jim O'Hara, the former chief executive officer of Intel. It will focus on delivering ideas and developing internationally recognised research centres. Ireland has been very successful in that area. It will ensure that researchers trained by Science Foundation Ireland will be employed in industry. Professor Ferguson stated that the emphasis will be on research with impact. That is the same kind of language used by the Minister of State. There is a need for applied research as well as basic research in order to leverage a result and an application from the various forms of research. There has been much debate in the media between scientists and researchers. Blue-sky thinking is needed. For the benefit of society, basic research needs to be turned into real applications. The Minister of State will chair and steer an implementation group which will give him the flexibility to implement change, where necessary.

The research prioritisation steering group produced its report a year ago. Times have changed in the past ten years with regard to the type of work and research. The research group identified 14 priority areas. Four criteria were required to be fulfilled: a global market needed to exist in which Irish-based enterprise could compete; public research and development in Ireland is required to exploit the opportunity; strength in research disciplines; and the existence of a national or global challenge to which Ireland could respond. The report of the expert group outlined a number of priority areas which are acknowledged as critical, including medical devices, health and independent living, diagnostics, therapeutics, food for health, sustainable food production, smart grids, manufacturing competitiveness, process technologies, innovation and services and business process. The group did excellent work which has provided a format for future progress.

The Minister of State referred to the work of IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland. In 2002 more than 40% of job announcements by IDA Ireland had been in companies with links to Science Foundation Ireland research teams. This equates to 4,000 jobs. The links with higher education and Science Foundation Ireland have been invaluable for IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland in their efforts to attract foreign direct investment and in developing indigenous industries. The emphasis will be on turning research into marketable products or services and this is welcome.

The promotion of science, technology, engineering and maths was formerly the work of the discover science and engineering programme. The budget in this area has been reduced, but the area is showing dividends in that more students are taking these subjects in last year's leaving certificate with a subsequent uptake at third level.

The Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation published a report on this area. It recommended that industry could fund and support research because it would be to the benefit of industry. I thank the Minister of State for introducing a Bill which is a step along the way in the funding of research.

I welcome the Minister of State. As Senator Clune said, it is a most important topic. We need the reforms which the Minister of State is proposing, but we need to stay flexible. He referred to the need to fund applied research in addition to basic research and the need to promote awareness of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The 2003 Act specifies the areas of information and communications technology, and biotechnology. The 2008 Act added the areas of sustainable energy and energy-efficient technologies. As Senator Clune said, the committee decided on the 14 priority areas.

It is interesting to reflect that after the first stages of ten and five years, it is rational to ask - although some of the people involved might be annoyed with us - whether Ireland plans to do anything in the area of sustainable energy. If the current price of energy does not make us make use of it, what is the point of having a research programme? The same applies with regard to energy-efficient technologies. One of the reasons for the price advantage of Ryanair over other airlines is that its fleet is much younger. Mr. Boeing does that for us; the rising price of aviation fuel is factored into the design of aircraft. It is right to ask these questions.

What surprised me in some of the recent debates about contracts of indefinite duration was that some people thought that when, as it were, the soft money for research ran out they were guaranteed a job for life. They could be facing some trouble in that regard. We should have flexibility, including perhaps the blue-sky research to which people refer. Perhaps 10% could be kept for blue-sky research. We have national priorities also. Perhaps the national priorities such as the two I mentioned should be a rolling scheme whereby we could have 14 priorities but reserve the right to drop two of them every year. That would keep it moving. Otherwise there is a danger that, as one researcher put it to me, one is taking a form book that might be ten years out of date to spend money up to five years hence. The form book is not a bad reference because, as the cliché has it, one is picking winners. However, one is using a very old form book and the race is not due for another number of years; therefore, that flexibility is necessary.

I will be a little self-indulgent in referencing section 4 which provides that the Minister prescribes "strategic" areas. I propose that the word "strategic" be dropped from Irish public administration. It does not appear to mean anything at this stage. Where it means "important", that is fine. Wondering what it meant, I looked up the definition in the dictionary. Among the definitions was: "designed to disorganise the enemy's internal economy and to destroy morale". When I hear people at universities use the word "strategic" I know it is time to bail out. The word has definitely been associated with more nonsense than average.

