Paudie Coffey (Waterford, Fine Gael)

I take the opportunity to acknowledge the contribution the ESB has made to the development of the economy and the Irish State since its foundation, and to acknowledge it is a very successful commercial semi-State company. However, statements have been made in the House which are factually incorrect. Parts of the ESB have already been privatised and there have been private contractors working in the ESB and on ESB networks for the past ten years or more, all by agreement with the unions in the ESB. I know this and declare an interest because I worked there for 20 years. I was a TEEU representative and I welcome the reasoned approach by the TEEU to this proposal.

The ESB has shown an ability to adapt. It reduced its workforce from almost 14,500 to 6,000 during the Celtic tiger years and it met the demands of those years when there was an unprecedented level of demand for electricity supply and connections. While there is genuine concern among existing workers within the ESB, the Government in its approach has addressed many of them. I have heard no Member welcome the fact the Government made a decision in July not to unbundle or break away the transmission asset from the ESB, which is very much welcomed by ESB workers. This shows clear intent by Government to protect what is a national asset.

I have heard language used here in regard to stripping the company and losing control of assets. The Government has stated clearly it wishes to sell a minority stake. It is not having a fire sale. It intends to go through a process that will get the best price. Deputy Ross is correct that this probably would not be happening were it not for a very good reason. The country is in receivership and we must raise equity to reinvest in job creation and try to stimulate the economy again. I have heard no solutions from Members opposite. They oppose everything, are against everything and some would even support strikes. What would that do for an economy that already is struggling? It would kill it stone dead. That does not constitute offering constructive solutions to the predicament faced by the country.

It is important that the Government retain majority control in this company. As for any equity raised, the Government will try to negotiate with the IMF to the effect that rather than simply paying off debt, it will reinvest it in job creation measures in the State and stimulating the economy. It is welcome that the ESB has become involved in areas such as broadband, but why do a number of semi-State companies compete against one another? Bord Gáis, the ESB and Irish Rail are all developing broadband infrastructure. It is important to pull together all of these assets and avoid having semi-State companies which essentially are owned by the taxpayer competing against one another. Such assets should be pulled together in our best interests and co-ordinated to improve the quality of and access to broadband.

I note plans are advanced to develop further interconnectors between Ireland and the United Kingdom, which already are under way. This is important from the perspective of energy security and if equity is raised, I argue that consideration should be given to investing in an interconnector between Ireland and mainland Europe. This would reduce our isolation and exposure to fluctuating markets with regard to energy supply.

I take up a point made by Deputy Wallace who referred to the price of electricity. The Government does not set the price of electricity, rather it is set by an independent regulator.

See this speech in context