Taoiseach Leo Varadkar (right) with David McCourt, who is leading the consortium that is the only bidder for the National Broadband Plan at Science Foundation event in new York in 2016
Taoiseach has just told the Dáil the cost of providing high-speed broadband to 500k homes, farms & biz will be “many multiples of what was anticipated originally”.
Varadkar expects a decision on whether to proceed to be made before Easter. #New
— Kevin Doyle (@KevDoyle_Indo) February 27, 2019
Hmm.
Previously: ‘An All-Too Familiar Vista In Major Communications Contracts’
Sponsored Link
the government always get heavily overcharged for everything because they’ve always paid whatever the cost because they don’t care, it’s not their money, and they don’t have the negotiation skills because most of em only have experience as fupping primary school teachers.
Dumb question perhaps, but are we not reaching the point where mobile technology is rendering this project redundant?
5G is supposed to suffice. And kill us all with cancer.
theoretical nonsense cancer at that
Emily there are areas of the country where mobile coverage barely reaches 3G standard
There are areas where ‘cheap’ wireless coverage is not cost effective.
This is why wired broadband is so expensive – the population density is just too low to be cost effective.
Providing broadband access to all citizens is as important as electrifying the country was 80 years ago. This should be done whether it is “cost effective” or not, everything can’t be measured in euro’s and cent.
Are you seriously saying that broadband is equivalent to electricity?
No. A better comparison might be to upgrade the ESB supply so every house in the country can fast-charge an electric car. That’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Sometimes I read your comments and I think that you are yanking our chains, but it appears that you actually believe this BS…astonishing!
rP, you know the old cliche about arguing with fools, I’m sure?
The feeling is mutual.
There is a phone line in most houses in the state (or one can be got easily). Through that everyone can access the internet (albeit slowly via dialup). This is equivalent to the rural electrification. Each house got one or two lights and one socket.
90% of internet traffic is video and file-sharing. So rural broadband will just give the farmers porn-on-demand.
+1 rP
Dial-up.
Oh, sweet jumping Jesus. What a pinhead.
This is fine, so long as rural broadband users pay a connection fee that covers the cost of the rollout, and pay a rate that reflects the increased cost in delivering the service to them as compared to urban dwellers.
Sorry, is he talking about the NBP or the NCH? (wasn’t the original cost of the NBP €500 million?)
What links the NBP to the NCH?
Siteserv is a contractor for both (and Siteserv was sold off by the State-owned bank, under Leo’s party’s watch, to a FG donor in controversial circumstances and that sale is the main subject of a commission of investigation that’s been ongoing for nearly four years).
It is just incompetence, sleaze or worse?
“It is just incompetence, sleaze or worse?”
This is Ireland, where low standards in high office is the norm..
People who choose to live in one-off rural builds should be forced to pay more to receive state services like electricity, broadband etc – it costs far too much to supply them on an equal cost basis.
One-off rural builds are undoubtedly lovely and spacious, surprisingly cheap, devoid of noise etc. But they’re also a blight on our infrastructure development. If someone chooses to live in one they should be fine with the additional financial costs incurred.
Those who choose to live in urban areas with regular bus services, trains and trams, libraries, swimming pools, playgrounds, post offices, police stations, and hospitals should pay higher taxes than the rural dwellers who have little or none of these although they pay for them.
I believe they do pay more, already, no?
Don’t think so. There’s nothing on my yokemebob from Revenue to say that my tax credits/codes are determined by my address. Is there something like that on yours?
Urban dwellers already pay for the services that they receive. Rural dwellers do not pay for any services that urban dwellers receive; they don’t cover the cost of the services that they receive themselves, nevermind anyone else’s
My property tax is determined by house value.
Property values in cities are much higher than the countryside (for comparable property). So yes, the city-dwellers pay more tax than their country cousins.
Thirty seven words typed. Zero sense made.
2/10
Must try harder.
Dublin is by far the biggest source of revenue for the State. In total, €22 billion in tax was raised in Dublin in 2017. This represents 56 per cent of the State’s total tax take, despite having only an estimated 38 per cent of the country’s population.
Dublin accounts for 61 per cent (€7 billion) of VAT receipts; 52 per cent (€8.5 billion) of PAYE/USC income tax; 45 per cent (€1.1 billion) of self-employed income tax; 62 per cent (€5 billion) of corporation tax receipts, and 43 per cent (€360 million) of capital gains tax receipts.
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/dublin-generates-56-of-irish-tax-but-cant-keep-a-cent-of-it/
Sigh.
I don’t know why I bother. But anyway…
Revenue report statistics based on the location of the office submitting the returns. If a major employer in Cork process their payroll in an admin building in Galway, the figures are reflected in the tax take for Galway.
Ok.
Are there really that many business conglomerates in, say, Longford, that are processing their payroll in Dublin that can account for this discrepancy?
No idea.
I do know that there are many large nationwide employers who report their taxes in Dublin.
What about the planning structure which allowed the one-off-housing in the first place?
What about the fact that many of these dwellings were constructed prior to any planning laws?
Pre-1963, yes. The point is, why should those living in them pay more for essential services? That’s not really fair to penalise somebody because of uncontrolled ribbon development and poor or no town planning a couple of generations ago.
Because broadband isn’t an essential service.
That’s not really fair to penalise somebody because of uncontrolled ribbon development and poor or no town planning a couple of generations ago.
True, so why are city-dwellers being penalised (through higher taxation) to pay for a national rollout of broadband to the country dwellers? Just so they can get Spotify or Netflix.
Think you’ll find that we are in violent agreement.
Good news, it looks like we have identified a pattern , possibly some sort of corruption , the next step now will be for a investigative reporter to look into it , they will expose far more details, then the Gardai will get involved , the government will then pass legislation , then problem will be solved and we can all move on with the knowledge that though bad things happen from time to time, corrections are quickly made and the system works…
Thats what usually happens, No?
bar the ‘corrections’ bit, that’s not even done for the most part, I believe.
Who has calculated the inflated figures, how much is fiber optic cable and external pole mounted
splice/termination boxes made and supplied by Acome and 3M respectively to Eir and how are
Eir funding this initial roll out, when they have significant borrowings and where the actual take
up is under 20 percent and there is a duplication of services where Eir are still using a copper
pair to provide telephone services and a fiber strand to provide broadband, given bandwith of
fiber, why has telephony not migrated from copper:
Are you having a stroke?