Accusing public research institutes of "living on government handouts" seems odd. I think a better address for critique for funding (if you think the idea is flawed) would be whatever instrument granted it.
The major thing I see wrong with Fraunhofer is the patents side, but that's another kettle of fish. (It's just as much the fault of the policymaking that use patent grinding as a benchmark for "innovation")
I don't accuse them of living on gov handouts - I am just pointing to that fact to set the correct expectations. This funding is particularly necessary as the research is too fundamental for commercial parties.
The major thing I see wrong with Fraunhofer is the patents side, but that's another kettle of fish. (It's just as much the fault of the policymaking that use patent grinding as a benchmark for "innovation")