Leo weaving a tangled web to net rural voters

LEO Varadkar appears have ignored the old truism ‘those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it’ in his dealings with the National Broadband Plan (NBP). And a hasty decision about awarding the contract for the NBP, currently embroiled in controversy, could end up with his Government embattled in the courts.

He should know that another FGled coalition’s awarding of the second mobile phone licence to a Denis O’Brien company in 1995 is still bogged down in litigation.

Leo Varadkar was a teenager in 1997 when Justice Moriarty’s tribunal first sat to examine the awarding of the licence to O’Brien’s Digicel. But he was a minister in the government that accepted the findings of Moriarty’s report when it was published in 2011.

THE Taoiseach insisted that minister Denis Naughten resign in October because of his handling of the broadband contract. It is clear that Mr Naughten, an honest man, has nothing in common with Michael Lowry, the FG minister responsible for awarding the mobile contract in 1995. Lowry resigned in disgrace and was castigated in Moriarty’s report, and his handling of the licencing process is an example of scandalous ministerial behaviour.

After Lowry, the standards required of a minister in charge of a process for a contract that could cost over €3billion is stringent: he or she must not only be innocent of any wrongdoing – but like Caesar’s wife, be above suspicion.

Clearly the Taoiseach had such rigorous standards (and potential litigation) in mind when he insisted Mr Naughten resign, and asked the auditor of the NBP process to report on its status. After the auditor’s report gave him the green light, Leo appointed another minister to oversee it and urged full steam ahead to award a contract. And just as urgent is the inclusion of high speed broadband for rural Ireland in FG’s manifesto.

It is clear now that price (maybe €3billion, but nobody really knows or even seems to care how much) doesn’t matter. And neither does the gobsmacking fact that there is only one bidder for a contract that is draped in protocols and rigmarole to make it appear more like a rigidly competitive process.

The sole bidding consortium has changed, but according to the Taoiseach: ‘It is not a new consortium, but the composition has changed.’ And then he wanted to know if the opposition was trying to scupper the project ‘so the people in rural Ireland will be denied the infrastructure they need?’

Déjà vu: in 1995 when TDs and the media were suspicious of Lowry’s handing of the second mobile licence, they were accused of frustrating the implementation of a vital communications service. So access to highspeed broadband is now a lure for the people in the 542,000 premises seeking it to vote for the Government.

BUT the Smyth report that allowed the Taoiseach to fast-forward the NBP into his election manifesto needs to be rigorously tested by the Oireachtas communications committee. Perhaps Mr Smyth will be asked about the process and protocols and if he has any idea of how much taxpayers will pay for the NBP.

Members of the committee may also ask him how he reached conclusions that turned out to be so convenient for the Government yet not too disappointing to Naughten.

They should ask the auditor to the NBP process why it has taken six years to fail to secure high-speed broadband for rural Ireland. And can it be delivered for €3billion?