Dáil debates

Wednesday, 13 October 2010

6:00 pm

Photo of Jan O'SullivanJan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I am disappointed by the response thus far from Ministers to this debate. In particular, the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Ó Cuív, spoke a few minutes ago and went off on all kinds of tangents but did not address the central importance of the issue raised in the motion tabled by Deputy McManus on behalf of the Labour Party. Although the Government clearly promised that a vouched fuel allowance scheme and a strategy would be put in place, no one appears to be taking this matter seriously or giving it the sense of urgency it truly needs. Deputy Wall is correct to note that public representatives know what this issue is about. This is about people who are afraid their kids will not have heat, light or electricity in their homes. All Members have encountered such people and I was particularly struck by a man with three kids who had been made redundant fairly recently. He was so worried about the prospect of being disconnected that he approached me and pleaded with me to make contact with the ESB to ensure he would not be cut off. This mirrors the experience of many Members.

When bills build up, people approach community welfare officers or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. In some cases, they already will have received help for something else and therefore help may not be forthcoming in this particular instance. They are terrified that they will put their children into a position of going into the winter without heat, light or cooking facilities. This is the reality that exists at present and knowing this, the Government should be acting with a sense of urgency about these issues. It should be dealing with them and responding to the commitments it has made, instead of putting them on the long finger or going off on tangents, as did the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Ó Cuív.

In her contribution last night, Deputy McManus noted that Bord Gáis conducted a survey of a sample of 500 disconnected households, of which 59% were owner-occupiers. Therefore, this does not simply pertain to one small category or section of society with which somehow, someone else must deal. This pertains to people right across the divide who are truly worried about their position. Another particularly striking statistic cited by Deputy McManus is that for Bord Gáis, debt management problems have multiplied by a factor of 40 over the past year. This is the stark reality for those people who now face this problem, and for their families.

Another issue that many Members have raised is the crazy initiative proposed by the energy regulator. While I do not know who regulates the regulator, the idea that €80 million will be spent on rebranding Bord Gáis Éireann and the ESB is absolute madness in the current economic climate. Someone should tell the regulator that the country simply cannot afford it. I assume the Government is in charge of the country and can do this. As for the reconnection fee, a person who cannot afford to pay his or her bills certainly cannot afford an additional €200 to be reconnected and we should follow the example of Britain in this regard and abolish reconnection fees. This fee has also been imposed by the regulator and it must be abolished immediately.

In the time that remains to me, I wish to address a particular issue to which the motion tabled by the Labour Party refers. It pertains to a national retrofit programme to public buildings, including schools and hospitals, to bring unemployed construction workers into the workforce and enable apprentices to complete their apprenticeships in line with Government commitments for a 33% energy saving across the public sector by 2020. Such a proposal makes sense as homes are already being retrofitted and grants are being provided for such work.

Many of our public buildings, including buildings in which children and sick people spend a great deal of their time, need that type of attention. Such an initiative would also provide employment at local level. I have in mind in particular some of the older hospitals and nursing homes, both public and private. We have seen public nursing homes under threat of closure because of the physical condition of the building and the difficulty of complying with HIQA regulations. This would be a perfect programme for older community nursing homes which are greatly appreciated by their local community and against whose closure people are protesting throughout the State. The scheme might also be suitable for private nursing homes which are based in large old houses. Those nursing homes are often closest to their own communities because they may have been developed by local families rather than by a conglomerate which operates private nursing homes throughout the country. This is a positive proposal for the sick, elderly, children and the large numbers of unemployed.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.