John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, will brief the committee on the upcoming Telecommunications Council of Ministers meeting taking place in Brussels on 6 December and the Energy Council of Ministers meeting taking place on 12 December. On behalf of the committee I welcome the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, and his officials, Mr. Mark Griffin, Secretary General, Mr. Ken Spratt and Mr. Dave Hanley.

I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. I also wish to advise that any submission or opening statements the witnesses have submitted to the committee will be published on the committee's website after the meeting. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I understand the Minister has another commitment and he has to leave by 10.45 a.m.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I am in the House with a Bill and I presume colleagues on the committee or at least the spokespersons will want to be in the Chamber as well because we are prosecuting a Bill.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will proceed. I ask the Minister to make his opening remarks.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the members for the opportunity to appear before the joint committee today to discuss the forthcoming Telecommunications and Energy Councils on 5 and 12 December, respectively.

I will start by dealing with the Telecommunications Council. I understand the committee already has a copy of the draft agenda. The Lithuanian Presidency will provide the Council with progress reports on two dossiers, first, the proposed network and information security directive and, second, the proposed regulation on broadband cost reduction. Both these files are an important part of the EU's digital agenda.

There will also be an orientation debate on the recent Commission proposals on the single telecoms market, also known as the connected continent initiative. The primary purpose of this debate is to provide some guidance and direction to the incoming Greek Presidency in terms of how best to manage this important and detailed file when it assumes the Council chair in January next.

Under the any other business part of the agenda, the Presidency will provide the Council with information on the files relating to trans-European telecommunications networks, and electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions. It is not anticipated that there will be any discussion on either of those two issues.

The forthcoming Council should be viewed in the context of the recent European Council, which had a specific digital theme. The conclusions of that Council meeting stated, inter alia, that the Heads of State wanted to see the completion of the digital single market by 2015. The European Council welcomed the presentation of the Commission's connected continent package and encouraged the legislature to carry out an intensive examination with a view to its timely adoption.

The draft network and information security directive relates to cyber security and proposes that member states be required to adopt national network information security strategies, designate national competent authorities and establish computer emergency response teams. It sets out standardised procedures for dealing with the increasingly sensitive area of cyber security and proposes an enabling power for the Commission to specify mandatory reporting obligations in regard to security breaches on public administrations and on critical infrastructure operators.

In general terms, Ireland welcomes the proposal although it is seeking clarifications on the precise scope of the directive. A number of member states are of the opinion that the proposed obligations on market operators and public administrations to assess and report risks posed to their information systems, as well as taking the necessary steps to deal with such risks, are too onerous. Striking the balance between commercial sensitivity and mitigating risks through information sharing will be an important feature of the final text on this directive. I expect discussions on the detail of this file to continue through next year's Greek and Italian Presidencies. I am conscious that the joint committee has expressed a wish to hold a meeting with my officials on this particular proposal and I have asked my colleagues to contact the joint committee with a view to arranging such a briefing as early as possible.

In respect of the progress report on the broadband cost reduction proposals, I understand the committee has already had an opportunity to discuss the detail of this file with my officials a couple of months ago. In common with most other member states, Ireland's primary concern in this regard is with the proposed legal instrument. While the Commission is proposing a regulation, the majority of member states would favour the greater flexibility a directive gives when taking into account existing national mechanisms for dealing with the issues and aims of the proposal. Subsequent to last year's publication of both the next generation broadband task force report and the national broadband plan itself, my officials have been working with fellow Departments and local authorities and agencies with a view to streamlining and introducing greater consistencies into the consent and planning processes around the installation of telecommunications and broadband infrastructure. I am very conscious of the extent to which civil engineering contributes to the costs of these investments and I hope that our initiatives in this area can have a positive impact on reducing overall capital investment requirements for telecommunications operators. My Department is also continuing to work to ensure that it leverages, as much as possible, the existing State-owned infrastructure, again with a view to reducing the overall investment burden.

