• 1 Robin Cohen, Global Diasporas: An Introduction, London and New York: Routledge, 2^nd ed., 2008; Wil (...)

1Traditionally, the image of diasporas was associated with rejection and exclusion. While some authors reserve the term “diaspora” to groups who share a limited number of idiosyncrasies, following a definition based on the Jewish diaspora considered as an ideal type1, this article favours Gabriel Sheffer’s broader approach. He posits that:

• 3 Neologism derived from the term diaspora which refers to persons living in a diaspora or any membe (...)
• 4 Rey Koslowski, “International Migration and the Globalization of Domestic Politics: A Conceptual F (...)
• 5 Idem, 9.
• 6 On this topic see: Richard Davone, “Diasporas and Development” Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2 (...)
• 7 Jennifer Brinkerhoff, “Creating an Enabling Environment for Diaspora’s Participation in Homeland D (...)

2Consequently, the attitude of governments towards the diasporas originating from their country differs according to the national and international circumstances. Some governments view their diaspora with suspicion, considering it could represent a potential threat to state sovereignty. Indeed, some diasporans3 are intent on having input in home country policies. Even a small number of them can have “an influence disproportionate to their numbers due to the acquisition of education and skills, the accumulation of financial capital and the cultivation of influence on host state foreign policies toward their home states. Individual emigrants may change the course of their home country’s political development.”4 Furthermore, the descendants of diasporans, born in the host land, may continue identifying politically with their parents’ or grandparents’ homeland, take active interest in the home state politics and “import” core values of their host land into the homeland.5 Such attitudes can cause friction when cultural values and economic models diverge widely. Conversely, the national authorities may welcome the contribution of the diaspora to the social, political and economic development of the home country.6 But, as pointed out by Jennifer Brinkerhoff: “Others have more complex relations, ignoring and discouraging diaporans’ actions in some arenas, while courting them in others.”7

• 8 Ravi Ramamurti, “Developing Countries and MNCs: Extending and Enriching the Research Agenda”, Jour (...)
• 9 Liesl Riddle, Jennifer M Brinkerhoff and Tjai M.Nielsen, “Partnering to Beckon them Home: Public-S (...)

3There is no denying that in recent years the economic potential of diasporas has attracted growing attention from researchers and states. Diaspora elites, in particular, are courted because of the connections they have in the business and political circles of their host countries. They can help build international business networks and open doors for exporters as well as political leaders. They can invest or help attract investments. They can share their expertise and assume the role of mentors for indigenous companies.8 They can act both as unofficial ambassadors of their home country or intermediaries if and when necessary.9 Therefore, being in a position to count on the help of powerful diaspora elites is, in general, considered as an extremely valuable resource for states which are increasingly drawing up strategies to harness their potential.

• 10 Hillel Schmid and Hanna Shaul Bar Nissim, “The Globalization of Philanthropy: Trends and Channels (...)

4Diasporas also donate money through remittances. In other words, diasporans transfer money to individuals known to them, either relatives or friends who have remained in the homeland, or through philanthropic organisations to contribute on a larger scale to the home country’s economic and/or social development. But these organisations’ actions may or may not align with the home country’s government political line and policy agenda, which can sometimes be problematic. Thus transparency on the part of diaspora philanthropic organisations is paramount to gain legitimacy not only in the eyes of donors but also to have the support of the home country government and public opinion.10

• 11 Idem, 169.
• 12 Tjai M. Nielsen and Liesl Riddle, “Investing in Peace: The Motivational Dynamics of Diaspora Inves (...)

5The motivations of donors to diaspora philanthropic organisations may be plural and vary according to their status in the host country. Some may feel marginalized and consequently be driven to “reinforce their symbolic status as loyal citizens of their homeland. This process includes material and cultural cross-border contributions such as political lobbying and fundraising.”11 Giving to the homeland will nurture their sense of belonging. Those who enjoy a higher status in the host land society may be guided by various motivations which are not mutually exclusive such as a desire for recognition, political influence, reputation, material gains or a sense of responsibility. They may feel they are indebted to their homeland and aspire to “give something back” to their community of origin.12

• 13 See Patrick Fitzgerald and Brian Lambkin, Migration in Irish History, 1607-2007, Basingstoke and N (...)
• 14 Donald Harman Akenson, The Irish Diaspora, The Irish Diaspora, A Primer, Toronto: P.D. Meany Compa (...)
• 15 Patrick Fitzgerald and Brian Lambkin, op. cit., 31.
• 16 Kerby Miller, Emigrants and Exiles: Ireland and the exodus to North America, New York and Oxford: (...)
• 17 Patrick Fitzgerald and Brian Lambkin, op. cit., 31-32.
• 18 In the 19^th and early 20^th centuries, Fenianism militated for the establishment of an independent (...)
• 19 The Irish National Land League was a political organisation of the late 19^th century which aimed t (...)
• 20 Nativism is the political policy of promoting the interests of native inhabitants against those of (...)
• 21 Some Irish emigrants did achieve outstanding success but they were a minority. Anne Groutel, Les d (...)
• 22 Laurence A. Glasco, “Life Cycles and Household Structure of American Ethnic Groups: Irish, Germans (...)
• 23 See Jay P. Dolan, The Irish-American: A History, New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2008, 209-307.
• 24 Some, like C. Feeney, took advantage of a “GI scholarship” which was made available to returning W (...)
• 25 Mary Daly, The Slow Failure, Population Decline and Independent Ireland, 1920-1973, Madison (WI): (...)
• 26 “Irish emigrants sent €5.7 billion back from the UK over 30 years”, < https://www.thejournal.ie/ir (...)

