Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)

We find ourselves in a very difficult position here. I am not happy with the circumstances which led to the need for this Bill to be introduced. We probably have no choice other than to support this legislation. This debate gives us an opportunity to highlight some serious issues. I would like to make a few points and ask a few questions to help me to understand fully what is going on. It seems that this Bill will have to be passed to avoid increases in the electricity prices paid by industry and, possibly, consumers. The legislation stems from the Supreme Court judgment in a case taken by certain private companies that want to include the carbon levy in their costs and pass it on to industry and, possibly, consumers. As a result of the judgment, the Minister has felt obliged to introduce legislation to remove the levy from them. While he is right to do that in the interests of protecting consumers and industry in this country from further electricity price rises, the private electricity companies who will no longer have the levy imposed on them will be the real winners.

I have serious questions about the Minister's statement that this measure will not really affect the Exchequer. He has told us that the moneys which came in from the carbon revenue levy were dispersed to multinational companies, presumably to subsidise their electricity prices. I would like to hear a little more about that. Can the Minister name the companies whose electricity costs we were subsidising? How were they chosen? Do the companies in question make very big profits? Are we essentially boosting those profits? Are particularly favoured companies getting windfall profits as a result of the disbursement of the revenues from this levy? Those questions need to be answered. The Minister referred in general terms to "significant employers" with a "multinational base". Could he be more specific? Who was benefitting from the carbon revenue levy and by how much? What moneys are we talking about here? How much was the carbon revenue levy generating? How much will be lost between now - we will drop this levy as soon as this Bill goes through - and the end of the year? The Minister suggested that the moneys in question will not be lost to the Exchequer. The beneficiaries will be these companies.

In that regard, the Supreme Court decision is extremely disappointing. The Supreme Court clearly has not acted in the public interest and I would like to hear a little more about the arguments that were used by the Supreme Court to justify its decision and to what extent this was contested by those representing the State interest and the public interest.

It seems bizarre that private electricity companies were essentially getting free windfall profits as a result of their allocation of carbon credits and that this can somehow be construed as a cost for them. It is just free profits. Serious questions need to be asked about how much windfall profit was being made. Did the carbon revenue levy take all the windfall profits back when it was in operation? Can this be clarified? If that is not the case, to what extent were these companies actually getting a significant free boost in profits because of the carbon credit allocation scheme? These are serious questions which I would like answered.

Whatever the answer is to those questions, it highlights a number of issues which the public need to consider and the Government should consider. First, it shows what a disaster the privatisation of power or electricity generation and supply is. The whole logic we got from Europe about deregulation and privatisation of electricity markets was that it would benefit the consumer and prices would go down. However, what we discover is the opposite, namely, private companies go to court and go to extreme lengths to ensure their profits are maintained and they make it clear that if they cannot do that, they will pass on the cost to the consumer - greed, in other words.

This crowd, whatever they are called - Viridian - are just a crowd of----- well, I cannot use the language in the Dáil. In any case, it is pure greed that motivated the legal case it took. The approach was: "We are not going to take a hit here. We are getting free profits. We like getting free profits and we are going to go court to make sure we can keep our free profits. If we do not get to keep them, we will unload the price on the consumer or industry." That is outrageous and it is the result of the privatisation of the electricity market, which flies completely in the face of the so-called of competition in the market, which is supposed to benefit the consumer. It means we will get more of this.

It also raises very serious questions about the carbon emissions and carbon trading scheme itself. I do not know all the answers so perhaps the Minister can enlighten me. In the context of the Irish Cement industrial dispute, it was brought to my attention by the Irish Cement workers that the cement industry in this country had made €226 million in windfall profits over recent years because of the allocation of carbon credits to those companies, mostly to big companies like CRH. Will the Minister tell us whether there is a carbon levy on those profits? He might just nod to tell if there is or is not. Are they getting windfall profits as well? Will they continue to get free allocations, as it appears they have, in coming years or will the free allocations end for that sector? Is it only electricity we are talking about or does it apply to other sectors as well? Are they getting these free windfall profits and will these continue at the end of this year? If I understand what the Minister is saying, in the electricity sector they will at least have to purchase the credits from the end of this year. Is this also true for companies like CRH or will they continue to get free windfall profits? If they do, it is a scandal.

I read an article by Ms Kathleen Barrington which stated that those who are concerned about these issues estimate that the free carbon credits allocation will continue to the cement industry, which will make €625 million in further profits in future years on top of the €226 million. Surely, a levy should be put on that money so it comes back to the Exchequer. It should come back to the Exchequer. Why is it being disbursed to multinationals? Should it not come back into the revenues of the State?

What all of this indicates is the absolute urgency of us developing our own energy resources. We are very well placed to do that. While we have a very good balance of trade, the one area where we must import and where we are very susceptible to the ups and downs of the markets is that of fossil fuels. I do not understand why the hell we do not develop our wind, wave and current resources in a way that could reduce that dependency. It seems we cannot because we are tied into a troika austerity programme that essentially prohibits the public investment that would be necessary to develop those resources.

See this speech in context