Mr. Declan Campbell:

Potentially, but I know from my experience that if a consumer is in one of those areas where they can only get poor broadband, they more than likely have tried every way possible to get an improved service at this point. They would have scoured the market and would be aware of exactly whether the service is fixed wireless or a satellite service. Historically, satellite services are a service of last resort. When consumers come to the conclusion the only service available to them is a satellite service, they tend to question when the NBI service will be available and whether they should spend €200 upfront now or there is the possibility that the NBI service will not be rolled out in six months' time. If consumers knew that they would not have a fibre service for six years it would be much easier for them to make that investment now to secure an improved broadband service for that six-year period.

The Government could answer that question for those individuals by potentially removing and subsidising the upfront cost, recognising consumers are not investing any money other than the monthly amounts and the Government would remove that risk. The Government would do that on the basis it would know the dates and it would acknowledge, realistically, that it could not keep people waiting. The Government could provide that for anybody who would not get the service for the next two years. It would know those consumers' Eircodes, the areas where they live. Consumers who would not get the service for the next two years could apply for that option and be entitled to a voucher that would cover the capital expenditure cost for a satellite service or another service that might be available to them. That is where I would see such an intervention being made. It would be a temporary solution. When the NBI service becomes available to those individuals, naturally they would move to that service.