Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle and Business Committee for giving me an opportunity to speak. I want to make it clear that it is the Department and not the Minister who is responsible for the governance and evaluation of the national broadband plan competitive dialogue procurement process. On the conclusion of this evaluation, the Department makes a recommendation to the Minister, and the Minister then brings the matter to the Government for a decision.

It is important to put in context my engagements throughout this process. During the debate here in this House last February, speaker after speaker highlighted the need to progress the project actively after Eir's withdrawal. A member of the communications committee at the time said:

It seems extraordinary that the tender has not yet been put in place.

It may be considered unfortunate to lose one bidder, but surely it is careless to lose two bidders. What happens if we lose the third bidder? What is plan B?

He went on to say:

I think this is a national emergency that requires emergency measures. I hope the Minister will act accordingly.

That is what I did - act accordingly to keep the remaining bidder at the table. At no time did I interfere or try to interfere in the process to benefit any bidder. I facilitated every meeting request from all the bidders in the dialogue process. The fact is that I, as Minister, was kept at arm's length from the detail of the procurement process, and I was asked to be present at some pivotal points in the process on the request of my officials. Such meetings were directed by officials both in terms of the briefings before such engagements and the meetings themselves.

The Smyth report shows I had 40 meetings with all the bidders since my appointment as Minister in May 2016. If one browses through the lobbying register, it is clear that meetings between the telecoms industry and Members of this House happen regularly. Just like Deputy Dooley and others in this House, my job required me to meet representatives of the telecoms industry because it is responsible for connecting every home, business and farm in the country in order that no one is left behind in this technological age. Should we have a closed-door policy for Ministers and an open-door one for everyone else just for the sake of these optics? As Mr. Smyth states in his report, the facts are that I did not have information available to me that was not already available to the bidder or bidders by virtue of the fact of it being a competitive dialogue process. My only objective throughout has been to keep the bidders in the process - both Eir until the time of its withdrawal and Granahan McCourt-Enet-SSE subsequent to the withdrawal of Eir - in order to ensure that every citizen in the country was treated equally by delivering broadband to the 1.2 million people who are without this basic, vital service.

Some of my engagements with Mr. McCourt have been the subject of incomplete reporting in recent days. Eight of the ten engagements I had with Mr. McCourt were when Granahan McCourt was the sole bidder in the process. I did not discuss the procurement process at any of the dinner engagements with Mr. McCourt. Furthermore, Mr. McCourt did not at any time canvass my support or seek to lobby or influence me on the procurement process. I did not give preferential access to any bidder in the process. By the time SIRO withdrew in September 2017, I had met the NBP participants on 23 occasions - ten times with SIRO, Vodafone and the ESB, six times with Eir and seven times with Enet-SSE. When Eir withdrew from the process in late January 2018, I had met the remaining NBP participants on 17 occasions - nine times with Enet-SSE and eight times with Eir. This included meetings on electricity policy with both the ESB and SSE.

In recent months, a theme of innuendo and aspersions inside and outside this Chamber has emerged which questions the capability of the last remaining bidder to deliver. This is not for any of us to determine now. That is the job of the 80-strong expert evaluation team. We must ask, however, what is driving this narrative and for what gain. Is it to collapse the plan altogether, perhaps? It may have that desired effect, which would cause more heartache for 1.2 million people in rural Ireland. I appeal to colleagues to let the evaluation team do its job. Over the past 34 months, some of the most capable people in Europe, with experience in highly complex procurement projects, have been working on this project. I reiterate that at no time did I interfere or try to interfere in the process to benefit any of the bidders, and the Peter Smyth report concludes this.

Finally, another voice from last February's Dáil debate:

The frustration on the ground is reaching boiling point... If it is not delivered soon, the benefits may be lost forever as investment will not flow to rural and regional Ireland. Successive Ministers have failed miserably to bring this crucial national project to completion.

My only objective and goal as Minister was to bring this project to completion for the families, business owners, workers and farmers of rural Ireland, who have been waiting for far too long to become equal citizens in this digital age.

See this speech in context