I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Michael Ahern, and his officials. If this meeting has not concluded its business at 1.30 p.m., a further meeting will be arranged, by agreement.
Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Bill 2002 [Seanad]: Committee Stage.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
Amendments Nos. 1 and 4 are related and may be discussed together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 6, subsection (1), lines 11 and 12, to delete "means the Science Foundation Ireland established under" and substitute "has the meaning assigned to it by".
This is a drafting amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: "That section 2, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
Various people, particularly Deputy John Bruton in his Second Stage contribution, said it was the responsibility of the Oireachtas to define the objectives of Science Foundation Ireland. There is considerable research into the possibilities for addressing humanitarian problems. A television programme last night showed that the genetic revolution was the order of the day in the UK. Oriented basic research to enable the foundation to concern itself with research and promotional activities, which are not restricted to commercial gain, comes into the interpretation. Have these matters been considered? What is the role and responsibility of Science Foundation Ireland in non-profit focused issues?
The Deputy's point is relevant concerning commercialisation. The interpretation of "oriented basic research" was as recommended in the Technology Foresight report. In the long-term I believe the Deputy is referring to job creation following from basic research, which is important and of concern to us.
I shall come back to this issue on Report Stage.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 3 to 5, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 6.
Amendment No. 3 is an alternative to amendment No. 2. Amendments Nos. 18 and 19 are related. Amendment No. 19 is an alternative to amendment No. 18. It is proposed to take amendments Nos. 2, 3, 18 and 19 together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 7, subsection (1), line 22, after "as" to insert "Fondúireacht Eolaíochta Éireann or in the English language as".
The purpose is to include the correct Irish language Title in the Bill and I have no objection to whichever amendment is accepted.
I agree that an amendment is required. Science Foundation Ireland is already recognisable in Ireland and worldwide. We are anxious that the foundation should continue to be known by that name. Consequently my amendment No. 3 puts the English version first.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 7, subsection (1), line 22, after "Ireland" to insert "or, in the Irish language, Fondúireacht Eolaíochta Éireann".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 7, subsection (1), line 23, after "Act" to insert "and is referred to in this Act as the 'Foundation' ".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 6, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 7.
Amendments Nos. 5 and 7 are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 7, subsection (1), between lines 39 and 40, to insert the following:
"(c) keep under review, and make recommendations to the Minister on, the ethical implications of research in biotechnology and such other strategic areas of scientific endeavour as it considers appropriate,”.
These amendments will ensure the ethical implications of all findings in research are given serious consideration. The Bill contains no reference to the ethical consequences or implications of any of the findings that might arise from scientific research that might be carried out. Deputy Hogan has already alluded to this point. This is particularly important in biotechnology and the developments in genetic engineering, stem cell research, genetic engineering, aspects of microbiology, etc. There should be a significant recognition of the ethical implications of developments that might arise.
I support Deputy Upton's remarks. There are concerns about ethical issues in science today. This section makes no mention of the foundation being required to adhere to a high standard of ethics in the performance of its functions. I ask the Minister to support Deputy Upton's amendment in that context.
I do not accept the amendment. The Minister for Health and Children has a lead role in ethics and set up a commission on assisted human reproduction in March 2000 to prepare a report on the possible approaches to the regulation of all areas of assisted human reproduction and the social, ethical and legal factors to be taken into account when determining public policy in this area. It is expected that in autumn 2003 the commission will publish its report on the possible approaches for the regulation of this area. The commission's report should form the basis for informing public debate prior to the finalisation of any policy proposals. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to deal with the issue in this legislation.
The Irish Council for Bioethics was established in 2002 as an independent body under the auspices of the Royal Irish Academy to consider the ethical issues raised by developments in biotechnology. The council will identify and interpret the ethical questions raised by biological and medical research in order to respond to and anticipate questions of substantive concern, investigate and report on such questions in the interest of public understanding, inform discussion and education and stimulate discussion through conferences, workshops, lectures, published reports and where appropriate suggested guidelines. SFI has also adopted a code of ethics from the Health Research Board.
I would like to be assured that there will be some reference to ethics in this Bill, without which it is significantly weakened. While I accept the comments the Minister has made about the Irish Council for Bioethics and the commission on assisted human reproduction, it is important for this Bill to incorporate some reference to the ethical aspects of science and technology in the broader sense of biotechnology and in other areas also. I have a further amendment later.
The subsection refers to information and communications technologies, biotechnology and such other areas. However, those other areas have not been identified. It is possible there will be ethical implications for other areas of scientific research that would be relevant here, but might not be referenced within the commission on assisted human reproduction or the Irish Council for Bioethics.
