Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 Nov 2015

Vol. 897 No. 3

Topical Issue Debate

Road Projects Status

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing this topic to be taken today. It is ironic that this debate is taking place a day after Kildare County Council decided to scrap a section 38 proposal that would have changed the traffic pattern in Celbridge and that would have had implications for a number of residential estates in the town. The bridge in Celbridge was built after a flood in 1802. It has been in existence as the town has developed over the past 200 years to its current size with a population of almost 20,000. The problem in the town is that there is just one bridge over the River Liffey. This restricts access from one side of the town to the other. It makes it difficult for many people to avail of the very good public transport links that are provided at Hazelhatch railway station. I commend the Minister on today's announcement of investment in the DART and Luas networks. It is very difficult for public transport operators to get through the village at the moment.

Seven options were set out in a report that was produced for RPS Consultants on behalf of Kildare County Council in June. The option that was favoured by a local Fianna Fáil councillor caused fierce consternation in the town. I am delighted that the public realised what was happening. The proposed route would have gone through the Simmonstown and Hazelhatch Park estates. Traffic would have been diverted onto a road that has a public play area on one side and housing on the other. Kids who wanted to cross that road to get to the area where they normally play would not have had a proper junction or crossing point to use. I thought it was absolutely crazy. I am delighted that as soon as the period of time for public submissions was completed, Kildare County Council made a rapid decision not to go ahead with the section 38 proposal. The proposal in question was one of the options put forward by RPS Consultants when they were asked to suggest ways of improving the traffic flow in Celbridge.

A second bridge is needed in the town of Celbridge. Most of us who have gone through the town of Enniscorthy have seen the helpful one-way flow system there, which uses two bridges in close proximity to each other. A second bridge in the centre of Kilkenny is helping to alleviate the traffic problems associated with the town. I accept that such a venture in Celbridge would cost between €8 million and €10 million. We need to put plans in place now for the development of something like this in the long term. I believe we can bring the public on board with the proposed second bridge if a long-term strategy is put in place. It was proposed to develop a second bridge from Castletown to Donaghcumper, but that was unacceptable because it would have been too close to the gates of historic Castletown House. That made no sense at all. I believe that if we put a plan in place, engage in proper public consultation and get the people on board, we can develop a second bridge in the village of Celbridge, which is wanted to ease the traffic flows that are there at the moment. If there is a better flow of traffic through the town, people will be more likely to use the public transport options that are available in Celbridge, including those provided through CIE and Dublin Bus at the railway station in Hazelhatch. I hope we can start a long-term process that will lead to the construction of a second bridge in Celbridge.

I thank Deputy Lawlor for raising this matter. As he is aware, the improvement and maintenance of regional and local roads in County Kildare is the statutory responsibility of Kildare County Council in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Roads Act 1993. Work on such roads is funded from the council’s own resources, supplemented by allocations made directly from the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. The initial selection and prioritisation of works to be funded is also a matter for the council. Ireland has just under 100,000 km of roads in its network. The maintenance and improvement of national, regional and local roads places a significant financial burden on local authorities and the Exchequer. Due to the national financial position, there have been large reductions in the amount of Exchequer funding available for roads expenditure over recent years. Funding for the national, regional and local road network was €2.3 billion in 2008, but it is just €760 million this year. In light of the challenging financial climate, the specific improvement grants scheme was curtailed to maximise the funding available for repair and strengthening work. It is important to reiterate that the purpose of Exchequer funding is to supplement the resources of each local authority. I have been emphasising to local authorities the importance of prioritising expenditure on roads when they are allocating their own resources, including local property tax receipts. The capital plan that will run from 2016 to 2021 provides for a gradual build-up in capital funding for the road network towards the levels that are needed to support maintenance and improvement works. The primary focus in the next few years will continue to be on road maintenance and renewal rather than new projects.

