Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Whitmore was in possession before the debate adjourned.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I get into the specifics of this Bill, I want to raise something frustrating and concerning with the Minister of State, Deputy Ossian Smyth. Yesterday at 4.10 p.m. we received an email from the Bills Office to tell us that amendments to this Bill had to be tabled by this morning at 11 a.m. We are still debating this Bill. That is an unacceptably short timeframe for which to have a deadline for amendments for such a technical Bill. Indeed, in the case of any Bill, to give allow less than 24 hours to table amendments is completely unacceptable. This issue, as well as the need to have this Bill in place, was first mooted by the European Parliament last October. Now, to squash all this debate, including the tabling of the amendments, into such a short timeframe, is completely undemocratic. I ask the Minister of State to ensure sufficient time is given so we can have a considered review of this legislation and can table considered amendments.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Deputy want the Minister of State to respond?

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, please.

Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will respond to Deputy Whitmore. I heard that only a little more than 18 hours' notice was given to submit amendments. I am not involved in making those decisions, but I contacted the Bills Office just before this debate. I am waiting for a reply and I have requested an extension on the timeframe for the tabling of amendments.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State. Hopefully, it will accede to that.

On the specifics of this Bill, on Tuesday I said we welcome that a windfall tax or a temporary solidarity contribution is being put in place to deal with the energy companies. There are specific issues, though, in relation to the application of that, which I will now go through. I have concerns about the number of loopholes that are provided for within the legislation. These loopholes will enable the energy companies to essentially get out of paying their full and fair dues when it comes to this payment. We have to remember that the additional income they received on the back of the war in Ukraine was completely unexpected. Any losses, capital costs or dealings they would have had prior to that war would have been done within their companies and a risk-based approach would have been taken. They would have assessed all those issues. This would have been done based on their normal income and what their projected income was. They could never have foreseen what was going to happen in Ukraine. Therefore, any of the additional revenues they have accrued were a bonus.

I do not believe any facility should be provided to enable any of these companies to use losses or, indeed, capital acquisitions from 2018 until 2023 in their contribution to this taxable profit. I, therefore, ask the Minister of State to reconsider that. I know the rationale behind it, but we have to be careful and we must recognise that businesses make their decisions on their own reviews. They forecast their own profits. We should not be providing this loophole so they can get out of paying back the incredible profits they have seen over the last couple of years. That is my first point.

My second point is that the direction from the EU on 6 October last year is clear in what expects Ireland or, indeed, any country that is applying the temporary solidarity contribution to do with this money. The solidarity contribution should be used for financial support measures to final energy customers and, in particular, vulnerable households. They speak about targeting financial support measures to the most vulnerable households and companies being affected by soaring energy prices. We have seen so many people being impacted by this energy crisis and some people are being impacted considerably more than others.

The level of energy poverty in our country has skyrocketed and many people are struggling to keep their heads above water. The money taken in through the temporary solidarity contribution, TSC, should, as per the EU directive, be targeted towards those most in need. I would like to see some element of ring-fencing included in the Bill. The Bill refers to every aspect of the directive bar the one that details what happens to the TSC's proceeds, so I ask that the Government make clear that it will ring-fence. I believe the Minister of State told the Dáil that all moneys accrued through the TSC would be targeted at the most vulnerable. I ask him to ensure that happens and to put it on a statutory footing in this Bill so as to avoid any doubt about where the money is going.

The premise of the EU’s directive is not just about reducing energy costs but also about reducing energy demand. There were expectations of electricity demand reductions as a result of the Bill. In Ireland, individuals, small businesses and households are doing their best to reduce their energy demands. The high prices have played a part in that, but people are also trying to do their best in terms of retrofitting with solar panels and so on. However, all of that effort is being negated by the large energy users, particularly data centres, essentially being allowed to increase their demand exponentially. At the same time we are telling people to put a large amount of money into their homes to reduce their demands, we are allowing large data centres to blow our targets out of the water. Will the Minister of State take this point into consideration? It is something the EU mentioned in the directive.

Another aspect of the EU directive I have not seen reflected in the Bill is reporting. The European Commission has applied conditions under the directive whereby member states should report to it on the application of the TSC and the use of the proceeds. I ask that this Chamber be provided on a statutory basis the same level of detail and the same access to information through reporting functions. This is important. A large role of the windfall tax, or TSC, will be to give confidence to the public that measures are being applied to energy companies to ensure they are being controlled in the level of profits they are making. This is in order for the public to be sure that not only is there a solidarity tax on these companies but there is transparency around which companies it is being levied on, how much they are paying and what is being done with the money. This is all about building trust with the public, who have had a very difficult few years, even while they saw energy companies' profits skyrocketing. They need to be assured those companies are being made to pay on their profits. The only way to give them that confidence is to be transparent in the details, ensure everything is specified within the legislation, have robust reporting requirements under the Bill and make the information publicly available. That last is important. Will the Minister of State take this suggestion on board?

