Vol. 599 No. 4
6 Ms B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources his views on the proposal from the Drogheda Port Company to build a major new port at Bremore in Fingal county; the timeframe and supports available to this project; the way in which he sees the new national port fitting into the recently launched ports policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8206/05]
In January of this year, my colleague, the Minister of State, launched the Government's ports policy statement. The policy statement aims to better equip the port sector and its stakeholders to meet national and regional capacity and service needs. One of the key challenges that lies ahead is the provision of adequate in-time port capacity, particularly for unitised trade. The policy statement sets out a framework to ensure that capacity needs are identified, planned and progressed in a co-ordinated manner.
The Department is initially consulting the commercial ports concerned to determine their view of port capacity and how they intend to deal with the projected capacity requirement. The Department is interested in key projects identified by the commercial ports as essential to deal with anticipated capacity requirements to 2014 and beyond, and whether the ports see these as being funded from their resources or in partnership with the private sector.
Drogheda Port Company has indicated that its proposal for the development of a new deep water port at Bremore will be a key element of its response to the information request from the Department in regard to port capacity. The timeframe for the proposed development and the preparation of a detailed business plan are matters for Drogheda Port Company in the first instance.
I cannot say at this stage which projects will meet the national capacity requirement. The new policy framework encourages all port sector stakeholders to address the issue of capacity provision. The policy statement makes it clear that the State will support capacity provision as residual financier, but only if proven essential to progress identified high quality self-sustaining projects. Clearly, not all proposals are likely to proceed.
The Minister obviously received the briefing documents and so on in regard to the proposal for Bremore. I understand Fingal County Council, in its development plan, is looking positively at the possibility of this development as well. Does the Minister see Bremore and the new Drogheda Port fulfilling a key part in this essential infrastructure, namely, our ports, given that 99% of our trade is by sea? In terms of our size, we are probably one of the most important trading nations in the world. This development might have a role to play in that context.
I hope we get a chance at some stage to have a full debate on the ports policy document which was interesting in the context of some of the questions it left unanswered. What is the Minister's view on the capacity constraints which may exist? The policy document refers to an increase in capacity of approximately 35% to 40% by 2015. Does the Minister see this increase being met by the seven or eight major ports?
I refer to the comments on privatisation of ports' property. The policy document said the Minister has an open mind in regard to privatisation. Obviously, we have a concern that the important land banks of Dublin Port and of other ports around the country would be open to land speculation and to privatisation — a type of snatch and grab of very important land in urban areas. In this city, the port has marched steadily towards the Irish Sea.
Does the Minister have any views on the criticisms of the ports policy document, which the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources received, by IBEC? I understand the pension liabilities of port workers is mentioned in the policy document. This is another important factor in the likely configuration of our future ports policy.
I am familiar with the proposal of Drogheda Port Company. I have taken a keen interest in it for a number of years. It was good enough to brief me on that proposals as soon as it was finalised. I do not want to prejudice any process which will take place but, having read it and knowing about the ports policy document, it is the type of project and approach we need to use in the development of our ports to meet the capacity demand up to 2014 about which the Deputy spoke and to which the policy document referred. I will not commit myself any further than that.
I had the opportunity recently to see what Hong Kong has done over the years. It is the ports capital of the world, particularly for the unitised trade. It evolved from virtually nothing over a period. I know China is on its doorstep and we probably would not be able to be as ambitious. Some 80% to 90% of our goods and services are exported, so obviously a strong ports policy is necessary.
I have no difficulty with the suggestion the Deputy made in regard to ports policy generally and it might be a good idea for us to debate it either in this House or in committee. On the Deputy's point about privatisation of ports and so on, the type of projects about which we are talking, such as the development of 21 hectares in Dublin Port or the proposal for Ringaskiddy, are major projects. The Exchequer will not be able to fund all of them and the ports will have to look to private sources of financing. I do not know what that might end up being but it will involve public private partnerships and the private sector in a big way. In regard to the criticism by IBEC, the policy has been put forward and we will consider any constructive suggestions and adapt policy as necessary as a result. It is a comprehensive document.
The question of pension liabilities is a matter for the ports themselves. I am aware there are pension deficits in a number of them. Obviously, that must be considered and the interests of the workers must be protected.
All of us in this House who have been treading the streets of Kildare and Meath in the past few days have seen the consequences of the remarkably fast development that has taken place in those areas without proper planning. Would the Minister agree that Dublin City Council's proposal for a different use of the south port docks area presents a unique opportunity to use that valuable land, which is within walking distance of the city centre, not merely to store containers but as one of the best quality areas of development so that people do not have to make those incredible congested journeys into Meath and Kildare every morning? If we turn to the Dublin Port Company for direction, it is clear it would plaster the whole of Dublin Bay in concrete and turn the city into a port and nothing else.