We needed to do this because an bord snip nua was quite caustic in this regard. It found that scientists and engineers are always interested in inputs and have not the slightest interest in outputs. In fact, the group wrote in 2009 that it was strongly of the view that substantial reductions in funding were warranted, given the significant amounts invested to date, the lack of verifiable economic benefits resulting from the investment and the inflationary impact of funding on research and administration salaries. It pointed out that administering the scheme involved more than 200 staff in the seven universities, costing over €16 million per annum. That is just guys filling in pieces of paper. That reference is on pages 68 and 69 of the report by an bord snip nua. There was a view that it was almost ungentlemanly to ask - even if it is wonderful for the people involved - if they actually did anything that made any difference to the outside world. Keeping it flexible and facing up to people who feel seriously insulted when one asks them what the results of their research were should be par for the course.

We all appreciate the value of this system. One correspondent wrote to me that, while arguing against his own interests did not affect himself, a range of science and engineering disciplines, including social and health sciences, have been at the margins of Irish research and innovation policy for decades. We should not leave people out. It is not always the people who shout the loudest who should get the money. There is a bias in favour of STEM - science, technology, engineering and mathematics - but that is not by any means the full complement of knowledge in the universities. The AHSS - arts, humanities and social sciences - subjects have been marginalised. That seriously distorts the resource allocation within universities. They are areas of knowledge, and that is very important.

The downside is the loss of interest by some of the recipients of funds in giving lectures. The basic assumption of universities is that those of 18 years and older from this country, whose taxpayer parents pay for the universities, should see the important people. I have a document that states one can use this money to buy out one's lecturing. Why would I buy it out? That is why I went there. I attended Trinity College Dublin in which all the senior people gave lectures to first years. They regarded that as their basic duty. However, I encountered some people who, when I asked them if they gave any lectures, replied "My career is currently not teaching-centric." In fact, universities are teaching-centric. One owes that duty. Where is the next generation of scientists, engineers and economists to come from if the top people are off working on very large grants and avoiding contact?

The excess bureaucracy problem is mentioned by an bord snip nua. It is also mentioned by the Royal Irish Academy. It says reforms are needed in the delivery of our research budget and suggests that we tailor government practices to individual institutions; protect and foster academic freedom; reduce bureaucracy; create and implement sophisticated validation methods; place academic practice and community centre stage; and promote sensitive participative management practices.

The Minister of State should look at the 14 priorities, one of which is more efficient business. If somebody runs his or her business more efficiently, his or her profit increases. Is some of the pleading by Irish enterprises for the Minister to spend more money due to the fact that their opposite numbers in the United States fund fellowships and scholarships for students? Is this just an imitation of the Irish Farmers' Association by multinational firms wanting to reduce their research budgets by transferring them to the Minister? They are quite good at getting tax breaks also, as people have mentioned. There has to be a different type of enterprise by enterprises and I look forward to much more funding and co-funding of research by industry.

The Minister of State mentioned Shannon Airport. I attended the meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications at which there was a discussion with the new chairman of Shannon Airport. The Commission for Aviation Regulation said in 2003 that Shannon Airport was massively over-manned. If it is to make itself an attractive airport in the way the Minister of State envisages, it must deal with its labour productivity. Its capital productivity was not up to much either.

This is an interesting area. My ability to respond is limited by long hours - the Seanad works until 6 a.m. The Minister of State is going in the right direction, but he should not lock himself into rigid models because it is very hard to predict where the best research will be. He must look beyond those who have grown used to large funds to the very able people elsewhere in universities where some small investment could be worthwhile. He should also keep it flexible outside the system of 14 priorities. Some of the 14 might already be redundant, but we can discuss that matter further on Committee Stage.

I welcome the Minister of State. It is always good to have him here. I also thank him for his positive comments about Senators' contributions this morning on the Order of Business. I will remind him of his words and seek his support when the referendum on the Seanad comes before the people.