I announced the 2015 regional and local road allocations on 3 February last. Some €10.7 million was allocated to Kildare County Council. The council received an additional €799,900 in restoration improvement funding in July of this year. All available funding for this year has now been allocated. I am aware that Kildare County Council has published a document, Feasibility Report for River Crossings of the River Liffey and Associated Traffic Management Requirements in Celbridge, that was prepared for it by RPS Consultants. I believe that is the report to which Deputy Lawlor has referred. I understand that the council commissioned this study to explore river crossing options and traffic management arrangements that could alleviate traffic congestion in Celbridge and that the report identifies short-term traffic management options and a longer-term new river crossing option for further study and evaluation. Local authorities are aware that it is a matter for each council to determine its priorities and to allocate funding accordingly. Therefore, it is a matter for Kildare County Council to decide how best to address the findings of this report and to allocate its own resources to the further evaluation of options if it considers that appropriate.

The report was welcomed in so far as it put options into the public domain. One of the short-term traffic management options referred to by the Minister was not acceptable because it would have had an impact on local residential housing estates. As I said, the road that would have been used divides houses from areas used by young kids for playing. I can understand why that short-term solution was not deemed to be acceptable. I appreciate that we need to take a long-term view in this regard as the economy improves. I do not envisage that Kildare County Council will be able to afford to put a new bridge in place on its own, but it might be able to do so with the assistance of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. I remind the House that the feasibility study was funded by the National Transport Authority. I suggest that if we work jointly on a long-term basis, we might be able to find a solution for the town of Celbridge which is choked by traffic at the moment. People are not able to go from one side of the river to the other because of the traffic volumes going through the town.

The Minister launched various public transport projects today. Public transport has difficulty going through the town. Feeder buses for Hazelhatch railway station also find it difficult to get through the town.

We always try to make the most efficient use of our public transport system, but when it is being choked by the town, it is very difficult. I hope the Minister will consider engaging with Kildare County Council to provide some long-term funding towards this because we have to find a solution for the traffic issues in Celbridge.

I take on board what the Deputy is saying and I acknowledge that there is a congestion problem and an access issue in the community to which he refers. Early next year my Department will allocate funding for local and regional roads for 2016. We would be able to work with the local authority to see if, within the allocation, it would be possible to deal with the matter. I am not in a position to make further funding available for this year but I hope that, as the economy strengthens and the funding available for local and regional roads improves, as is the case with the capital plan for transport which we published a number of weeks ago, it will be possible to do projects such as this. I am aware they are needed and that some of them require further support from local authorities in order for the necessary work to be done.

Access to Higher Education

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this important matter for debate. I am relieved to have the opportunity to raise the matter with the Minister following months of back and forth with his office and with officials from his Department. Unfortunately, I have got nowhere.

The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is failing farmers with learning disabilities and literacy problems who wish to be registered as professional users under the sustainable use of pesticides directive by way of statutory instrument SI 155 of 2012. I have been contacted by a farmer within my constituency who has been told that he cannot avail of the highest accredited course under one of the bodies which the Department has tasked with providing the appropriate training because he suffers from severe dyslexia. The farmer was informed by representatives of the training body that he would not be able to participate in the course as he was not capable of reading the instructions on the labels on the back of the pesticide canister. This farmer assures me that he is just one of many others who feel marginalised and discriminated against as a result of the Minister's inability to address this issue appropriately.

I wrote to the Minister regarding the matter in early September and received the following reply, "As part of the quality assurance accreditation of every provider by the awarding bodies, QQI and City & Guilds in this case, there is an undertaking to make skills/competency-based courses, such as those required by DAFM for the registration of professional users, accessible to all." This should include people suffering like my client.

In fairness to the Minister, he did say he had been in contact with three providers who indicated that the necessary supports would be put in place following consultation and agreement with the individual concerned. However, the providers cited in his response are not the preference of the farmer who wishes to participate in a top accredited City & Guilds course under Kearney Training & Consultancy. Why should he not be given the opportunity to participate in the best course available? Why can he not be facilitated? Students with similar learning disabilities are facilitated with audio facilities when taking their State examinations. Why can the instructions on the pesticide canisters not be provided in audio form? This would get this man over the hill.

