Mr. Pat Galvin:

As Mr. Denihan said, the industry identifies with the frustration felt by people about the broadband and mobile phone issue. When we talk about scale of market intensity, we are not suggesting we have a problem with social planning generally. All we are saying is scale is hugely important for any utility industry, be it electricity, water and sewerage or telecommunications. As it is a very capital-intensive industry, we must make a commercial return and the reason we must make a commercial return is very simple. If we do not make reasonable profits, we cannot plough them back into extending the network we develop; therefore, it is an iterative process. It is very important to understand what "commercial viability" means and I might refer to our understanding of the Government's view in respect of the national broadband plan.

As Mr. Denihan outlined, perhaps compared to three years ago, one of the reasons customer frustration has become very sharp, particularly in the past year, is that as the industry rolls out high-speed broadband into communities that three years ago would never have anticipated receiving it, while communities in every county in Ireland can access high speed fibre-based broadband, not everybody can access it. In the case of the fixed network, we are involved in a three year national upgrade programme and any programme of this scale in terms of an infrastructure upgrade takes time and planning. Inevitably, when one starts to do it, the frustration for those who do not receive it immediately builds. Therefore, the frustration of those living in what we call black spots is completely understandable. The challenge identified by the Deputy and the Chairman is whether the industry can identify with this - we do - and develop a process to accelerate the development of broadband services. In that context and certainly in the case of the fixed network, we have accelerated our plans and now intend to have 1.6 million premises accessing high speed broadband in 2016 at the end of the three year programme.

In respect of the communities that will ultimately be served during that time, there will still be a residual number of people who will not have broadband. The outcome of the industry collaboration with the Government two years ago was a recognition that there was a line between the commercial market and the market that was difficult to serve and that we needed a collegiate approach to solving that problem. The industry supports the Government's conclusion - that at some point in respect of where the line is drawn, people generally assume the ratio should possibly be 70%:30%. It may not be that figure; it may be higher or lower as the industry develops the network. However, the industry generally endorses the Government's conclusion that if we are to eliminate the digital divide, it must be collaborative. The Government has signalled that it intends to identify those areas in which it cannot be proved the service is commercial. That will change as we roll out the service because the degree of commerciality improves depending on how it is rolled out. At that stage, the Government will intervene. Our message to it, of which it is aware, is that we should do this quickly and get it right first time. That is what the industry is committed to doing in the context of the national broadband plan. Whenever tender is issued, we will respond to it as an industry in a competitive way. The solution is available to be implemented. The challenge for the industry is to manage expectations and the frustration felt in the interim period.

That is my comment on the overall solution in respect of rural broadband services.