Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

This debate is really useful because we are hearing the type of information that has been difficult to get. Before discussing the NBI I wish to ask a few questions about mobile services. Who decides the policy that licences for mobile services are sold on a population basis to the private sector?

I know ComReg issues the licences. Who decides the policy, the Minister or the Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg?

Why was this done on a population basis rather than a geographic basis? My understanding is that covering, say, 90% of the population allows huge areas of countryside with relatively sparse populations to be left out. On the other hand, I understand that some of the Nordic countries provided operated on a population basis and covered 99% of the population. Their populations make Ireland look very densely populated. In the northern Arctic regions the population is very small but the geographic area is huge. I understand they have something like 99% coverage. Perhaps the witnesses can explain this and say where responsibility for policy resides.

What is the population coverage requirement for a licence at the moment? In other words, what population do 4G and 5G licence holders have to cover? What area coverage does that translate into? That is very important. Those are the hard questions people in the areas with no decent signal are asking.

Regarding National Broadband Ireland, NBI, I have always believed in providing fibre to the home, as long ago as 2011 and 2012. I am glad speeds have improved from 30 Mbps. That is historic now. I welcome the idea that rural Ireland is getting 500 Mbps. That is fantastic. The fibre solution is the only solution. I know there will be exceptions to that but they will be very few and far between. I have one question in that regard. The offshore islands have quite dense populations. I see the Aran Islands are marked on the witnesses' graphic. How will they be connected to the mainland? Will there be a fibre cable connection or a wireless radio connection?

There is another question that everybody is asking. At the moment, when users connects to the Internet and enter their eircode they are either served or told they are in the NBI area. It is very black and white. No indication is given of whether service will be available in five years, six years or whatever. When will indicative dates be available? In all fairness, Eir did this. There was slippage of months, but not of years. When will there be some indication of when this will be carried out? Presumably those responsible already know.

The witnesses say the contract runs for six or seven years from this time last year. Has one year of the contract elapsed? Could that be reduced to five years from this time last year, that is, four years from now? That is becoming absolutely critical. These centres are fine, but they do not replace what people are looking for. They want connections in their homes and businesses.

We have been told the cost of the NBI last year. I have always believed it was worth pursuing one way or the other. I went against my own party on this because I thought it made a mistake. It was costing €2.9 billion, but I understand that included a big contingency. Given what happened this spring in relation to fibre connections to the 300,000 Eir premises, am I right in thinking that there could be a very substantial drop in cost? That was contingent on a very low take-up which has probably already been exceeded in the Eir coverage area.

I am trying to keep my questions very specific. Do we have figures for the current take-up of fibre in the Eir deployment area, which is almost equivalent? Did Eir cover the full area the company said it would cover, that is, the 300,000 houses and premises? I thank the Chair for his indulgence.