The Minister, Deputy Coveney, referred me to an official within his Department with the purpose of ensuring that participation would be facilitated for this farmer. There was no urgency in dealing with my queries and, as we speak, we are two days out from the deadline of 26 November and I am no better off than when I started. This man and many others have met roadblock after roadblock in their attempts to gain top accreditation, and this is as a result of having learning disabilities or literacy difficulties. Why should this man, and many others in the same situation, have to settle for a lesser qualification? This is a man who has been farming for his whole life and has more than 45 years' experience of working with pesticides and associated dispensers. He probably has more knowledge in this area of agriculture than the so-called experts who have deemed him ineligible to take part in this course and gain a full qualification.

There are only four days left to look at this man's situation. He came to me at the cow mart a couple of months ago and told me he suffered from dyslexia. He cannot read the canisters at the moment so he cannot take this course because of the rules and regulations. If we can provide audio facilities for students, why can we not do the same for a man who makes his living in this way? It is his business, and his income will be severely hit unless he can get accreditation. Will the Minister look at the case of this individual and give him time to get accreditation because we are close to the deadline?

I thank Deputy Aylward for raising this case. The individual concerned was not mentioned in the question. I did not realise the Deputy's question was specific to one person but we may look at his particular case.

The sustainable use of pesticides directive establishes a framework for community action to achieve the sustainable use of pesticides. It aims to fill the current legislative gap regarding the use phase of pesticides at EU level through setting minimum rules for the use of pesticides in the community to reduce risks to human health and the environment. It also promotes the use of integrated pest management.

Implementation of the sustainable use of pesticides directive relies heavily on the training of the various people involved at all levels of the industry, including pesticide advisers, pesticide distributors, professional users and inspectors of pesticide application equipment. A new programme to test all pesticide application equipment is also being put in place. Bearing in mind the potentially toxic nature of pesticides, the need for appropriate training must be viewed in the context of protecting both human health and the environment and, in particular, maintaining the high quality of our water. The risk associated with the use of pesticides is related to the properties of the product itself and not to either the quantity used or the frequency of use.

As part of the quality assurance accreditation of every provider by the various awarding bodies, there is an undertaking to make skills-based courses, such as those required by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for the registration of professional users, accessible to all. The Department has worked with a wide variety of service providers, including Teagasc, City & Guilds and FETAC, to ensure participants who have completed relevant pesticide application courses will meet the requirements for professional user training. In addition, an individual who has completed a pesticide application module equivalent to one of the Department's recognised qualifications as part of their certificate in agriculture or other award is not required to undertake any further training to register as a professional user. A list of training providers for professional pesticides users is available on the Department's website.

All plant protection products are classified as either professional or non-professional. Labels indicate to which category a product belongs and the status of a product may be checked on the Department's website. Non-professional or amateur plant protection products can continue to be used in the home or garden situation and are approved for such purposes. There are no restrictions on the use of such products and there is no requirement for such users to be trained or registered with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. These products are most likely to be found in the local garden centre, DIY store or supermarket.

It should be emphasised that 26 November 2015 is simply the official start date for the new regulations. The sustainable use of pesticides directive requires all professional users, namely, anybody who applies or sprays products authorised for professional use, to be trained and registered as a professional user with the Department by 26 November, regardless of the quantity or method of application. Therefore, only registered professional users can spray professional use products after this date and there is an obligation on an individual to be appropriately trained as a professional user and registered with the Department before he or she may apply or spray professional plant protection products in order to be compliant with the provisions of the sustainable use directive. In practice, however, only those individuals who intend to apply plant protection products authorised for professional use immediately after 26 November will be required to have completed their training and registration. The vast majority of individuals who will not apply plant protection products until the spring or summer of 2016 will have some further time to be trained and registered. However, they must meet this requirement before they apply or spray professional plant protection products.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. While I may have referred to one individual in my constituency, I have been informed by the individual in question that several other people are affected by the issue I raise.

