Underfunded scientists in search of a financial formula

With scientific research under threat from cutbacks, the science community is urging the Government to set up a trust fund and reduce uncertainty, writes Dick Ahlstrom

The Government's decision last week to renege on funding promises made under a key scientific research support programme has caused consternation within the research community. There is a better way, however, according to the Irish Research Scientists' Association.

The Government should create a trust fund that would support scientific research in perpetuity, according to the representative body for scientists. A fund of €250m would provide research support no matter what happened to the public purse.

The continuing uncertainty about the future of the Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI), as reported in this newspaper last week, threw into sharp focus the inconsistencies between what the Government says it wants to achieve and how willing it is to invest to get there.

"They talk about a knowledge-based economy. The reports last week just rubbished that," states Dr Fiona Regan, an analytical chemist in the School of Chemical Sciences at Dublin City University and chair of IRSA. She and fellow IRSA executive committee members, Dr Edmond Magner of the University of Limerick, Dr Donal Leech of NUI Galway, and Dr John Donovan of the Dublin Institute of Technology believe that the creation of a trust fund would help to put some stability back into research funding here.

"It wouldn't solve the problem with the PRTLI," says Dr Regan. "What this would do initially is provide longer-term stability."

She likened the approach to a pension fund. "We are suggesting it could work on a similar basis to a pension. You start with an initial seed fund and use the interest from this to fund research. We have been pushing for this for many, many years. It is not a new idea. We just can't understand why the Government hasn't copped onto it themselves."

An Irish fund would find itself in good company, says the IRSA. The Wellcome Trust is the single largest source of funding for medical research in the UK. The Howard Hughes Research Institute plays a similar role in the US, where there are dozens of other private funding trusts.

The Danish Research Foundation was created in 1991 with seed capital of about €190m. Income is sufficient to fund 37 centres of excellence in science and the arts with an annual income of about €24m. Norway created a research and innovation trust in 1999 with €385m funded through the sale of state shares. Brazil established the research foundation FAPESP in 1962, which is guaranteed an annual and fixed one per cent share of all the taxes collected by the state.

The IRSA suggests initial seed capital of €250m, perhaps coming from the proceeds of State company privatisations. The Telecom Éireann flotation raised €4,570m, but was a missed opportunity to create a research fund, Regan says. Further State asset sales would present further opportunities.

The start-up money could be added to annually, allowing the fund to grow, and the resultant return for research activities to increase over time. In addition, companies should be encouraged to contribute to the fund, the IRSA argues. They could do so if donations were allowable against tax as "incremental expenditure on research", as defined by section 60 of the 1995 Finance Act. Tax relief in this case would be three times the tax rate (currently 12.5 per cent) of their donation.

"If other countries have observed the need and established research foundations, why do we not have one?" asks Dr Regan. "Such a fund would benefit the entire country and continue to do so in perpetuity."

She says it is important that the Government take a long-term view on the issue of funding.

"It doesn't work within the four-year election time plan. It doesn't work like that. It is based on foresight."