Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

No system is a sacred cow. Members are used to systems under which there is Government involvement in, or the State has ownership of, certain strategic assets or infrastructures that provide services crucial to the country's operation. However, is it right that the State should be so heavily involved in the energy sector? In general, it is accepted that competition is good. However, four semi-State agencies are engaged in generation, namely, the ESB, Bord Gáis, Coillte and Bord na Móna. The ultimate question must be whether this state of affairs is in the interests of taxpayers and citizens. This week some evidence has emerged of how all is not right in the system as it operates. This issue must be addressed, which may involve, in part, the State withdrawing from the provision of services.

I refer to the annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General which was published this week. It notes there are two State companies, the ESB and Bord Gáis, which control 75% of the market. However, since the freeing of that market and the entry therein of other operators such as Airtricity, the ESB and Bord Gáis have been fighting with each other for customers. In other words, two State entities are fighting each other. This week the price has been set out clearly as being more than €20 million in marketing. One State entity is continually taking customers from the other and vice versa. Moreover, this does not include the company representatives who are going around door to door and all the others who must be paid. In this context, I also note the sum of €2.4 million that Bord Gáis, a State company, is paying to the Grand Canal Theatre. How can this be justified? How can a State company pay money to have its name up in lights to compete with the ESB? This must be wrong.

Another issue arises in the way in which the rules operate. The ESB controls 60% of the generation market, which gives it a dominant position. Consequently, the rules require it to perform an equalisation exercise and reduce its production to 40%. It must offer contracts to other generators to, in turn, sell on what is actually its own electricity supply to the grid. This also is ridiculous. The McCarthy report suggested that to achieve the 40% target which would put the ESB in a position of generating 2,000 MW of electricity - its current capacity is 3,500 MW - part of the generating assets should be sold. The money thus accrued should be invested in the infrastructure for which people are crying out such as broadband.

All is not well and some of these issues will be resolved by selling assets as appropriate and investing the proceeds in the provision of infrastructure, thereby creating jobs. That is what the NewERA document and the programme for Government promise to the people, which is to be welcomed. In effect, this is the bottom line of the motion's objective, which pertains to the provision of a jobs stimulus and so on.

That is what this will do.

Privatisation is spoken of as if it was a demon. The issue of Eircom is constantly rolled out but this is a completely different model. The State will have control. No matter what percentage of Aer Lingus is owned by Michael O'Leary, he is not succeeding in paying dividends. If one is a minority shareholder, that is all one is. The State is in control and will remain so. It has been business as usual in the ESB since it was founded in 1927 and nothing will change.

See this speech in context