Dr. Dónal Palcic:

All we are questioning is the comparative cost, that is, the cost the Department assumed of renting Eir's fibre in the 300,000 premises area as compared to the additional cost of laying fibre. We have been told it is a significant additional cost to the winning bidder rolling out its own fibre, overlaying Eir's existing fibre in the 300,000 premises area. That is just a point of comparison that we are looking for and to see what justifies it. Why would Eir's product not be dependable? I cannot remember which company was here at the time - perhaps it was Analysys Mason - but it said something about a view that Eir's product would not be dependable. That company did not go into significant detail, but what are the precise reasons that Eir's fibre would not be good enough and that Granahan McCourt need to overlay that fibre with its own fibre in the 300,000 premises exclusion area?