Sir, - In his letter of November 6th, Fergus O Raghaillaigh berates you for using assertion in your leading article about the White Paper. However Mr O Raghaillaigh makes several assertions of his own throughout his letter. The association welcomes the White Paper as an honest attempt by the Minister's office to provide a starting point for the future development of STI in Ireland. They should be congratulated for doing this.
It is quite clear, and has been for many years, that science policy in Ireland has been made "on the hoof" with scant regard for the overall coherence of a national science and technology policy. The proof of this is in the large numbers of agencies, committees departments, boards, panels and councils that have a day to day dealing with S&T. The addition by the Minister of two more the new Interdepartmental Committee and the STI Council, and the addition of the new Food Safety Board by the Minister for Health is not an auspicious start. Bolting on new bits and pieces is not a solution in the absence of a single person to take ultimate responsibility for S&T as his or her primary brief. In short without a Minister for Science and Technology science policy will continue to take second place.
With an annual expenditure of almost a billion on S&T, second place is not sufficient. However, the most surprising aspect of this figure is the fact that only one per cent is ending up on research benches up and down the country. Scientists are concerned that the remaining 99 per cent is being spent by administrators with an incomplete understanding of research and development. The level of discretionary spending in this huge amount of money is entirely inadequate. If the present Government is serious about moving STI to the centre of economic development here, there needs to be, as a matter of some urgency, a redistribution to real research of this money.
The most productive place to invest this money is in the researchers in the third level. This is not idle chatter. The recent UK Treasury report and the Report of the Council of Economic Advisers, along with many others, have all quite independently come to the conclusion that the returns on, investment in basic research are, enormous. The estimated direct, economic returns are between 25 and 33 per cent. The estimated direct social returns are much higher, at about 70 per cent. Simply put, investment in basic research makes money and improves the lot of the entire society.
However basic research accounts for only one third of the research done in Irish colleges; the rest is applied in one form or another. In the light of this, it is deeply disappointing, but not surprising, to see that the third level, (source of more than 80 per cent of all research done in Ireland) is to be excluded from Forbairt's new research networks for indigenous Irish companies. Irish companies spend tiny amounts on research and development. Research and development are the key to maintaining their future competitiveness.
The EU estimates that industrial research networks involving fundamental laboratories are at least twice as successful as those that don't. Irish companies need to spend more on R&D and they need access to some of the best researchers in the world. Excluding Irish colleges from these networks is a bit like expecting the jockey to win the Grand National without a horse. It is unfortunate that the existing industrial research funds, the EU funded.
Measure 1 fund, carries no obligation to use local expertise nor to carry out the research in Ireland.
October 29th, the launch of the White Paper, was the time to come down off the fence and make concrete commitments to developing a strong, vibrant, creative and flexible innovation system, to set up the partnership between all the players, third level, industry, government. A bit like the way the Finns did it over the last 15 years. - Yours, etc,
Executive Secretary,
Irish Research Scientists'
Association, c/o 28 Sandyford Hall Park,
Kilgobbin Road, Dublin 18.