Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I was intrigued by Deputy Kevin Humphreys’s contribution earlier in which he started off by claiming the Government was forced into selling off Bord Gáis by the previous Government and that the Labour Party would not have sought to privatise vital services. He then went on to talk up the benefits of this privatisation. That is somewhat paradoxical.

Along with health and education, energy infrastructure is one of the critical areas of strategic interest. One cannot create economic wealth or build an industrial sector without a good energy infrastructure.

Although I generally do not agree with wholesale privatisation, I am not opposed to the sale of some State assets. However, I need to be convinced that problems will not be created down the line through a sale. It is not good enough to suggest there will be no consequences of the sale of BGE. If the company is left with just a network of pipeline but it has no income coming in, how will it maintain it? If we have a significant gas find, what is there to say it will not be exported for the higher price? There are many issues which could be potential strategic risks down the line. For example, there was the great sell-off of the railways in the UK under Margaret Thatcher. Essentially, the short-term financial gain from this sale has been more than wiped out by the long-term failure of the privatised rail network. In the case of Eircom, we lost a serious opportunity to be ahead in broadband provision, an infrastructure equally important as a decent road or rail system.

When the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources was leader of the Labour Party in opposition, he was a vocal opponent of privatisation, particularly in the case of Bord Gáis and its potential to lead to rising energy prices. Every Member is concerned about the impact of high energy prices not just on households but on the industrial sector.

Bord Gáis is one of the most profitable semi-State companies. It is in a position to borrow itself on foot of that profitability.

That, in itself, can stimulate the economy. It is unfair to say that selling this asset is the only way additional resources can be leveraged. The key issue is that it is of strategic importance that we have a secure energy source that we can use to our benefit and guarantee that we will have in terms of creating wealth through building an industrial sector. While I am not ideologically opposed to the sale of some State assets, to sell one as strategic as our energy supply has serious potential downsides which I am not sure are being considered properly.

See this speech in context