John Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 7: To ask the Minister for Communications; Energy and Natural Resources the allocation for the better energy homes scheme in advance of 2011; the additional resources committed in the jobs initiative; the outrun at the end of the years; the provision for 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2615/12]

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 13: To ask the Minister for Communications; Energy and Natural Resources the amount of revenue arising from the imposition of the carbon levy that is planned to be ring-fenced for direct use by the Sustainable Energy Authority Ireland towards home energy retrofitting grants in 2012; the overall planned spend by him on fuel poverty alleviation measures in 2012; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2576/12]

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 13 together.

The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, administers the Better Energy programme on behalf of my Department. The SEAI was initially allocated €65 million for the programme in 2011. On taking office and in the context of the jobs initiative, I announced an increase of €30 million in funding for the programme, which brought the final capital allocation for the Better Energy programme in 2011 to €95 million. The provisional outturn for 2011 is approximately €91 million.

Measures being supported under the Better Energy programme are those designed to deliver the greatest energy savings, thus maximising the value achieved from the Exchequer allocation. The additional €30 million provided to the programme for 2011 under the jobs initiative delivered a further €30 million in private sector investment.

As announced in the context of the budget, the Government has again committed significant funding of €76 million to the Better Energy programme for 2012. The programme will continue to underpin economic activity throughout this year, supporting at least 4,500 jobs and realising significant energy savings. The budget allocation for 2012 was agreed in the context of the capital review conducted by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. The Better Energy programme meets the key criteria governing the Government's investment priorities. These criteria are as follows: consistency with the programme for Government objectives, including returning to sustainable public finances; supporting sustainable employment and employment in the immediate delivery phase; and meeting critical economic and social infrastructure deficits.

The Better Energy programme is directly funded by the Exchequer through my Department's Vote. The Exchequer receives its moneys from a variety of sources, including the carbon tax. Revenue from taxation receipts, including the carbon tax, is a matter for the Minister for Finance.

The 2012 allocation for the energy poverty strand of the Better Energy programme is just over €17 million, which will enable 17,000 low-income homes to be retrofitted this year under the warmer homes scheme. In November, I launched the Government's affordable energy strategy, which sets out the range of tangible time-based measures to tackle energy poverty in a cohesive and cross-governmental way. The strategy identifies a number of priority measures, including a commitment to review the national fuel scheme in terms of examining the feasibility of aligning income supports with the energy efficiency and income of the home. We will also progress the phased introduction of minimal thermal efficiency standards for rental accommodation.

Ensuring greater access to energy efficiency measures for those most in need and reforming the eligibility criteria for energy efficiency schemes will ensure that funding under warmer homes is as targeted as possible during 2012.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not need to tease out some of the information further as I just wanted to know the outturns. Where it is up to the Minister for Finance to decide on the amount, is the carbon tax not ring-fenced for particular projects? What really irritates people is that they are paying for something definite, which the carbon tax is, so the carbon tax should be about offsetting in a very demonstrable way the use of fossil fuels.

Second, is it likely the Minister will target people who receive the fuel allowance? There has been a cut of six weeks in the fuel allowance this year. It seems there is a certain element of reducing the impact on those houses, if the house meets the criteria for upgrading, but this is targeted in a certain way due to the impact on the fuel allowance. Is there any relationship with that? Is there a relationship with the Department of Social Protection? Does the information regarding payments such as the fuel allowance come from that Department? If not, can that happen?

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree that what the Deputy mentioned in regard to ring-fencing the carbon tax appears logical. The legal advice, however, is that we cannot have hypothecated taxes in the way we do business in this jurisdiction. I remember raising the same point in terms of the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, and the drugs barons, to the effect that where moneys are recouped from drug barons by the CAB they ought to go back to the communities where people's lives have been destroyed by the pushing and selling of drugs, and so on. At the time I set up the drugs taskforces, the Attorney General would not permit that, stating it was not possible under our system to earmark a tax in that way. It does, however, go into the general maw of the Exchequer and I have no doubt the Minister for Finance would say it balances out in the end.

The fuel allowance is a matter for the Minister for Social Protection. In answer to the Deputy's question, there has been very little contact between one Department and another down the years. This has led to the rather crazy situation wherein we are spending the kind of money I mentioned on improving thermal efficiency in homes while, at the same time, throughout the past ten years we have spent in the order of €2 billion in fuel allowance which, in many cases, goes up the chimney. It is not the best way to spend money and I do not know how long it will take to reorient that kind of mindset.

