The government has made £560m available over the next seven years to build up Ireland's expertise in computing and in biotechnology to a world standard. The question is whether to spend the money building two new institutes with their own laboratory complexes or to use the cash to develop existing facilities in the third-level institutions.

It is also possible that the recommendations expected to be sent to Cabinet later this month by the Office for Science and Technology, within the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, may opt for a blend - with new institutes being built on a university campus.

The debate on the issue has been characterised by claims and counter-claims made by those for or against the institutes proposal. These are just a few of the talking points:

The institutes will have large amounts of money to spend and will steal away the best of the university researchers.

This is the greatest fear amongst academics who claim high pay scales will attract senior researchers and also post doctoral researchers, but this was denied by a source who advises Government. "There is no question of denuding the universities," the source argued, claiming that the institutes would in fact compete with third-level labs and improve standards overall.

The institutes will duplicate the infrastructure already in place at third level.

If built the institutes would have to be impressive but would also need world class facilities if they were to be successful in attracting international researchers here. Proponents claim they would be a showcase for Irish talent. The universities argue they already have good lab infrastructure and the academic staff and students to plug into expanded campus facilities.

The institutes won't be able to attract world class researchers to institutes which have no track record.

The universities claim that no senior academic in a US or British institution would leave a tenured job in a high-profile lab to join a new institute with no reputation on a four-to six-year contract basis with no guarantee of future employment. Institute proponents point out that many only want the research, not academia, and would be attracted by a combination of high salary, excellent facilities and the possibility of contract extensions.

The universities won't be able to make effective use of all the money that will become available over the next seven years.

"We just don't want to spend the money on more of the same," is how one pro-institute source put it. The argument holds that there aren't sufficient Irish researchers with an international reputation to achieve a world standard. The third level counters that the current HEA funding round will be worth £65m and last year's was £162m and these funds are being put to good use.

The international trend is against institutes, because without a university base they will calcify and lose focus.

The third-level camp argues that campuses foster the exchange of ideas and allow crossfertilisation that leads to discovery. Off-campus institutes would not be able to adjust fast enough to changes in research direction. The pro-institute view holds that researcher contracts would be short term, with demands placed on achievement. Either the visiting researchers deliver or better ones are found to replace them.