Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Earlier today I was considering the current situation compared with what it was a year ago when there were three bidders in this process.

SIRO pulled out for its own reasons and Eir has also now withdrawn. We are left with just one bidder in this process to provide broadband to the most difficult to reach parts of the country, areas that have the most potential because they are so under-developed.

Eircom was privatised many years ago. Many ordinary people were stung, having been encouraged to buy shares in Eircom, many for the first time in their lives, and ended up losing so much. Eircom has since been taken over on seven occasions and asset-stripped on all of them. When I travel the rural roads of counties Leitrim, Sligo or Roscommon I see telephone polls hanging into ditches and gone white and almost rotten because, as I was told by a senior person in Eircom a couple of years ago, the budget for dealing with such matters was pulled after one of those takeovers. There was no budget for maintenance, apart from whatever trickle could be gotten by a manager who was prepared to go in and do something in an area.

Members are very aware of the huge number of people left without broadband in rural Ireland. There are 11,500 such people in County Leitrim, over 17,000 in County Cavan, over 34,000 in County Donegal, over 14,500 in County Sligo and almost 19,000 in County Roscommon. All those people have the potential to prosper and try to have a future. As I said, the parts of the country affected are those with the most potential because they are the most under-developed. The lack of progress in the roll-out of broadband indicates that under-development will continue.

A national school in Kiltyclogher in north Leitrim almost closed last year. It set up an online website called KiltyLive to encourage families to move to the area. There is a mediocre broadband service in the village but a mile or two outside it there is practically no broadband, nor any mobile phone coverage. The same pertains in many of our rural areas. Unless the Government gets to grips with this situation we will be lost. A few years ago in Carrigallen, beside where I live, people were worried because under the broadband plan at the time Hutchison 3G was erecting a mast to provide broadband to the town. The mast went up. People were worried about its implications but it is there and working. However, there is still no broadband in the area. The local supermarket cannot have an ATM because the broadband is not strong enough for it to operate. The national school had to get broadband from a separate provider which beams it in from Corn Hill in County Longford.

Each inception of the national broadband programme has been a failure. The big failure on this issue is one of ideology. If one is determined to do something according to an ideological outlook, it will not work because ideology is the greatest solvent of all and disperses all thought in its path. It prevents people from thinking about anything other than the ideological route down which they are going. The ideological route down which this Government and past Governments have gone is that of private being better. The great things done in this country and every other country in the world were achieved when a Government went in, rolled up its sleeves, did the work on behalf of the people and provided for the people. Broadband is an issue on which that must be done.

The State owns the ESB network whereby there is a system of poles and lines through everyone's fields and gardens to every house. That is the route through which the State can deliver broadband to everyone. Any other route is about somebody making a profit and that is the problem with this process. All Members are aware of the huge number of people waiting for broadband. Those people are being betrayed. I do not blame the current Minister, Deputy Naughten, who I believe wants to do the right thing. Unfortunately, he is going down the same route as has previously been travelled, an ideological route whereby broadband must be provided by some company that will come in and do it for profit. That is the root of this disaster. At its core is the ideological problem that when one wants to provide something for the people, it must be done by the Government. The Government must be the provider of last resort and, in this case, the provider of first resort. Schemes such as rural electrification, the installation of telephone lines and water schemes around the country were all provided when the Government of the time rolled up its sleeves and did the work. When such schemes were left to private providers to implement, they took the profitable parts and the rest could go to hell. That is what we see in this case and that is what will happen. I have no faith in the one provider left in the process. That provider is there to make money, not to provide rural broadband to people. Eircom was privatised to get private money in order that we would have the capital assets to roll out broadband across the country. That did not happen and it will not happen tomorrow, the day after that, next year or the year after that. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling him or herself. We need opportunity for the people, not a few well-connected people who think their company will be able to make them big profits from this process. That is not good enough. All Members who have contributed to this debate have mentioned the potential that broadband can bring to people, not just in rural areas but in the entire country, including cities. Everyone must ensure they have connection to the Internet because, no matter where one lives, it provides an opportunity to do business with any part of the world. If we want that to happen, the Minister must take charge and state that the Government is going to roll up its sleeves and do it and that will be done now by getting the money on the international markets, putting it in and doing it. To hell with anyone in Europe who says the Government is not allowed to do so because of some European law that has been made up about it. We need broadband for the people and that broadband should be delivered by the Government they elected, not some provider that rolls up with money it made on a stock exchange. That is nonsense and will not work.

The ideological problem in this process must be tackled. The Government must realise that it has a responsibility to provide broadband and make a real difference to people. It must walk away from the ideology that has brought us along this route for so long and destroyed not just this situation but many others such as Irish Water and the other quangos that were set up. If we are to provide broadband to people, the Government must do so through the ESB network that already brings a line to every house in the country. That is the way forward and anything else is a means of lining somebody's pocket, which is not good enough. I do not think the Minister believes it is good enough.

If Members realised the potential in this situation, action would be taken. This country could have an advantage over many other places and yet we turn our backs on that because someone thinks he or she can make a handy few bob. That is no longer good enough. When we look back on this in 20 years, it will be considered a lost opportunity. The opportunity is now and I appeal to the Minister and the Government to grasp it and tell the remaining bidder that there is no longer a bidding process if there is only one bidder and we will have to start again. The Government must go back to basics. It should go to the international markets, raise the money, contract whoever needs to be contracted and get fibre optic cable up on those poles and into everyone's house. When people see fibre optic cables coming up to the gables of their houses, they will start to believe in the Government and that it is working for people. It is an opportunity for the Government. However, if it continues on its current route with one remaining bidder seeking a profit from the process, it is throwing that opportunity away.

See this speech in context