7Emigration is an endemic feature of Irish history but its intensity has varied over time.13 It reached a climax in the mid-19th century, when the Great Famine compelled millions of Irish people to leave Ireland. Most went to North America but others went notably to Britain, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa.14 It became customary for Irish immigrants to send remittances to their relatives in need who had remained at home: “As promised on leaving, a traditional duty of Irish immigrants on arriving was to write home with ‘consolation’ in the form of both emotional and financial support […].”15 These monies, often saved at great personal sacrifice, provided a genuine lifeline against poverty to emigrants’ families. The so-called “Letter from America” helped pay the rent, the shopkeepers’ bills or buy a horse. In 1908, the village of Clifden, Co. Galway received £10,000 in remittances, which was half the entire rent owed by the 3,000 plus inhabitants of the district.16 Or they could contribute to perpetuating the migration chain by allowing those who had stayed at home to buy a passage ticket to the New World.17 The money sent to Ireland by the diaspora could also be used to support a political cause such as Fenianism18 or the Irish National Land League.19 The Great Famine’s emigrants, mostly Catholics from the Western parts of the island, who went to America and other parts of the world were extremely poor. A lot of them ended up living in the slums of big American cities like Boston, Philadelphia or New York. They were not welcome, to say the least, by the local protestant middle class (including the Irish-American middle class) and later became the target of the American Party, commonly known as the Know-Nothing Party, an American nativist20 political party which operated in the mid-1850s. The Know-Nothing Party was anti-Catholic and against immigration. The “Famine” generation, taken as a whole,21 did not succeed in elevating its social status in the United States.22 However, the following generations managed to slowly move up the social ladder.23 Indeed, by the end of the 20^th century, Americans of Irish descent were highly represented in multinational boardrooms.24 Social mobility was slower and less spectacular in other host countries such as Britain or Australia. However, money kept coming in to Ireland from all over the world. Until the 1950s, remittances were the largest source of Ireland’s dollar income. In the 1940s, money transfers from the UK surpassed those from North America.25 Indeed, the Central Statistics Office (Dublin) estimated that Irish emigrants sent the equivalent of €5.7 billion back from the UK during the period that extends from 1940 to 1970.26 Sending remittances is distinct from philanthropy per se for the latter involves an intermediary who will decide who is the beneficiary. Nonetheless, given the extent of the phenomenon in the Irish case, it shows that sending monies to the homeland “to help” was very much ingrained in the relationship between Ireland and its diaspora.

• 27 The Northern Ireland ethno-national conflict, which lasted from the end of the 1960s to the late 1 (...)
• 28 Further reading on NORAID: Jack Holland, The American Connection, U.S. Guns, Money, and Influence (...)

8Irish American philanthropy goes back to the beginning of the United States, notably the Society of the Friendly Sons of Saint Patrick created in Philadelphia in 1771. Since its inception, this organisation has aimed to promote Irish culture and education and provide aid for the Irish in America. Many other fraternal and benevolent societies were set up in America throughout the 19^th century. However, an organisation of a different kind was founded after the start of “the Troubles”27 in Northern Ireland in 1969. The Irish Northern Aid Committee (NORAID) was indeed known for raising funds in the United States for the Provisional Irish Republican Army and Nationalist community groups.28 However, not all Irish Americans believed the use of violence would help settle the conflict in Northern Ireland. In 1976, the Ireland Fund was created on the initiative of Dan Rooney and Tony O’Reilly, two elites of the Irish diaspora. Daniel Milton “Dan” Rooney was president, owner and chairman of the Pittsburgh Steelers, an American football team in the National Football League. Dan Rooney was United States Ambassador to Ireland from July 2009 until December 2012. After a career as an international rugby player, he moved to a successful career in business and became H. J. Heinz Company’s Chief Executive Officer. He also invested in Ireland where he became a media mogul.

• 29 Tony O’Reilly quoted in “Details announced of Ireland Fund Awards”, The Irish Times, 21 August 198 (...)
• 30 “American Fund Raisers Present £40,000 for Peace and Charity”, The Irish Times, 25 August 1976.
• 31 <https://irelandfunds.org/>, accessed on December 7, 2019.

9The two men, concerned by the rise of violence in Northern Ireland, decided to set up a philanthropic organisation with a view to raising funds to support programmes for peace and reconciliation, arts and culture, education and community development throughout the island of Ireland. This fund intended to provide an alternative to NORAID and to attract the money that was going into the latter’s coffers. Tony O’Reilly played on emotions to entice well-off American Irish to contribute to the fund: “The Irish-American people have an enormous debt to Ireland, and there are millions of both traditions, orange and green, who have never given anything to Ireland. […] we are trying to alert them to their debt.”29 Beyond the huge success the Ireland Fund30 (now The Ireland Funds) encountered in raising money for the island of Ireland,31 the organisation managed from the beginning to muster the support of a critical mass of Irish American elites including prominent businessmen. The charity events organized by the Fund allowed them to get acquainted and meet on a regular basis.

• 32 Conor O’Cleary, “The Silent Giver”, The Irish Times, 4 October 2003.
• 33 Under the GI Bill of Rights 1944, grants were available to war veterans who wished to go to higher (...)
• 34 Conor O’Cleary, “The Silent Giver”, op. cit.

