Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak in support of this motion on fuel poverty which was introduced by my colleague, Deputy McManus, on behalf of the Labour Party yesterday. I thank Deputy McManus for her well thought out and provocative contribution. Every percentage increase in electricity and fuel prices for consumers, whether domestic consumers or SMEs, imposes a further burden upon sectors that are already fighting hard to make ends meet.

In response to the hidden crisis of fuel poverty the Government must be proactive in implementing the policies and promises to which it has committed. It is particularly striking that it has failed to date to publish a fuel strategy. This is somewhat mind boggling in the context of the introduction of a carbon levy alongside a marked failure to protect the many people put at risk by the imposition of that levy. I appeal to the Government to act cohesively and consensually in this respect. It must increase the fuel allowance to compensate those affected. We need a comprehensive strategy to deal with fuel poverty. The Labour Party was ahead of the curve in 2008 when we published the Fuel Poverty and Energy Conservation Bill. The Government should examine that legislation in line with its talk of consensus. We must have a concerted effort to ensure all households will be able to heat and power their homes during the winter period at least.

The difficulty many people are experiencing in discharging utility bills to the ESB, Bord Gáis and others is an increasing problem in the current straitened climate. It is important that new payment plans are made available to customers who are struggling to meet their commitments. Utility companies must be facilitative of and responsive to customers who find themselves in trouble. How can the reconnection fee have been set by the regulator at €200? These people cannot be expected to meet that payment when they could not afford to pay their regular utility bills.

I support Deputy McManus's call for a zero reconnection policy in order to arrive at fees that are more reasonable and manageable. I have spoken to a constituent of mine who was in personal difficulty and who fell behind with ESB payments. Somebody called out and explained the difficulty.

However, an €80 call-out charge was imposed. This person does not take things sitting down. He fought the matter tooth and nail and the charge was eventually waived, but he was disgusted that anyone would contemplate imposing an €80 call-out charge.

The plan by the Commissioner for Energy Regulation to insist on the re-branding of Bord Gáis and the ESB at a potential cost of €40 million, which will ultimately be borne by the consumer, must be scrapped. It is ludicrous, especially in the current economic environment and when the brands are already well established.

I and the Labour Party have always supported a national retrofit programme. We were the first party to initiate this proposal. Payment plans will ensure participation from all sections of society and not just from those with disposable income. Deputy McManus has emphasised this and it is alluded to in the terms of the motion. This is important in view of the need to curb climate change. The world is in transition and a low carbon society can only be achieved by a massive reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. We are approaching the end of the oil era and of energy inefficiency. The shift from the brown to a green economy is well under way.

We know the formula for a low carbon society is threefold: improving energy efficiency; switching power generation from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources; and electrification of all surface transport. We must have a plan for the next 40 years. This is important in the context of employment.

I cannot understand why the Government was so reluctant to bring forward a stimulus package that would have created a number of jobs, particularly in this area. A retrofit programme would facilitate many people finishing apprenticeships. This is a high labour intensive industry. Many apprentices are just one year short of finishing their courses. All existing houses will have to be retrofitted to A1 standard and that implies an increase in energy efficiency of ten to 15 times the present levels. All new buildings will be energy positive. Retrofitting will require the two million houses built before 1965 to be brought up to an A1 building energy rating and 200,000 commercial units will have to be brought to the same standard.

The cost of retrofitting to this standard is between €20,000 and €25,000 per unit. That is huge. We will have to put in place an appropriate grant system that will facilitate achievement of that laudable objective. That will involve a spend of €50 billion over the next 40 years, or €1.25 billion per year. At present, €100 million is being spent, so we can see how far we have to go to achieve this objective.

We will have to create a new industry of retrofitting. The importance of this industry is that it is highly labour intensive and requires a significant supply chain. It will create approximately 10,000 jobs in building and 5,000 in the supply chain. We all assume the 1:1 ratio of direct to indirect jobs which the Government announced in its own policy last week so we could be talking about 30,000 jobs in all. Some 30,000 jobs could be created in retrofitting commercial buildings so the programme would create between 50,000 and 60,000 jobs. This would represent a significant benefit to the State in the form of high tax and PRSI payments into the State coffers and a decrease in social protection payments. There would also be significant savings on the import of hydrocarbons. It would serve as a stimulus to the economy, something the Government seems reluctant to embark upon, and would allow apprentices to complete their courses. This would be part of a complete package.

See this speech in context