Based on the comments of Deputy Upton, the Minister should consider this matter carefully. It is rather strange that the Minister for Health and Children, who is deemed to be responsible for this matter, has set up a commission that will report only in October, which will be too late given that this legislation will have completed its passage through the Houses of the Oireachtas. The Bill has significance for ethics in biotechnology. We need to pin down the definitions, objectives and ethics in this legislation and to be able to pre-empt what we want Science Foundation Ireland to do. For Report Stage, we should get some indication from the Department of Health and Children as to the likely outcome of any report that Department is likely to publish or any preliminary information available to it which might assist this committee and Science Foundation Ireland in terms of clarity as to its objectives and the ethical performance of its duties.
The commission on assisted human reproduction was set up in March 2000, not just lately.
It must have a great deal of information at this stage, in that case.
Exactly. It will report in the autumn of 2003, which is just a short time from now. The outcome of the deliberations of the commission and the Irish Council for Bioethics will not only cover this specific area but all relevant areas, such as Science Foundation Ireland and other scientific research areas. I believe that will be sufficient as SFI will be specifically included in the findings of those bodies.
Is the amendment being pressed?
Yes. It relates to a very important issue.
Amendment put.
The Committee divided: Tá, 4; Níl, 7.
Tá
- Hogan, Phil.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- Murphy, Gerard.
- Upton, Mary.
Níl
- Ahern, Michael.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Wilkinson, Ollie.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 7, subsection (1), between lines 39 and 40, to insert the following:
"(c) keep under review the implications of intellectual property law in so far as it affects strategic areas of scientific endeavour, and, where appropriate, make proposals to the Minister for the updating and amendment of intellectual property law in so far as it affects strategic areas of scientific endeavour,”.
This amendment seeks to ensure that intellectual property rights which arise from research are properly managed. This issue is sensitive and difficult from the perspective of ensuring that intellectual property rights are distributed fairly among those who rightly should have access to them. It is a complex matter, which is why it is extremely important that intellectual property rights be incorporated somewhere in the Bill. There must be an awareness of the significance of provisions in this regard.
I do not propose to accept the amendment. Any review to update or amend intellectual property provisions is a matter for the intellectual property unit of my Department. Any view the foundation might have in this would, of course, be considered by the unit. Ireland's legislation and policies regarding intellectual property rights have improved considerably in recent years to a point at which we are significantly in line with all EU and international obligations. This country is at the forefront of intellectual property protection provisions worldwide.
This is an important area and I would like to think we could address it again on Report Stage. The implications of this Bill are significant in terms of investment, apart from anything else. One hopes important scientific developments will result from its enactment. Accordingly, there will be major implications in respect of ownership of the knowledge which evolves. I would appreciate agreement from the Minister of State to refer again to the matter on Report Stage.
The issue of intellectual property rights is very important, but it applies to many agencies such as Enterprise Ireland and its spin off companies as well as to Science Foundation Ireland. It is important to provide for intellectual property rights in legislation which covers other areas also.
I support the views expressed by Deputy Upton. Under the old system, which operated according to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1963, copyright automatically meant that the invention of the product was invested in the person who commissioned the work. What changes have been made since the introduction of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000? As I understand it, the position has changed, which is why the ownership of rights, royalties and payments in respect of the foundation should be set out specifically in this Bill. It is possible confusion could arise about the ownership of inventions and patents. The State is investing a considerable amount of money in the establishment of Science Foundation Ireland in the equivalent of a public private partnership which will involve people who are in regular contact with a small number of colleagues around the world. It could mean that significant investment might be made elsewhere rather than in this jurisdiction. We need to protect intellectual property rights on behalf of the State to avoid a scenario in which taxpayers' funding might be invested in another jurisdiction ultimately.
Flexibility is needed in the Bill. The intellectual property resulting from any research programme shall vest in the research body. It will not be provided for by a catch-all reference to intellectual property in the Bill to establish Science Foundation Ireland. One cannot tie the matter down in this legislation as many research programmes will be carried out. Intellectual property will belong to those individual bodies which carry out the research. It will not attach to an overall umbrella organisation.
Do the Copyright and Related Rights Act and the Industrial Designs Act 2001 apply to Science Foundation Ireland?
The Copyright Act defines the ownership of properties, not the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland)Bill.