Much of this territory is covered in the Commission's draft regulation and the Government's aim is to ensure the measures being proposed are as effective as can be and as has been achieved to date in Ireland and do not cause additional complexity. In the Government's view, a directive would be a preferable legal instrument that would allow member states such as Ireland to adapt legal principles to suit local circumstances. A number of member states have expressed concerns about the impact of the proposed regulation on property rights, a concern which Ireland shares. It will be important to resolve these issues as this proposal moves forward to ensure the proposals are effective and workable. Much scrutiny work remains to be done on this proposal at working group level and I therefore expect no discussion or debate on the subject at Council next week.

The final substantive item on the Council agenda is the proposal on the single telecommunications market. I understand the joint committee recently engaged with my officials on this matter and has issued a considered opinion on the subsidiarity aspects of the Commission's proposals. The concerns raised by my officials during their appearance before this joint committee a few weeks ago have been echoed by a number of member states at recent meetings in Brussels. The European Council, in its October conclusions, noted the need for intensive scrutiny of the proposal, which will assist in ensuring proportionate and effective outcomes from this measure. The Lithuanian Presidency will chair an orientation debate on this issue at next week's Council. This proposal is relatively new, having only been published in September. I expect that member states will reiterate their support for a digital single market during the debate but will also signal the need for time to consider this new proposal in detail. It is worth reminding members that during the previous Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council on telecommunications held in June last, which I chaired in Luxembourg, Ireland facilitated a policy debate on the concept of a single telecommunications market. Although this debate was prompted before the Commission had published its proposals, it provided an opportunity for member states to signal any issues that were likely to be of concern.

Two key perspectives on policy emerged from that ministerial discussion, the first being that market consolidation across Europe may not be in the long-term interests of competition or consumers and the second being that spectrum is a national strategic asset and must be safeguarded for economic and other reasons. I believe Ministers are very likely to hear a repeat of these key messages when they gather in Brussels again next week. I am glad that the Lithuanian Presidency has devoted much of the agenda to a debate on this topic, as the Government has consistently underlined the need for in-depth and intense debate on it. The Commission always has been proactive in promoting a seamless digital single market and this initiative seeks to accelerate progress towards this end. Additional consumer protections, the elimination of roaming and other regulatory measures are all welcome ambitions and the Commission has a strong track record of delivery in these areas. It is important, however, to have a measured and considered debate on this proposal to ensure the goal of a single European digital market is achieved as effectively as possible and to continue to support vital investments in telecommunications infrastructure and services.

At the Council next week, Ireland will highlight the continued need for the Union to maintain a stable and pro-investment regulatory framework, while continuing to progress the various elements of the digital agenda targets. I am pleased to note that files which were prioritised during the Irish Presidency have been progressed by the Lithuanians, in particular the file on electronic identification, which will be the subject of a report under any other business. Clearly, it is in the interest of Ireland and Europe to have a fully functioning, seamless digital market across Europe. All of these measures contribute to that goal, which aims to increase Europe’s competitiveness and ensure an more inclusive society for all of its citizens.

In respect of energy matters, the Council will deal with one legislative file, which is the draft directive on indirect land use change and Ministers are expected to adopt a common Council position on this file. As for non-legislative activities, the Council will consider two reports, one on the internal energy market and the other on external energy relations. These reports are being presented by way of follow-up to the European Council of 22 May 2013.

