Mr. Fergal Mulligan:

I will address the notion that Mr. McCourt might be fully paid back by a certain date. We hope the design, build and operation of the plan will be successful. If everything is a roaring success, like any equity put into any company, the equity providers will be entitled to take their money back with a rate of return. That is what Mr. Watt would have said. If Mr. McCourt is successful in rolling out to 540,000 premises, connecting them on time and meeting all of the KPIs, requisite milestones and every other part of the contract - it will be a significant burden on any private operator over ten years, but I hope to be sitting here in ten years' time saying he has done it - he will be entitled to take back the money he has invested. If he does not meet the requirements, he will have two choices. His main choice will be to invest more equity. If there are fewer customers in year four or five and a cashflow shortfall, he will have to make up the equity. He will not get more of the subsidy. The equity in the company being established is to be €175 million, but who knows what additional amount might have to be invested by year six or seven to avoid us stepping in.

The Deputy should not forget that we have a choice. If Mr. McCourt has 150 or 200 people working in a company, we will not be starting from scratch. As long as it is appropriate to do so, we have the choice, not the obligation, to take that company and keep everything going. Much of the subsidy will not have been paid at various checkpoints. There are 110 deployment areas. If 40 are delivered by year four, the network will have been built for those 40 areas. We would take on those 40 areas and have a choice about whether we shouold keep the process going with the operating company or doing it differently. I assume the operating company would be working in the way it should, with experts and people in place. It might just be the case that Mr. McCourt had ran out of road and money.