Communications Regulation (Premium Rate Services) Bill 2009: Instruction to Committee.

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan)

I move:

That, pursuant to Standing Order 172, Standing Order 127 is modified to permit an instruction to the committee to which the Communications Regulation (Premium Rate Services) Bill 2009 may be recommitted in respect of certain amendments, that it has the power to make provision in the Bill in relation to amending the Communications Regulation Act 2002, by amending section 52, section 53, section 55, section 56, section 60 in Part V of the Communications Regulation Act 2002 and any consequential amendments to any other sections in the Communications Regulation Act 2002 in order—

to extend the provision to grant consent and set conditions for consent in section 53 of the Communications Regulation Act 2002 to the NRA, for all national roads; with local authorities retaining the consent-giving authority for local and regional roads;

to update the provisions in relation to the consent procedure set out in section 53;

to provide for the NRA to make a scheme to charge for the use by network operators of ducts on national roads provided by an authority;

to amend the provisions concerning emergency roadworks;

to amend the provisions in relation to cost apportionment for electronic communications infrastructure relocation due to road improvements;

to provide for specific conditions in legislation that may be set by an authority, without prejudice to any other conditions they may also set;

to update the provisions in dealing with regulations and policy directions to road authorities;

to update the provisions on service of notices;

to update definitions;

to make any consequential amendments needed to take into account the changes above.

The amendment I am introducing to this Bill relates to Part V of the Communications (Regulation Communications (Regulation) Act 2002. Part V of that Act provides for local authorities to grant consent to telecom operators to open public roads for the establishment of underground communications infrastructure. Under the 2002 Act, local authorities were the sole consent-giving authority in this regard for local, regional, national roads and motorways.

The main purpose of this amendment is to designate the NRA as the consent-giving authority for national roads, which include motorways. This is to facilitate the National Roads Authority making available its ducting on national roads, including motorways, to facilitate the roll-out of high speed fibre networks to the regions. Much of the text in the amendment is very similar to the text of Part V of the Communications (Regulation) Act 2002. Many of the textual amendments are to extend references to "an authority" to include the NRA as well as the local authorities. This amendment also aims to balance the needs of telecom operators while also ensuring the safe operation of the road network.

I will now set out the key changes that are being proposed. First, the provision to grant consent and set conditions for consent in the 2002 Act is to be extended to the NRA for all national roads. Local authorities will remain the consent-giving authority for local and regional roads. Second, the proposed amendment will provide for the NRA to make a scheme whereby it can impose charges for the use by network operators of ducts on national roads provided by an authority. This will be subject to the approval of the Minister of Transport following consultation with the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. Third, under the Communications (Regulation) Act 2002, consent is not required for emergency roadworks but a network operator is required to notify the authority as soon as practicable in advance of the commencement of the emergency roadworks. The proposed amendment deems consent to be granted for emergency road works. This is to facilitate rapid response by network operators to fix faults. The amendment retains the current requirement for advance notification to the authority by the network operator but, unlike the existing 2002 Act, also allows conditions to be imposed by an authority during the progress and after the emergency roadworks. This is to ensure that such roadworks are carried out having regard to the safety of all road users and that the road in question is not left in disrepair after the works are completed.

Fourth, section 55 of the Communications (Regulation) 2002 Act deals with cost apportionment for relocating electronic communications infrastructure due to road improvements. The 2002 Act provides that, where a road authority undertakes roadworks, it pays to a network operator all reasonable costs incurred by the operator in relocating its infrastructure. It is proposed that this provision will be retained.

However, it is intended to include a provision that the NRA will not incur any costs relating to the relocation of network operators' telecoms equipment in ducts on national roads that have been provided and made available by an authority. Finally, it is proposed to provide for specific conditions in legislation that may be set by the local authority or the NRA without prejudice to any other conditions they may also set. The specified conditions include any losses and liabilities that the road authority incurs from a third party, which are caused by any act undertaken by the network operator, can be passed on to network operators; in cases where ducting assets on national roads are provided, and made available, by an authority, to a network operator, the authority will not be liable to that network operator for any loss or damage howsoever caused to the electronic communications infrastructure unless it was caused by gross negligence or wilful neglect on the part of the authority; and the authority will be allowed have representatives present during works to supervise compliance.