With regard to the fuel mix in the transport sector, the 2009 renewable energy directive set a target of 10% of transport fuels from renewable sources by 2020. This target is binding on all member states. The directive also requires that all biofuels used to meet the 10% target must comply with certain sustainability criteria, that is, they must not be made from feedstocks sourced from certain categories of land and must achieve certain greenhouse gas emissions reductions. In October 2012, the Commission proposed a set of amendments to this directive and to the fuel quality directive to mitigate the potential effects of indirect land use change, ILUC, occurring as a result of the use of certain biofuels, sending a clear message to the market that second generation biofuels were preferable to biofuels made from food crops. One amendment proposed was to limit the contribution that certain crop-based biofuels can make towards renewable energy targets for transport in European Union member states. I share the concerns that biofuel production and its use, unless properly regulated, could have a negative impact on food production and on food prices. Moreover, first generation biofuels also could lead to increases in greenhouse gas emissions, which would be contrary to the objectives of the renewable energy directive. In this regard, Ireland has argued for a restriction on first generation biofuels and for incentives to encourage the development of advanced biofuels that do not affect food production. Ireland’s preference is to see as low a cap as realistically achievable to mitigate the potential conflict between biofuel use in the EU and land use in the developing world, and the potential for higher greenhouse gas emissions from certain categories of biofuels.

This has been a complex file with views expressed across a broad spectrum, from arguments that it does not adequately address the risk of ILUC emissions to concerns about its impact on investment and jobs. However, I understand that the Lithuanian Presidency is confident of securing a qualified majority at Council with respect to its text, which includes a cap of 7% on biofuels from food crops and the requirement that member states report to the Commission on the feed stocks used in making biofuels. Ireland has supported the Lithuanian Presidency's efforts to reach agreement on this proposal and although, regrettably, a lower target is proposed, Ireland can agree to the overall text as a package in the context of a negotiation with the Parliament in 2014, and we will indicate that next week.

The Presidency will present a report on completion of the EU internal energy market by 2014, as a follow-up to the 2013 European Council's conclusions on energy. The report is to be adopted at the Energy Council on 12 December and submitted to the European Council in March 2014.

The Presidency's report covers a range of issues concerning the completion of the internal energy market, IEM, including demand side issues; further empowerment of the energy consumer and protection of vulnerable consumers; the need for further discussion on generation adequacy and capacity mechanisms; and the importance of joint solutions to problems and of information exchange between member states, particularly on matters with potential implications for other member state. In addition, the five energy policy priorities identified by the European Council, namely, the single energy market, investments, diversification of energy sources, energy efficiency and competitiveness, are also addressed in the Presidency's report.

The report highlights the importance of the TEN-E Regulation 347/2013 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure adopted in April to end energy isolation, and states that the first list of projects of common interest, covering 248 projects spread over 12 priority corridors and areas, marks an important milestone for the implementation of a fully interconnected trans-European energy network.

With regard to investor certainty, the report states that a clear framework for climate and energy policies for 2030 is required. In March 2014, the European Council will discuss policy options for the 2030 framework, having regard to the Commission's 2013 Green Paper, A 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy Policies.

The Presidency's report also notes the ongoing discussions on the Commission's proposed directive on the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure; the Commission's plans to adopt guidelines on state aid for energy and environmental protection in 2014 so as to ensure that subsidies do not unduly distort the internal energy market; the updates on a number of programmes which will fund energy related measures; and the development by member states and the Commission of an action plan to implement the integrated roadmap which will prioritise the development of innovative solutions for the European energy systems in the future by mid-2014.

With regard to diversification, energy efficiency and pricing, the Presidency's report refers to the work being done by the Commission on an environment, climate and energy assessment framework to enable safe and secure unconventional hydrocarbon extraction, which is expected to be published before the end of this year.

The draft report contains updates about progress made by member states on the implementation of the energy efficiency directive and on the rate of transposition of the 2010 directive on the energy performance of buildings. It urges member states to define and clarify the relevant regulatory and policy framework for nearly-zero energy buildings.

The report also lists the actions being taken to address the impact of high energy prices and costs, in the context of the EU competitiveness, including reviewing whether a new approach is needed on long-term contracts in the EU wholesale gas market. In addition, the report looks forward to the presentation by the Commission of its analysis of the composition and drivers of energy prices and costs, as requested by the European Council. That analysis will form the basis of further discussion on the factors underlying increasing energy prices and costs.

