Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

It has been a slightly unusual day in terms of this legislation. People were not sure whether they were coming or going in terms of the timing of it, but we are here now and we will be debating the legislation in general until later this evening. My understanding is that we are debating the motion essentially to recommit this section of the legislation to committee so that we can discuss its contents.

The Minister will be aware that although the parties opposite him are anxious to facilitate this legislation, we are far from happy about the way it is being brought forward. Having said that, I want to use this opportunity to make some comments on the long amendment which, essentially, is a new piece of legislation that the Minister and his Department have chosen to add to what was the Communications Regulation (Premium Rate Services) Bill but is now becoming much more than that.

I thank the officials in the Department for taking the time to brief me today, but, let us be clear, this is not the ideal way to do business. My concern, for what it is worth, is that there is no opportunity for me to amend the new Bill because we are recommitting it to Committee Stage so that we can debate the amendment and there is no facility for the Opposition parties to amend the new Bill or the amendment, as is the case. That is a problem because we are not doing our job, and we are not allowed do our job. We put down an amendment on Committee Stage but we have not had an opportunity to amend what the Minister has tabled, which is a different amendment to the one rejected on Committee Stage because it was not seen as consistent with the legislation.

The actual legislative process whereby the Minister and his Department puts legislation together and asks people like me and Deputy McManus to look at it, give our observations and make amendments as appropriate is not happening and cannot happen unless I am misreading something. I do not see how we can do it between what is now a recommittal to Committee Stage and what will be Report Stage later because there is insufficient time to do that. Perhaps the Minister will clarify that position for us but that is my reading of it.

In terms of the substance of what the Minister is proposing, it is a significant improvement on what we have at present. It is totally unsatisfactory that the NRA has ducting along all its motorways and much of its national roads so that it cannot allow access to roll-out fibre for broadband purposes across the country.

The Minister's amendment changes the Bill significantly. Instead of telcos, telephone companies, having to deal with local authorities when wishing to access road infrastructure or to dig up roads in order to install ducting for laying fibre, they will now deal with the NRA. This is a welcome provision. For a backbone piece of fibre infrastructure to be laid between Cork and Dublin, it would in the past have been necessary to deal with all the local authorities along the way and now there will be only one authority, the NRA. I understand this legislation is to make a one-stop-shop available to telcos which will help streamline State-owned infrastructure in the laying of fibre or accessing ducting or sharing infrastructure and so on. However, we do not know how the one-stop-shop will work.

I ask the Minister to outline how long it will take to put the one-stop-shop concept into action. We still do not know what it will look like, what its powers will be or whether it will just be an office along the lines of a citizens' information office where telcos can access information about the ducting regarding its location, ownership and management and contact names. It could be that the one-stop-shop will do this work for them, but we do not know how that will work. The House is passing legislation to allow the NRA to make its ducting available at a cost to telcos and we are asking it to take responsibility for the national roads network when negotiating with the telcos. The absence of information sums up the unco-ordinated approach towards the roll-out of fibre in particular.

I am pleased that the Minister plans to introduce a charging mechanism. This Bill will allow the NRA for the first time to charge for the use of its ducting. This is necessary but I would like to see much more co-ordination between all the State-owned ducting in the charge of the NRA as well as elsewhere so that when a privately-owned telco comes to Ireland or wants to expand its infrastructure, it is not forced to deal with a multiple of different State companies and agencies as is the case at present. The NRA is yet another agency to add to that number. It will allow for some progress on ducting on the roads network but it still adds to the myriad of different agencies with which telcos must deal.

The Minister has dealt with the issue of emergency road works in a sensible manner. On the question of who pays for the relocation costs associated with roadworks and the moving of ducting or fibre, the Minister has got the balance right. However, when NRA-owned ducting is being rented for the purpose of laying fibre to a telco and if the ducting needs to be moved to accommodate roadworks, then the NRA should be obliged to cover the extra cost of moving that fibre as well as the moving of the infrastructure. This is one area where the Minister should consider an amendment when the Bill goes to the Seanad.

I will not vote against this new legislation because I recognise the need to ensure that infrastructure being paid for by taxpayers can be accessed by telcos and can improve the broadband backbone infrastructure in Ireland. This is being facilitated in this Bill and is to be welcomed.

I appeal to the Minister to get his one-stop-shop concept up and running. We need to see how it will work. This process should not be delayed further. The Fine Gael approach is different from that of the Minister. Under our approach, all State-owned broadband infrastructure would be under the ownership and management of one new State company which would market the asset. There would be a web of infrastructure to facilitate the roll-out of fibre and other forms of broadband in a more co-ordinated way than is the case at present. The Minister's alternative proposal is the concept of the one-stop-shop which is a less desirable approach, but it is better than what we have at present.

If the NRA is to be involved in the broadband infrastructure area, then the one-stop-shop should be put in place to help it. I question if the NRA has telco expertise and I suggest it has none. I will return to this subject on Report Stage. I understand the Minister will not be present for Report Stage this evening and that this is unavoidable. However, I ask him to move ahead with his co-ordinating body which he has christened the one-stop-shop so that we can make life a lot easier for the companies wishing to spend money in Ireland by rolling out broadband infrastructure.

See this speech in context