After the cut, the fuel allowance applies for 30 weeks. No doubt the Deputy has noticed that since this Government came to office the winter weather is immensely milder - it is like a spring day outside today. That has been one of the big advantages of the change of Government.

Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have some supplementary points. First, the motor tax fund was ring-fenced in respect of the local government fund. I do not know how that could have been done if it is not possible to do the same in this case. Second, the Minister reports there is very little relationship between the two Departments regarding this scheme. Would he consider having a relationship with the Department of Social Protection concerning this scheme in order to go about it in a systematic way, given there are people who are already categorised as requiring fuel allowance?

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a sensible suggestion. I would be glad to do that. I do not have the document with me but we have published the affordable energy strategy. If the Deputy has had the opportunity to read even the executive summary, in that we set out that kind of reorientation of policy in this area.

It is not my business to speculate about the future of fuel allowance or how it may proceed. I will say only that at least in some cases, perhaps in very many, it is not the best use of money. In the work of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, and work in which my Department is involved in improving the thermal efficiencies of homes, I have met some of the people concerned. Any who have had jobs done such as general or attic insulation, replacement of boiler and-or more, report a world of difference. Whatever happens, I hope we will maintain the warmer home scheme which is a far more productive use of money. However, I do not want that to be interpreted as any signal that the fuel allowance is being terminated in any way. That is not the case.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome what the Minister stated about introducing building energy rating, BER, as a condition of rent allowance. I started that process in Government when I was in the Department of Social Protection. To be honest, I do not know why my predecessors had not done this because it is a no-brainer. When one looks at the statistics one finds that people in rented accommodation make up the largest numbers of those who experience fuel poverty.

The Minister did not answer part of Deputy's Browne's question. According to the estimates we have he is providing €64.6 million - let us say €69 million because we will not argue about €4 million or €5 million. I understand the pension levy is to be taken again this year, amounting to €30 million. Am I right? The pension levy the Government introduced last autumn is to run for three years.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What has that to do with the issue?

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That supplies €30 million, which means the normal Exchequer contribution to this scheme comes only to between €30 million to €40 million this year. If the Exchequer provided €60 million last year, to which the Minister has added another €30 million from the pension levy, that makes €90 million. This year the Minister will get the €30 million again because there is a levy on pensioners again. The total sum, according to the figures we have, is €64 million. That means that other than the money being taken from the pensioners to fund this only €30 million is to come from the Exchequer, a halving of the money that came this year.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Either I am a bit dim-witted or we are at cross purposes. I am not sure I understand what the Deputy means in respect of the pension levy. What does that have to do with retrofit? My predecessor provided for €65 million in the budget of 2011. My colleague, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, acceded to my request that an additional €30 million be made available, bringing the total to €95 million. In the event, €91 million was spent.

This year the Government has provided for €76 million to be spent on better energy, which is something of a reduction in keeping with all the other reductions across the board we have had to make in order to make fiscal targets. However, it is still a significant investment in this area, given the times we face. I explained to the Deputy that what I am trying to do is maintain the momentum because interest has been stimulated among people who realise they can make significant savings in their energy bills if they do this work. I am trying to maintain that momentum until I get to the stage where the pay as one saves scheme will be in operation. When it does, in a partnership between the energy supply companies and the banks, there will be a model where the householder can make an application and pay for the work from the savings that accrue over three or four years, whatever time it takes. That is the model we are working on at present. It is rather complex but it is very important that it is not too complex for the citizen to access.

I do not pretend to be stupid but I genuinely do not understand the Deputy's point about our taking such a sum from the pension levy and thereby giving only so much to retrofitting. One could say, equally, that such a sum was taken in the levy but only so much was given to health or environment. I do not know why the Deputy is putting it on my head.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The reason is the initiative-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are considerably over time.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I must explain this to the Minister.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

You can explain it to him afterwards over a cup of coffee.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The jobs initiative was about giving the €30 million to beef up the amount of money on these schemes. Fair enough, last year the Government did that. However, given all the three card tricks that go on in the Department of Finance, although the €30 million is to come from the system again this year I notice the figure for spending has gone back to the initial figure of last year, more or less. What the Government is doing, therefore, is taking the €30 million and putting it into the Exchequer. That is the usual three card trick the Department of Finance plays. It says it will get extra revenue and provide it for something in particular. It does that the first year but the second year it cuts the amount from the Exchequer and the money raised becomes a tax like every other tax.