While there are other consequential minor textual amendments included, the changes I have outlined are the most significant. I believe that these changes will greatly streamline the process for getting access to ducting running along national roads and motorways for telcos. The proposed changes seek to strike a balance between the need to encourage and facilitate greater investment in broadband roll-out with the need to ensure that our road network is managed and operated in a manner that ensures the highest possible safety standards for all users.

Deputy Liz McManus

I did not get a copy of the Minister's speech. Is there a problem with it?

Deputy Eamon Ryan

I understand copies will be available as soon as possible. These changes are also in line with the policy goals around establishing a one-stop-shop aimed at pulling together the various disparate pieces of State-owned ducting infrastructure into a more cohesive, seamless and cost-effective network.

Deputy Simon Coveney

It has been a slightly unusual day in terms of this legislation. People were not sure whether they were coming or going in terms of the timing of it, but we are here now and we will be debating the legislation in general until later this evening. My understanding is that we are debating the motion essentially to recommit this section of the legislation to committee so that we can discuss its contents.

The Minister will be aware that although the parties opposite him are anxious to facilitate this legislation, we are far from happy about the way it is being brought forward. Having said that, I want to use this opportunity to make some comments on the long amendment which, essentially, is a new piece of legislation that the Minister and his Department have chosen to add to what was the Communications Regulation (Premium Rate Services) Bill but is now becoming much more than that.

I thank the officials in the Department for taking the time to brief me today, but, let us be clear, this is not the ideal way to do business. My concern, for what it is worth, is that there is no opportunity for me to amend the new Bill because we are recommitting it to Committee Stage so that we can debate the amendment and there is no facility for the Opposition parties to amend the new Bill or the amendment, as is the case. That is a problem because we are not doing our job, and we are not allowed do our job. We put down an amendment on Committee Stage but we have not had an opportunity to amend what the Minister has tabled, which is a different amendment from the one rejected on Committee Stage because it was not seen as consistent with the legislation.

The actual legislative process whereby the Minister and his Department puts legislation together and asks people like me and Deputy McManus to look at it, give our observations and make amendments as appropriate is not happening and cannot happen unless I am misreading something. I do not see how we can do it between what is now a recommittal to Committee Stage and what will be Report Stage later because there is insufficient time to do that. Perhaps the Minister will clarify that position for us but that is my reading of it.

In terms of the substance of what the Minister is proposing, it is a significant improvement on what we have at present. It is totally unsatisfactory that the NRA has ducting along all its motorways and much of its national roads so that it cannot allow access to roll-out fibre for broadband purposes across the country.

The Minister's amendment changes the Bill significantly. Instead of telcos, telephone companies, having to deal with local authorities when wishing to access road infrastructure or to dig up roads in order to install ducting for laying fibre, they will now deal with the NRA. This is a welcome provision. For a backbone piece of fibre infrastructure to be laid between Cork and Dublin, it would in the past have been necessary to deal with all the local authorities along the way and now there will be only one authority, the NRA. I understand this legislation is to make a one-stop-shop available to telcos which will help streamline State-owned infrastructure in the laying of fibre or accessing ducting or sharing infrastructure and so on. However, we do not know how the one-stop-shop will work.

I ask the Minister to outline how long it will take to put the one-stop-shop concept into action. We still do not know what it will look like, what its powers will be or whether it will just be an office along the lines of a citizens' information office where telcos can access information about the ducting regarding its location, ownership and management and contact names. It could be that the one-stop-shop will do this work for them, but we do not know how that will work. The House is passing legislation to allow the NRA to make its ducting available at a cost to telcos and we are asking it to take responsibility for the national roads network when negotiating with the telcos. The absence of information sums up the unco-ordinated approach towards the roll-out of fibre in particular.