10Chuck Feeney was one of the Irish-American magnates and philanthropists who contributed to a great extent to the development of Ireland’s economy. Born into a modest household, Feeney grew up in a working class neighbourhood of Elizabeth, New Jersey. Both his parents were involved in charity organisations. Although he was brought up in a catholic family, he distanced himself from the Catholic Church.32 In 1948, after graduating from St Mary’s of the Assumption High School, he volunteered to join the military (ahead of conscription) where he trained as a radio operator. He was then sent to Japan to serve with the American occupying force, a country where he stayed for four years. When he came back to the United States, he benefited from a “GI scholarship”33 which allowed him to enroll at Cornell University. He later made his fortune as a co-founder of the Duty Free Shoppers Group, which pioneered the concept of duty-free shopping.34

• 35 Andrew Carnagy quoted in Martin Morse Wooster, “The Atlantic Philanthropies, Right – and Wrong – W (...)
• 36 Andrew Carnegy quoted in “The Gates Foundation’s Approach Has Both Advantages and Limits”, The Eco (...)
• 37 <https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/>, accessed on December 10, 2019.
• 38 Steven Bertoni, “Chuck Feeney: The Billionaire Who Is Trying To Go Broke”, September 18, 2012, <ht (...)
• 39 Conor O’Clery, The Billionaire Who Wasn’t, How Chuck Feeney Secretly Made and Gave Away a Fortune?(...)

11The essay entitled “The Gospel of Wealth” that Andrew Carnegie wrote in 1889 had a profound influence on Feeney. Carnagie thought that “the duty of the man of wealth” was “to set an example of modest, unostentatious living” and to give away his wealth while living as “The man who dies rich, dies disgraced.”35 But interestingly, Carnegie also believed that “One of the serious obstacles to the improvement of our race [was] indiscriminate charity.”36 As will be seen, Feeney adopted a hands-on approach to make sure the monies he donated bore tangible results. In 1982, Feeney founded The Atlantic Philanthropies (TAP),37 one of the largest private foundations in the world. For years, he gave away his fortune in secret, so much so that he was dubbed the “James Bond of philanthropy” by Forbes in 2012.38 Once the secret was revealed, the Irish journalist Conor O’Clery wrote Feeney’s biography in which he depicts the billionaire as a modest and frugal man.39

• 40 Atlantic Philanthropies, <https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/atlantic-philanthropies/, acce (...)
• 41 Idem.
• 42 Id.

13Interestingly, this entity was based in Bermuda which enabled it to circumvent American law. Indeed, unlike US-based foundations, an offshore foundation can fund advocacy activities.40 The organisation was well known for its involvement in “left-of-centre politics.”41 In the US, it substantially funded Health Care for America Now, an organisation advocating for Obamacare. In addition, it helped set up the Civic Participation Action Fund, a non-profit organisation which supported the Democratic Party candidates in the 2016 election and the presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. It was also a key funder of groups supporting increased immigration to the United States.42

• 43 Conor O’Clery, The Billionaire Who Wasn’t, 137-141.
• 44 Louise Holden, “Limerick Leader Is True Original”, The Irish Times, February 10, 2009.
• 45 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, New York, The Atlantic Philanthropi (...)
• 46 The Higher Education Authority is the state body in charge of universities in Ireland.
• 47 Don Thornhill, “Atlantic Philanthropies Investment in Irish Third Level Education, a Memoire” http (...)

14Feeney went to Ireland, the land of his ancestors, for the first time at the end of the 1980s. He started taking an interest in the higher education sector in Ireland after meeting with Ed Walsh who was in charge of the development of the Limerick National Institute for Higher Education. Walsh had ambitious plans and wanted to turn the institute into what the Americans call a technical university, in other words, he wanted to upgrade the status of this institute.43 Both men got on well and Feeney suggested setting up a foundation. This was a financing method that did not exist in Ireland’s education sector at the time. The project materialized and Feeney became the first chairman of this foundation. As for Walsh, he managed to convince the Irish authorities to top up the amount provided by the foundation.44 Those combined funds enabled the Limerick Institute to transform into a modern higher education institution. In the years that followed, Feeney extended his donations to Irish higher education as a whole through TAP. According to Christopher G. Oechsli, president and chief executive officer of this foundation, “Feeney kept a foot in both camps, of business and philanthropy” and was “well aware that if the lack of higher education was hampering his own business interests, other employers were probably coming against the same problem.”45 Incidentally, in the mid-1990s, Ireland’s Department of Education and the Higher Education Authority46 started to pay more attention to research policy and the need for formal funding mechanisms but it was only when the perspective of a substantial TAP contribution came up that a project started to take shape.47

• 48 Ned Costello, “Building on the Legacy of Chuck Feeney’s Philanthropy”, The Irish Times, January 6, (...)

15In 1999, the Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions (PRTLI) was finally launched by the Irish authorities. It was managed by the Higher Education Authority on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science and the Government. The PRTLI was a partnership between the Irish State, Irish Universities and The Atlantic Philanthropies which provided 30% of the funds needed during the first three years of the programme. Fifteen higher education institutions benefited from it. The monies made available were used to build modern infrastructure for research (laboratories, libraries, accommodation etc.) and to grant scholarships for researchers in “hard” sciences, humanities and social sciences. Atlantic Philanthropies donated 1.2 billion euros to Ireland between 1987 and 2014, 553 million of which went to higher education.48

• 49 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. cit., 100.
• 50 Idem, 31-32.

16Although the PRTLI was strongly supported by the Higher Education Authority, Don Thornhill, its Chairman (1998-2005), and TAP, it came against the initial opposition of the Department of Finance which saw it as yet another source of public expenditure. Moreover, the principle of a private-public partnership had never been tried in Ireland. Adding to this, it seems that in Ireland there was “the suspicion of an ulterior motive around philanthropy.”49 The mystery that surrounded the anonymous donor (Feeney) probably did not help. So, it took considerable time to convince the government.50

• 51 Proinnsas Breathnach, “Exploring the ‘Celtic Tiger’ Phenomenon: Causes and consequences of Ireland (...)
• 52 Katelyn Peters, “Celtic Tiger: Definition, History, and How Irish Economy Thrived”, 13 October 202 (...)