As a farmer, I accept the pesticide directive. It is good policy as it is appropriate that people know how to handle spraying devices. The response of the Department on this issue has been inadequate, however. The farmer who raised this matter with me has many years' experience spraying pesticides and does a significant amount of contract work dispensing slug pellets over the winter months. As a result of the lack of urgency displayed by departmental officials, he is likely to be penalised for engaging in this type of work when the deadline passes on Thursday next. Is the business of the man in question being placed at risk because he has dyslexia? I am not asking questions about the scheme, which is perfectly in order. As a farmer, I accept it and I know that either I or my son will have to complete the course if either of us wishes to use pesticide sprays in future. The person who raised this matter with me suffers from a disability, namely, dyslexia. Why will the Department not facilitate him by affording him the same rights as are afforded to everyone else?

The Minister of State's reply was fine in so far as it related to the pesticides directive. I am asking about an individual who cannot obtain the accreditation on which his business depends and who will lose money this year if he is penalised or prevented from making a living from spraying pesticides. I ask the Department to address this issue, rather than the implementation of the scheme. The issue is one of access for the individual in question and others who are in the same position.

I acknowledge that the Deputy has accepted the need for the directive. We all agree that it is important because there has been too much misuse of pesticides and people have concerns about cancer and so forth. The regulation has been introduced for that reason and requires people to be trained in the use of pesticides. The directions printed on spray cans are a specific issue. Users need to know how much of a product needs to be added to water before a solution can be sprayed on plants.

I will speak to the relevant officials about this and similar cases. The Deputy may wish to come to the Department to discuss the issue, which we want to solve. No one is placing obstacles in anyone's way and none of us wants to take away a man's job. There are many spraying businesses. We should be able to facilitate the individual in question within the terms of the directive. I am amenable to arranging a meeting to discuss this issue with some of those involved. No one wants to close down a business. That is not our role. I would welcome a meeting with the Deputy, perhaps later this week, to try to find a solution.

I have been trying to arrange a meeting with departmental officials for three months and I have got nowhere.

I spoke to the relevant officials while preparing for this discussion. They are not trying to put anyone out of business. They want to implement the directive because pesticide sprays are dangerous.

School Transport Eligibility

I welcome the presence of the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, as I know he has an interest in this issue. The school transport system is based solely on providing transport to the nearest resourced school. While it works reasonably well for most students, unfortunately it is detrimental to some students with special needs and disabilities who attend special schools as it does not take account of their medical needs or the support services they require. The problem is particularly difficult in areas such as Carrick-on-Suir in County Tipperary as the Department insists that students with special needs from the Carrick-on-Suir area attend school in Waterford city. This issue has been raised with the Department on numerous occasions.

School transport has been refused, including on appeal, and I appeal to the Minister to address the issue as it is particularly difficult for students and parents. The problem is that, since birth, special needs students have been availing of services in County Tipperary and have built up relationships with the services and their staff. For instance, many have been visiting paediatric consultants, medical, nursing, psychological, physiotherapy, social work and speech and language therapy staff in Tipperary. In some cases, they have attended preschool services in Tipperary. All of these services are available in two special schools in Cashel, Scoil Aonghusa and Scoil Chormaic, where they are provided by a multidisciplinary team. They are of great benefit to the students and provide families with great support.

If the students are forced to attend school in Waterford, they will have to be taken out of school to travel to Tipperary to visit the paediatric consultant, psychologist, physiotherapist, social workers and speech and language therapists with whom they have built up a relationship. All these services are based in Tipperary. It will be traumatic for the children who avail of these services if they are forced to leave the county to attend a school Waterford, which is excellent, and have to travel back to the county to access the services they require as a result of their disabilities. This does not make sense and will be traumatic and costly for the children in question and their families.

Will the Minister to look at this very seriously and amend the scheme? A small number of students are affected by it and it could be addressed at little to no cost. In fact, it would probably cost nothing to amend the scheme to include these students.

I thank Deputy Healy for raising the matter. The Department of Education and Skills provides for the education of children with special educational needs through a number of support mechanisms and placement options depending on the child's assessed needs. In general, education provision for children with special educational needs is made in special schools, special classes attached to ordinary schools or in integrated settings in mainstream classes.

I am not sure what wording the Deputy used. I only have the wording I have here as to the debate he raised which was on services in general. I understand that the issue was discussed at a public meeting last night and that there was a support locally from other Deputies on the issue. The Deputy did not clarify, however, what wording was different from what he submitted.