I am pleased that the Minister plans to introduce a charging mechanism. This Bill will allow the NRA for the first time to charge for the use of its ducting. This is necessary but I would like to see much more co-ordination between all the State-owned ducting in the charge of the NRA as well as elsewhere so that when a privately-owned telco comes to Ireland or wants to expand its infrastructure, it is not forced to deal with a multiple of different State companies and agencies as is the case at present. The NRA is yet another agency to add to that number. It will allow for some progress on ducting on the roads network but it still adds to the myriad of different agencies with which telcos must deal.

The Minister has dealt with the issue of emergency road works in a sensible manner. On the question of who pays for the relocation costs associated with roadworks and the moving of ducting or fibre, the Minister has got the balance right. However, when NRA-owned ducting is being rented for the purpose of laying fibre to a telco and if the ducting needs to be moved to accommodate roadworks, then the NRA should be obliged to cover the extra cost of moving that fibre as well as the moving of the infrastructure. This is one area where the Minister should consider an amendment when the Bill goes to the Seanad.

I will not vote against this new legislation because I recognise the need to ensure that infrastructure being paid for by taxpayers can be accessed by telcos and can improve the broadband backbone infrastructure in Ireland. This is being facilitated in this Bill and is to be welcomed.

I appeal to the Minister to get his one-stop-shop concept up and running. We need to see how it will work. This process should not be delayed further. The Fine Gael approach is different from that of the Minister. Under our approach, all State-owned broadband infrastructure would be under the ownership and management of one new State company which would market the asset. There would be a web of infrastructure to facilitate the roll-out of fibre and other forms of broadband in a more co-ordinated way than is the case at present. The Minister's alternative proposal is the concept of the one-stop-shop which is a less desirable approach, but it is better than what we have at present.

If the NRA is to be involved in the broadband infrastructure area, then the one-stop-shop should be put in place to help it. I question if the NRA has telco expertise and I suggest it has none. I will return to this subject on Report Stage. I understand the Minister will not be present for Report Stage this evening and that this is unavoidable. However, I ask him to move ahead with his co-ordinating body which he has christened the one-stop-shop so that we can make life a lot easier for the companies wishing to spend money in Ireland by rolling out broadband infrastructure.

Acting Chairman

I was under the impression that the spare copy of the Minister's script was to be photocopied and that both Deputy McManus and Deputy Coveney would receive a copy. However, Deputy Coveney was the first speaker and he was given the copy so I regret that Deputy McManus did not receive a copy.

Deputy Liz McManus

I have just received a copy now. I appreciate that Deputy Coveney would need to have a copy. It is not good enough that Members have to come begging for copies of a Minister's speech. I do not wish to labour the point but when the Minister is making his contribution, we should have a copy of what he is saying. It is a reference for us and is useful, and it leads to a better debate. This is so obvious that I am embarrassed to even mention it. It really raises questions about how this Bill has been managed.

We were dealing with a Bill to cover the ground relating to premium rate services and difficulties encountered with standards not being applied in that sector. This is the subject matter of the Bill. Regtel was to be abolished and amalgamated with ComReg and this was the focus of our attention. In reply to a parliamentary question last week, the Minister made the point very clearly that he did not intend to introduce any amendment on Committee Stage but rather on Report Stage and relating to a matter that had absolutely nothing to do with premium rate services. The Opposition supports the principle of the amendment but, as Deputy Coveney has pointed out, we do not have an opportunity to amend or put forward amendments to what the Minister is proposing. We tried to be helpful by putting forward a Government-framed amendment on Committee Stage but it was ruled out of order as not being relevant to the Bill. At least there is logic in that ruling, but this highlights the illogical approach taken by the Minister and it is very unsatisfactory. It adds salt to the wound when, as Members, we are trying to catch up and do credit to the Bill and the changes in it, but we cannot have a copy of the Minister's speech. I hope I have made my point.

We want to see this type of development where the National Roads Authority will take on responsibility for enabling telcos to access ducts. It makes sense to deal with one authority when a national primary route travels through several counties.

Debate adjourned.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 8 Dec 2009