This amendment seeks to ensure that the implications of intellectual property law will be kept under review in so far as they affect scientific endeavour. Scientific endeavour and the outcome of scientific research can be different in terms of ownership from other forms of industrial development. It is important to treat intellectual property slightly differently in this instance. Special consideration should be given or an acknowledgement should be made in the Bill to ensure that intellectual property rights are recognised. The Minister of State seems to be contending that intellectual property will be owned by the scientific body which, if true, merits more substantial debate. I understood that information resulting from non-commissioned research would be made widely available to the greater scientific community. Can the Minister of State provide greater clarification in this regard?
The terms and conditions provide that ownership of intellectual property resulting from a research programme shall vest in the research body, subject to compliance by the research body with the requirements of the foundation. The Deputy seeks to have Science Foundation Ireland keep under review the implications of intellectual property. Enterprise Ireland has responsibility in the area of research, development and commercialisation. To tie the matter down as a function of Science Foundation Ireland would be restrictive.
This a fundamental issue of the ownership of property rights.
Yes, under the Copyright Act, which is the reason Science Foundation Ireland does not have responsibility for the matter, nor should it assume this responsibility.
The problem with this policy is that a third party company offered a contract with Science Foundation Ireland may take exception to a contractual term of this nature and may choose not do business. On the other hand, a dispute over intellectual property rights may arise. If these are vested in the company, will the researcher or Science Foundation Ireland or another person or entity have overall control on patent and royalties attached to the invention in question? The State could find itself exposed to considerable outlay if we do not copperfasten the ownership of and responsibility for the intellectual property rights in this legislation.
If the State is investing significant resources in a company which will add considerably to the knowledge based global economy we want to develop, the least we should expect is that it receives a return on its investment. The looseness by which we are trying to facilitate Science Foundation Ireland could expose the State to the loss of millions of euro in due course.
I am surprised the Bill does not provide a definition of intellectual property rights. We are relying on old legislation to address the matter. It would be worthwhile to resolve the issue now rather than exposing the State to problems in the future. The objectives and definitions of everybody concerned should be clear and correct from the outset in order to avoid confusion about contractual obligations entered into in due course between individuals or companies with Science Foundation Ireland arising due to a failure to define precisely where their intellectual property rights ultimately rest.
Information on the way in which intellectual property is to be handled and the terms and conditions which will apply is available on the website of Science Foundation Ireland. As everyone involved in research and development is aware that the information they require is available, no one is working in the dark. Everyone concerned is aware of the terms and conditions relating to the ownership of intellectual property and details of same are available to the public on the foundation's website. Those working in that area know where to find it. Science Foundation Ireland does not operate in a black hole or vacuum.
On the contrary, the world looks to Ireland for the most up-to-date intellectual property law.
That is not the point.
It is vital that this information be incorporated in the Act. It is not good enough to say it is available on the Internet as publication on a website does not give it any status, except for those people who bother to consult it for their own particular reasons, which may not always be those we wish to have incorporated in the legislation. I have in mind areas such as the genetic modification of foodstuffs, which has significant ethical implications and implications for intellectual property rights. We are not asking that the legislation interpret intellectual property rights, but that it keeps under review the implications for scientific endeavour and its outcomes. It is important this is written into the Act.
The issue is not one of information, but of ownership. We know Ireland has a good image with regard to scientific development. Who will retain exclusive ownership and rights attached to any particular invention?
The terms and conditions of the contracts agreed between Science Foundation Ireland and contracted parties will set out in detail who will retain rights and ownership.
Is the amendment being pressed?
Yes.
Amendment put.
The Committee divided: Tá, 4; Nil, 7.
Tá
- Hogan, Phil.
- Upton, Mary.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- Murphy, Gerard.
Níl
- Ahern, Michael.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Wilkinson, Ollie.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 8, lines 15 to 22, to delete subsection (3) and substitute the following:
"(3) In this section 'strategic areas of scientific endeavour' means such areas as in the opinion of the Foundation are strategic areas of scientific endeavour and in particular includes information and communication technologies, biotechnology and such other areas that concern economic and social benefit, long-term industrial competitiveness or environmentally sustainable development as may be prescribed from time to time by the Minister.".
The Act refers in particular to biotechnology and information technology, and while these areas are very important I have no doubt they will change and evolve over time. It is quite restrictive to isolate two such areas and not include others. Therefore, the purpose of this amendment is to broaden the base of the strategic areas of scientific endeavour included under the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act 2002 to accord a higher priority rating to other such areas, sooner rather than later.
Is the amendment being pressed?
I would like the opportunity to raise this matter again on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 8:
In page 8, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following subsection:
"(5) A directive given under subsection (4) shall be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas as soon as may be after it is made and if a resolution of either such House is passed annulling the directive within 21 sitting days thereafter, it shall be annulled accordingly but without prejudice to anything previously done thereunder.".
