Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There is really no financial benefit for going the other way because the State is carrying such a huge chunk of the cost.

On the 300,000 premises, do the witnesses accept that if, as has been suggested, that the notion of overlaying the fibre was to protect the future demands of the 300,000 premises that are already in the intervention area? If any consideration was given to that as a reason for the additional cost it would breach the state aid rules because there is already an incumbent. Therefore, any further provision of taxpayers' money to future-proof the 300,000 premises would be a breach of State aid rules.