Cathal Berry (Kildare South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his detailed opening statement. I welcome the opportunity to make some comments and contribute to this debate on the windfall gains in the energy sector. Like my colleagues, I certainly welcome the content of this Bill, but also like my colleagues and like the Minister of State, I recognise how belated it is. The war in Ukraine began 18 months ago and we are only now commencing the Second Stage of this Bill. That is a major issue as most of the damage has been done at this stage.

That leads me nicely to my first point, which is the lack of strategic foresight in Ireland. There have been three major black swan events in the past six or seven years. We have had Brexit, the pandemic and the war in Ukraine and there has been pretty much no early warning. No horizon scanning was done as we do not have a dedicated national intelligence service and that is exactly what a dedicated national intelligence service should be doing - scanning the horizon and providing this information, providing a threat assessment and ensuring legislation like this is either on the Statute Book or on ice ready to go so that when Putin pulls his trigger, we are in a position to pull ours and respond accordingly.

The Minister of State was in Helsinki last year and signed up Ireland to the Hybrid warfare centre. That is definitely a good thing. I ask him to use any influence he has during the remaining lifetime of this Government to look at establishing a proper national intelligence service. We have the National Security Analysis Centre, NSAC, which is basically three men in a shed. They are doing it as a part-time role. The Regional Group is solutions focused. The reason this Bill is so late - one and a half years behind time - is that no contingency planning was done. There was no threat identification. Yes, Putin's invasion of Ukraine was probably not preventable but it was entirely predictable. We had discussions in this House long before he crossed the start line noting it was going to happen. The is not unique to the energy sector. Let us look at the difficulties in refugee reception. Again, no contingency planning was done or at least no meaningful preparation was done. I ask the Minister of State to take that point on board.

One of the many advantages of being in the European Union is that we can benchmark ourselves against other EU countries. We have the most expensive electricity in the EU. Out of 27 countries, we are at the bottom of the class. We have to ask ourselves why that is the case. There are a number of failings. I know the boards of the energy companies are not here to defend themselves but they have a responsibility from an environmental, social and governance, ESG, point of view. They have completely failed from that perspective. We have heard a lot about hedging. Hedging strategies were used which means that wholesale prices have come down but the retail prices have not. That is the excuse we are getting at least. There is a wonderful American phrase: I've lost the part where this is my problem. The hedging strategy by these energy companies failed. Why are ordinary customers expected to foot the bill? I have seen no evidence of any reduction in the cost base of any of these energy companies. There has been no attempt to cut their costs so they would not have to pass on the excess prices to customers. I am not sure whether the Minister of State has visibility of what bonuses the senior executives and board members will receive and already received in 2022. It would be worth inquiring at least whether these people will still get their high bonuses for signing off on and implementing a failed hedging strategy. It is at least worth posing the question.

The second entity that may not have been working at an optimum level is the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU. I welcome the additional powers it is being granted in this Bill - it is not before time - but I am not convinced the CRU used its existing powers to maximum effect, especially in the past 18 months. The taxi regulator in Dublin has tight control over the cost of taxi fares. Why can a similar principle not be used from a CRU point of view? If we have that tight control over what most people regard as an optional taxi fare, surely we should have tighter control over something that is life and death for many older people, the cost of heating their homes.

There is a third entity that could have worked harder on this. I think the Minister of State will accept this from a Government perspective. I do not want to indulge in bank bashing or anything like that. However, there was an issue in recent months that banks were not passing on the deposit rates they should have been. They were hauled in and in a matter of a couple of weeks, interest rates have at least started to rise - not as much as they should, but it is at least a start. I did not detect that same emphasis in the past 18 months on the energy companies. Greater control is definitely needed.

I want to focus on solutions. From a short term perspective, the electricity credit worked wonderfully last year. The €600 made a huge difference to the vast majority of households. It is likely it will be repeated in this budget and I hope it will be. The big takeaway I have from it is that it is exactly how Government support should be given, no red tape and preferably at source. It was not a bureaucratic monster. I compare that to the supports that were given to business for energy costs which were a bureaucratic monster. If electricity credits are to be announced in the budget in a few weeks' time, I ask they be extended to businesses as well as domestic customers. There has been some criticism of the universality of the electricity credit. It should be straightforward - the Minister of State has a tech background - to have a module on an energy company's website where the meter number can be tapped in and people can waive their right to the electricity credit.

There are many people who are comfortably well-off who would be happy to spend two minutes in front of a computer to do that. It is certainly worthwhile exploring and following up on that.

I will go back to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities for a minute. It is not just about electricity. Irish Water costs for businesses have gone through the roof in the last 12 months. I am not sure if the Minister of State has a constituency office but most of us here in the Chamber do. I suspect Irish Water costs for businesses have doubled over the last 12 months. It is okay for the likes of the Minister of State and me, who might get State funding for our constituency offices, but small family-owned businesses have to earn the money to pay Irish Water. More emphasis on this from the Commission for Regulation of Utilities is definitely needed.

There are short-term solutions, such as the electricity credit, for the budget that is around the corner. From an individual point of view, solar panels are working well in the country. You see them sprouting up on a lot of south facing roofs at the moment. I welcome the fact that VAT was reduced last year - long may that continue - but more can be done. We should be encouraging people to at least look at the option of installing solar panels wherever they have a south facing roof. It is making a very significant contribution in my constituency. One constituent told me that he actually looks forward to his electricity bill now because he has so many solar panels that he gets a cheque rather than an invoice. It helps from an energy security perspective, it keeps downward pressure on prices and it also helps this individual from a cash flow point of view and he needs that because he is an elderly gentleman.

I very much agree with the Minister of State's views on energy. We are completely aligned from a "cleaner" and "greener" point of view. However, I do not believe there is enough emphasis on the third part, that is, "cheaper". It should be cleaner, greener and cheaper. The Government and State entities need to maintain downward pressure insofar as possible. Increases in the cost of energy have massive knock-on effects on general inflation from the perspectives of food and transport so we should do everything we can from an energy point of view.

The last point I will raise relates to the State's level of ambition. I know we are looking at offshore wind, that there have been auctions and that four wind farms will probably start to be erected in 2026. I also know there is a certain amount of State involvement but the best way for the State to control the price of electricity is to be heavily involved in that sector. The Ceann Comhairle will know Poulaphouca, which is in our constituency. It was built decades ago by our grandparents' generation. An entire valley was flooded and an entire village was relocated. The project has been providing renewable energy to every generation since then. I am not sure our generation is matching the level of ambition of our grandparents. If there is such a viable investment opportunity off our coasts, why is the State not getting more involved? There is a school of thought that the new reserve currency on the planet is not the US dollar but the kilowatt hour. The cost of energy is only going to go up. We have a strategic investment fund and we are investing in companies all over the world but it is time for Ireland to invest in itself. I ask the Minister of State to look at this carefully to see if we can get the ESB more involved in these offshore wind farms, allowing us to keep control of prices and make sure we have cleaner, greener and cheaper energy for our people.

I have two last questions. Is there any estimate, even an estimated bracket, as to how much money the State hopes to recoup from this windfall Bill? Are we looking at €100 million or something more? We are now facing into our second winter of the Ukrainian conflict. Do we have any idea when this Bill will come into force? Those are my final two questions.

See this speech in context