Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I too worry about my grandchildren. I take a very different view from the last speaker. I believe, for example, that the State's decision to invest in broadband so that every family in the country will have access to high-speed broadband was a good decision for rural Ireland. We have seen the product of that already with increased remote working and new opportunities in rural villages. We will see in the future the delivery of remote health and educational services. There will be real transformation of the opportunities for people in rural Ireland. It is important that we seek to build on the infrastructures of the future rather than pretending we can remain doing the things we have always done.

That brings us to the question of how we manage energy and the climate challenge we face. We cannot pretend that global warming is not a reality. It is transforming the environment in which farmers have to work. We have seen weather events and the impact climate change is having is very real. In this House, having had the citizens' assembly report to us on climate change and biodiversity, we need to take a collective view of how we can manage the extraordinarily difficult energy transformation that must happen. The CRU has pointed out, as has the Minister of State, that 17 GW of new renewable capacity will be built in the years between now and 2030. That is an extraordinary transformation in our energy system. We need to prepare for that and to manage it in an effective way.

I welcome the report of the CRU today. It is interesting. All of us will have a kneejerk reaction and will ask why consumers are not seeing prices fall. However, the CRU, which is paid to do the detailed scrutiny, has stated it has not found evidence of windfall profits in the retail market sector and that the market is working fairly. It has committed to undertaking a review of the differences across Europe, which will be welcome, and to provide more transparent information in order that the debate in this House can be more informed as to what is actually happening in our energy market rather than pretending that when we see wholesale prices going one direction it should immediately be reflected at the pumps. As the CRU rightly states, hedging policies are put in place by companies to try to avoid the volatility. It has had access to the detailed hedging contracts of these companies. The review and conclusions on which this report is based reflect the CRU's scrutiny of what is happening.

I welcome this Bill. It is right that we are clawing back the profits that were made, in particular, by those working in the renewable sector, which contracted for prices at around €90 or €95 per MWh. Even in the Bill, they are being given a generous enough ceiling with €120 per MWh being the figure at which gains are clawed back. However, we need to leave space for the renewable sector to grow. I can understand why we are leaving a bit of flexibility in that regard.

We need to urge the redesign of the electricity market at EU level. I know work is going on and this measure only provides clawback to the end of June this year. We need to see a system at EU level whereby we set electricity prices not on the last supplier, the most marginal piece of generation equipment brought in to serve on any given day. That has locked us into gas prices, in particular, that have become very volatile. That will continue to be a volatile market. We need to move away from linking our electricity pricing to the most volatile element of the mix. The sooner we have that, the sooner we will not require these special measures. That said, this measure is particularly welcome.

One of the things that confuses people is that where generators make big profits, this Bill allows that if they pass on those savings to their consumers, the Government will not be clawing back. However, elsewhere, generators are prevented from cross-subsidising a retail arm. Generators that are making big profits cannot pass those profits on to reduce the cost to their consumers. That seems to be a bit of a contradiction. On the one hand, we are banning the use of profits to reduce consumer burdens while on the other hand, we are making a provision that where it happens, allowances will be made. There may be a bit of thinking about policy to be done in that regard.

The big issue that concerns people is how the Government will use this money. Under Article 10 of the directive, it will have to be ploughed back into energy users.

We need, and I think it is in line with the Minister's thinking, to try to come up with solutions that are more permanent, as well as the short-term relief we have been able to give. I welcome the short-term relief to energy bills that has been given. Listening to the debate we have just heard, you would not imagine that €1.6 billion has been spent by the Government on reducing household energy bills in the last 18 months. That is a truly staggering amount of money coming from the Exchequer, not to say it has not left high bills with people nonetheless. We need to try to move towards those more permanent solutions. I regret that the smart meters and the time-based use are not getting the pick-up they ought to. There are general data protection regulation, GDPR, obstacles preventing that and we need to find a way of making it more available to people. We need to look at enterprises that can make energy savings, like closing fridges and the many examples that are out there. We need to use this money creatively.

We need to see the energy security review. A decision was recently made and it was cited that the energy security review had not yet been published. We need to get that out there so that we have a clear understanding of the framework within which energy policy is to be pursued.

See this speech in context