In March 2012 the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Richard Bruton, launched the Government's plan to target the majority of the core €500 million budget that the State spends on scientific research every year on areas with the greatest potential for economic return. That sum is a very considerable amount of money and in today’s economic climate it is vital that the return on this investment is as high as possible, particularly in terms of job provision. Scientific research is the means by which new knowledge can be adopted by enterprise, woven into high-value goods and services and then exported to the world market. That is all good news for the economy and it is the reason investment in research continues to be a priority for the Government. In trying to ensure the State gets as much return as possible for the large amount invested, the Bill is part of a series of changes being put in place, including a research prioritisation exercise, a one-stop shop for commercialising research and a new strategy from SFI which aims to become the best science funding agency in the world.

The main focus of the Bill is on extending the remit of SFI. Established under the Industrial Development Act 2003, the foundation provides grants for researchers and research groups based in higher education institutions. The Bill will expand its remit to include applied research, with the objective of increasing the potential for turning the ideas generated into products, services and jobs. There is a gap in this area which needs to be filled in order that ideas generated by research can be further supported and developed by organisations such as Enterprise Ireland and IDA Ireland. In 2012 more than 40% of IDA Ireland job announcements, representing more than 4,000 jobs, were in companies with research links to SFI research teams.

Since the establishment of SFI in 2003, the level of scientific research taking place in Ireland has grown to world class status.

The Government announced last March that it would refocus public research spending on 14 areas with the greatest potential for creating jobs and growth, and the director general of SFI, Professor Mark Ferguson, has supported this. He was much quoted this morning. He sees it as a way of leaning towards targeted research instead of having an emphasis on blue-sky or basic research, which has been the focus in recent years. However, within these 14 areas there will be ample room for basic and applied research. Concerns have been voiced by scientists that funding for basic research will be harder to acquire, but the experts say there is not a real divide between basic and applied research. It is a continuum where one feeds into the other. Without knowledge application, nobody benefits. Without new knowledge generation, there is no application.

Not only will requests to SFI for funding have to be scientifically excellent; they must also clearly describe the potential impact of the science in an economic, social or environmental context. The 14 priorities put a strong focus on life sciences and information technology as well as innovation in manufacturing, services and business processes. This year, SFI will allocate more than €150 million in funding for research and by 2015, 100% of funding from the foundation will be focused on these 14 areas. The Bill also includes a function for SFI in the promotion of science, technology, engineering and maths. The responsibility for the administration of the programme on discovering science and engineering, which was under the remit of Forfás, has been transferred to the foundation. This will promote a positive attitude to careers in science, technology, engineering and maths and promote greater understanding by the public of their importance.

Another important element of the Bill is that it will allow SFI to broaden its scope beyond the State, allowing it to provide direct funding for institutions in Northern Ireland and to have the possibility of entering into cost-sharing arrangements with international partners. Currently, SFI's participation in these schemes is restricted due to the 2003 Act and Irish researchers are potentially missing out on additional funding. It is important for Ireland, through SFI, to be ready to participate in international programmes in areas where we have research strengths when the opportunities arise. Sharing development and operational costs also makes sense because of the increasing cost of scientific and engineering infrastructure. Ireland must have the facility to contribute to such infrastructure in order that we, in turn, can benefit from the research investment made by other states.

Ireland has come a long way in terms of scientific research. We are now ranked third in the world for immunology research, sixth in nanotechnology and eighth in materials science. The legislation will ensure the groundwork done over the years will be built on by better targeting of State resources. Translating the results of high-class research into marketable goods and services is the challenge for the future. I congratulate the Minister of State and his team for their hard work in preparation for the Bill, which I commend to the House.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and the opportunity to discuss the role of research in contributing to knowledge in the economy. Even though it has a number of concerns, my party will not oppose the Bill. The Minister of State will see the concerns as genuine and may be able to address them in his response. I recognise that the Government has safeguarded, to an extent, funding for research, while other public services have experienced severe cuts. I give credit to the Minister of State where it is due in that regard. The legislation will allow us to maximise the money spent.