While departmental policy is to ensure the maximum possible integration of children with special educational needs into ordinary mainstream schools, students who have been assessed as having special educational needs also have access to a range of special schools or class placements. Special educational needs organisers, or SENOs, from the National Council for Special Education, or NCSE, can assist parents to identify appropriate educational placements for children with special educational needs. The NCSE has published a guide for parents and guardians on choosing schools for children and young people with special educational needs. The guide is available at the council's website.

The Department's policy on school transport is that transport is provided to the nearest school which can be resourced to provide education for the child, taking into account any recommendation made about the type of educational provision that is recommended for the child, whether special school placement, special class placement or mainstream placement with additional resources. The pertinent recommendation for consideration for school transport is the recommendation by the NCSE as to which is the nearest school which can be resourced to cater for the educational needs of the particular child taking into account the type of placement recommended in professional reports. The role of the NCSE is to advise parents on the educational and other resources which can be provided to allow a child to attend school. The availability and provision of health related services, including therapy supports, which is the issue that was raised, is the responsibility of the Health Service Executive. The Department of Education and Skills has no responsibility or mandate for such services. The availability of therapy services in a particular school is not, therefore, a factor which is taken into account by the NCSE in designating which is the nearest school placement which can be resourced to meet the educational needs of a particular child. I understand that therein lies the Deputy's problem.

I understand that the situation the Deputy is trying to raise is the difference between the services provided by the Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Health and decisions made in the latter as well. I stress, however, that the rules around school transport are designed and implemented nationally. I have to ensure they are implemented fairly across the board. In circumstances such as those the Deputy has raised in respect of a particular school, it can be difficult when different Departments provide different services. In light of that, a health and education steering committee has been established to progress the national programme on progressing disability services for children and young people. The programme is based on the recommendations of the report of the national reference group on multidisciplinary services for children aged five to 18 years which was produced by representatives of the professions and management involved in delivering multidisciplinary services to children. The long-term goal of the programme is to bring consistency to therapy service delivery and a clear pathway to services for all children with disabilities according to need. The implementation of the programme will have a positive impact on the provision of clinical services for all children requiring access to health related supports regardless of where they live or which schools they attend.

The difficulty I am trying to raise is set out towards the end of the Minister of State's reply. The nub of the question is the absence of communication or connections between the Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Health on transport services for children with disabilities where the resourced school is not in the area where the services have been provided to the particular child since birth. That is the key problem. The Minister of State has acknowledged that there is no communication between the two. To be fair to these students and their families, communication is needed between the Departments and the scheme must be amended to take into account the medical and support service needs of children with disabilities where they have established a relationship with those services and with the individuals providing those services in their own county. It is nonsense to have them attend school in Waterford city and have them brought back regularly from school to Tipperary to attend psychology services, speech and language, paediatric services and physiotherapy services. All these services are available in south Tipperary in special schools that provide an excellent service. It is time the Departments of Education and Skills and Health got together to ensure the scheme was amended to allow for the small number of cases we are talking about. These are cases that are highly traumatic for the children and traumatic and pressurising for families. I appeal to the Minister of State to get the Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Health to knock heads together to amend the scheme to make it available to the parents and students I have outlined.

I thank the Deputy for raising the issue. It is one about which the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Hayes, has also spoken. It is an issue that has arisen in a number of places and not just in Tipperary, which I think Deputy Healy acknowledges. The solution regarding a combination of services provided through the Department of Education and Skills and the Department and Health is not really a school transport one. I have sympathy for the issue. It is something I have been involved in before in other scenarios. Other cases were brought to me where we have tried to work with the Department of Health to find solutions. Solutions have generally been found. We had a case last year which I do not want to outline but in respect of which the Departments - rightly - came together. What the Deputy is saying is that we have a policy issue to fix.

