Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The gap-funding model was chosen for good reason. The idea was that the State did not have a preconceived notion of how this ambition would best be served. It wanted to test the market. It also wanted to ensure that irrespective of the technology that was developed and put in place, there would be an incentive for whoever was operating it to keep it future-proofed throughout its life.

The backdrop to this is that a number of years ago Eir was sold off, meaning that we do not own the vast majority of the network. The inevitable feature of this intervention area is that it has to graft itself upon an existing network that is in private sector ownership. I do not pretend that I have read every document from that period when that decision was being taken. However, it was taken on the right basis that the best way to develop this was to stimulate the private sector to come up with a solution that grafted onto existing assets that were not in public ownership. That was the best option. State ownership, in itself, did not confer benefits since it would be a piece of a much wider jigsaw. That was the backdrop. I have no reason to suggest it was not the right decision.

On the Deputy's second question, when two of the bidders decided not to proceed, a decision was taken that nonetheless we would continue with the competitive dialogue. That was taken on the basis that there was an understanding in the Department of the parameters of a successful bid to deliver the sort of solution that was emerging. It was interesting that all the cost-effective solutions emerging were fibre to the home. There was confidence that with proper oversight of the evolution of the contract which was undertaken, this would still represent a proper way to finalise a cost of delivering this.

The Department substantially geared up its resourcing to ensure that it could investigate in enormous detail the cost of different elements of a potential roll-out. The Department has a high level of confidence in the various cost estimates that have been put in place, having shadowed much of the cost-estimation process. The Deputy could argue, as many have argued, that it would have been better if two remained in the race. However, given that two or more did not stay in the race, the Department took the necessary steps to ensure that this evolution would be invigilated to a point where there would be confidence in what was being proposed.

Obviously, it is up to Government to decide whether the costs that will now have been identified with the various riders, contract terms, qualifications, etc., represent a decision that it wants to go along with. I hope to be in a position to bring a recommendation to Government very shortly.