Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Cuív wants to come back in and there may be other members who also want to. I will ask a couple of questions because I am going to the House later and would not like the officials to miss out on them. Will somebody give us an update on what is happening at EU level? The basic high-speed broadband definition at EU level at the moment is 30 Mbps per second. None of us believes that is high-speed broadband. When I was Minister, I pushed hard to get that definition increased to 100 Mbps per second. I understand there is ongoing engagement between the Commission and member states on this, so I ask for an update on it.

On a positive aspect, last December, when the officials were before the committee, I raised the issue of broadband connections to marts around the country, explained the difficulties marts were having and gave a list of those I identified where there were specific problems. In fairness, the officials came up trumps with 11 of them, including the mart in Castlerea where there was very poor broadband service, which is a very positive development.

Mr. hÓbáin referenced on a number of occasions that the Covid-19 pandemic has been a big part of the problem in the failure to deliver this year. As I said in my opening remarks, the planned build next year is just 800 homes more per month than this year, despite the projection that we will not have the issues related to Covid-19 next year. It just does not add up that there is big problem with Covid-19 this year and yet we are only able to deliver 800 homes more next year when we do not expect a problem with Covid. I have gone through the transcripts from the Committee of Public Accounts and the Department of the Environment, Transport and Communications, in addition to the evidence we have heard this morning, and Eir does not seem to have a problem with Covid-19. It has achieved its make-ready target and gone beyond it for this year. How is it that one telecommunications company has been able to achieve its targets for delivery of the national broadband plan on the make-ready target despite Covid, yet the reason NBI has given for not meeting its targets is the issue of Covid? If Covid has been such a problem in terms of teams on the ground, was this ever communicated to the HSE? The HSE specifically established teams to look at serious infection rates in meat plants. I scrutinised this in a lot of detail in relation to various outbreaks and not once did I hear of any of the public health teams throughout the country talking about a problem with telecommunications companies. Will the officials clarify that for me?

I received a tweet from an individual this morning, to which Mr. Neary might respond. It states that this individual is just finding out that he or she cannot have NBI fibre and a landline telephone. Apparently, NBI connections do not support the two. The mobile phone reception for this person is not good at home and he or she really relies on a landline. Will Mr. Neary provide an answer to that?

On the issue of communications, Mr. Neary spoke about the example in Castleplunket and said that NBI works on the best information it has available to it. Last week, I furnished details of a case of a constituent of mine to Mr. Neary, who this summer received correspondence from NBI stating that he or she would be connected to the high-speed fibre network by this autumn. This person has now received a further communication stating that it will be a further five years, 2026, before he or she will get it. In this instance, the surveys and the design were completed. The design was completed months before my constituent got this particular correspondence. The best information available to the company was not reflected in the communication to this individual. This is just one example. I can bring Mr. Neary to communities in south Roscommon, east Galway and mid-Roscommon that have received similar correspondence from NBI. What exactly is going on with the communications strategy?

Mr. Neary said that the contractor will go as far as it can where it is technically possible to do so. What is the limit of that technical possibility?

SACs and so forth have been mentioned but what is the technical limit of the build-out?

The core of the problem is that Covid-19 is not the single biggest factor causing the problems and delays. All we have to do is look at what the Tánaiste said to me in the House last week, and said in the House two weeks before that. He flagged there was a problem in getting permission to erect poles. That is a problem from local authorities across the country.

I received a reply on 14 October to a parliamentary question regarding the mobile phone and broadband task force, which was established to deal with these problems where there was a lack of connection between telecommunications companies, local authorities and other State and semi-State agencies. Bizarrely, that task force sat for the last time the month before the contract was signed. In the reply of 14 October, we were told a joint utilities local authority user forum was being used to address the problems between local authorities and the contractor. Why were guidelines issued by the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage in August and why did the Minister bring the planning officers together last May if this forum was already working? My understanding, and Dr. O'Connor can correct me if I am wrong, is that the County and City Management Association, CCMA, has written to the Department asking that the task force be re-established. That association obviously believes there is a problem, if it is seeking the re-establishment of a task force that has not sat in the last two years.

The Secretary General of the Department in evidence before the Committee of Public Accounts last week said one of the three original contractors, the UK-based Kelly Group, decided not to do work here and that left us high and dry with the delivery of 140,000 km of cable. How big a factor has the Kelly Group's decision not to take up that contract been? What action is being taken to recoup some of the costs resulting from that?

The task force was abandoned in October 2019. The contract was signed in November 2019. The programme for Government was published in June 2020 and promised to fast-track the national broadband plan. The Government's remote working strategy stating it wanted to prioritise the delivery of the broadband plan was published in January 2021. The guidelines issued by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage happened 21 months after the contract was signed, 14 months after the commitment was given in the programme for Government and eight months after the remote working strategy was published. I understand there is a new agreement between National Broadband Ireland and Eir on fast-tracking the make ready programme. Why has it taken 23 months since the signing of the original contract for this review to take place, given that 16 months ago, a clear commitment was given in the programme for Government to look at fast-tracking it and the remote working strategy was published ten months ago?

I know there has been a problem with Irish Rail. Fibre cable has gone as far as Irish Rail and will not go under or over the rail line. I understand there is now an agreement in place with CIÉ, 23 months after the contract was signed, 16 months after the commitment to fast-track this in the programme for Government and ten months after the remote working strategy was published. We have, in terms of Transport Infrastructure Ireland, a trial taking place in Blessington concerning anomalies there in accessing the licensing and infrastructure. That is 22 months after the contract was signed, 15 months after the commitment in the programme for Government and nine months after the remote working strategy. There is clearly a lack of joined-up thinking between Government, State agencies, semi-State bodies and local authorities. One mechanism that could have dealt with much of this was the task force that was established specifically to do that and was stood down the month before the contract was signed. It is not just me coming up with this interpretation. The CCMA believes the same thing or it would not have requested that this be re-established. The Chairman of the communications committee, Deputy O'Donnell, said last month:

...it would appear that one of the areas that probably requires a bit of tightening up is ... to get [the] road opening [and] planning licences [streamlined] through the local authorities.

The answer from National Broadband Ireland is that if "dedicated resources within each local authority [could be put in place to] handle our licence applications and [processes] in a timely fashion, it would be of great benefit to us in attempting to complete this plan in less than ... seven years". The witnesses have been aware of the problems for two years. Why has the task force not been re-established? Why have these issues been left to drag on? As a result of that, 75,000 homes must wait for longer. If the witnesses could address those issues, I would appreciate it. They are the issues to which the public wants answers. Members of the public want to know there is joined-up thinking across Departments, Government agencies and bodies to deliver this because it is a basic piece of infrastructure that every citizen wants and should have the right to receive as quickly as is humanly possible.