The £130 million Media Lab Europe in the centre of Dublin has long been one of the pet projects of the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern.
The benefits of hosting the lab - an offshoot of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - seem clear to Mr Ahern. The Taoiseach believes the Dublin location will allow the State to take centre stage in the world of cutting-edge technology. It may also act as a magnet, drawing in major research funding. Mr Ahern said previously: "I believe we're bringing the future to Ireland".
The Taoiseach is not alone in believing the lab represents a great capture for the State. Businessman Mr Denis O'Brien - currently bidding for part of Eircom - is among its most enthusiastic supporters.
It was he who originally approached the charismatic director of Media Lab in the US, Prof Nicholas Negroponte, after the latter gave an inspirational presentation in Dublin in September 1998. Experienced Fianna Fail figures, such as former party fundraiser Mr Paul Kavanagh, one of its directors, also fervently support it.
The Government's decision, however, ruffled some feathers among academics and some Government departments. It caused consternation among third-level researchers who have campaigned vigorously for the investment to be made in existing research laboratories rather than standalone institutes.
Sources in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and Forfas are also reported to have some qualms. The president of University College Cork, Prof Gerry Wrixon, last year voiced reservations, saying it might be better to build up the State's existing institutions.
The internal Civil Service documents which have been released show there was concern over the investment of money in an American centre rather than an Irish one. The Taoiseach was aware of this concern. In a document (dated November 1999) seen by him and written by Mr Dermot McCarthy, a senior official in his Department, it was made clear the then Minister for Education, Mr Martin, was "concerned" about giving money to an overseas college instead of a domestic one.
Mr Ahern and his Department decided these concerns were outweighed by the merits of MIT's proposal.
The document states the project - one of the largest single educational expenditures of recent years - needed to be treated differently to other projects at third level.
It would not be funded in the normal way by the Higher Education Authority and would not have its performance directly monitored.
The November document states: "There is a concern that the investment by the Exchequer is committed largely without reference to performance".
But crucially the document continues: "This risk is seen as being potentially much greater than £28 million, since there would be an expectation that the State would fund the ongoing operation".
From this document it would appear the investment is a major gamble by the Government. It will be many years before it is known if it would have been better to go with an Irish institution.
The sometimes vague nature of MIT's work means it will be difficult to measure its performance in monetary terms. Ideas such as "dance sneakers", "intelligent roads" and a virtual dog named Sydney are the hallmarks of the free-thinking environment at MIT in the US. But are these inventions measurable? Probably not.
Bringing MIT here does at least give Ireland a globally-recognised name.
Irish institutions have already developed links with it. But it will be many years before the verdict on this futuristic centre can be delivered.