The role of research in a modern economy is crucial. A strong research and development sector is an essential part of a modern knowledge economy. The future sustainability of the economy will be based on research and development of skills, knowledge and products. Therefore, Sinn Féin is supportive of the measure and recognises that the responsibility for this goes beyond the role of SFI and the third level institutions, although they unquestionably have a vital role.

It is striking that one of the areas of development is computer technology and the Internet. However, computer studies is not a core subject for schools or included among subjects for the junior certificate and leaving certificate examinations. I have raised these matters on many occasions at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. The Government should give serious consideration to this point.

I also support the extension of the role of SFI to support applied research. It is undoubtedly welcome. We are also very much of the view that a balance must be struck. To some degree, we are concerned that the focus on applied research may undermine the work in oriented basic research. One scientist claims that the work of Peter Higgs in identifying the particle that has become known as the Higgs boson might not have been supported if the focus was solely on applied research, as commercial interest at the time would have been limited. Pure mathematics, which is the starting point for many of the areas of applied research, may not be supported to the degree it should be. I ask the Minister of State how he intends to maintain a balance between the oriented basic approach and applied research. This is essential to ensure the long-term nature of research is not lost to the short-term return.

At the release of the research prioritisation plan, Jim O'Hara, the chairman of the steering group, called for the delivery of specific economic outcomes from investment in research. To date, the Government's economic plans have been short on economic outcomes and targets. Our various jobs strategies, the same proposals and investments reheated and re-promoted, have failed to deliver the jobs we need in any real way. Will the Minister of State outline how we will measure the success of investment in research? Will SFI monitor patent applications, jobs created, the value of the product and the benefits that will accrue from it?

I acknowledged that not all investment in applied research transfers to productivity and product. However, as much it does, we should seek to measure it. Questions must be asked. How will the Government ensure the State is not subsidising investment without a return? How will the Minister of State safeguard a return for public investment? Will SFI look for an equity stake? Will it seek a return on investments made? Will it retain ownership of patents?

Under section 4 of the Bill, SFI also gets additional responsibility for the promotion and support of awareness of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Given the lack of facilities in schools and the lack of computer science at junior certificate and leaving certificate level, how does the Minister of State see this being supported and rolled out within the existing SFI budget?

Under section 5, we welcome recognition of the need for partnerships with institutions and researchers in the North. More could be done to promote cross-Border research partnerships. I would like to hear the view of the Minister of State on how this can be further developed.

I am concerned and perplexed at the inclusion of section 8. It differs entirely from the remainder of the Bill and refers to the Government proposals to change the remit of Shannon Development. A separate and comprehensive Bill should have been developed on this matter for the full consideration of the Oireachtas. This should have been debated on its merits, which would have been a preferable way to enact legislation. I give the Bill a qualified welcome, but I have some concerns. Given the day that is in it, a qualified welcome is the best I can do.

I am very grateful.

I must declare an interest at the outset. While I derive no income or funds from SFI, I am the leader of a consortium funded by SFI which will be in receipt of approximately €7.5 million worth of research funds over a five-year period. This has enabled us to build a unique nationwide consortium of cancer researchers working together to try to deal with the inconsistencies of a country that has a relatively small population but a relatively large number of academic institutions.

The leadership SFI provided in that regard was simply irreplaceable.

Let me proselytise for one second. As the Minister of State knows, science is not a pursuit carried out by eggheads in white coats with thick glasses. Science is knowledge; it is the language of the universe. We are all doing it every day of our lives. Our discoveries that fire is hot, that things fall down rather than up and that, as a baby, one should not go near stairs are all manifestations of the scientific process. I am a very firm believer in the necessity for democracies to have scientifically informed and sophisticated populations.

History is replete with examples of where a lack of knowledge of science was quickly plugged with ignorance. In certain circumstances, that ignorance was harnessed with very negative and anti-social consequences. I do not want to invoke Godwin's law, but I must mention the fact that the large and successful totalitarian states of the 20th century such as the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had at their core a willingness to subjugate the truth of science to ideological fervour. A famous case arose in the Soviet Union on foot on the now discredited genetic theories of a gentleman called Lysenko, whose crackpot theories on plant genetics were such that he was single-handedly responsible for several of the union's large famines. We do not have to go into detail about the crackpot ideological theories used by the Nazis to justify their wars of racial superiority and extermination.

