Liz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)

I have some points to make but it is complicated when we are recommitting such a large group of amendments.

On amendment No. 7, the Minister proposes to delete line 27, "Principal Act means Communications Regulation Act 2002;". Does that mean there is no reference to any principal Act anywhere in the Bill? If there is, there should be an explanation of what that Act is. Why did the Minister need to insert amendment No. 38 even though Deputy Coveney and I had already made the same changes in amendment No. 39? Perhaps there were legal aspects, the whole process has been mysterious at every level.

I agree with Deputy Coveney, there are issues related to compensation. The new section 53(6)(b) states the authority shall not be liable to the network operator for any loss or damage caused to the infrastructure, which is the property of the network operator, except where such loss or damage caused by the wilful act or gross negligence of the authority. Authorities do not engage in wilful acts and gross negligence sounds extreme. If there were a court case, a sharp lawyer could argue on behalf of the NRA that an act was not grossly negligent, even if it was negligent. No life may have been lost. How does one measure these things? What is gross and what is not? If any negligence is proven against an authority, there must be some sort of settlement made. We are talking about vital infrastructure that costs money. I am concerned about the use of the term "gross negligence". "Wilful" act will not be a common experience but it is very hard to define gross negligence even though one can imagine someone in a digger being negligent and causing a fair amount of damage but not being grossly negligent.

The arrangements that have been cobbled together with the Minister for Transport, because he wants his place in the sun, are unnecessarily complicated. What happens if one or other does not comply? There is a consultation period not exceeding 21 days between the two Departments. What happens if the consultation period exceeds 21 days? Is it taken that the Department can proceed without getting any feedback? Is there a penalty?

The Minister for Transport may draw up guidelines after consultation. The Minister for Transport has no interest in communications, and he certainly has no responsibility for them. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has a lot of responsibility and an interest in making sure this works but the guidelines are being drawn up by the Department of Transport. We want a clear line of authority in terms of devising the safeguards and protections that must be in place. How could such an elaborate system be considered to be the best way forward?

We must see this come into operation quickly, with telecommunications companies able to access a resource they will pay for. It is a revenue gathering exercise but it must be done quickly and in a way that is not unduly bureaucratic.

See this speech in context