During a Seanad debate on Telecommunications services, I said: thank Senators for the opportunity raise this crucial issue for the development of our country. I do not think anyone can be complacent about this matter and, having listened to the concerns expressed by Senators O’Reilly, Brady and Carty, I do not think they are being complacent. They are very much aware of their constituents’ concerns and interests in having a better broadband service. The first fundamental question is to ask why this is of such importance...

Second, broadband is vital for the democratic development of our country. One of the other uses of the Internet is the social networking that can take place on it. In addition, it involves collaboration and a democratic engagement and involvement that can take place through the use of those networks. During the recent presidential election campaign in the United States we saw a further step up in terms of people becoming engaged and actively involved in politics, which is what we all aspire to see happening regardless of our political background. The Internet is therefore an important tool of democratisation in the development of our society.

Third, the important question “Why?” arises. I believe the Internet will be of crucial importance in meeting many of the environmental objectives we have. It will cut down emissions and the use of resources. People often refer to the “Internet of things” whereby we will go from one website, weblink or datapoint to another. It will increasingly be a network that connects devices for electronics, transport, monitoring and machines in the home so we can use them more efficiently. It will be centre stage in how we deliver efficiency to expand the economy in a way that meets the green economist Herman Daly’s criteria of having qualitative development rather than quantitative growth.

For those three reasons the roll-out of broadband is crucial. If one looks at which countries have been successful in this respect and where networks have developed best, it is clear that competition has driven it. In Holland and the United Kingdom where they have good networks that are ahead of ours, the competition between cable and fixed-line phone companies to provide such network access has driven the development, bringing speeds up and prices down. While we have lagged behind in recent years, that competition has been more in evidence. Because of it we have seen investment by companies and improvements in the situation. As Senator Carty said, in June 2007 we had some 500,000 broadband connections whereas we now have roughly 1.2 million and the figure is rising. We have come back from bottom of the league to tenth in the EU out of 27 member states. We cannot be satisfied with that, however, because we need to be in the top three. We need to match Denmark, Holland, Britain and other countries. We recognise, however, that we have come some way. We have 40 operators which are all equally important in that competitive market. We do not see one operator as the sole possible provider.

We must also recognise that in instances there has been real market failure. The reason we have been lagging behind is because Eircom as a fixed-line company, and the cable operator, in those crucial years from 2002 to 2004 when the new Internet was developing, failed to invest in their networks and provide broadband access to the public. They would say that was due to the lack of a business case but the reality was that we were not giving people the opportunity to connect and by dint of that we were falling behind and losing jobs. We also lost the sort of Internet connectivity that is expected in a modern, knowledge-based society and thus our ability to obtain services from such networks was hindered. Because of that market failure the Government has over a period made a series of interventions and will continue to intervene to stimulate competition and get the services we want.

One of the key initial investments that makes such obvious sense now, although at the time it was fought tooth and nail by certain sections of the public service because we may not have had a top notch cost-benefit analysis, was in our international connectivity. A State investment in a global crossing-fibre connection to the wider world Internet, was a crucial investment. It improved our position through cheaper international connectivity and higher band width speeds, which brought business to this country. Continuing that tradition of investment, recent contracts have been signed concerning Project Kelvin, which is an international connection from the United States to the north west of this island, connecting down through Monaghan and Cavan — Senator O’Reilly will be glad to hear — to Dublin. That will add to our international connectivity thus ensuring quick and fast connections with the rest of the world.

In addition, the Government has engaged in a number of different schemes to boost market efforts. Initially with the group broadband schemes, some 127 rural communities were given the opportunity to access the type of operators referred to by Senator Twomey. They often operate with innovative fixed-line and wireless solutions which we must turn to because of our demographic situation, which is different to most other countries. Up to 40% of houses are located in rural areas where it is difficult to run a DSL connection any distance from an exchange.

Beyond that there was the development of the metropolitan area networks in two phases. It was a massive investment by the State in fibre connections in most large towns and several large cities. That investment will prove to be a long-term real benefit to the State, as we need to move to fibre as our main transportation network for heavy data traffic. There will be space for cable, mobile, fixed, wireless, satellite and other operators. They will be able to work best when they get their volume data transactions on to fibre. New photonic systems will be able to carry large volumes of data, multiples of what is carried by present systems. The metropolitan area networks were an important long-term investment by the State in that regard.

The issue of covering rural areas that could not be included in the metropolitan area networks scheme did not go away. Neither did the group broadband schemes solve the problem. In recognition of that, we have signed contracts on a national broadband scheme which is aimed at getting to the 10% of the population which otherwise would not be served. The best way to manage the scheme was to go down to the smallest local area district — the electoral district. We reached agreement with the EU under the competition rules that where there was a significant minority of the population in any such electoral district which could not get broadband, it could be provided on a subsidised-supported basis.

That is what happened with the competitive process involving several different companies and leading to the contract being awarded to 3, a Hutchinson Whampoa company, which in turn is a major international company providing 3G broadband access with guaranteed broadband transaction speeds. It is a crucial and important development for the social, economic and environmental agenda. The public sector involvement of €79 million, out of the €200 million project, shows it is not an insignificant investment and the political importance of covering those areas that would not be provided with that broadband service.

We need to push further and not rest. In the next-generation broadband discussions, we engaged with a range of different industries, not just telecommunications but the computer and broadcasting industries. Several developments from these discussions have emerged.