Worryingly for a sophisticated country such as the United States, it has in the past 12 months seen evidence of the consequences of a lack of scientific knowledge. There are reports that perhaps as many as 50% of Americans believe dinosaurs and humans coexisted during the mere 6,000 years in which they believe our universe has existed. We have heard a US politician state rape could not result in pregnancy owing to a false understanding of biology. We have heard others state evolution is a lie from the pit of hell.

There is no doubt that it is good for society to be scientifically informed. I was delighted to see in SFI's strategic report such a heavy emphasis on curriculum development and the placement of science at the centre of society, commerce, etc.

The economists have criticised scientists, with whom I align myself loosely. I do a little scientific research, but I am primarily a clinician. The economists have criticised scientists for focusing on inputs rather than outputs. Let us for one second consider the relative outputs that have occurred in the past two centuries of science and economics. Scientists have worked out how to have clean water, how the universe and gravity work and how to free us from the shackles of gravity such that we can fly. They have given us information technology, conquered many, if not most, infectious diseases and have gone a long way towards curing cancer and understanding the basis of circulatory disease. They have increased life expectancy. In most western countries with access to the fruits of science life expectancy has increased from approximately 30 years to 75. There is a long way to go, but we have done well. During the past two centuries apparently no two economists agreed on anything. Economics schools may follow von Hayek, Friedman, Keynes, Marx or Adam Smith, but they might as well be talking about different disciplines. I mentioned this morning that if doctors were as consistent as economists, one doctor might say one should have an operation, while another, giving a second opinion, might say one should become an opera star. At least, the scientific method produces consistency.

Why should we conduct research and support science? Knowledge is good in its own right. If there was nothing else, having knowledge would be better than having none, as knowledge leads to tangible benefits. All the advances we have made in technology and health care, for example, have come from somebody's scientific discoveries five or, ultimately, 400 years ago. The pursuit of knowledge is good and has many collateral benefits. It increases the quality of education and training and what people do in the health service and the manufacturing sector.

Knowledge delivers enormous economic benefits. We are not blessed with considerable natural resources in Ireland, but we can ensure good leveraging of our national intelligence and skills base. SFI has been a great success. I was out of the country from 1985 until 1993. I became very involved in trying to set up research activities when I returned and have noted that the changes in the past decade, since SFI has been on the scene, have been colossal. In stark contrast with most other State agencies, SFI is highly effective. It is highly efficient and has a very good management structure. It believes in attracting the best international experts to assess what should be funded. If a project is good, it is funded and we get out of the way. We come back a couple of years later and ask for the report card and whether the job has been done. SFI does not micro-manage, which is the reason science in Ireland has accelerated to such an extraordinary degree in the past decade. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" - SFI is working well.

The idea of incentivising applied research while still holding basic research in esteem is valid. The distinction is blurring as time passes. Certainly in cancer care, concepts that once appeared incredibly philosophical and abstract have actually been translated into treatments in relatively short periods. Research that seemed very basic has actually become very applied to the real benefit of patients. Ireland, importantly, has had some role in this and other areas, principally immunology.

This is the wrong time to give anything other than a great message of support. We had a country that deluded itself into believing we could all get rich by selling one another houses and that we needed vast numbers operating in a regulatory capacity to try to build an economy. What we really need to do as we rebalance and reformat the economy is ensure there is a strong, technical engineering and scientific sector. The job SFI has done and will continue to do will aid in the process.

I genuinely thank every Member who has contributed to the debate. I will respond as best I can and some very valid points have been raised. If I do not respond to all of them, I will be happy to respond again on another day, with the permission of the House.