This amendment is to ensure that the Houses of the Oireachtas have control and that any development or information worthy or their attention is laid before them. It is somewhat related to the subject alluded to by Deputy Hogan.
I do not propose to accept this amendment. Directives such as that proposed will normally relate to ongoing matters and I do not think it either necessary or efficient that the Minister has to lay every directive before the Oireachtas. Any major policy change to the functions of the foundation would require to be prescribed by the Minister under paragraph 3(c) of this section.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 7 agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Amendments Nos. 9 and 11 are related and may be discussed together, by agreement.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 8, line 28, to delete subsection (3).
It is a matter of opinion whether one believes a chief executive should be part of the board. I have served on State boards that have had chief executives as members and on State boards that have not. Sometimes, if a chief executive is part of a board, it puts him or her in a difficult position. It might be better if there were a more hands-off approach on the part of the chief executive.
I see relatively few advantages in having the chief executive on the board of the foundation, but he or she may disagree with me in that respect. I am not referring to the current circumstances that obtain in the foundation - the current regime is in place and is working very well.
I do not propose to accept the amendment. The provision that the director general should be a member of the board is in line with other industrial development legislation setting up Forfás, Enterprise Ireland and the IDA. As with any other issue where a conflict of interest might arise with a board member relating to the topic to be discussed, the director general can absent himself or herself from that discussion.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 8 agreed to.
SECTION 9.
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 9, lines 45 to 47, to delete subsection (11) and substitute the following:
"(11) At least 5 of the members of the Board shall be women and at least 5 shall be men.".
I am sure I will have lots of support for this amendment. I am concerned that as it currently stands, the Bill is rather weak in terms of ensuring gender balance. We have arrived at a stage where there should be no difficulty in ensuring that at least five of the board members should be women and five should be men. I am concerned if this section stands that it will leave a loophole and make it easy not to make the effort to find suitable, well-qualified women. I assure the Minister of State that such women are widely available in the science area.
While my three daughters, all of whom study science, might give out to me over it, I do not propose to accept this amendment. Appointment to the board will be made on the basis of relevant experience and skills. I do not feel we have to insert a quota into the legislation. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment will take the views expressed into account in selecting the best available individuals to serve on this important board.
Is the amendment being pressed?
Based on reports and data that have been presented to us in the last few days relating to representation of women on State boards, I feel it appropriate that there should be an acceptance that it is possible to find five suitably qualified women, as well as five suitably qualified men, to serve on this board. We may have to refer back to Deputy O'Dea to ensure this takes place. I strongly feel that this should be incorporated.
Unfortunately I will not be able to accept the amendment. Personally, I feel that qualified men and women should be appointed on the basis of their qualifications.
I would like to be able to raise this on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 9 agreed to.
Sections 10 to 12, inclusive, agreed to.
Amendment No. 11 not moved.
Section 13 agreed to.
SECTION 14.
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 12, lines 23 to 26, to delete subsection (2).
This is a drafting amendment.
I do not propose to accept the amendment. This is now a standard provision in this type of legislation. Ministers are answerable to Parliament for policy while the function of the director general is to carry out such policies. While the director general is responsible for the day to day management of the foundation, including accounts etc., it would not be appropriate for him or her to question or express an opinion on any Government policy when appearing before an Oireachtas committee. Of course, this does not mean that the director general would not be free to express his or her opinion to the Minister.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 13:
In page 12, subsection (3), line 30, after "and" to insert "the Foundation".
This is a drafting amendment.
I accept the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 14, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 15 and 16 agreed to.
SECTION 17.
I move amendment No. 14:
In page 14, between lines 45 and 46, to insert the following subsection:
"(5) The Third Schedule to the Freedom of Information Act 1997 is amended by inserting in Part I at the end thereof:
(a) in the second column of “Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act 2003”, and
(b) in the third column of “section 17(1).”.
This refers to freedom of information. This precedent in the Taxi Regulation Bill 2003 provides for the facilitation of the application of the Freedom of Information Act to the foundation.
I do not propose to accept this amendment. This provision can be effected by a statutory instrument under the Freedom of Information Act 1997. It is the view of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel that it is undesirable in the interests of protecting the integrity of the Statute Book to apply the Freedom of Information Act by primary legislation when a mechanism exists for doing so by way of secondary legislation. I will request the relevant Department to make the necessary order as soon as this Bill is enacted.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 17 agreed to.
Sections 18 and 19 agreed to.
SECTION 20.