It is proposed to ensure high speed 100 MB connectivity broadband in our schools and a wireless connection for every classroom. For example, a French classroom could connect with a classroom in Mayo or Donegal to provide a real-time interaction and different learning experience. Another example would be a mathematics class being able to download the latest leading physics lectures from MIT at the click of a mouse. Teachers and students having that ability would change the education system. This would be the greatest benefit of the State intervening to provide such access to schools in an open and competitive manner which supports the market. It also will have a knock-on effect in the provision of high speed broadband services to other services and households in the area.

Another development in the strategy is to provide a one-stop-shop wherever there is State infrastructure with ducting, which could carry a fibre network. It will be co-ordinated to allow businesses access to it. Likewise, the planning system must be changed so that any new housing developments will have high-speed fibre connections to ensure householders do not have to retrofit their residences.

The most crucial advantage Ireland has in the development of a broadband network is its available wireless spectrum. Access to it, unlike in other countries, is not restricted because there is not much of a military demand for it and because we are an island. The use of that spectrum in an innovative way to test new wireless systems and applications is an advantage. We have given clear directions to the communications regulator to use the spectrum wisely and put us ahead of other countries which might not have the same resource.

It is crucial, be it the cable or fixed-line telephone companies, to make the investments now that will deliver the next generation of broadband services on their networks. Be it building a fibre connection to a telecommunications cabinet to ensure high-speed connection to the nearest homes or be it upgrading the cable television system to provide broadband, such investments will provide a future for those companies and provide an income, not just from their traffic but others sharing it.

In this way, a business case can be built up for what is a difficult and costly investment. Failure to do that will see this country falling behind again and missing out on the jobs we need to create in this economic crisis. The State will do whatever is possible to support this type of investment in a competitive market. There must be a more co-operative, but at the same time competitive, approach to ensure access for a range of different suppliers is made much more easily and everyone benefits economically. That is the nature of this new Internet world. It is a more collaborative and open world and ages away from the old days of the Department of Posts and Telegraphs where the one company managed the whole process. That was the time when one had to wait nine months to get a telephone and someone could listen in on the exchange. We are in a faster, more open-access and distributed Internet world now. We need to be good at it. The companies which fail to invest in it will fail in the short run because it is a fast-changing world. This is what we must achieve. It is no small task and one we cannot ignore or be slow in taking on.

welcome the Minister’s speech because I was not happy with the wording of the Government’s motion that Seanad Éireann welcomed the Government’s intervention in broadband provision. It was far too complacent while the Minister was much more open and explained his plans and hopes for achievement in the area. It was far more honest.

On 12 December 2007, Senator Ross also put down a motion on broadband access. During that debate I pointed out one of the four principle issues in the last Australian general election was broadband roll-out to every house in the country. The Australian Government of the day lost the election because of its failure to roll out high speed broadband.

I accept many other factors will determine how people vote on this Government, but the broadband issue is very important. I live less than 15 km from Dublin city centre and yet I cannot get broadband in my home. I was pleased the Minister said there would a subsidised-supported basis for those households which cannot get broadband. I am probably one of those but I am frustrated that I have to do so.

I am still concerned at Eircom’s reluctance to invest in next-generation broadband, which hits people in sparsely populated rural areas hardest. Eircom stated that the economic downturn forced it to review its investment in next generation broadband, which will be a major disappointment for many of its customers. Eircom is carrying a huge debt burden, in the order of €3.7 billion, and is losing market share. Its Australian parent company is in even worse shape and is struggling to survive. This means Eircom is not well placed to deliver what the country needs, namely, a high-speed broadband service.

People in rural areas will be obliged to depend on wireless technology for their broadband needs. This is not ideal because the connection speeds will be relatively slow and will be dependent on the number of users accessing the service at any one time. For personal users, low-speed broadband may be adequate. However, for most businesses, first generation broadband will not suffice. Unless rapid progress is made in respect of high-speed broadband provision, rural dwellers will fall further behind their counterparts throughout Europe. In Sweden, for example, 80% of farms already have access to the Internet and one third of those who live on these farms use the Internet daily. Ireland’s rural internet service is closer to that provided in regions such as Tuscany in Italy and countries such as Hungary, where only one quarter of farmers use the Internet.

Last year the Government rejected Eircom’s request for a State investment of €150 million to support its €500 million plan to provide a faster broadband service to 70% of the population. If the figures I have provided are not correct, perhaps the Minister will correct them.

We will eventually reach a situation where it will be much more attractive for businesses to locate in Northern Ireland if high quality broadband services are not available here. One need only consider the recent advances made in the North in this regard. Almost 30,000 customers in the Balmoral area of Belfast are to be given access to super-fast broadband on the BT network early next year. This is part of the largest ever investment in super-fast broadband in the UK in a project worth some £1.5 billion. The speeds available by means of this model are more than ten times as fast as those obtainable by most households in this country. Why are we not taking a similar approach and investing properly for the future? I am confident that the Minister, who spoke about the future, intends to do the right thing. We must exert pressure to ensure that he does so.

Access to high-speed broadband is a key requirement for modern business and is also a critical factor for national economic recovery. The Government will be obliged to reassess matters if, as seems increasingly likely, Eircom is unable to deliver on its commitments in respect of future investment.

I welcome the Minister’s comments and his commitment. However, I am concerned that people do not fully recognise the importance of broadband services. I urge the Minister not to be complacent. I am of the view that the motion before the House displays a degree of complacency which really must be avoided.

For the full debate, please click here.