In that context, does the Minister agree that this alternative development of Dublin Port needs strategic leadership from someone like him? Does he agree that this is a clever option, that we can develop our port traffic somewhere like Drogheda which has the proper infrastructure, and put people in the south docks in one of the highest quality locations in the whole of Europe? Will the Minister bring in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Department of Transport, or will he leave it to the port companies to decide what they want? The ports document shows a massive increase in the volume of trade in Dublin Port which gives me no confidence that the Minister is listening to what people in Dublin City Council are setting out as a very intelligent solution.
The matter to which the Deputy has adverted is a matter for Dublin City Council.
It is not. The ports are under the Minister's direction.
Any development in the port must go through a planning process, which is controlled by the local authority.
The Dublin Port Company and Dublin City Council are at loggerheads on this. The Minister must give direction.
7 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources his plans for the development of the public and private broadcasting sectors in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8380/05]
My core policy objectives for the development of the broadcasting sector are detailed in my Department's statement of strategy, 2003-2005. These objectives are to create an environment that encourages the maintenance of high quality Irish radio and television services by both independent broadcasters and RTE, to secure a viable future for high quality public service broadcasting, and to seek to retain access to a range of high quality programming in analogue and digital form on a universal and free-to-air basis.
My key priorities for achieving these objectives include the following: developing the regulatory framework by bringing forward a Bill to provide for the establishment of a single content regulator for both public and private broadcasters and to establish RTE on the lines of a company under the Companies Acts, taking steps to establish TG4 as an independent entity, ensuring adequate public funding for RTE and TG4 so that they can deliver on their statutory mandate; building on progress made in maximising the effectiveness of television licence fee collection, developing proposals to ensure that in a digital era Irish viewers continue to enjoy access to a range of high quality programming, and bringing forward proposals for the future licensing of radio services in Ireland.
I am of the opinion that viewers will be best served by a broadcasting environment that includes a strong public service broadcasting presence in the form of RTE and an independent TG4 together with private broadcasters. Digital television offers opportunities for Irish viewers to avail of an increased number of broadcasting services, including new services of particular relevance or interest to Irish audiences.
Many local radio stations are being sold for extraordinary amounts of money. Given the proliferation of licences granted in Dublin, is there a possibility of allowing competition in a franchised area where only one licence operates? Does the Minister believe the independent broadcasting fund should be expanded to allow private broadcasters to invest more in public service programming?
The question of granting licences and the issue of franchises and so on are a matter for the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland. I have no ideological hang-up about introducing competition. I note that the BCI is allowing increased competition in a number of areas. A few years ago it introduced the concept of a regional radio station in the south east. I have no problem with that.
The scheme for funding is administered by the BCI and is being finalised. The possibility of using it specifically for what would be termed public service broadcasting is addressed reasonably well given that programmes that are financed from that fund are ones that are not normally and probably never would be funded at peak time rates and they must be played at peak viewing times. The public service element of that is included in the draft regulations that are being put in place.
Is it possible that as the BCI makes statements about granting more licences and the more competition there allegedly is, the blander the programme content will become? As we flick through the dials on the way home to Meath or Kildare, will we hear virtually the same types of programmes?
Is the Minister concerned that the chairman of the BCI has stated that he may reduce the requirement that news and current affairs must constitute 20% of programming? Should there not be a public service broadcasting requirement on every station?
Are BCI and ComReg not all over the place regarding the spectrum, given that this is such a valuable resource for an island nation? Is it possible that we could utilise it better to benefit the Exchequer as well as everything else? Does the Minister agree that the two regulators are approaching this from different angles?
The Minister referred to digital services. I note that Oftel, the UK regulator, has published many studies on the introduction of digital services. I have one entitled Driving Digital Switchover. We have had nothing in this regard in this country. The Minister appears not to have asked these regulators for anything in this area. Is that something the Minister might act upon during the next few months in this ministry?
There is always a danger that if there are more licences, stations will become blander. While the BCI is committed to granting more licences, it is also trying to uphold quality. Some of the licences it has issued have been for specific areas and specific interests. Listenership figures show that we have not yet got to a stage where everything is very bland.
What about the figures for "The Dunphy Show"?
The Deputy is trying to tempt me. The reduction of news and current affairs to below 20% of programming is something I would very much regret and on which I would make my views known. There are certain minimum levels of public service broadcasting that most stations should carry.
