Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

To insert the following after “National Broadband Plan procurement process”: “notes that State ownership of the proposed National Broadband Plan network would best ensure the future needs of the homes and businesses covered by this contract are met and the State’s investment protected to the best extent possible;

calls on the Government to:

—ensure the evolving high-speed broadband needs of the locations covered by this contract are met and remain in step with those areas covered by the commercial marketplace, taking

into consideration future technology advances;

—take action to reduce the cost of high-speed broadband by transposing immediately the European Broadband Directive (2014/61/EU); and

—ensure the service provided under the National Broadband Plan will guarantee connection speeds of at least 100 megabytes per second initially; and

resolves that the ownership of the network proposed in the State’s National Broadband Plan revert to the State at the end of the contract period.”

I want to congratulate the Minister on his fiery speech. It is a pity that he did not have a more appropriate speech at Cabinet. It seems that he is a ram in the Dáil and a lamb at Cabinet. Unfortunately, he lost the battle.

Over the past two days he has delivered a forceful presentation on what has been achieved. On a number of occasions, he has identified that his personal opinion and wish would have been to retain the network in the State ownership. He went on to give a standard finance line, that is, to ask from where the money would come and the projects we do not want to see happen.

It is a standard line. I was a backbencher on the other side of the House when the same line came from the Department of Finance. It would ask what schools, roads or sewerage schemes we did not want to build. It provides a toolbox of excuses, and it is incumbent on the Minister of the day to fight on behalf of his Department and the interests that fall within his remit. Sadly, the Minister lost the battle. He could have told the Department of Finance and the Minister concerned that the economy is growing and there will be an extra €1 billion in revenue available to the State for the budget this year. He could have rolled the €600 million to which he referred over six years, which would be 10% of the additional moneys available this year and probably a lesser percentage if the growth projections remain on target for the next five or six years.

The Minister could have told them to look at the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund and consider it as a commercial investment, in terms of the part that would be commercial. As the Minister knows, whatever contractor ultimately wins the battle will have to go to the marketplace for finance. It is very possible that the winner could eventually be funded through the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund because it has the capacity to invest in commercial entities. The back-end of this contract will be commercial because the gap in the middle is being filled by the State.

It is very possible that the State will provide money through the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund to the ultimate contractor. The Minister will fill the gap in funding and the project will reside in the hands of a multinational that will have the capacity before the ending of the contract to flip the assets and make significant profits for the company concerned.

I speak with some knowledge of and interest in this area. In the past, my party took a decision which at the time seemed like the correct one. All of the discussion and political consensus in the House and in Europe at the time was that it was in the best interests of the State to sell Eircom. We were told the return to the State would build more schools, water and sewerage schemes and public housing. As a result of that decision, which was taken in good faith by all concerned at the time, there were significant delays in the roll-out of broadband which has put us well behind the European average in terms of the penetration of broadband.

That happened because we did not have the capacity to control access to and investment in the network. The vulture funds that played fast and loose with the asset that is now Eir's asset in order to make a profit for themselves in the short-term jockeying of resources left Ireland, in particular the parts the Minister and I know best, those areas we seek to represent, in a difficult position.

Many speakers will catalogue the various enterprises that have failed to get appropriate speeds in order to be able to carry out their business. There are personal stories of homes where junior certificate, leaving certificate or college students are failing to get access broadband to prepare reports, interface with universities and submit dissertations on time. We all deal with these issues in our constituency offices on a daily basis. We can say or do little other than to point out that Eir is a private company and, sadly, we have no more control over it.

I have been in the House for 13 or 14 years - the time flies. Sadly, on far too many occasions decisions are taken here that focus on the electoral cycle. Decisions are made to build schools before the next election cycle so that people can get a bunch of votes. That kind of planning should be consigned to history. We should look to a much greater extent to the future and put in place the kind of foundations that will build upon future necessities.

The spine that will be delivered in the network has major potential not just to deliver broadband to homes, but to provide the backbone for future generations of mobile phone technology. There is little doubt that Ireland has the capacity to be a mobile island in terms of the roll-out of various pilot projects by many social media organisations, all of which are now delivered in a mobile environment. We should be doing everything we possibly can to attract more activity into that space.

Handing this network to an environment that will ultimately fall into the control of private operators will not encourage that kind of investment and will have significant negative long-term consequences for the State. I hope that whoever is around in 25 years time has the good grace to read the Official Report.

See this speech in context