17In 1958, Ireland’s political leaders decided to abandon the protectionist policy that had been implemented since 1932 and opted for the market economy model. However, in the 1980s, the country was still one of the poorest members of the European Community. In the 1990s, a combination of factors,51 which included a young educated English-speaking workforce, low corporate taxes, low wages, foreign investment, a stable national economy, adequate budget policies, EU membership, and EU subsidies, contributed to Ireland’s economic boom. Indeed, the Irish economy grew at an average annual rate of 9.4% between 1995 and 2000, and between 1987 and 2007, the country’s GDP increased by 229%. In 1999, Ireland was ranked in the top three countries for economic openness by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).52

• 53 See the recommendations the Enterprise Strategy Group presented to the Irish government. This grou (...)
• 54 Adam Hayes, “What Is the Knowledge Economy? Definition, Criteria, and Example”, 22 January 2021, <(...)
• 55 Kelly Coate and Iain MacLabhrainn, “Irish Higher Education and the Knowledge Economy”, in Jeroen H (...)

18Up until the mid-1990s, the foreign multinationals that invested in Ireland mostly established production units employing unskilled or semi-skilled workers. Research activities were carried out elsewhere. It was thus easy for them to relocate to places where labour costs were lower. The start of the 2000s was a turning point as the Irish authorities came to accept that the country’s economy had to move up the value chain and become a “knowledge economy” to remain competitive.53 A knowledge economy is “a system of consumption and production that is based on intellectual capital. In particular, it refers to the ability to capitalize on scientific discoveries and applied research.”54 For Kelly Coate and Iain Labhrain, a key characteristic of a knowledge-driven economy is that technology is no longer just imported, but is generated in the country.55 So research in universities was pivotal in the transition of the Irish economy.

• 56 Ferdinand von Prondzynski, “Ireland’s Future Depends on Continued Investment in Research”, The Iri (...)
• 57 Kelly Coate and Iain MacLabhrainn, “Irish Higher Education and the Knowledge Economy”, op. cit., 2 (...)
• 58 Idem, 207.
• 59 The Lisbon Strategy of the European Union, launched in March 2000 by the EU heads of state and gov (...)

19According to Ferdinand von Prondzynski, former president of Dublin City University, prior to the Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions, none of the Irish universities was recognized internationally in the research field. He also believes that this programme was instrumental in conveying a new image of Ireland and ultimately in attracting foreign multinationals: “Most of the key investments that the Industrial Development Authority has attracted to Ireland over the past few years would not have come at all but for the research culture that we have created.”56 The research culture von Prondzynski refers to is not the only factor that has attracted foreign companies to Ireland, but it most certainly is an important one. As Coate and Mac Labhrainn note “it is difficult to find any policy or strategy documents about higher education in Ireland that do not emphasize the importance of higher education in contributing to the knowledge economy.”57 They contend that the main strategic aim of the Higher Education Authority is to “encourage the economic contribution that higher education makes to Irish society describing the new role of universities as ‘engines of growth.’”58 Both the OECD and the Lisbon Strategy of the European Union,59 have indeed been encouraging this trend since the start of this century. As a result, there has been a marked tendency to prioritize subjects such as biotechnologies, technology, engineering and maths to the detriment of humanities and social sciences.

• 60 Kathleen Lynch, “Neo-liberalism and Marketisation: The Implications for Higher Education”, Europea (...)
• 61 Sandra Fisher, “Does the ‘Celtic Tiger’ society need to debate the role of higher education and th (...)

20Kathleen Lynch60 and Sandra Fisher,61 amongst others, have deplored the fact that knowledge and education is less and less considered as a “public good” but increasingly as a service to be sold:

• 63 Pat Carroll, The OECD in Irish Higher Education, a Study of Two Policy Reviews: 1962-64 and 2003-0 (...)
• 64 Peter Scott, “Glion Colloquium: A Retrospective” in Luc Weber and Jim Duderstadt (eds.), Universit (...)

21The main objective of the PRTLI was to invest in higher education and research to help these sectors meet the needs of the Irish economy. Yet given the amount of money provided by TAP, this foundation was in position to push its agenda, whose ethos suited the Irish administration at that time. However, it should be noted that under Frank Rhodes’s TAP chairmanship (2000-2008), the humanities were an integral part of the PRTLI. Rhodes, a former president of Cornell University and one of Feeney’s long-standing friends, had a strong influence on opinion leaders within Irish higher education. 63 He was a member of The Glion Colloquium, a think tank which aimed at facilitating a transatlantic dialogue between academics on the future of higher education in the context of growing economic globalisation. This was a controversial topic at that time. While some academics advocated continuity, others thought universities had to embrace future challenges and adapt. Rhodes believed the two visions could be reconciled.64 As Khoo et al. noted, it is quite paradoxical that:

• 66 Idem, 8.
• 67 Frank H. T. Rhodes and John Healy, “Investment in Knowledge: A Case Study of a Philanthropy’s Part (...)
• 68 From 2001 to 2008, the foundation also contributed to the Support Programme for University Researc (...)
• 69 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. cit., 35-37.
• 70 Ellen HazelKorn, “Rebooting Irish Higher Education: Policy Challenges for Challenging Times”, Stud (...)
• 71 The first Global Irish Economic Forum took place in Dublin in 2009. A number of Irish diaspora eli (...)
• 72 Government of Ireland, Department of Foreign Affairs, Global Irish Economic Forum Report, 2009.

