Dáil debates

Wednesday, 3 February 2021

Household Utility Bills Support: Motion [Private Members]

 

11:25 am

Photo of Mick BarryMick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity) | Oireachtas source

The Dáil is debating the issue of fuel poverty. From time to time the Dáil has debates of this kind.

Usually, they do not generate much passion or many column inches in the newspapers, which is perhaps not surprising because very few Deputies and few enough journalists suffer from fuel poverty. That is not the case, however, for many people living in this State. It is a scandal that in 2021, in one of the richest countries on earth, one in six suffers from fuel poverty. The State does not take enough action to tackle this problem; in fact, in many respects the State worsens the problem. Let me give the House two examples.

The first example is of the State not doing enough to tackle the issue. If we were to take 157,000 houses across Cork city and county and raise their BER ratings to B2 or better, it would cost €380 million each year. The State spends €40 million annually on the warmer homes scheme. An initiative such as I have outlined would create 7,000 jobs and lift 25% of those households out of fuel poverty. That is the kind of initiative that is needed rather than the pitiful efforts in which the State is engaging.

I will give an example of how the State is worsening the position. The ESRI said on 19 June last year, and this is a direct quote, "Carbon taxation is found to be regressive, with poorer households spending a greater proportion of their income on the tax than more affluent households." What does the Government do? It proposes a carbon tax not just kicking in in May 2021 but year on year, every single year, for ten years. What effect will that have on fuel poverty in this country? What effect will it have in being what the ESRI described as a regressive tax? Will it take more people out of fuel poverty or push more people into fuel poverty? To ask the question is to answer it. We need bold policies to tackle the climate crisis in this country, but carbon taxes, which are ineffective and which alienate large numbers of people from a progressive green agenda, are not part of the solution, and those taxes should, in our view, be scrapped.

Particular issues have been raised by the pandemic. I wish to draw attention to the double whammy of individuals or households who have lost their jobs or who have maintained their jobs but lost some income and now work from home. The income is down, in some cases way down, on the one hand and, on the other hand, the heating bills, particularly in the winter months, go up in order for these individuals to be able to work from home in something other than freezing or Arctic conditions. I support all the positive proposals in the motion to address this issue but I would go further and say two things. First, there should be no cut-offs of electricity, gas, etc., for people who fall behind on their utility bills, especially in this situation of a double whammy in the pandemic. Second, there should be an audit of energy debt. What debts have people built up as a result of this double whammy of having their income slashed and having to work from home? There should be write-offs for people who are not wealthy: ordinary people, working people and middle-class people.

Those debts should be written off in this situation.

I make the point that utilities, including utilities that are not 100% in private ownership, are now operating to market mechanisms. They are operating to mechanisms which look at the maximisation of profits or the positive side of the balance sheet and without sufficient concern for social needs. In addition, there are fossil fuel companies that have a vested interest in acting against the climate agenda and extracting maximum profit from fossil fuels that can only damage society and the future of the human race. For these reasons, we need to break with the market model of for-profit utilities and fossil fuel companies that operate on the basis of maximising profit. In practice, that means taking these companies out of private hands and bringing them into public ownership on a democratic basis, under democratic control, workers' control and workers' management. The companies should operate in the interests of society and speeding up a genuine just transition in this country and internationally.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.