Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for their presentation. Mr. Slye indicated that expenditure on the project had reduced from an estimated €4.2 billion to €3.2 billion and, ultimately, to €2.7 billion. He talked about how the international panel had found in 2012 that undergrounding would cost three times as much as proceeding with the overground option. He suggested that he disagreed with that estimate, but one would assume an international panel would have some expertise in the matter. Will he clarify that point?

As I understand it, there is an intention to provide an interconnector between France and Ireland in due course. Looking to the long term, does it make sense to go around the country installing pylons and wind turbines when the probability is that in ten to 15 years time we will not be able to produce electricity more cheaply than the price at which it can be imported? In England, for example, they have kicked the wind turbines to touch and given a contract to the French to build five plants. In Mr. Slye's opinion, is the most likely scenario one in which it will be cheaper to import electricity than to produce it here?

Mr. Slye referred to working with IDA Ireland in the regions. That must be a recent development because everything that organisation has been doing has been focused on Dublin. It is not in the past three, four or ten years that consideration has been given to the regions.

Investment in motorway infrastructure in recent years has left us with a good network. By and large, that development managed to avoid, as much as possible, impacting on home owners. In deciding the location of pylons and other infrastructure why does EirGrid not seem to give the same consideration to avoiding building near people's houses? Why has it not worked in conjunction with the National Roads Authority in devising these projects rather than imposing a blight on the landscape in all parts of Ireland?

Deputy Michael Colreavy and Senator Sean D. Barrett spoke about the impact of this infrastructure on property prices. Has EirGrid undertaken any analysis of the extent to which the homes of people living 50 m or 100 m from these unsightly pylons will be devalued? The delegates have indicated that they took account of the impact on tourism and referred to community grants, which seems to be the buzz phrase. Community grants are being talked about like the pill the doctor will give to the patient to make him or her better. However, ordinary people, many of whom are in negative equity, are understandably concerned about the impact of pylons and turbines on the valuation of their property. We have seen how much the technology has advanced in the past six months throughout Europe and the world in dealing with cryptosporidium and other types of water pollution. I am sure that if similar progress is made in the case of electricity infrastructure, networking could become a very efficient and cost-effective way to go.

Has Mr. Slye looked at the cost base analysis given that more people are working, be it digging or whatever, and more tax is returned to the Exchequer and it may be a better option for everyone's sake? I ask Mr. Slye to address particularly the issue of England and France. Are we going down a road where there will be wires and pylons all over the country?