Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 15 February 2018

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment

National Broadband Plan: Discussion (Resumed)

10:00 am

Photo of Joe O'ReillyJoe O'Reilly (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

At the outset I want to apologise as there may be a level of duplication in my questions. I was unavoidably late for this meeting because of another commitment and therefore have not heard all of the questions. Despite that, I am going to ask questions to which the people I meet seek answers.

There are three specific allegations in the letter from Eir to the Minister of 30 January 2018. The first concerns the regulatory and governance issues that have been repeatedly highlighted over the past 18 months. Implicit in that is the suggestion that Eir had flagged its difficulties and that in some way those problems were not adequately responded to. Can the witnesses comment on that? The second problem mentioned in the letter is that Eir had grave and growing concerns about the current regulatory environment. Can the witnesses comment on that? Is the regulatory environment too oppressive? If so, will this also be a difficulty for Enet? If Eir had legitimate difficulties, will Enet face them as well?

The third issue in the letter from Eir is that there were well-communicated, red-line issues over the period. Implicit in that is that Eir was very clear about what it wanted and that there was not an adequate response to that and that there was too much tardiness in dealing with the issues. The people watching and listening to us today or those who will read the Official Report of the meeting would want assurances and a response on those three implicit suggestions in the letter from Eir, namely, a certain tardiness, a failure to deal with red-line issues and an oppressive regulatory environment, as well as the fact that each of those issues had been flagged. Was enough done? Was there inflexibility in the witnesses' dealing with Eir during the process? Was there an unused flexibility in the system?

There are a few simple basic questions about Enet to which people would like answers. Can the witnesses explain why Enet will not cost more than it would have cost? In other words, how will we avoid a situation where it exploits its position as the only bidder? An assurance around the cost issue would be appreciated, as well an explanation as to why the witnesses are confident about that issue. There will be some doubting Thomases on this issue; apt terminology given the season we are in at the moment.

How will the process with Enet work? How will the process be managed to ensure the kind of objectives the witnesses have are met? People are wondering about the capacity of Enet to do the job - I acknowledge we have had assurances - but can the witnesses pad that out a little? The big issue is the timeframe. Will deadlines be met and when will shovels be in the ground? When do the witnesses see the whole process completing?

When the Minister was in the House on the last occasion, I mentioned there are three simple questions that people on the streets are asking. Will they get the broadband, and when? Will it be cost-effective? Will it be efficient? In essence that is what the questions amount to. I would appreciate if the witnesses could address the specifics I raised.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.