Let me begin with the dialogue that has emerged on basic research as opposed to applied research. It has been said we cannot take the foot off the pedal with regard to basic research. The Higgs boson analogy is drawn upon regularly, but it is somewhat tired at this stage. To be blunt, it is normally informed by those who have not really read the fine print. There is no danger that we will take the foot off the pedal in funding basic research. We must provide context. On 25 January SFI announced a fund worth €60 million covering basic research, computer-assisted neurosurgery, animation, inflammatory diseases, hepatitis C, ICT, tissue engineering, chemistry, biofilms, microbiology, carbon sequestration, farm waste for bioenergy, etc. It is incorrect to imply we are taking the foot off the pedal in this regard. The remit of SFI is very clear. It is important, however, that when the country is going through a period of economic turmoil, we seek to ensure taxpayers' money is invested to achieve the greatest societal and economic outputs. That is what we were trying to achieve. Advancing the remit of SFI is part of what I call the stage-gate process.

We acknowledge the role of Dr. Harris and previous Governments in this area. It is an apolitical space. It is a space in which the only differences of emphasis might pertain to whether one funds, with taxpayers' money, basic or applied research. In the past ten or 15 years emphasis was placed on building capacity, human capital and putting bricks and mortar in place through the programme for research in third level institutions. It is now a question of being in the top ten in the areas I outlined in my opening remarks. It is a question of recognising that we must now move to a new stage of excellence. We must not take the foot off the pedal; rather, we must prioritise the relevant areas.

It must be remembered that funding for Science Foundation Ireland is approximately €150 million. The Higher Education Authority budget is approximately €1.02 billion. Senator Clune spoke about the 14 key areas of research prioritisation. I chair the prioritisation action group whose purpose is to provide action plans for the key areas of priority in order that we can fund those areas and bring industry engagement into new areas of opportunity to maximise economic and societal output. We must bear in mind that the budget line for the 14 areas is approximately €440 million. There is a large tranche of money available for research from other sources.

I agree with Senator Barrett that we must have a degree of flexibility. That is why as the Minister of State with responsibility for research, I am leading a conversation whose end point is a well rounded view of the landscape such that the Irish Research Council talks to Science Foundation Ireland, to the Health Research Board and the HEA and that everybody is moving in one direction with consensus. We can then ensure that there is flexibility built into the system such that we find mechanisms or small pots of money to fund the perceived outliers who are doing niche, blue-sky or esoteric research which is no less important to, and legitimate in, our society. Impact is the key factor. We no longer fund for the sake of funding but on the basis that the people in those areas can prove that there is an impact, whether economic or societal.

That does not exclude the basic research scientists. For example, I do not think there is an over-emphasis on funding stem cell research, but we must ensure we fund science, technology, engineering and mathematics in a way that ensures we have a throughput starting at primary level to bring a cadre of young bright Irish minds to fuel the tertiary sector. That is in line with SFI's Agenda 2020 document whose philosophy and vision is that Ireland becomes one of the best countries in the world at achieving excellence.

May I interrupt for one second?

I am over time.

No, the Minister of State is not over time. He has three minutes left. The Minister of State with responsibility for Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy McGinley, is coming for the Adjournment debate and it seems that all Ministers received a text message asking them to be in the Dáil Chamber to hear a statement by the Taoiseach. Can the Minister of State, please, finish in three minutes?

Yes.

In respect of stem cell research, it is important to recognise the importance of science, technology, engineering and mathematics. We must take the recent TIMSS and PIRLS exercise which showed that we are doing well on literacy and are above average on mathematics and science subjects at primary level. This was extrapolated from fourth class students. It is vital that we make a greater investment in continuing professional development in that area.

With regard to pure mathematics, I find it interesting that people raise this point when there is a clear public record and proof that in the last round of SFI funding we gave more than €2 million to MSSI at the University of Limerick for the examination of pure mathematics. We are covering all the bases. We are still in a period of transition but we are mindful that we are not going to be too hemmed in about how we approach funding for science. I refer the Members to SFI's document about SFI research impact, published in January 2013. It asks what is meant by impact, impact and outputs and impact statements. It is a very good, clear, concise document explaining how impact will be measured and so on and so forth. I am happy to come back to the House to address the other points at a later stage.

The Minister of State will return to take Committee Stage of the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 12 February 2013.

When is it proposed to sit again?

At 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 12 February 2013.

Top
Share