Tommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)

I was not aware that my amendments Nos. 17 and 19 were in this group. I support the principle of Deputy Ferris's amendment No. 12. These two amendments are the reason I sought in the earlier vote to amend the Title of the Bill. Amendment No. 17 proposes to insert a new subsection (7) which states: "The SEM Committee shall always take full cognisance of the impact of Committee decisions on household and business electricity consumers and shall refer in this matter to the relevant statutory consumer protection agencies within the Commission and the Authority".

There is grave dissatisfaction with the workings of the SER. I referred to SONI in that regard earlier but I should have referred to the Northern Ireland regulator. In this Bill, the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill we passed recently and the amendment to the 1999 Act there should be a forthright system to protect the rights of consumers. That is still not in place, making these amendments central to the Bill.

The 1999 Act, which established the Commission for Energy Regulation and set out its functions, refers to the interests of consumers but it does not ensure that consumers are at the heart of the process. I tried in amendment No. 19 to insert in section 9(3) of the 1999 Act that it shall be the duty of the Minister and the commission to establish a representative consumer panel of not less than 15 persons within the Commission for Energy Regulation which will be continuously consulted on energy market pricing policy. The more competitive British market has such a mechanism. Deputy Ferris's amendment calling for consultation with relevant trade unions on both sides of the Border and representatives of electricity consumers could also be a mechanism for ensuring this will be the case.

Consumers feel far removed from consideration, as the Minister of State saw when he attended meetings of the Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources when Mr. Tom Reeves and his colleagues were present. Often the anger consumers have felt throughout the lifetime of this Government was a result of the lack of control arising from the refusal of the Minister to answer to the Dáil and the CER's lack of a mechanism to listen to consumers. On the CER website and documentation on the increases for the ESB before Christmas, there were generation portfolios, costs over the previous two years and elaborate mathematical schedules to demonstrate the need for a 20% increase, which subsequently became 13%, but there was no mechanism whereby consumers were represented.

Consumers should be at the heart of the process. The SEM committee must resolve many technical issues but I called a vote earlier on amendment No. 1 because I want these provisions to be inserted into the Bill. The next Government will have to re-examine the CER. If there is an all-island market, the SEM may develop into an all-island regulator or act for both the regulator in Northern Ireland and the CER in the Republic in an all-island regulatory body. We will move in that direction after 1 November and something more forthright than the 1999 Act will be necessary. I called a vote on this during the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill a few months ago because electricity generation and distribution and energy security should be for business and household consumers and no one else.

See this speech in context