Feargal Quinn (Independent)

That is exactly how it should be. The real people to blame in this matter are we, the legislators, who allowed this to happen by the laws we enacted ten years ago. If we did not foresee what would happen back in 1997, we have had ample opportunities since then to see the error of our ways. Despite this, we have been very slow to do what is necessary to impose our will in this area, even with all the support we have had from Brussels and the direction it has given us.

The stark fact remains that the sector has operated as it has for the past decade. If we wish the communications sector to be run in the national interest, as it is our right to do, then we must assume the powers to make that happen. To whatever extent this Bill represents a step in that direction, which is desirable, and I am not sure exactly how far it does go in that respect, it must be welcomed, however belated its arrival.

I have a number of questions for the Minister of State which I hope he will be able to answer. Will this legislation deliver competition which we have not had up to now? With the best will in the world, is there a danger the heavy penalties provided for in the Bill will act as a disincentive to competition? Will those operators considering joining this race, which should yield them high profits, find the heavy penalties provided for in the Bill a disincentive to do so? I have always had a difficulty trying to explain to myself and others how the electricity system works here where the ESB is the power provider as well as the retailer. That is similar to a case where a large supplier in the business I have experience of is a manufacturer and also a retailer. How do we make sure that such a system can work? Is there fair competition if the producer of a product is also the retailer which deals with the customer? In this case Eircom seems to be the network as well as the retailer. Does Eircom have a view on this? It is such a large player in this area that we must know the direction it intends to take. Is it enthusiastic about splitting and separating what it does? It is difficult to understand how that system can work if the network and the retailer is the same operator.

Senator Kenneally referred to the system of emergency calls, which the Minister of State also mentioned. I was not sure how the system worked in the past but I gather Eircom is not terribly enthusiastic about maintaining it because it involves a considerable cost. From my reading of the Bill I assume that some effort is required to put this right to ensure we have an effective and efficient emergency system, which luckily I have not had to use too often. If the system is operated by only one of those retailers and it is not terribly enthusiastic about doing so, perhaps that explains why we hear complaints about the emergency system not working nearly as effectively as it should.

A provision covering whistleblowers is also provided in section 7, which is worthy. However, if we include a provision for whistleblowers in the communications sector, does that mean a similar provision must be included in every Bill introduced? If so and if we have to wait 10, 20 or 30 years before it is implemented, is it worthwhile considering the introduction of whistleblower legislation to cover every area to ensure we do not have to remember to include a similar provision in every Bill introduced, given that there may be areas of society not covered by legislation?

My last question is on broadband. I have been impressed by the progress made in this area in other countries. I am mindful particularly of Singapore, which identified many years ago that it wished to be the hub in Asia, and perhaps even of the world, for handling the knowledge society. It did that by giving every citizen an e-mail address. Have we taken the right steps in that sector in this country? Have we identified that Ireland could be a similar centre for Europe or the world? We are so far behind other countries that we have ended up at the bottom of the league table. Is there a danger that it is too late? I do not believe so because technology moves so fast that sometimes it is useful to come in behind the others. We may not be burdened with the old equipment and we can buy the modern equipment.

These are some of my concerns. I am confident the Minister has looked at this and that his objective is the same as that of all of us. However, I remember ten years ago when many of us clearly stated that the objective was not just to be fair between different competitors in this market, but actually to encourage competitors to come into the market in the first place. It is not just a question of being fair. It might have been better not to privatise something if the only objective was to make fairness the only common area between different competitors. In such cases, there might be other ways of doing it. In this case, it is right that we encourage competitors to come in. We encourage fairness between them, but we also make sure that competition gives us the sort of service we want in Ireland. That service may mean broadband only, broadband or emergency services, or it may mean that we get an advantage in a competitive marketplace to take the lead in this world. I welcome the Bill inasmuch as I understand it is an effort to go in that direction, and I wish the Minister well.