22According to Koo and Coate, TAP was more open when it came to funding non-science and technology topics. However, humanities only accounted for only 2.7% of the funds available under the Programme for Research in Third Level Institutions.66 Moreover, the latter involved a radical change in the way funding was allocated as it focused on competitive bidding with an assessment of research projects by international peers. This was “strongly resisted by the research community, which wanted a reinforcement of the more traditional project type funding system.”67 Indeed, the project-based funding principle, the outcome-based culture TAP insisted on instilling, and the competition between researchers that resulted, seem far from the humanistic left-oriented values that TAP boasted. In 2002, TAP decided to move away from funding higher education in Ireland.68 The organisation considered that it should now focus its grant giving activities on fewer sectors to make a measurable impact before its dissolution.69 So this decision was a strategic one. Funding became even harder to obtain for social sciences and humanities projects when TAP’s financial contribution stopped. Faced with the financial crisis which started in 2008, the Irish government gave full priority to applied research in the field of science70 despite the advice given by a number of diaspora elites at the first Global Irish Economic Forum.71 These diaspora magnates advocated a broad conception of innovation that should include the arts for example.72

• 73 Su-Ming Khoo, Carol Healy and Kelly Coate, “Development Education and Research at Third Level in I (...)
• 74 Tony Proscio, Winding Down the Atlantic Philanthropies, The First Eight Years: 2001-2008, Center f (...)

23For Koo et al., philanthropy as a source of funding raises the question of sustainability.73 Feeney was attached to the principle of Giving While Living, hence his decision that his entire endowment would have to be spent by 2016. He shared his decision with TAP’s management in 1999, at a board meeting at the Cornell Club in New York.74 But it was not made public until 2003 when TAP announced that all its activities would be wound up by 2020.

• 75 Houses of Oireachtas, Committee of Public Accounts debates, 5 February 2009.
• 76 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. cit., 47.
• 77 Richard Boyle, Philanthropy Working with Government: A Case Study of The Atlantic Philanthropies’ (...)
• 78 Idem, 29.
• 79 Id.
• 80 Paula Clancy, “History of TASC – Reflections on the first twenty years”, <https://www.tasc.ie/abou (...)

25As mentioned previously, from 2003 onwards, TAP’s grantmaking in Ireland concentrated on social issues including early childhood development. This foundation proposed that the Irish government provide €5 million to co-fund programmes in this sector. The latter responded favourably. Pobal is a state agency in charge of the delivery and management of programmes which promote social inclusion, reconciliation and equality. In 2007, it managed seventeen programmes for seven departments including the Department of Health and Children and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. The three bodies were involved in the work of the new partnership with TAP.75 From the beginning, the foundation insisted that an evidence and outcome-based approach, clear goal setting as well as rigorous programme monitoring and evaluation be adopted. “Evaluation was not negotiable”76 and “randomized control trials”, which were relatively unheard of in Ireland,77 had to be used to assess the programmes that worked and those that did not. Only those that showed tangible results were to be kept. In 2008, TAP and the government set up the Centre for Effective Services (CES), “an independent, not-for-profit body.”78 TAP and the two departments involved in the partnership put up €10 million for its creation. This centre operates on an all-island basis with “the aim of promoting the development of an evidence-informed approach to policy and practice with those working with children, families and communities.” It describes itself “as part of a new generation of intermediary organisations working in the areas of evidence translation and implementation science.”79 In addition, TAP funded or co-funded other organisations aimed at informing Irish policy makers as well as citizens, promoting debate and at influencing decision-makers. These organisations included TASC – A Think Tank for Action on Social Change, created in 2001. It claims to be independent of all political parties, albeit “it is clear in its founding statement that its values were those traditionally associated with the political left.”80

• 81 Teachta Dála (abbreviated as TD) is a member of Dáil Éireann, the lower house of the Oireachtas. I (...)
• 82 Oireachtas is the Irish Parliament.
• 83 Houses of Oireachtas, Committee of Public Accounts debates, 5 February 2009.
• 84 Houses of Oireachtas, Committee of Public Accounts debates, 4 November 2010.

26The CES drew the attention of some TDs81 of the Oireachtas82 Committee of Public Accounts.83 Indeed, TD Thomas P. Broughan (Labour) questioned the absence of a tendering process, as did TD Róisín Shortall (Social Democrats). The latter repeatedly asked if there was really a need for yet another body when Pobal and the government departments concerned had first-hand knowledge of the way programmes worked and that there was already a performance framework in place within each department. She also enquired whether the CES was going to take over the responsibility for some of the functions within Pobal. Furthermore, she regretted that the former was not subjected to the same accountability tests as Pobal. Indeed, the Department of Finance was not involved in the assessment of the programmes the CES was carrying out.84

• 85 Idem.
• 86 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. cit., 12; Richard Boyle, Philan (...)
• 87 Government of Ireland, Department of Children and Youth Affairs, Better Outcomes Brighter Futures (...)
• 88 Government of Ireland, Department of Children and Youth Affairs, Better Outcomes Brighter Futures,(...)

27Gerry Kearney, Secretary General of the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, tried to justify the existence of the CES which, he stated, was in charge of redesigning the programmes of both departments because, he said: “at no stage since the establishment of the Department [has] Pobal provided for us the redesign of a major funded programme. Nor would we see Pobal, no more than the Department itself, as having access to the international expertise to support such a redesign.”85 In fact, during the course of this debate, it became implicitly clear that the CES would get the “international expertise” from TAP itself and that academics would provide additional reports. This way, TAP managed to have a major and direct influence on the redesign of a number programmes in the sector of early child development. It was, for example, in a position to push the government to shift its funding toward early intervention and prevention for all children instead of trying to act once problems and difficult situations were already entrenched, which had been the customary approach until then.86 The outcome-based approach, advocated by TAP, is clearly noticeable in a government policy document entitled Better Outcomes Brighter Futures87 and the latest report on the implementation of the measures included in this document.88

• 89 Richard Boyle, Philanthropy Working with Government, op. cit., 5.
• 90 Idem, 9.
• 91 Id., 40.

