Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Recognising that the ESB is populated with highly qualified engineers, it is pretty adept at assessing risk, and the same could be said of Eir and its technical people. It is clear that this is an enormous project with an enormous level and multiplicity of risk. Based on its considerable experience of stringing cable and rolling out fibre and high-voltage lines, ESB recognised that at an early stage and decided that the risk was too great, given the return on investment versus the investment made. We have to draw our own inferences from the fact that a company such as ESB, with a fine track record, did not believe it was doable for the money available and that the achievable return was questionable.

This leads to a point that I have had real concerns about for a long time. How did a private investment firm from Boston, with a list of subcontractors and without the level of expertise in the marketplace, experience or understanding of the continued complexity of this process, go as far as it did? I do not expect ESB to discuss that; it is merely a comment.

The removal of 300,000 homes was termed by others as cherry-picking by Eir. It was entitled to do that and the State had no choice but to remove those homes from the intervention area because, once the offer was made to roll it out commercially, under state aid rules the State could not be seen to subvent that. It was a game changer for ESB, but the Department had no issue with it.

Having rolled out fibre into that area, can we assume that it is now easier for Eir to rock up and offer to do it for €1 billion, given that a good chunk of the groundwork is done? It could be said that that is Eir's good luck, but the truth is that this is a significant advantage for Eir and would help explain how its costs are less than those of anyone else in that position.