National Broadband - is this amazing leadership, electioneering or a corrupt waste of tax - what do you think?

The NBP as is currently proposed looks like a bad deal for the tax payers

  • Yes

    Votes: 25 73.5%
  • No

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • Total voters
    34

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Or the network will be a success and the cost of it will be forgotten.

Btw if it was a money machine, it would already have been built by the private sector.

Finally not sure how you can quantify the public return on the investment.
So you're in favour of the government diverting €3bn of tax payers money on a project that has no metrics? So how will we ever know if it's a success or not?

Surely the metrics would include:
  • no of new online businesses paying tax
  • reduction in commuter traffic (baselined to employment rates)
  • road building avoided due to reduction in commuter traffic
  • reduction in carbon emissions as a result of the reduction in traffic
  • inward investment beyond Dublin attributable to access to broadband
If you can't measure something you shouldn't spend someoneelses' money doing it.
 


paulp

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
7,604
So you're in favour of the government diverting €3bn of tax payers money on a project that has no metrics? So how will we ever know if it's a success or not?

Surely the metrics would include:
  • no of new online businesses paying tax
  • reduction in commuter traffic (baselined to employment rates)
  • road building avoided due to reduction in commuter traffic
  • reduction in carbon emissions as a result of the reduction in traffic
  • inward investment beyond Dublin attributable to access to broadband
If you can't measure something you shouldn't spend someoneelses' money doing it.
3 bn for broadband, 1.7bn to be invested in roads. I assume you demand the same metrics for the roads investments?
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
If they provide broadband to every part of the country?
Unless there's a positive from that why should they be spending tax payers' money?

If it's only to get Paddy Mc faster access porn then the government have no business being involved, but also if there's no measurable economic or societal gain (education, transport, employment) then it's highly questionable if the government should be involved.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
Unless there's a positive from that why should they be spending tax payers' money?

If it's only to get Paddy Mc faster access porn then the government have no business being involved, but also if there's no measurable economic or societal gain (education, transport, employment) then it's highly questionable if the government should be involved.
How would you measure the economic or societal gain of having Irish as an official language or of preserving sites of historic interest?
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
How would you measure the economic or societal gain of having Irish as an official language or of preserving sites of historic interest?
I wouldn't, but then again the government isn't about to spend €3bn to create a private sector monopoly that will own our language and our history, so I don't get the question, to be honest.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
I wouldn't, but then again the government isn't about to spend €3bn to create a private sector monopoly that will own our language and our history, so I don't get the question, to be honest.
You said "if there's no measurable economic or societal gain (education, transport, employment) then it's highly questionable if the government should be involved."

The government is involved in both things I asked about so the question is therefore pertinent.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
You said "if there's no measurable economic or societal gain (education, transport, employment) then it's highly questionable if the government should be involved."

The government is involved in both things I asked about so the question is therefore pertinent.
You know the way the thread is about national broadband, and NOT language and history?

I was staying on topic, an alien concept to many I know.

If the government don't have tangible metrics other than "look at how many people have broadband!!!!!" then €3bn seems like a bit of a punt.

Do YOU think it's good value for money?
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
You know the way the thread is about national broadband, and NOT language and history?

I was staying on topic, an alien concept to many I know.

If the government don't have tangible metrics other than "look at how many people have broadband!!!!!" then €3bn seems like a bit of a punt.

Do YOU think it's good value for money?
You offered criteria by which you would measure whether government should be involved in a project without specifying that you believe that they should only be applied to this project.

If that is what you believe then perhaps you could tell us what's unique about broadband that it needs it's own spending criteria that may not be applied to any other government expenditure.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
You offered criteria by which you would measure whether government should be involved in a project without specifying that you believe that they should only be applied to this project.

If that is what you believe then perhaps you could tell us what's unique about broadband that it needs it's own spending criteria that may not be applied to any other government expenditure.
Tell you what - you answer the question about whether you feel it's a good use of tax payers money first.