28In addition, a report commissioned by TAP, reveals that its collaboration with the Irish authorities went deeper than meets the eye especially with regard to public sector wide initiatives.89 It makes it clear that this foundation was intent on “using its leverage with government to change policy”90 in particular in the field of service provision. The objective was to introduce more commissioning and more competition to improve the impact of government initiatives. TAP’s influence is discernible91 indeed in the following section of Fine Gael Public Service Reform Plan (2014) on alternative models of service delivery:

• 93 The author of the report does not mention any name. Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Repu (...)
• 94 Idem.

29TAP’s funding of social programmes was made conditional on a new evidence-based, data-driven efficiency, bringing in international consultants to redesign programmes and close programme monitoring. However, there was a risk this new approach and TAP’s deep involvement in government affairs may raise hostility from ministers as well as civil servants. Evidence is scarce but some reports suggest that there was a degree of resistance from the Department of Health,93 including the Minister, which, for example, initially strongly resisted the co-funding of Mercer’s Institute for Successful Ageing. A senior civil servant allegedly told Colin McCrea, a retired senior vice president of The Atlantic Philanthropies, that he was not “going to have philanthropists setting [his] agenda.”94

• 95 Richard Boyle, Philanthropy Working with Government, op. cit., 26.
• 96 Idem, 31.
• 97 Id., 16.
• 98 Id., 51.

30Moreover, some civil servants viewed the approach to evidence generation and gathering as “burdensome and overly academic in nature.”95 The reports provided by the CES were viewed as too long and not informed enough to be useful to policymakers. This was the case in the fields of education and community development where policymakers believed this work should be done internally, not outsourced.96 Some of those interviewed regretted the limited engagement with middle management in government agencies because they believed it was often at this level that “the programmes [could] be made or broken.”97 TAP did acknowledge the fact that implementing change had been slower than anticipated as resistance to change across the public system could be strong. This was partly due to “entrenched cultural and historical patterns.”98 However, despite some “pockets of resistance” in the Irish administration, TAP’s methods were adopted with the approval of a majority of government leaders of both Fianna Faíl and Fine Gael administrations.

• 99 Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. cit., 47-48.

31Some grantees also had a hard time getting used to adopting an evidence-based approach. Getting closely monitored by outside consultants was not usual practice.99 Moreover, assessing to what extent NGOs’ actions “make a difference” is a complex issue that may not be easily quantifiable or “tick the right boxes.” As TAP funding stopped if the efficiency of a programme was not backed by data, one can imagine the difficulties this created both for grantees and programme beneficiaries. This trial-and-error method too seems to run counter TAPs’ “do-good” ethos.

• 100 Frances Fitzgerald quoted in Liam Collins, The Atlantic Philanthropies Republic of Ireland, op. ci (...)

32Apart from co-funding partnerships in the fields of higher education, research and social policy, TAP also financially supported organisations which advocated certain causes. According to Frances Fitzgerald, Minister for Justice and Equality (2014 – 2017), “Atlantic really developed advocacy in this country […] Governments always have mixed feelings about this, obviously […].”100 As will be seen, TAP’s funding had a far reaching impact in this sector too.

• 101 Charities Act 2009, part 1, section 2, <https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2009/act/6/enacted/en/ (...)
• 102 Idem, part 1, section 3.
• 103 Houses of Oireachtas, Dáil Éireann debates, 15 November 2007, vol. 641, n^o 5; Houses of Oireachtas (...)
• 104 Houses of Oireachtas, Seanad Éireann debates, 26 November 2008, vol. 192 n^o 8.

33The Charity Act 2009 states that a body must be engaged exclusively in “charitable purposes” to be registered as a charitable organisation.101 This excludes “advocacy” groups which lobby for the advancement of their causes. A purpose is regarded as “charitable” if its aim is “the prevention or relief of poverty or economic hardship, the advancement of education, the advancement of religion or any other purpose that is of benefit to the community.”102 Although quite broad, the latter category does not include either the defense of human rights or the advancement of political causes. During parliamentary debates,103 TDs and senators across the political spectrum did try in vain to have human rights included in this legislation. Given that organisations whose primary goal was advocacy were not registered as charity organisations, they could not benefit from the tax concessions the latter were entitled to. For Senator Dan Boyle (Green Party), this reflected “a particular mindset, not necessarily a party political one, that charities should be seen not heard.”104

• 105 LGBT is an initialism that stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.
• 106 See: <https://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/subtheme/lgbt>, accessed on 3 February, 2020.
• 107 Idem.

34Thus, the funding TAP provided to some advocacy groups was pivotal. From 2003, TAP donated monies to various associations defending the rights of LGBT105 people in Ireland and “working to change laws and attitudes and remove other barriers so that LGBT people could enjoy the same rights and protections as their fellow citizens.”106 By providing funds to these organisations, TAP considered it contributed to the passage of the landmark 2010 civil partnership law in Ireland. Other organisations involved in the promotion of public debate also received financial help from TAP. In 2011, a group of academics launched We the Citizens with a grant of more than $900,000. This pilot project worked as a nongovernmental public assembly which focused on policy issues. Its success prompted the government to set up in 2012 a second larger consultative assembly called the Irish Convention on the Constitution whose primary purpose was to tackle the issue of same-sex marriage. It put forward the idea of a referendum on marriage equality which was held in 2015. A majority of 62% of voters, on a turnout of 61%, voted For. The legalization of same-sex marriage followed shortly after.107

• 108 Breda O’Brien, “Asking questions about funding for referendum campaign, ‘Groupthink has been exalt (...)
• 109 Idem.
• 110 See Senator Rónán Mullen’s comments, Houses of Oireachtas, Seanad Éireann debates, 14 May 2015, vo (...)
• 111 The term quango stands for a quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation.
• 112 Houses of Oireachtas, Dáil Éireann debates, 14 May 2015, vol. 878 n^o 3.

35However, some people criticized TAP including Breda O’Brien who writes a weekly opinion column in The Irish Times. She denounced the methods used by the foundation, in particular its financing of the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network (GLEN) “that turned an essentially voluntary organisation with a single-funded post into a powerful lobby whose staff and consultants work “inside the machinery of government.”108 She also contended that the network had connections with people who were on strategic boards such as the Irish Human Rights and Equality Authority. In 2015, just before the referendum on same-sex marriage, she wrote: “This is not Atlantic Philanthropies funding a hospital or school. This is foreign money being systematically invested to change public opinion, to seamlessly deliver a Yes in a referendum that has enormous consequences for family law for generations.”109 A few independent TDs, and senators110 raised the same issue in the Irish Parliament. Echoing O’Brien’s words, Independent TD Mattie McGrath was outraged that Atlantic Philanthropies stated on its website that its explicit aim was to fund groups “to work inside the machinery of Government” to advance its ideological agenda. He also complained about TAP’s financial support, which amounted to €24 million, to various organisations, quangos,111 and government agencies that were “doing the work of the ‘Yes’ campaign in the referendum.” This, he claimed, was “interference and a despicable attack on a sovereign state which undermines what democracy is about: free and unhindered vote of the people.”112

• 113 Aine McMahon, “Catholic Church ‘bereavement’ after same-sex marriage vote”, The Irish Times, 2 Jun (...)

36TAP’s multi-pronged funding strategy was certainly well thought out to advance its progressive agenda. By helping financially advocacy groups, like GLEN, it allowed them to have their voices heard. Moreover, by supporting projects, like We the Citizens, TAP’s funding contributed to laying the foundation of a more participatory democracy which gradually led to a change in attitude of a majority of Irish voters towards same-sex marriage. As could be expected, some conservative religious groups and representatives of the Catholic Church in Ireland expressed their disagreement113 but all the major parties supported the Yes campaign.

• 114 Conor O’Clery, The Billionaire Who Wasn’t, op. cit., 190.
• 115 Idem, 187.
• 116 TAP’s president, John Healy, did not want TAP to have any dealings with Gerry Adams and Sinn Féin (...)
• 117 Id., 184-194.

37Feeney was a member of the small group of prominent Irish-Americans who went on a secret exploration mission to Ireland, north and south, at the start of the 1990s and acted as amateur intermediaries in negotiations between various paramilitary organisations involved in the conflict and the US government. Feeney’s presence was pivotal.114 Furthermore, he believed the Northern Ireland conflict had to be resolved by political dialogue, not violence. He was convinced this was what Gerry Adams, the Sinn Féin leader, also wanted.115 Feeney was a powerful ally for Sinn Féin as he had connections in the business world in the US. He could become helpful when it came to attracting American investments to Northern Ireland should a settlement be reached. As it happens, Feeney personally116 donated 240,000 dollars which covered the rent and the staff wages of Sinn Féin’s office in Washington in the years following the IRA ceasefire. Through TAP, he also donated millions to promote peace, reconciliation and human rights.117

• 118 Id., 276.
• 119 Id.
• 120 The other members of the board were: Enda McDonagh the chairman of the board of University College (...)
• 121 Conor O’Clery, The Billionaire Who Wasn’t, op. cit., 277.

38At that point, even if it was occasionally criticized, TAP’s collaboration with the Ahern Administration worked rather well. This started to change in 2005 when the former decided to financially support the Centre for Public Inquiry, a non-governmental body. This centre aimed to expose and possibly rid the local political and business scene of corruption and thus raise ethics standards in Ireland. Promoting measures to protect whistleblowers was also one of its objectives. This centre intended to collaborate with the Irish media and human rights protection organisations to uncover cases of wrongdoing. According to Conor O’Clery, Feeney was “concerned about the level of corruption being reported in the Irish media among politicians and businessmen.”118 Because he had dual Irish-US nationality, “he had reason to feel he had a stake in civil governance in Ireland.”119 TAP committed nearly four million euros to this organisation which was chaired by Justice Fergus Flood.120 Flood was a retired judge from the Irish Supreme Court, well-known for having conducted an inquiry on allegations of corruption of some Irish politicians at the end of 1990s.121

• 122 The 26^th Government of Ireland (6June 2002-14 June 2007) was led by Fianna Fáil leader Bertie Aher (...)
• 123 Martin Wall, “The Private Investigator”, The Irish Times, February 5, 2005.
• 124 “The Future of the Centre for Public Enquiry”, The Irish Times, December 19, 2005.
• 125 John Waters, “Subversion of Connolly affair”, The Irish Times, January 2, 2006.

