Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

There are two elements to it. One is the fact that Enet was awarded the contract in 2004 and the contract was then extended until 2030 without going back to the market with a tender. Much of what has gone on in relation to the issue is opaque and requires scrutiny. In mid-2017 the infrastructural investment fund invested €200 million in Enet. To be honest, I find that curious given that it is buying into a company whose only product is owned by the State, so the investment was in the State's own asset, as it were.

There are probably two issues. The first is that when the investment was made, Enet was vying for the broadband contract. It is not clear which came first. That is something we need to know because it would have had a bearing on the investment. Broadband has been a huge source of frustration for a long time, given that much has been promised and the roll-out has been hugely disappointing outside of major urban centres. A lot of money has been invested. The situation is opaque and there is a need for scrutiny into what happened. We are now at the point where, currently, there is only one tender. We talk about the need for competitive tendering. The personnel within the company who made the tender has changed over time. I do not know if we can look at the issue but it is happening in real time. The problem is that Actavo, formerly Sitserv, was involved, and there is a commission of investigation into it. The whole issue is hugely problematic. At the very least in this term we should get the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment to come before the committee to get a better understanding of what has happened to date in terms of the investment that was made in relation to this contract and about having better oversight of this.