The report concludes by stating that sustained efforts are needed to achieve the 2014 goal set for completion of the internal energy market. It identifies three priorities for attention: harmonisation through implementation of the third energy package; development of energy infrastructure without delay; and effective application and enforcement of EU rules on market integration and energy efficiency for a level playing field for companies operating in the EU.

In May 2013, the European Council called on energy ministers to follow up on their 2011 conclusions on the Commission's 2011 communication on security of energy supply and international co-operation, entitled The EU Energy Policy: Engaging with Partners Beyond our Borders. Following the Commission's review in September 2013, and discussions with member states, the Lithuanian Presidency prepared a draft report dealing with the main elements in the global energy landscape since 2011.

The report identifies the most significant issues since the adoption of the conclusions in November 2011 as the continued growth of unconventional oil and gas production in the US, increased exports of US coal to the European Union leading to increased use of coal in electricity generation and reduced use of gas-fired plants in the EU - the competitiveness of European energy intensive industries has been affected; the potential for shale gas exploitation in the EU has become a significant issue in terms of security of supply and competitiveness; and new sources of fossil fuels are emerging, most significantly in the eastern Mediterranean.

Competitiveness continues to be a significant issue in Europe and energy prices are a major contributor to the debates. The Commission is working on an analysis of the composition of energy prices and costs and will present this in January 2014 as part of the climate and energy 2030 framework package. The topic for discussion at February European Council is competitiveness.

During the discussion at the September 2013 ministerial meeting in Vilnius, Ministers noted the significant progress on the energy community treaty, which will be the model framework for developing energy relationships with other countries and regions. For example, there is a possibility that a similar energy community will develop from the Union for the Mediterranean.

Work on modernising the energy charter continues and membership has increased. Russia has still not ratified the treaty. However, it has paid its outstanding dues up to 2009 and continues to engage with the charter. The aim of the ministerial session on 5 December is to assess the last 15 years of practice and theory in energy investment promotion and protection under the treaty. The Lithuanian Presidency's text on the energy charter will be approved at COREPER on 29 November and presented to the Energy Ministers' December Council for endorsement.

Under any other business, there will be a presentation on the work programme of the incoming Greek Presidency and an update on recent development in the nuclear energy field.

It is expected that the Greek Presidency will deal with only one legislative measure, namely the ILUC file, which will inevitably be affected by the European Parliament elections. The priority issue for the Greek Presidency is likely to be progress on the climate and energy 2030 framework. The European Councils in February and March will discuss competitiveness and the 2030 framework, respectively. The Greek Presidency will have input into both European Councils. The March Energy Council is also likely to discuss the 2030 framework. The other priority issue for the Greek Presidency will be the protection of vulnerable energy consumers.

Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to discuss what will be a busy meeting for him. I appreciate that he mentioned earlier that a number of items will not be debated and discussed, but in the context of the pursuing of a goal of a single European digital market, one question that would arise is whether the successful achievement of this will result in lower prices for the Irish consumer.

What is the current state of biofuel production in Ireland in terms of secondary resources, as outlined, rather than those associated with the food area? I understood that what little biofuel production occurs in Ireland is related to the food area.

Is it the concept of developing energy infrastructure without delay, as outlined in the report's conclusions on the completion of the internal energy market, that is forcing EirGrid to pursue its current policies on accelerating infrastructural development in Ireland? Does the Minister have any comment to make on the ongoing debate on infrastructure? A number of groups have appeared before the committee in recent weeks that are united in their view that there should be undergrounding of cabling in Leinster and the north midlands. I would be grateful if the Minister, who has made a number of public statements in this regard, took the opportunity of clarifying the exact position.