On digital services, the Deputy will be pleased that in the next three or four weeks I will be putting in place a few experiments relating to digital terrestrial television. We are talking in terms of setting a date for the changeover from analogue to digital and are starting to move in that direction. The Deputy is correct in stating that we need to give people plenty of notice to ensure both the consumers and the market know our direction in this matter. I will outline our plans in the coming weeks.
The last point is the one in which I am interested. Has the Minister received a report on the matter? Will he issue a policy document or will he issue direction to the broadcasting commission to establish experimental digital services? Given that the Minister is considering this issue, when does he believe we will have widespread availability of digital services? Does the Minister agree this technology has had a long gestation period? I have been reading reports for many years stating that technology is just around the corner. While we have turned several corners, we have yet to see a sign of it. I ask for more detail of what is around the corner.
Given the success of the local digital television service in Waterford, does the Minister have plans to promote the concept in the regions, for which a huge potential market exists?
The Deputy will be delighted to know that Navan also had a very successful local television service. I believe it was one of the first ones. It worked well with a limited audience.
I hope it is in better shape than the footpaths.
They will all be watching it on Saturday.
It covers many matters of local interest, mainly in the evening.
There is not much need for it at 4.30 a.m.
The Deputies would not expect me to spoil a full-scale announcement due to take place at a later stage. I agree with Deputy Eamon Ryan in the matter. About three or four years ago huge interest was expressed in moving to a digital service. As has happened throughout Europe, it was felt the private sector would move into this area. While a competition took place, no successful bidder emerged. We will address the need to move to DTT. Following discussions with ComReg, all the outstanding points are nearly resolved and no major difficulty remains. We intend to provide DTT in a few experimental areas. Based on what we learn over a two to three-year period we will make the decision to roll out the service nationwide. When we launch the experiment I intend to give an indicative date as to when this will move completely to a digital service. I plan to give people as much notice as possible on the conversion.
8 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if he is concerned at the initial level of pricing for a 3G mobile phone service in Ireland; if his Department has contacted the Commission for Communications Regulation with a direction on this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8203/05]
I have no function in setting pricing for phone services. The regulation of telecommunications operators, including pricing for mobile services, is the responsibility of the Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg, in accordance with the requirements of the Communications Regulation Act 2002 and regulations made under the EU regulatory framework for electronic communications.
As Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, I have responsibility for overall telecommunications policy and my main goal in this policy is to create conditions for sustainable growth and competition that will benefit the economic and social development of Ireland by providing competitive services. It is my belief that improving the market conditions to enhance competition is the best way to drive down mobile phone charges to the end user. The more competitive telecommunications services that are on offer, the better in the long run for consumers, the sector and the economy.
In March 2004 my predecessor issued policy directions to ComReg, including a direction on competition. That direction on competition mandates ComReg to focus on competition as a key objective, with a particular focus on competition in the fixed and mobile phone markets, and to implement where necessary remedies which counteract or remove barriers to entry and support entry by new players to the market and entry into new sectors by existing players. In doing so ComReg should have particular regard to the following: the market share of new entrants; ensuring that the applicable margin attributable to a product at the wholesale level is sufficient to promote and sustain competition; price level to the end user; and the potential of alternative technology delivery platforms to support competition. ComReg has, as one of its key objectives, under the Communications Regulation Act 2002, the promotion of competition in the exercise of its functions. Competition in the fixed and mobile phone markets will drive down prices for consumers.
Do the report by ComReg, Market Analysis — Wholesale Access and Call Origination on Public Mobile Telephony Networks, and the initial 3G prices we have seen not again show that the mobile phone market, particularly for Vodafone and O2 is a licence to print money? Members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources found the report shocking. The two main operators have 94% of the market in Ireland. We are the only country where the two leading operators seem to have a co-ordinated strategy. This contrasts with the UK where the top two operators have only 50% of the market. Even in countries like Austria and Finland the third and subsequent operators have at least 25% of the market.
For two or three years representatives from Vodafone and O2 appeared before the committee and told us a pack of blarney on the matter. They claimed our mobile phone costs were very high because we love to talk, which we do. However, even on that score, based on the ComReg analysis, while Ireland does not have the highest amount of talk time, we have by far the highest average revenue per user. These two giants, particularly Vodafone, have taken advantage of us right, left and centre. Our revenue per minute is among the highest in Europe.
