Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

The intervention by Eir last week has changed the tenor of our investigation to a certain extent. The previous presentation by academics from the University of Limerick was also very compelling. Going back to my core concern, the question was always whether a gap model or concession model was the appropriate approach. The State is the investor here and the one taking the risk and putting in all the money. I am sure the witnesses have been following the hearings we have had on this, but it is still hard to understand how, given that the State is putting all the money in, we do not own the asset at the end. One thing we learned from what Eir said last week is that fibre stands up well against lightning and wet Irish conditions. The experience of the 340,000 houses is that fibre holds up well and will hold up even better if we are building a new network. What Analysys Mason said today is slightly different from what it said to this committee. Is hard to reconcile what it says in its note to the Department with what it said here about the benefits of having a dual network. Given that we are creating that dual network and, according to Eir, that the fibre is standing up well to the environment in rural Ireland, why are we giving away the assets that we are paying for? Is there anything the two University of Limerick academics said in that regard that does not make sense? I found their arguments compelling.