With regard to the report on progress on external energy relations, reference is made to the continual growth of unconventional oil and gas production in the United States and increased exports of US coal to the European Union, leading to the increased use of coal in electricity generation and a reduction in the use of gas-fired plants in the European Union. This is a very serious development, coming about primarily because of the literal collapse in the cost of shale gas in the United States. A number of companies are able to sell their coal cheaper than gas, which represents a complete turnaround from the position a year or two ago. It is stated that a particular type of coal, Illinois coal, does not seem to pose as much danger to the environment in terms of climate change, but I am not so sure because a leading expert in the coal area said recently that three quarters of the remaining coal deposits should remain in the ground. Does this relate to Ireland in any way in the context of the increased exports of US coal to the European Union? Does it affect climate change and our obligations in terms of trying to reduce carbon emissions?

Can the Minister give us an update on the position of Ireland on fracking? A media report last week indicated that the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, will produce its impact report in January or February of next year. Can the Minister say when he expects to get that report? What does he expect to do with it?

Does Ireland participate in nuclear energy discussions at Council meetings when they arise? For example, under the heading of any other business, there will be a presentation on the work programme of the incoming Greek Presidency and an update on recent developments in the nuclear energy field. I am curious about this because Ireland has a particular anti-nuclear position. Do we actually participate in nuclear energy discussions or do we absent ourselves?

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are a number of important questions. The primary motivation behind the digital single market across Europe is not so much focused on the impact on domestic consumers; rather, it is about facilitating continued economic growth within the European Union and removing obstacles to stimulating investment and growth within Europe. It is a matter of enabling Europe to compete with Asia and the United States. It is designed to encourage innovation and enterprise within the Union and to allow greater access to these markets for Irish businesses. However, it is fair to say that a single digital market could only have a positive impact on prices. It is certainly very difficult to understand why it should have a negative impact on prices. A great deal of work has yet to be done. Different member states have different traditions and histories in this regard. The members will know from recent engagement with my officials that there is a great deal of work to be done.

Senator Mooney is correct that what has happened in the United States has had a profound impact on the global energy market. It was not foreseen as recently as five or six years ago. The scale of discovery of shale gas and shale oil has had a considerable impact on gas prices in the United States. The result is that the United States is now engaged in the export of coal to Europe. I will not say it is cheap coal, but it is certainly cheaper, and that is beginning to change the geopolitical map in energy terms. The United States is heading fast towards self-sufficiency in energy production, which would have been unthinkable only a few years ago.

The Senator asked about the impact of US developments on Ireland. They have little enough impact but they have major implications for Europe at Commission level in the sense that serious issues of competitiveness arise owing to the fact that the cheaper energy stock is available in the United States.

The Commission is due to publish a paper on hydraulic fracturing by the end of this year. Many member states will be interested in it. Some member states are far more positive about the new technology than others. Poland, for example, is very anxious to proceed with it. Its rationale is that fracking makes a contribution to lowering carbon emissions because shale gas would be a better prospect considering its reliance on coal at present. The British Government recently made taxation changes to encourage hydraulic fracturing in Britain. Countries such as France have a temporary moratorium while they examine the issue.

The moneys have been assembled and the basic groundwork has been done for the major study by the EPA. Given the length of time it took the United States Environmental Protection Agency to produce its report, I do not believe we will have ours in 2014. I believe it will be 2015. As the Senator knows, there will be no hydraulic fracturing taking place in Ireland in the interim. It is important that we carry out a proper, thorough and professional assessment of the technology and that we can ultimately rely on the science. In political terms that is a long way down the road, but Europe cannot turn a blind eye to the competitiveness implications of what is happening elsewhere in the world. We will have to engage in the debate, but I would like to see us engage in it when we have proper scientific analysis that will allow us to engage on the basis of fact.

Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister anticipate that there will be a move towards a comprehensive shale gas protection policy within the European Union following next week's meeting?

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. The report was only seriously engaged in during the summer and will not be published until the end of this year. There will not be any push in the interim until we get that report and member states have had an opportunity to examine it.

No primary biofuels are being processed in Ireland and all secondary biofuels are from used cooking oil and tallow. The biggest and most significant plant is in Wexford, which I visited recently. It is increasing employment, has almost 50% of the market in Ireland and proposes to grow further.

