Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

We welcome this Bill and the opportunity to have a debate on it today. Over the past few years, we have seen the impact and huge community and societal cost of the prices. There have been record energy prices for consumers, and record levels of energy poverty and disconnections. At the same time, along with the incredible impact on our communities and individuals, there have been record profits for energy companies. That is a clear illustration that our energy market is not robust enough to deal with external shocks such as Ukraine. It is not just Ukraine that has caused these record issues; there are many other factors, including those within our ability to pre-empt or to try to mitigate. We have a very insecure system that is quite isolated from the rest of Europe and because of that, we may need to look at it with a different lens from what would be applied to more standard markets or energy systems across Europe. There is an opportunity at this point, when we are making shifts in our energy system and moving away from traditional fossil fuels to a more electrified energy system and market, to look at how our energy markets are regulated. I understand that is part of the EU discussions but I hope this Government is strongly participating in those discussions and ensuring that an islanded and isolated system like ours gets full recognition at a European level so that we have a market that works for people and consumers, rather than for companies, as is the current situation.

My discussion today will focus on the Bill and the regulations. I hope some of the things I mention will be taken into account as we go through this legislative process. There are a few issues which could be addressed and broadened out; the scope of the Bill is too narrow. If you look at the EU directive and the regulations, there was an opportunity to expand on what this Bill could have achieved. I highlight the timeframe. The regulations and the Bill relate to the period from December 2022 to June 2023, which is a very short timeframe. Even within the EU regulation, it repeatedly references how the electricity markets and very high prices were observed since September 2021. It also discusses extreme and lasting price increases observed since February 2022. The six-month period that the EU and this Bill reference is not long enough. Energy prices have been rising since early 2021. There has been an impact on people since that time and prices are still incredibly high. Therefore, this Bill will not do anything to cap or pull back some of the profits companies will make on the prices people are facing and being hit with at the moment. I am not sure if it is in the remit of the Government to extend that period but I think there is some flexibility within the EU regulation because it references that there are ways of derogating from Union rules. I ask the Government to seek advice to see whether that six-month period can be extended. It would be very worthwhile. We must make sure no company profits on the back of a war and the exploitation of ordinary consumers when it comes to electricity prices. Energy is an absolute necessity for life. It is not something people can do without. It is important that we do not see any excess profits on the back of people's suffering in that regard.

I spoke earlier about our energy market and other ways in which these high prices could have been addressed. I note that a range of tools and measures could have been implemented. This windfall tax is one of them, which is welcome. If you look at all the other European countries, retail price regulation was open to us, as was wholesale price regulation and the mandate to state-owned firms. A lot of different measures were open to Ireland under the EU rules, including ones we did not apply. Ireland and Finland were the only two countries of all the European countries not to bring in retail price regulation. Countries like France and Spain had wholesale price regulation. Other options were open to the Government to try to assist. The Government could and should have investigated and examined those options to see whether it could have brought in something that would help.

Also mentioned in the regulation is the requirement that member states should endeavour to reduce their total gross electricity consumption from all consumers. That is part of this regulation and, essentially, a condition of it. It is one area this Government has failed to address. When I talk about reducing energy consumption, I am not talking about individual homeowners because the pricing did that for many people. There has been a great reduction in electricity use and emissions from the residential sector, but there has been no curb or aim to control the electricity consumption of large energy users such as data centres. One area we have never really gotten to the bottom of is the level of pressure placed on prices by energy and electricity demand from large data users. It is supply and demand. The more the demand for a service like electricity, the higher the price. The Government should look into that. I sought clarity on this issue from the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, and various Departments but it does not seem to be under investigation. It is important that we look at the impact of data centres, not just on energy consumption and emissions but also on pricing because it impacts and is often paid for by residential homes.

Ring-fencing is not included in the Bill but it is important that it should be. The funds and money from this windfall tax should be ring-fenced. It should be in the legislation that they must be ring-fenced and used in a targeted fashion, as per the regulation. The EU regulation states that the money should be collected and directed towards those most impacted. The Government has not got that targeting right. It has not targeted the supports enough. I have repeatedly spoken in this Chamber and elsewhere about the number of holiday homes that received €600 or €800 credit as a result of the scheme. It is an absolute waste of taxpayers' money and it is important that whatever money is taken in through this measure be directed to those who need it most.

See this speech in context