I agree to talk to my Department and the Department of Health to determine how we can fix this. I am not of the view that the solution involves school transport. The issue is the provision of services between the Department of Health and the Department of Education and Skills. I will raise the matter to see if there is anything we can do in any policy area to address the problem. The difficulty for my Department is that we do not get involved in the provision of health related services. That is a matter for the Department of Health, as I think the Deputy acknowledges. I will talk to colleagues in both Departments to see if anything can be done to improve this. It has caused difficulty in a couple of cases. I agree that we have a duty to find a solution. I will provide feedback to the Deputy. If he wants to provide me with the specific details of the case, I will certainly investigate it personally. On the overall policy issue, there is ongoing work which might help in this regard. I will certainly add to that conversation to see if we can fast-track matters.

National Broadband Plan Implementation

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this very important matter. It not only impacts on the rural parts of south Kildare but also is an issue throughout the country. I thank the Minister for attending to address the matter personally. I start by acknowledging the role the Minister and his Department have played in addressing the structural deficit in certain parts of Ireland outside the larger urban areas and the deficiency in certain areas which lack high-speed broadband. I acknowledge in particular the recent capital programme of State expenditure which is the first in which we have seen significant direct Exchequer funding for broadband provision. Normally, capital plans cover only schools, hospitals, physical buildings and roads, but this is a real recognition that broadband, which is perhaps invisible, is equally important infrastructure for the State. The money is required for the Minister to do his job because this is very frustrating for those who have not benefited from high-speed broadband. I have been frustrated by the amount of time that has been wasted in the past and the years of underinvestment in this area.

I raise this matter today because it is timely to do so. A year ago today, the Minister published the national high-speed coverage map for 2016 which marked out areas in blue and amber depending on whether they were going to get commercial high-speed broadband from the private sector or needed State-led intervention.

I note from recent responses by the Minister to parliamentary questions that his Department intends to publish an updated version of the map before the end of the year and hopes to proceed to formal procurement, which would be welcome. The updated map will take account of details relating to proposed new commercial investments that have been unveiled during the year.

I have concerns about specific areas in my constituency, including Narraghmore, Calverstown, Kilmeage, Brannockstown and Maganey, which were marked in amber on the Minister's map one year ago and were due for State-led intervention. Subsequently, they were included in Eircom's fibre broadband roll-out plan last June. This was met with much local enthusiasm, as something was finally going to happen. However, despite my repeated requests of eir, as it is now known, I have been unable to get a clear timeframe for this. That worries me. I am afraid that those areas will be excluded from the updated version of the map of State-led intervention that the Minister is about to publish because we will not have a commitment from the private sector on when it will invest in broadband.

We must ensure that an area that has been removed from the map is not adversely affected by a delay. Private operators may try a land grab, take as many areas from the State as they can and stockpile business for themselves in the years to come without being held to clear timelines for roll-outs. Will the Minister assure me that the areas removed from the State intervention map will receive high-speed broadband roll-outs in a shorter timeframe or, at the very least, in the same amount of time as those areas covered by the map? Other areas in my constituency, such as Moone, Allenwood, Ballitore and Ballymore Eustace, were included in previous Eircom plans but are still awaiting commencement.

As the Minister knows, broadband is no longer a luxury. It is a daily necessity for most adults and children. It is used for work, education and social purposes and is one of the first services that we look to when moving to new premises. It is crucial that we get this process right. Before the Minister publishes a new map and we move to procurement, we should have clear commitments.

I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue. I agree with him on the importance of broadband infrastructure. He was correct in that, when we traditionally spoke about infrastructure, we meant physical infrastructure like roads and other big-ticket infrastructure that was important to a modern economy. Now, though, we must speak of the digital infrastructure. Broadband is at the centre of that. The Deputy was right to lay emphasis on the necessary digital infrastructure for our economy.

The Government's national broadband plan is delivering high-speed broadband to every citizen and business in Ireland. This is being achieved through a combination of commercial investment by telecoms operators and a proposed State intervention where the commercial sector will not invest. The high-speed broadband map that I published last year provides detailed information on commercial investment areas and the proposed intervention area. It covers more than 50,000 townlands in every county, including Kildare.

I understand that high-speed broadband services have been rolled out to more than 55,000 premises in County Kildare to date, with more than 12,500 more expected to be served by commercial investment by the end of 2016. Approximately 20,500 remaining premises in Kildare will either be covered by further commercial investment or will be targets for proposed State intervention.