If amendment No. 15 is agreed,No. 16 cannot be moved as it is an alternative. Amendments Nos. 15 and 16 can be taken together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 15:
In page 16, subsection (1), lines 2 and 3, to delete "the Industrial Development (Science Foundation Ireland) Act 2003” and substitute “section 34”.
We are advised by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel that this reference is preferable to the reference proposed by the Deputy.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 16 not moved.
Section 20, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 21 to 23, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 24.
Question proposed: "That section 24 stand part of the Bill."
This section does not explicitly impose a time limit on the foundation for the submission of an annual report. The section uses the words "after the end of the financial year" and this could be next week or the week after that. When is the end of the financial year?
It is December.
Is this the standard provision now?
Yes.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 25.
Question proposed: "That section 25 stand part of the Bill."
All Members are conscious of the difficulties in getting replies to parliamentary questions and accountability to the Oireachtas from any independent agencies. One cannot get accountability from the National Roads Authority or any independent agency by way of parliamentary question. I do not think legislation should be enacted that does not allow Deputies to get answers to questions, except by bringing people before the PAC. We allow this to happen all too often.
The Minister of State should look carefully at this section on Report Stage to enable the Minister to furnish comprehensive replies to questions on Science Foundation Ireland. We should have an appropriate forum for accountability to the Oireachtas. Most Deputies are frustrated when they cannot get answers to questions - I am thinking of the National Roads Authority in particular. If we want to question the Minister about this we are told he does not have responsibility for it.
I am not saying this will happen under Science Foundation Ireland but, as a general principle, I feel strongly about accountability to the Oireachtas in respect of all these agencies. We do not have it at the moment. Will the Minister of State consider a provision on Report Stage?
The director general can come before the committee to answer questions.
I know that, but one must be a member of the committee or substituted for. That is not as accountable as is the case under a parliamentary question. I do not think too many questions will be tabled about this agency once it is established. However, as a general principle, it would be desirable.
What kind of detail would the Deputy recommend?
I can clearly state that the ingenuity of Department officials with their replies never ceases to astound me.
Would questions such as why a grant form did not issue to John Murphy down the road need to be answered?
We can write to Science Foundation Ireland directly and, depending on the efficiency of the officials, they could write back quickly. However, that is not always the case.
I am sure that if the Deputy tables an amendment on Report Stage, the Tánaiste will give it due consideration.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 26 agreed to.
NEW SECTION.
I move amendment No. 17:
In page 18, before section 27, but in Part 2, to insert the following new section:
"27.-(1) The following shall be and are transferred to the Foundation on the establishment day-
(a) all property and rights held or enjoyed immediately before that day by the committee of Forfás established under section 10 of the Act of 1993 (as amended by section 46 of the Act of 1998) referred to pursuant to such establishment as Science Foundation Ireland, and
(b) all liabilities incurred by the committee of Forfás referred to in paragraph (a) before that day,
and accordingly, without any further conveyance, transfer or assignment-
(i) the said property, real and personal, shall on that day vest in the Foundation for all the estate, term or interest for which immediately before that day, it was so vested in the committee referred to in paragraph (a) but subject to all trusts and equities affecting the property subsisting and capable of being performed,
(ii) the said rights shall, as and from that day, vest in the Foundation, and
(iii) the said liabilities shall, as and from that day, be liabilities of the Foundation.
(2) All moneys, stocks, shares and securities transferred to the Foundation by this section that, on the establishment day, are standing in the name of the committee of Forfás referred to in subsection (1) or of any trustee or agent of such committee shall, on the request of the Foundation, be transferred into the name of the Foundation.
(3) Every right and liability transferred to the Foundation by this section may, on or after the establishment day, be sued on, recovered or enforced by or against the Foundation in its own name and it shall not be necessary for the Foundation to five notice to the person whose right or liability is transferred by this section of the transfer.
(4) Section 12 of the Finance Act 1895 shall not apply to the vesting in the Foundation of any property or right transferred by or under this section.".
Since the foundation was set up as a committee of Forfás, it has entered into grant agreements which involve the payments of grants in instalments over a period of time. This amendment allows the rights and obligations arising under these agreements to be transferred to the foundation when it is established as a statutory body. The provisions of the proposed new section are based on similar provisions in the Industrial Development (Enterprise Ireland) Act 1998.
Amendment agreed to.
Sections 27 to 36, inclusive, agreed to.
TITLE.
Amendment No. 18 not moved.
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 5, line 11, after "IRELAND" to insert "OR, IN THE IRISH LANGUAGE AS FONDÚIREACHT EOLAÍOCHTA ÉIREANN".
Amendment agreed to.
Title, as amended, agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.