The dispute in Europe is that there is something of a rethink about the correctness of using primary biofuels and a realisation that the emphasis should move towards secondary biofuels. There is a bigger concern in the developing world. The committee may have been subject to representations from NGOs that know what is happening in some African countries, where huge tracts of land are being cleared. Big transnational corporations from Europe have bought up land for the production of primary biofuels. It is land that could otherwise be used for food production, so there quite a lot of concern about that. The Lithuanian proposal is probably the best that can be achieved in the current circumstances because opinion is divided. During the Irish EU Presidency, when I chaired such Council meetings, I strongly supported the NGOs' arguments. In this particular regard, the NGOs know what they are talking about and state that it is having a negative effect on food production in certain African countries.

On the other hand, some member states have put huge investment into this area in the expectation that they would have certainty for some years ahead. As a result, the 7% figure in the Lithuanian proposal will not meet the target of the NGOs, which have set their cap at 5%. We will support the Lithuanian proposal, however, which is likely to be as good as we will get at this time.

We do participate in the nuclear debate and express the Irish position. The debate is topical for a number for reasons. Post-Fukushima, the decisions that have been made in Europe are highly significant. For example, nobody anticipated the decisions made in Germany and their implications. We have seen what is going on in Britain, which has been engaged for some time in regenerating its nuclear power facilities. The UK has encountered a great many obstacles and difficulties, and has only recently entered into a contract with the French state company, EDF, to construct a plant at Hinkley Point. That is going ahead. We expressed the Irish position, however, and are not alone in doing so. Member states such as Austria take a stronger view than ours. There are also issues concerning the EU safety directive, including nuclear liability and stress tests, in all of which we have an interest. We express those views when the issue is debated at Council level.

As regards energy infrastructure, the debate on the completion of the internal energy market has been focused on the design of the market, as well as regulatory questions and other difficult technical issues. The question of infrastructure and building interconnectors between member states is still some distance into the future. However, one cannot have an integrated market in practice without that interconnection. We have recently strengthened our interconnection to the neighbouring island with a 500 MW interconnector that was commissioned just over a year ago between Wales and County Meath. That is a valuable piece of infrastructure which is cited in Europe as an example of what should be happening between member states. If we are to develop an export capacity exploiting our indigenous resource for the purposes of creating employment and bringing a revenue stream into Ireland by trading green energy with the neighbouring island - and, who knows, maybe further afield in future - then we will have to improve the transmission system. In any event, the transmission system must be continually refurbished to be fit for purpose. The concerns raised by members of this committee are the same across Europe. We have a State agency of acknowledged international competence, which is charged with the delivery of a safe and secure electricity supply system in Ireland. That agency must have regard to safety issues and best practice, but I accept that it is not without controversy.

In recent discussions with EirGrid, and conscious of the position adopted by this committee, I took the opportunity to state that there ought to be an extension of the public consultation period for the Grid Link project. I expressed my own support for that view. As members of the committee will know, the public consultation period has now been extended to 7 January 2014 in order to give community groups and all citizens an opportunity to make their input. We will see how it progresses.

Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will try not to cover ground that has been dealt with already. I wish to thank the Minster for briefing us on the forthcoming Council meeting. A number of critical issues will be discussed there, one of which is cyber-security. Given Ireland's dependence on telecommunications, one of our main growth areas is the services industry, including the financial and technical perspectives. Cyber-security should be at the top of our agenda, given the potential for financial and transactional fraud, electronic identity theft and the leakage of critical data. I know the Minister will raise these matters at the forthcoming Council meeting. We have seen some high profile cases recently whereby critical data is getting into the public domain, but it should not happen. That element of risk needs to be addressed. I welcome the fact that cyber-security is a high priority for the Minister. I would be interested to hear of any further developments in that area.

The Minister noted this committee's concerns about the single telecommunications market. The committee did agree to a considered opinion. It is certainly my opinion that the Irish spectrum of the telecommunications network is a national asset. We need to be careful in any agreements that are reached with our EU partners not to abdicate any control of that network or how it is utilised. It could have implications for our competitiveness, especially given our peripheral position. Perhaps the Minister can expand further on that issue.

