Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank Members for their contributions to the debate. The Bill was warmly welcomed in the Lower House, where colleagues were confident, as am I, that it will make an important contribution in terms of improving connectivity, especially in provincial Ireland.

We could have a debate all day long on the question of the international figures, how good or how bad our system is, what happened in Northern Ireland when BT came in, and so on. However, to use the great cliché of the day, we are where we are. We can have an interesting academic debate on why certain things happened, including why Telecom Éireann was privatised in the fashion it was, why its subsequent owners engaged in asset stripping and why the necessary investment in broadband infrastructure was not made. We can also discuss the circumstances in which BT intruded into Northern Ireland, secured state aid approval and did a splendid job there. The decisions made here were different. We certainly can debate those decisions but, ultimately, what is done is done. The task I have now is to ensure there is quality connectivity available as widely as possible in this country.

It is not true that where there is a similarly sparse population in rural parts of other countries, including the United States, that they all have a quality service. Indeed, some parts of the United States have no service at all. The previous Government implemented a commitment under the national broadband service contract whereby a guarantee was given of the provision of between 2 and 3 Mb. Of course, as a result of contention, the actual service can be inferior to that. Nevertheless, the then Government did put in place arrangements for the monitoring of the implementation and delivery of that contract and those channels are there to the present day. The reality is that there would not even be a basic service in many rural areas if that had not been done.

Senator Mulcahy and others referred to service blackspots. A number of providers are currently seeking to roll out 4G and enhanced 3G services. A consequence of that and other work that is under way is that there will, for certain periods, be a deterioration of service in some of these areas. This should be a very short-term problem and the enhancement programme will ultimately see significant improvements in the service. The investment of €855 million by four different providers is a vote of confidence in the future of the country's economy. It was a considerable quantum when we had the spectrum auction following the closure of analogue television.

In respect of the questions about way-leave, compensation, etc., the position is that we propose to use the existing distribution network. As a result, the level of intrusion onto people's land will be minimal. Where and if such intrusions occur, they will involve ESB employees or those of companies contracted by it. I do not believe there is great cause for concern in this regard because, as already stated, the existing supply system is going to be used. In the context of compensation, the term "where appropriate" means that if there are particular circumstances where land must be acquired or leased, the matter will be dealt with as appropriate. We are talking here about taxpayers' money. I recently received a deputation the members of which wanted to advance some arguments about a particular matter. One of the individuals involved was very aggrieved because he thought a particular transmission line was going in the direction of his land. The man in question has suffered a significant loss of income as a result of the line being changed. There is nothing new in all of this. We had the same experience with the roads programme and any difficulties which arose were resolved. We also had a similar experience in the context of the erection of mobile phone masts. Members of both Houses lodged complaints about those masts but the quality of mobile phone services would be much worse had they not been erected. The outcry which occurred at the time was similar to that in respect of the issue under discussion. However, I do not believe anyone would now seriously suggest that there were any scientific or other bases for the outcry, which some of us recall.

We live in a market economy and the rules relating to that economy apply. Under state aid and European Union rules, it would not now be possible to do what Senator Quinn has asked me to do. However, he is correct with regard to the decision taken in Northern Ireland. What we are doing is seeking to acknowledge that the commercial sector is delivering high-quality connectivity in Northern Ireland which is comparable with anything available in Europe and which that sector will not deliver to communities in rural areas of this jurisdiction. As a result, State intervention is going to be necessary. In order for the State to intervene, we will be obliged to engage in the very detailed process that is necessary to satisfy - or cut the mustard with - those in Brussels. That is why we are approaching the end of a very detailed process relating to mapping every area of the country. When this is complete, we will make a submission for approval to Brussels. The purpose of all of this is to ensure that remoter areas will have enjoy quality connectivity in the future. The Bill fits neatly into this process in the sense that, in the context of the overall broadband plan, it is one more piece of the jigsaw. When that jigsaw is complete, the ESB will be able to use its existing distribution system, in co-operation with one or more partner companies, to roll out fibre-optic cable to parts of Ireland where residents would never have imagined that they might have access to future-proofed fibre capacity. In most countries, the latter does not happen. In that context, the Bill is a very important measure and I welcome the support for it. Senator Quinn need not be concerned about the length of time it will take to enact the legislation. The Bill was not a matter of contention in the Lower House . If it proves to be contentious in this House, I do not believe that will be the result of anything it contains. We should be able to enact it quite quickly.

The ESB has already concluded its expressions of interest process and must be very close to announcing a preferred bidder. When that is done, the joint venture will be created as quickly as may be and the process of providing this Rolls Royce service to rural areas will commence. In the meantime, we will be submitting our plan in respect of state aid to Brussels for approval. As Senators will be aware, competition is hotting up all the time in urban areas. In general, the quality of service provided in such areas is already very high.

Senator Barrett referred to energy prices. I hope we will have an opportunity to discuss that matter at another time. I am sure the Senator will welcome the news that the remuneration package of the new chief executive of the ESB is half that of his predecessor. I am not referring to Senator Barrett when I say this but we should not, as Senator Ó Clochartaigh observed, use information that is out of date in order to denigrate people who work for a company such as the ESB, particularly at a time when the position with regard to remuneration has changed dramatically. During the past six weeks we were all very grateful for the extraordinary efforts those people made in very dangerous circumstances to try to ensure that citizens had access to energy supplies. In that context, Senator Brennan highlighted the tragic death of Mr. Michael O'Riordan who worked for Eircom. Like their counterparts in the ESB, Eircom employees were out working in all kinds of conditions in recent weeks. Mr. O'Riordan's death is a terrible tragedy for his family. I take this opportunity to again extend my sympathy and that of the Government to Mr. O'Riordan's family.

I take no issue with colleagues who argue that it is not possible to have balanced economic recovery in this country without the necessary infrastructure being put in place. In order to have a strong economy, it is necessary to have water, power and connectivity. We have shown in different ways over the years a disposition to obstruct and delay infrastructure that is fit for purpose. The mobile phone masts I referred to earlier constitute one example in this regard and the road network constitutes another. Money was bountiful at the time when road projects were commenced and, as a result, the authorities were able to buy their way through the country. That was an expensive exercise but at least the necessary infrastructure is now in place and can be used. As a number of Senators pointed out, such infrastructure is not in place in the context of either energy or water. We are attempting to deal with this through the creation of a water utility in State ownership. All I can say to Senator Ó Clochartaigh is that the "Er" in "Ervia" is intended to represent Éire, while "via" is the Latin word for way. The new name for the company was arrived at by means of a competition among staff of Bord Gáis Éireann. I cannot say that I am overly attached to it-----