Professor Eoin Reeves:

The reason the gap-funding model was recommended in the KPMG ownership report was that it would increase the value to the bidder, which, in turn, would help drive down the subsidy and the cost. That was the reason the model was chosen. That is why we brought it in, just for the purposes of comparison.

On the question of ownership of network infrastructure, I take on board a number of the points the Senator made. However, I am always mindful of the experience with the Eircom privatisation and the decision made back then to divest full State ownership of vital telecoms infrastructure. We would not be here today if the decision in that regard had not been made. Governments should be extremely careful about giving up vital network infrastructure, be it roads, telecoms or electricity infrastructure. For that reason alone, I would be loath to recommend to Government that it opt for something like the gap-funding model, not only because the justification for it is not very strong, particularly in view of the points that have been made, but also because giving up vital network infrastructure is not necessarily in the strategic interests of any country. That is how I would respond to those two points.