39The creation of this centre was not welcome by the representatives of the parties in office at that time,122 to say the least. Jim Minihan of the Progressive Democrats questioned the need for such an organisation, which was financed by private sources, and whose action would duplicate or overlap the action of the state’s institutions.123 Mary O’Rourke (Fianna Fáil), the president of the Senate, as well as other Irish politicians were also wary of this centre’s objectives. Mary Harney, the deputy Prime Minister, called the idea “sinister and inappropriate.”124 Some feared that this centre would be a private tribunal, financed by funds from abroad, which would not be accountable to anyone. It would be in a position to act independently, scrutinize whatever case it wished and publish reports to inform the public of its findings. Under those circumstances, who would make sure that some individuals would not be accused wrongly? Echoing this anxiety, John Waters, a journalist from the Irish Times, wrote: “As a matter of fact, I would welcome the closure of the Centre for Public Inquiry. The idea of a foreign ‘philanthropist’ sticking his nose and his dollars into the affairs of a sovereign nation, as Chuck Feeney has done in funding the centre, is to my mind deeply unhealthy.”125

• 126 Martin Wall, “The Private Investigator”, op. cit.
• 127 Garda Síochána is the national police service of Ireland.
• 128 Houses of Oireachtas, Dáil Éireann debates, December 13, 2005, vol. 612, n^o 2.
• 129 Liam Reid, “Centre for Public Inquiry has ceased its work”, The Irish Times, April 10, 2006.
• 130 Houses of Oireachtas, Dáil Éireann debates, Decembre 13, 2005, vol. 612, n^o 2.

40Feeney responded that this centre had been set up with the money from the sale of his properties in Ireland so technically, it was not money from abroad. As for the centre, it justified its existence by saying that Ireland was one of the only European countries that did not have such an independent watchdog to examine public life.126 Be that as it may, the centre was soon ‘neutralized’. Indeed, in December 2005, Michael McDowell, the Justice Minister, “arranged for a document from a Garda Síochána127 file, which the Irish Independent sought, to be delivered to it.”128 The document was related to the suspicions surrounding the executive director of the centre, the journalist Frank Connolly, who was known for supporting the Republican cause. Connolly and his brother Niall were strongly suspected to have gone to Columbia with false passports in April 2001. Niall Connolly and two other alleged IRA members (known as the Columbia three), suspected of coming to Columbia with the aim of passing on technical know-how to the FARC guerrillas (in return for money to the IRA) were arrested in August 2001 by the Columbian police.129 Frank Connolly was questioned at the time by the Irish police but the Director of Public Prosecution decided not to bring any charges against him. Despite this, Michael McDowell and Bertie Ahern, the Taoiseach, asked Feeney to suspend his financial support as long as F. Connolly remained the director.130 Feeney did so and a few weeks later, just over a year after its opening, Justice Flood announced that the centre had ceased its work and would not publish any more reports.

• 131 Idem.
• 132 For further details on this question see the statements and questions of TDs Joe Costello (Sociali (...)
• 133 For additional information on this topic see the statements and questions of TDs Caoimhghín Ó Caol (...)

41Both McDowell and Bertie Ahern were highly criticized in the Daíl by TDs from Fine Gael, the Labour Party, the Green Party and Sinn Féin. The former were at pains to justify the decision to communicate information from a Garda Síochána file to the press.131 In fact, the government was suspected of turning an old case into a hot story on purpose to discredit Frank Connolly and was accused by representatives of four opposition parties (Sinn Féin, the Labour Party, the Green Party and the Socialist Party) of having deliberately sought the closure of the Centre for Public Inquiry because it was looking too closely into the sale of the Thornton prison site by the Department of Justice132 and into matters connected to the Corrib gas pipeline.133

• 134 “The Future of the Centre for Public Enquiry”, op. cit.

42A group of academics and members of various associations condemned the “witch hunt” against F. Connolly and stood up for the right of citizens to be informed. Here is an excerpt of their letter targeting Mary Harney which they sent to the Irish Times for publication: “Her misgivings about the source of funding do not extend apparently to Mr Feeney’s gifting an estimated €600 million to Irish universities over two decades, or to political donations to Government parties by multinational corporations.”134

• 135 Report of the Expert Group on Future Funding for Higher Education, March 2016, 7-8, <https://www.g (...)
• 136 Houses of Oireachtas, Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innova (...)
• 137 Idem.
• 138 Indecon, The Landscape of Philanthropic Giving in Ireland, submitted to the Department of Rural an (...)

43It is beyond dispute that the €1.1 bn that the Irish state received from Feeney’s foundation was a boon for the sectors that benefited from it. However, the case of TAP raises a number of questions. Firstly, what has happened, for example, to the higher education sector since TAP’s donations ended? The Report of the Expert on Future Funding for Higher Education135 and a recent debate of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science reveal that the higher education sector is faced with severe difficulty. According to Arjumand Younus, from Women in Research Ireland, “the current financial model for Irish higher education institutions is unsustainable due to funding shortfalls and growing budgetary demands. Higher Education Authority data shows that while funding for higher education was reduced by 38% between 2009 and 2016, the number of students grew by 34,000.”136 Furthermore, Tony Donohoe, policy advisor at the Irish Business and Employers Confederation, pointed out that public funding for the higher education sector had “not even returned to pre-financial crisis levels and rapidly increasing student numbers has resulted in an almost 50% increase in the funding per student.” 137 Thus, it looks like the Irish government chose to reduce the budget allocated to higher education when it came to defining priorities and has made students bear the brunt of the funding shortfall. The extra income that TAP’s donations provided to higher education is surely missed. This tends to show that sustainability is not to be neglected. In order to make up for the loss of some philanthropic donations, the Irish Government has set up a National Advisory Group on Philanthropy to see how it can be best encouraged in Ireland. It is also working on a national philanthropy policy138 which should be made public in 2023.