Is Report Stage agreed? The House can then decide on taking Final Stage.
Telecommunications (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1996: Report Stage (Resumed) and Final Stage.
Question, "That the Bill be received for final consideration" put and agreed to.
Acting Chairman
When is it proposed to take next Stage?
We have difficulty with the Final Stage.
It was explained to the Opposition that the Minister agrees with Government policy and fully supports it. He wishes to see all Stages taken to a conclusion today. The argument being made by the Opposition was dealt with by the Minister's statement. It would be unfair to bring the Minister into the House. I propose we take Final Stage now.
We are worried about the procedural aspect of the Bill, not what Senator Cregan spoke about. At what point can we discuss the replies of the Minister of State? I believe the appropriate time would be the Final Stage. We want to get to Final Stage, discuss this matter and decide whether to allow the Bill to pass.
If we agree to Final Stage being taken now, is this side of the House prevented from objecting to the final passage of the Bill?
Acting Chairman
No. Senators can object to the passage of the Bill.
The Whips agreed that Report and Final Stages would be taken today. I understand that on the Order of Business this morning the House wished to make sure that the new Minister, Deputy Dukes, supports this Bill. That was why there was discussion as to whether we would take Final Stage today. The final decision on the Bill is made after Report Stage. Having heard the letter from the Minister which Senator Cregan read out, it seems that matter is not of concern any more. The Minister appears to support this Bill. If we are to speak about this matter we should do so on Final Stage, which should be taken now. We may vote against it but it should be taken now.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
My point has already been made by Senator Mooney. I refer to what occurred on the Order of Business this morning. The contention from this side is that there was some question as to whether the incoming Minister was committed in the same way as his predecessor to the sale of a 20 per cent stake in Telecom to KPN-Telia. We wanted a delay between Report and Final Stages of the Bill to clear up that confusion. What Senator Cregan has said to us has cleared up the confusion as to the Government's commitment to the issue.
There is, however, an outstanding matter which arises from the Order of Business. Senator Manning affirmed on the Order of Business that the Government was committed to the Bill. When he was asked about Luas he said we could debate the matter. The inference is that the Government's commitment to Luas is not the same as the Government's commitment to this Bill. There is a certain inconsistency in the replies given to us this morning. I took it that if we could debate Luas it was not Government policy but that it was Government policy to proceed with all stages of this Bill.
The Minister, Deputy Dukes, has a different emphasis on the question of Luas. The question arose as to whether he had a different emphasis on this matter as well. I am prepared to accept that this is a Government decision and that it is determined to see this Bill through. That does not necessarily mean that we agree with the Bill or will vote for its passage when we are asked to do so.
I wish to record my appreciation to the Minister for his commitment to introduce legislation at a later stage to cover one of the areas about which I was concerned. My concerns in two of the amendments I tabled on Committee Stage have been answered in a manner which I am happy to accept. They deal with the need for the regulator, or the director, to be proactive and to seek out competitors. We had not included the customer in this Bill and I am concerned about that.
I was not concerned about the main thrust of the director's functions which were to ensure fairness between the various parties and competitors. I understood that point and had no problem with it. This Bill ensures fairness between the various competitors in the market place. However, it did not encourage the director to seek more competition in the interests of the customer. The Minister has read out a statement which answers my concern in that regard. I gather that he intends to introduce provisions to this effect either by way of order or perhaps at a later stage in omnibus legislation.
This Bill covers one aspect of what is required but many other aspects are required. The Department spoke about these as early as last January and we were promised omnibus legislation in 1996 but it has not yet appeared. We are taking the Government on trust when it says that this is only part of omnibus legislation. It is very important that we use this opportunity and do not to sit back and wait for that legislation. The various regulators that will come into being, forced on us less by an enthusiastic Government than by the European Commission which is working towards fewer monopolies and more competition, will require omnibus legislation. I ask the Minister to make sure it happens soon. The Minister's statement puts my mind at rest in regard to one area.
I have concerns about other areas and I look forward to debating them, particularly that of the uniform tariff and the universal service obligation under which everybody in the telecommunications industry will be placed. We must see these issues not as threats to Telecom Éireann but as opportunities for its customers and those of the other bodies that will compete with Telecom Éireann in the years ahead. I thank the Minister and look forward to even more action in the future.
The Leader said this morning that he understood Members' concern regarding what the Minister said. The Minister's attitude and Government policy have now been clearly explained. There was never a question that we were not prepared to allow an open debate on the legislation. We have done so and it is only right that we pass the Bill now.