77.4% who took the poll here don't believe it is - a democratic majority some would say - but our government are likely to proceed anyway without offering any way to measure the outcome.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
Tell you what - you answer the question about whether you feel it's a good use of tax payers money first.

77.4% who took the poll here don't believe it is - a democratic majority some would say - but our government are likely to proceed anyway without offering any way to measure the outcome.
Ok, you don't want to answer a basic question so I'm forced to assume that your real objection is not to the cost but to the principle of providing rural services.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Ok, you don't want to answer a basic question so I'm forced to assume that your real objection is not to the cost but to the principle of providing rural services.
Pot, kettle, black???

I think it's a shocking waste of money because there are so many unknowns and in the end we're building a monopoly for a private company to use and abuse and can only buy it back once the technology is a busted flush.

"Rural" services is a bit too vague, to be honest unless there's a way to plan and measure them - which it seems there's NOT, so 20 odd years on from the mobile 'phone license and less than a decade after Siteserv (both the cause of tribunals and/or inquiries, the SAME government is yet again about to embark on a major "investment" with a known corruptor of ministers....and of course the ministers making this decision will be long retired and living off the tax payer when the pooh hits the fan.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,729
I'm forced to assume that your real objection is not to the cost but to the principle of providing rural services.
More likely, its a determination to have a conspiracy theory. The same argument can be made against road and rail services outside the main cities. When the ESB started, power lines were called "McGilligan's maypoles" by those who thought paraffin lamps and turf fires were good enough.
 

Baron von Biffo

Moderator
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
18,175
Pot, kettle, black???
Hardly. Just asking to do things in a nice, orderly, chronological fashion.

I think it's a shocking waste of money because there are so many unknowns and in the end we're building a monopoly for a private company to use and abuse and can only buy it back once the technology is a busted flush.

"Rural" services is a bit too vague, to be honest unless there's a way to plan and measure them - which it seems there's NOT, so 20 odd years on from the mobile 'phone license and less than a decade after Siteserv (both the cause of tribunals and/or inquiries, the SAME government is yet again about to embark on a major "investment" with [defamation deleted] ....and of course the ministers making this decision will be long retired and living off the tax payer when the pooh hits the fan.
You're rambling now.

You tried to wriggle out of answering my question on the grounds that you would only deal with broadband but now you're dragging in mobile phone licences and Siteserv.

And for the record, the current government has only been in place since 2016.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Hardly. Just asking to do things in a nice, orderly, chronological fashion.



You're rambling now.

You tried to wriggle out of answering my question on the grounds that you would only deal with broadband but now you're dragging in mobile phone licences and Siteserv.

And for the record, the current government has only been in place since 2016.
I read a post like yours and I stop wondering why we continue to elect such awful governments.
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
27,183
Danish legal opinion concludes 5G contravenes human and environmental laws...

 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,606
Let's hope 77.4% of politics.ie's members are wrong and that the national broadband is indeed an amazing display of foresight and leadership, because the deal is done.

We're committed to spending €3bn+ on rolling out old technology to areas of the country with fewer than 10 inhabitants per km2.

Let's take a moment to remember how this occurred.... how Denis Naughten had to resign because of the way he managed the tender, but then FG just kept going with the same sliveen process - a one horse race with FG's favorite entrepreneurs in the owners enclosure.

Anyway - I'm sure that's all behind us now and that we'll start to see the undefined and unmeasurable benefits flow forth anytime soon....
 

james toney

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
18,949
Can the plan be null and void under a new government...or cancelled?
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,496
It may be expensive, and I'm in two minds whether it is worth doing, but it's not old technology. It's the technology that will eventually be used everywhere for at least the next 20-30 years, probably longer There is nothing in the pipeline that is better than fibre.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,729
It may be expensive, and I'm in two minds whether it is worth doing
It is expensive and whether its worth doing depends on whether you benefit or not. Its not possible to operate a competitive business without reliable internet connection so I don't see an alternative.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom