Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael)

I understand the Minister wishes to conclude so I will be brief. I compliment Deputy Coveney on hammering away at the issue of windfall tax for the past number of years. My colleague, Deputy Connaughton, said he was sick of listening to him going on about the issue up to the point that he did not believe Deputy Coveney but his efforts have borne fruit. Part of the problem with windfall tax as it was discussed was that nobody understood the issue or believed it. It is complex.

The fundamental purpose of any kind of carbon levy is to reduce the amount of carbon going into the atmosphere and drive down the cost of energy. I am concerned that the revenue from this Bill will disappear into a black hole in the Exchequer, to be redistributed on the approval of the Minister for Finance. This does not offer much comfort to those involved in alternative energy projects that are waiting to be primed and promoted in an effort to deliver more carbon efficient energy at a competitive cost that will drive down the price of energy.

We are moving into an era in which the emissions trading system, ETS, will be reviewed and the cost of providing carbon credits as a currency will inevitably increase, impacting on food production and general energy production. The Bill seems simple, but what it is trying to achieve is complex. Unless we are careful that the Bill is not challenged and that the €6 million or €7 million referred to by the Minister reverts directly to the alternative energy projects, the rapid expansion of which would allow consumers to avail of cheaper energy, we will be in trouble.

A paradox of the Bill is that the most inefficient energy generation stations will suffer the most even if they are trying to improve their efficiency levels. Deputies McManus, Coveney and Deenihan referred to Endesa's problems. On the one hand, it is trying to make stations more efficient and, on the other, it is being levied at the highest level while other stations, such as Moneypoint, have a vast amount of free carbon allowances that are calculated on old generation figures. If the Bill is to work, there must be some way of recalculating to whom the carbon allowances will be allocated. If we do not do this, the old inefficient stations will stay inefficient and they will be unable to play their part while some newer stations will benefit.

The question of who will benefit from the Bill has been raised. It is feared that a select few will be chosen to benefit at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises that can provide jobs. I know we are all under pressure, but we must be careful about the way in which the funds generated are re-allocated. This is key. People involved in the alternative energy sector, including biomass generators, are concerned that, instead of their sector seeing a benefit from the Bill, the money will vanish into a black hole like lotto funding to shore up the Exchequer's accounts.

See this speech in context