The most damning point in the report regarding the Vodafone companies is that while German media commentators and parliamentarians feel the margins there represent a licence to print money, margins here are far higher and the same is true for comparison with O2 in other markets. Does the Minister not agree we have been ripped off by these large powerful companies? While I admit they did well in rolling out the networks and supplying us with mobile phones, in reality we have had to pay through the nose for it. Is it not time we ensured that the decision of ComReg and of the committee was implemented? We need to get mobile virtual network operators on-line as soon as possible. In countries like Britain, Denmark and Finland, where this has happened real competition has emerged. Is it not time for the Minister to issue some policy directives on the matter?
Changing mobile providers is very difficult. For example, Vodafone has approximately nine different tariff options, including Vodafone Social Life, Vodafone Work & Leisure, Vodafone More to Say, Vodafone Light, Vodafone Extra, Vodafone Active, Vodafone Business 75 etc. I could outline the same number of options for O2. Given that virtually all of us have mobile phones, is it not time the Minister took an initiative to stop these companies taking advantage of us in this way to ensure we get real competition. This may necessitate the Minister introducing legislation to give ComReg much stronger powers given the market dominance of the big two. From this damning report, considered by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources under the chairmanship of Deputy O'Flynn, it is clear they are co-ordinating their policy to effectively rip us off.
I welcome Deputy Broughan's contribution, which supports Government policy in this area. The thrust of my response to the legitimate question he raised is that the best way of ensuring 3G and other services are provided at a lower price is to ensure there is competition in the market. That function is very much part of the directions I have given to ComReg, which has been mandated to focus on competition as a key objective with a particular emphasis on competition in the fixed and mobile markets. ComReg has the power to introduce remedies where it finds there are barriers to entry into the market or where competition is being suppressed.
Like the Deputy, I welcome ComReg's recent report. The remedies proposed by the commission in regard to the dominant position of the two mobile telephone companies and the alleged collusion between them will allow mobile virtual network operators access to the networks and ensure access to the market for as many operators as possible. As Deputy Broughan observed, this approach has been successful in other countries. In Denmark, for example, charges dropped by some 25%.
Although I have no function in this regard, I have had direct discussions with the two leading operators and have made the point to them that the Irish market is overpriced. They, in turn, have made their case to me and supplied me with further details from their point of view. However, I strongly support the view and actions of ComReg in this matter. Competition is necessary and Irish consumers, who are significant users of mobile telephony, contribute greatly to the profits of these companies and deserve better than what they are currently receiving.
ComReg has been very effective and is clearly increasingly empowered in performing its functions. What help can the Minister give the commission to ensure there will be competition in view of two players controlling 94% of the market? What timescale does the Minister envisage for measures such as sharing of masts and deregulation of facilities to allow competition and reduce prices? Is any legislation required to speed up this process?
I have had meetings with ComReg on a number of occasions since joining my Department and am not aware that any outstanding legislation is required. However, if ComReg needs further assistance through legislation or any other means, particularly to address the area of competition, I will have no difficulty in that regard.
That is very good and I thank the Minister.
9 Ms Burton asked the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources if he will make a statement on the recent report, Market Analysis — Wholesale Access and Call Origination on Public Mobile Telephony Networks, produced by ComReg and the subsequent statement issued by the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources on its review of the mobile telephone market urging mobile telephone companies with a dominant market position to enter into MVNO arrangements on commercial terms in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8195/05]
ComReg is independent in the exercise of its functions and it would be inappropriate for me to comment in detail on its work. However, I have noted its recent findings in the report, Market Analysis — Wholesale Access and Call Origination on Public Mobile Telephony Networks, in which it designated the mobile telephone companies, O2 and Vodafone, as having significant market power and concluded the market was not effectively competitive because of their joint dominance. I note also that the European Commission supported this finding, which was notified in accordance with Regulation 20 of the framework regulations, SI 307 of 2003, and Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic networks and services.
A new regulatory framework was introduced in 2003 which was designed to ensure competition between providers, some of which dominate for historical infrastructural reasons thereby giving them market advantage. As Minister with responsibility for telecommunications policy, I welcome any developments that improve competition in the sector. The more competitive telecommunications services that are on offer the better in the long run for consumers, the sector and the economy.
ComReg has, as one of its key objectives under the Communications Regulation Act 2002, the promotion of competition in the exercise of its functions. Competition in the fixed and mobile markets will drive down prices for consumers. Under the new European framework, ComReg's basis for intervening in a market is now predicated on finding an operator dominant in a given market. I also welcome the interest shown by the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources in this regard and compliment it on its comprehensive review of the mobile telephone market and its associated report.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.
