Brian Stanley (Laois, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We started out with a benchmark of €800 million or €0.8 billion for this project and the Minister stood up in the Chamber week after week to tell us the sum would cover the delivery of fibre broadband to every home, farm and business in the State. It has now been clarified that the Government and the Department have moved away from that. Even though there is not going to be fibre broadband delivered to every home, and we do not know how many homes it will not go to, the subsidy has increased to €2.95 billion, which is amazing. I know that politicians will sometimes reject the advice of civil servants at either local or national level. We have all had bits of arguments with civil servants either at local government level or at national level, and I have had arguments and disagreed with civil servants on occasions.

There is a memorandum, dated 3 April 2019, by Mr. Brendan Ellison in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, which states:

However, we strongly recommend against approval of the appointment of the preferred bidder to the current NBP procurement process, on the grounds of: costs and affordability;

impact on the NDP and on projects foregone as a result; [We know the list includes schools and other infrastructural projects.]

value for money and, specifically uncertain benefits;

unprecedented risk to the Exchequer; [The phrase "unprecedented risk" is very strong language.]

and compatibility with the spatial objects of Project Ireland 2040.

That is just one quote. The documents are littered with such statements.

Mr. Watt in the Department stated in another document, "I want to again reiterate my gravest concerns about all of this", which he outlined.

Is the Department certain that it should go against this advice and the advice of the officials in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform who are charged with looking after the State finances? The public is looking at this and those who have been looking at the issue over the past ten days or so see that the costs have not shot up, and that the nature of the investors and who they are has not changed dramatically. We were given to believe there would be a 50:50 split, even if it was not said explicitly, and that if the taxpayer put in €1 billion, the investor would put in €1 billion. The main investor now appears to be putting in €45 million.