I propose to take Questions Nos. 493, 494 and 504 to 511, inclusive, together.
The filling of the post in question was undertaken as part of a package of measures in the area of science co-ordination and oversight. In June 2004 the Government approved the putting in place of a Cabinet Sub-committee on Science, Technology and Innovation, STI, an interdepartmental committee for STI and the creation of the post in question — chief science adviser to the Government and the appointment of the current incumbent to it. The individual in question was returning from a position at director general level in the European Commission, having previously worked in a number of senior STI positions in the Irish public service.
The post was filled on the basis of the availability of the individual concerned and his track record in the development of science policy and programmes at national and European level and was not the subject of advertisement or competition. The nature of the position is such that no formal qualifications have been stipulated with the key criterion being a broad background in science, technology and innovation. The individual in question supplied a curriculum vitae prior to appointment detailing his experience and academic background including details of his qualifications and experience at graduate and postgraduate level — BSc, MSc and PhD. Following its publication on 9 October 2005, I am aware of the media report referred to which has raised issues in respect of the individual's PhD and the awarding institution. I have had a discussion with the individual concerned and I am examining the issues further.