Household broadband penetration comes to 65% nationally. I need not tell the Minister of the importance of equality of access to high quality broadband services. While I accept that we are a predominantly rural country, we are a small country. In comparison to other member states, are we achieving favourable access to quality broadband services in the regions? Quite an investment has been made over the past several years in the MANs, metropolitan area networks, in the larger urban centres. What is the connectivity of these centres? It has been identified that Aurora’s dark fibre network needs to be extended to Waterford city and region to link up to other MANs in Cork and Dublin, which are coming out of recession. If we want the regions to come out of recession too, the roll-out of high quality dark fibre broadband infrastructure will be required. Will the strengthening of telecommunications and broadband infrastructure in the regions be on the agenda of the Council meeting?

I welcome the announcement that the time for the consultation process on the Grid Link project will be extended. This will allow for more public consultation on the project, as well as submissions. The Minister referred to the interconnector between Ireland and the UK. How far has development of the interconnector between Ireland and mainland Europe progressed? This will be an important element in the import and export of energy into the future. Energy security and competitiveness are important in optimising our energy resources.

I believe building energy performance is an area in which we are lacking but one in which we are beginning to catch up. Action No. 44 in Action Plan for Jobs is to establish an energy efficiency fund to support energy efficiency in the public and commercial sectors. This is an important action to be implemented if we are to reduce our carbon emissions and get the public on board. We cannot expect various sectors to reduce their carbon emissions when the public sector has not, however. We need to lead by example in this area.

Another action in the plan relates to a disruptive reform in big data and data analytics. The plan hopes it will have a direct economic impact and will support the delivery of public services through innovative measures. This needs to be discussed both domestically and in the European Union, seeking support from our EU partners in areas where there are infrastructural deficits to connect the regions. The fact the south east does not have Aurora’s dark fibre interconnection is putting the region at a disadvantage. Waterford Institute of Technology, WIT, produces top graduates in financial services. Recently, Deutsche Bank announced that it would be creating thousands of jobs in Dublin. There is no reason those jobs cannot be created in the regions, providing we have the infrastructural support. We have the graduates but they are moving to where the infrastructure is located. We need to get the infrastructure in place to support the regions.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I cannot agree more with Deputy Coffey. The exciting point about this new technology is that it offers the regions an opportunity for local development that they never had previously. If we can improve the quality of broadband interconnectivity in provincial Ireland, it will stimulate the creation of local employment that has not been possible in the past 100 years of industrial policy. It is not that we are suddenly going to start landing major foreign investment projects into remote parts. There will be some of that but it will be mainly small companies being spawned to provide services of different kinds online while allowing people to live where they were reared.

The broadband debate at the European Council will not be along the lines that Deputy Coffey has suggested, but it is happening here. We are in the middle of a detailed mapping exercise which is required as a result of the fact that the commercial sector will not provide high quality bandwidth to the regions. There is a very healthy and fierce rivalry in urban areas, with high quality service provision which would compete with most EU member states and is better than some. That is not the case for more than 20% of the population, and due to our population density, a great deal more than 20% of our landmass. It is certainly not up to what will be needed given the increased uptake and the extraordinary developments in the technology and its applications.

The MANs initially were slow to catch on. That is no longer the case, however. It is no exaggeration to say 50% of them were not lit as recently as two years ago. That is no longer the case. The operating franchise recently changed hands, with a new American company in charge. It is its intention to stimulate further usage of the MANs. I do not believe the company in question would have made the purchase, which cost it a lot of money, if it did not see market possibilities.

As a result of the Cabinet approving the requirement for State investment in the south east, we have to comply with state aid rules and make a submission of considerable detail to Brussels. Every tract of inhabited land is being mapped for this submission. We are determined to deliver a high quality service to rural areas. In saying that, I have the support of the Cabinet sub-committee that supervises infrastructure. We do not think anything about the billions of euro spent on roads, electricity and water provision. Yet broadband, like the roll-out of electrification in the 1950s, has the capacity to lift rural areas.

