Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 9 March 2017
112. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the safeguards that are in place to protect the intellectual property developed in third level institutions in the context of spin-out companies and other commercialisation of research; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12466/17]
View answer114. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if there is a legislative requirement on a shareholder of a spin-out company established by a third level institution who is also a member of the staff, board or governing body of the same institution to declare an interest in the shareholding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12468/17]
View answer115. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if it is a legal requirement that all third level institutions must have a policy governing the conflict of interest of members of staff, board members or members of a governing authority generally and more specifically in the case of spin-out companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12469/17]
View answer116. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if there is a legal framework in place to ensure that staff or those in paid positions of authority within third level institutions who have direct access to and knowledge of research and intellectual property of the third level institution are prevented from making personal gain through the sale or development of the research or intellectual property or through obtaining shareholdings in a company which subsequently profits from the sale or development of the research or intellectual property, if concerns have been raised with his Department in respect of issues of this nature; if a body within his Department has been tasked with oversight of the establishment of spin-out companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12470/17]
View answer118. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills if it is normal practice that paid members of staff of third level institutions would become shareholders of companies or other structures established to exploit the commercialisation of the research of the institution in which they are employed; if such shareholdings would be in conflict of interest of the position of employment within the institution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12472/17]
View answerAs a country, Ireland has invested significantly in building research capacity in strategic areas allied to industry needs. This includes investment in top quality researchers, physical infrastructure, equipment and structures to commercialise research.
Investment in research is key element of overall enterprise policy and seeks to drive innovation and competitiveness in business and the public sector and enable the creation of sustainable jobs. Higher education institutions are central to the delivery of this ambition.
In that context, the Deputy may already be aware that the national IP Protocol “Putting public research to work in Ireland” was developed by a task group comprised of leaders from industry, the investment community and TTOs in 2012. The new protocol built on earlier guidelines and codes of practice, using the lessons learned from their use.
In 2013 the Government established a centralised function with responsibility for technology transfer in the State which led to the creation of Knowledge Transfer Ireland, launched in May 2014. Knowledge Transfer Ireland (KTI) now has responsibility for setting direction for research performing organisations (RPOs) best practice to enable compliance with IP policy and procedures.
The publication of the national IP protocol in 2012, and its subsequent refresh in 2016, sought to establish policy and guidelines on the interactions between industry and Ireland’s Higher Education Institutes, including the treatment of intellectual property. It provides guidelines and sets expectations for the RPOs and for industry.
The national IP Protocol 2016 comprises two volumes:
- the National IP Protocol policy document which sets out the framework underpinning research collaboration and access to intellectual property from state-funded research
- the IP Protocol Resource Guide which provides an overview of the national IP management guidelines and links to resources and template documents, available for industry and RPOs. It also provides an overview of the knowledge transfer structures in Ireland and the kinds of agreements that can be used to formalise research-industry engagements.
The protocol explains the National IP Management Requirements and requires that RPOs have in place and operate internal IP management systems that meet or exceed these. The protocol also includes “good practice” that will normally be followed. However, industry and RPOs are free to adopt a different approach where this is in the best interests of successful relationships and research commercialisation. Practices are also highlighted that may be followed if industry / RPOs choose to do so.
The IP Protocol is a key reference source for Ireland’s HEIs and research funders. HEIs have developed IP policies that are in line with national guidelines and good practice. These will include policy on spin-out formation. The detail of policies will differ amongst institutions.
The research funding agencies for the publicly funded research system all require that the higher education institutions own the intellectual property arising from research projects that they fund. Each University and IoT has a set of policies that cover how they will govern the use of that IP.
The national IP Protocol explains that commercialisation may benefit HEIs and provide incentives to the researchers involved in creating IP. IP may include protectable IP and know-how. Furthermore, the national IP management requirements make provision for HEIs to have in place a system for sharing of income from commercialising within the organisation, including with relevant researchers.
It is international practice that researchers may hold shares in spin-out companies. The national IP Protocol makes it clear that HEIs should have policies and procedures in place that minimise or manage potential or actual conflicts of interest concerning the commercialisation of IP.
The IP Protocol (National IP Management Requirements) refers to conflict of interest as it applies to commercialisation of IP.
The national IP Protocol is clear on the policy and processes to identify, protect and commercialise IP that arises in HEIs. This includes guidance on licensing of IP. A suite of Model Agreements, available for use if HEIs and companies choose, covering a range of IP licensing scenarios is available on the KTI website.
In addition, all HEIs are requested yearly as part of their governance statements to state that a code of conduct for Governing Body members and a Code of Conduct for Employees have been adopted and are being monitored. Guidelines for these codes are included in the IOT and University Codes of Governance (section 3.2).
The University Code of Governance has been implemented since 2007 and was updated in 2012. A copy of the code is available here: http://www.hea.ie/sites/default/files/university_code_of_governance_2012.pdf.
The Institutes of Technology Code of Governance published in 2012 replaces an earlier document published in 2003: A copy of the code is available here:
http://www.hea.ie/sites/default/files/code_of_goverance_jan_2012final_updated_0.pdf.
At institutional level, the Code of Conduct for employees and members of governing authorises would include statements related to conflict of interest and outside employment.
For example, one institution policy states:
“Any employment, business or professional interest, including shareholdings, directorships, professional relationships and so forth that could involve a conflict of interest or could materially influence the member in relation to the performance of his/her functions as a member of the Authority. If, during the duration of his/her membership any new development on the lines outlined above transpires, the member should advise the Secretary.”
Implementation of the policies and procedures outlined above are a matter for the institutions in the first instance. My officials have been made aware that there is an internal review underway in one institution with a view to confirming that the institution’s interest had been appropriately represented and protected, all relevant policies, protocols and procedures had been complied with and satisfactory governance processes had been applied.