It is right to applaud the Minister's statement in response to Senator Quinn's amendments to section 3 on Committee Stage relating to the competitive element of this Bill. Senator Quinn has done the House a service in this regard and I am glad the Minister has seen this. In fairness to the Minister, he said he was in sympathy with much of the sentiment behind the amendments. As one who supported the broad thrust of Senator Quinn's amendments I am happy that their spirit will now be implemented. I am content with the statement issued clarifying the concerns raised on the Order of Business.
I heard the interview that gave rise to the newspaper speculation as to the content of the interview with Deputy Dukes. If the interview had been published there would be no controversy at all; the interpretations of the interview in the newspaper gave rise to disquiet. We have been in contact with the Minister and his statement is absolutely clear. He supports the Bill. The Bill is Government policy. Commercial decisions have been taken and this Bill is needed to implement them. We are talking about £500 million of people's money in one form or another. It is very important that we do this business in the way we agreed.
I thank Senators for their interest in and debate of the many crucial policy questions which underpinned the legislation. The Government's view is that to build a first class telecommunications economy we must also aim to construct a first class national operator by providing a legislative foundation for the Telecom Éireann strategic alliance. The Bill is a vital step in that direction.
The alliance is fundamentally about strategic benefits which will in turn create a real opportunity for Telecom Éireann to develop and prosper in a competitive market. In KPN/Telia, Telecom Éireann has found a consortium with a genuine long-term commitment to the Irish market. These companies have the strategic and financial resources and the wealth of experience required to bring major benefits to all Irish telecommunications customers.
No developments in the alliance can be achieved without all parties being prepared to change. The Bill has addressed the changes required in a realistic manner and has done so in a way which is sensitive to the interests of all parties. I am especially pleased that it has been possible to address the key issues involved in restructuring the board of the company with full regard to the views of Deputies and Senators, as well those of the semi-State employees and worker directors.
The Bill's provisions relating to the establishment of the office of Director of Telecommunications Regulation and for the transfer to the director of the functions of the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications relating to the regulations of telecommunications, radio communications and cable television sectors are also of far reaching significance to the Irish economy. These provisions reflect the fact that the Bill marks the beginning, and not the end, of a process by which the telecommunications sector in Ireland shapes up to meet the new competitive environment head on.
I draw attention again to my response to the amendments put forward by Senator Quinn. These themes will be treated comprehensively in forthcoming legislation on multi-sectoral regulation and on telecommunications. On enactment of the Bill, the Government will move speedily to put in place arrangements for effective regulation of the sector. These include physical arrangements relating to the establishment of the office, as well as practical issues such as the appointment of a first director. In enacting this Bill, by paving the way for the conclusion of the strategic alliance and by putting in place the necessary steps for the establishment of independent regulatory arrangements, the Oireachtas will demonstrate its commitment to getting on with the job of moving Irish telecommunications into the 21st century with confidence.
I thank the parliamentary draftsman and officials of the Office of the Attorney General who provided expert assistance in all aspects of the drafting of the Bill. It would be remiss of me if I did not also thank the House for an excellent debate on foot of the amendments tabled by Senators, and the officials sitting namelessly behind me and who have done an excellent——
Did the Minister of State say "aimlessly" or "namelessly"?
I said "namelessly". I thank them for the amount of work and skill they brought to this issue. Some Members met them when they explained technical aspects of the Bill to Senators.
I concur with the remarks made by the Minister of State. I am grateful to him for his interest in the amendments and in the issues raised. I also concur with his remarks on the excellence of his administrative and technical staff.
I congratulate the Minister of State on the manner in which he took the Bill through the House and on the way in which he listened to and commented on proceedings. He supported and understood the intention of many of the amendments. While not all of them were agreed to, they were given a good hearing and they will be taken into account in future legislation.
As one who had the opportunity to meet the nameless people behind the Minister of State, I was impressed with their expertise, skill, commitment and dedication. The Bill is a step in the right direction and the people of Ireland will benefit from it in the future.
I thank the Minister of State and his staff for the way in which they dealt with the Bill. I am glad that any confusion has been resolved and that we are clear as to the Government's intention for the legislation and the commitment of the new Minister to it. I wish the legislation well and I hope it will achieve its objectives.
I thank everybody concerned. This is one of the best Ministers of State in the Government. I have always admired his courtesy, efficiency and total dedication to his position. I thank him and his officials for their courtesy, kindness and understanding during the passage of the Bill.
This has been a constructive debate. I thank the Minister of State and his staff. Some of them may be better off in front rather than behind him. He is to be complimented on the positive way in which he listened to people and accepted constructive amendments. Other amendments which may not be relevant to the legislation were not accepted. However, there will be other opportunities to argue for short wave and better frequencies for radio programmes, not only on this island but also in Great Britain.
Question put and agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 1.15 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.