The discussions on the interconnector with France are in the early stages. It is one of the projects of common interest to which I referred earlier.

The energy efficiency fund has been established to focus on energy efficiency in public and commercial buildings. The Department has put €35 million into the fund, with pledges for more than that from the private sector. Last week, the preferred bidder was approved and the legal provisions are now being put in place. It will manage the fund. We will see if we will be able to leverage further private sector funding or use the European Investment Bank as a source of further finance to replenish and increase the fund.

That decision was approved last week.

I agree with the point about cyber-security and critical infrastructure in particular. As I mentioned earlier, we have a group equivalent to the computer emergency response teams, or CERTs as they are known in Europe, and we are examining this issue.

In respect of the single telecommunications market, I cannot see any set of circumstances in which we would pool spectrum. It is a national asset and I cannot see circumstances in which we would want to agree to that.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for my late arrival. I got lost in Galway. I think the internal roads there have changed since I last updated the Sat Nav.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the Deputy should stay more in touch with neighbouring counties.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise to Members for my late arrival.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the Minister is on a time deadline so I ask Deputy Colreavy to get straight down to questions.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have business in the Dáil after Question Time. I apologise to the committee. It is not my regulation.

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be brief. I welcome the Minister's statement that the Government will not accept any of the bids for Bord Gáis. I predicted at the time that the announcement of the pending sale would bring the bargain basement purchasers out in force. In a spirit of co-operation, I will work with the Minister and the Department in their stated aim of continued investment in and development of the Bord Gáis energy business and reviewing options for the future of the business. I have been critical of the Department and Government in respect of the lack of what I would call a real strategy for energy and natural resources. I have made the point that we tend to respond to business interests rather than take the initiative to do what I believe is the right thing for this country.

We agree broadly on the key considerations for energy and natural resources. These are security of supply for this nation; a maximum return for the Irish people in terms of taxation, other income and, critically, employment; and the smooth and non-controversial development of energy and natural resources projects throughout the country. Sadly, that has not happened to date. Critical to this issue of smooth and non-controversial project development is not trampling on the rights of coastal communities in a bid to push ahead with what are sometimes badly planned or located developments. Again, I will work with the Minister on this. I believe his Department and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government need to look at the possibility of a land and landscape planning and management strategy.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has to leave, so could Deputy Colreavy wrap up?

Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe that would ensure that we can preserve what is precious in our unspoiled landscape. Had this been done, the EPA would not even be considering fracking in the north west. Critically, it would permit rational discussion of the impact on host communities and measures needed to minimise or, if necessary, compensate for adverse impact where it exists. It would enable us as a nation to take the initiative. We would be telling the companies where they can locate rather than always responding to the companies' expressed wishes. I have made two offers of co-operation, which the Minister seldom gets from me.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and Deputy Colreavy. I appreciate the olive branch on both issues and the Deputy's remarks about Bord Gáis. The Government stated from the outset that under no circumstances would it engage in any kind of bargain-basement disposal of Bord Gáis and that the energy business of Bord Gáis, which is not a strategic consideration in the same sense as the distribution networks and so on, would only be sold at fair value. In our judgement and that of the advisers to the Department and the company, the final bids that came through did not represent fair value. As a result, I announced this morning that the prices are unacceptable and that we will continue to develop the energy business of Bord Gáis. I am going into the House to complete the Gas Regulation Bill shortly.

On the wider issue of land use planning, natural resources and taxation, I suspect that Deputy Colreavy and I - le cúnamh Dé - will be around to discuss the details for some time into the future.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for attending and for giving us that report. From his comments, I understand that he is taking on board the concerns of the committee in respect of the spectrum.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is true.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank him for that. We will suspend for a minute to allow the witnesses to withdraw.