Ireland's proposed broadband intervention strategy, which I published on 15 July, sets out a series of detailed proposals by the Government in respect of the proposed State intervention. Some 41 submissions have been received arising from the recent public consultation on the draft intervention strategy. These are being carefully considered with a view to finalising the strategy by the end of this year, as the Deputy mentioned. A detailed procurement process will then be undertaken in order to select a potential bidder or bidders in line with all EU and national legislative requirements.

The Government is determined to ensure that the network is built out as quickly as possible, and engagement with industry stakeholders has indicated that this could be delivered within three to five years of the contract's award. Following this process, 85% of premises in Ireland will have access to high-speed services by 2018, with the balance having services by 2020.

I assure the Deputy that I am alive to the issues that he has raised. However, it is too soon to say precisely how the announcements by eir and other operators this year will impact on the cost to the State of funding our intended intervention. Detailed examination and analysis of all commercial proposals are continuing. I expect to be in a position to make a final decision on them by December, when I intend to publish a revised national high-speed broadband coverage map showing commercial investment out to 2020 and a potentially revised intervention area.

The detailed scrutiny that the Deputy would expect us to apply to all commercial plans and undertakings is ongoing and is quickly nearing a conclusion. By the end of this year, we will be in a position to make our announcements and proceed to procurement.

I thank the Minister for his detailed response. Can I take it from him that just because a commercial operator claims it will look after an extra 300,000 households, as was the case with last June's announcement, the Department will not take that at face value? Can he confirm that there will be detailed scrutiny and that an area that was to receive State-led intervention will not necessarily be knocked off the list unless the Department can be assured of a swifter roll-out of broadband that is at least of equal quality? If so, I will be greatly reassured. It is important that my constituents know whether that will be the case.

State-led intervention is the right approach where there is commercial failure. Previous Governments were happy to sit back and leave this to the private sector, which has given us a patchwork map of broadband across the country. Obviously, the commercial sector was always going to look after large urban areas first because they had more customers and larger returns were possible, which meant that small areas such as villages and one-off houses in rural areas were left behind. We have been left another mess to clean up, as we must ensure that everyone gets equal access and the commercial sector does not get the jump on us.

Last year, I surveyed a large number of constituents in my area about the effect on them of a lack of broadband. It brought home to me the positive impact that a change would have. We are a little more than one hour from Dublin. A number of my constituents could work from home a couple of days per week, not clog up the roads, have a better quality of life and be at home at 5:30 p.m. instead of 8 p.m. That is not even to mention children who want to study or do projects online, the possibility of watching television on the Internet, etc. Small businesses must be located in towns because people do not have sufficient broadband speeds to set up at home. For Ireland to develop a more even spread of our economy so that the economic recovery is not urban-centred, broadband is necessary. I look forward to developments in the coming weeks.

I thank the Deputy for his support for what we are doing. His assessment of what we are doing and his analysis of what is necessary is spot on. We are rigorously assessing new and existing industry investment commitments in order to ensure it delivers the services that have been promised. The Deputy laid some emphasis on speed of delivery. That is a factor that we must all be conscious of, but it is not the only one. When we assess what we are being told, we look behind mere assertion. That is the point of an assessment process. The commercial operators understand this. Assertions are not taken entirely at face value.

We have our own expert input available to us in order to assess and evaluate the quality and credibility of what is being said and the intentions. The speed of delivery is one issue but there are others, as the Deputy will appreciate.

Very considerable work is being done on this. We are on target to do what we said we would do. When I became Minister, we said we would publish the map in November. We did that. We said we would come back in July of this year with the detailed intervention strategy, and we did so. We then said we would have further consultation in respect of that and the map and that we would commence the procurement process by December. We are on target to do that. We are moving ahead with this project, which is critical to the people for the reasons the Deputy has set out in terms of the economic, social and cultural and educational benefits. The Deputy is absolutely correct in this regard. We are progressing this project and I thank the Deputy for his support.

Top
Share