The Bill is welcome. It could be stronger, but it is an important measure for the Government to introduce. The Social Democrats and other parties called for it. I also welcome that the Bill will be applied retrospectively to profits in 2022 and 2023. I ask the Minister of State to take on board my suggestions. The Bill should mirror the conditions and requirements placed on each territory under the EU directive. It is important the issues of ring-fencing and reporting also be included in the legislation. If the TSC is introduced, we do not want to see an undermining of public faith by companies not paying as much as they should because of the very many loopholes in terms of losses and capital costs that allow them to offset business decisions made long before they knew the war was coming. This is an important point from the perspective of public confidence and I ask that the Government review the offsets being afforded the companies to ensure there is no way of getting out of paying the TSC.

Brian Leddin (Limerick City, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. Profiteering on war is wrong. We have seen significant profits being recorded by the fossil fuel industry over the past two years, even while energy prices for consumers rose constantly. While I welcome and acknowledge the support from the Opposition for this important Bill, I listened to some of the debate on Tuesday. I do not want to tar all of the Opposition with the same brush, but I was amused by the too little, too late response to the Bill from some in the House. It rang hollow on two principal counts. The first of these is that Ireland has set the contribution at 75% of windfall earnings, which is the highest rate in Europe by a long shot. Romania is the next highest at 60%. Most countries went with the lowest allowable contribution under the EU regulation, that being, 33%. The Minister, Deputy Ryan, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste are to be commended on the leadership and ambition they are showing. This country is leading the way in capturing windfall earnings, returning those gains to the people and, critically, keeping fossil fuels in the ground.

The second reason the too little, too late narrative rang hollow is that so much was already being done to protect families and individuals from the surge in energy costs even before the EU regulation was introduced. Some €5 billion has already been invested to assist Irish people with the increased energy costs brought about by Russia’s appalling and horrifying war against Ukraine and her people. It is worth putting on the record some of the measures that have been introduced: last winter’s €600 electricity credit and the €200 credit the winter before for every household in Ireland; the €400 fuel allowance lump sum; and the extension of the fuel allowance qualifying threshold and the expansion of the scheme, which meant that up to 81,000 new households were supported with their fuel costs for the first time. There have also been across-the-board welfare increases of €12 per week, which took effect from this January. Other measures include the €200 lump sum payment for those in receipt of the living alone allowance, the extension of the VAT cut on gas and electricity, the extension of the 20 cent cut in excise on petrol, the 15 cent cut in excise on diesel, the €500 lump sum under the working family payment for those on low incomes, a double payment of child benefit last November, an extra €100 per child in child benefit this May, free schoolbooks this coming September for primary and special schools, the €500 payment for those in receipt of the carer’s support grant, and the €500 payment for those in receipt of the disability allowance. These payments are in addition to a number of other social welfare increases, such as an extra week of welfare payments on top of the Christmas bonus, an extra week of children’s allowance and a €10 increase in weekly welfare payments. The Economic and Social Research Institute’s assessment of last year’s budget was that it would insulate most households from rising prices in the winter just gone, and it did so. The ESRI stated these measures were large enough to leave the lowest-income households better off on average once inflation was taken into account.

It is estimated this Bill will accrue between €200 million and €400 million.

This will be ring-fenced spending for even more measures of the sort I just mentioned. I want to be careful not to say this is about all opposition, but it is certainly about some of the opposition we are hearing in relation to this Bill. Opposition is a fundamental part of our democracy, and good government depends on it. I think it is fair to say that the opposition itself must be good. In the guise of holding the Government to account, dismissing this or previous measures implemented by the Government as too little, too late or inconsequential is really not being serious. We deserve better in this House.

War and fossil fuels go hand in hand. We have seen that throughout the 20th century and in the early part of this one. In the past 18 months, fossil fuels have been used as a weapon of war by Russia against Ukraine in the first instance, and against the people of Europe who are overwhelmingly on the side of Ukraine and her people. This reliance on fossil fuels, the flow of which is controlled by a dictator, has been an attempt to force hardship on consumers here in Ireland and all over Europe as gas prices have increased tenfold. It must be clear to everybody, if it was not before now, that fossil fuels are not the future of our energy system, not alone because of the existential crisis of climate change, but also because in the hands of tyrants and dictators they can be used as weapons of war. We also know that if we have any chance of meeting our global climate objectives, we must keep fossil fuels in the ground and we must power our lives and our economies by renewable energy.

While we have a lot more to do, we should be proud that Ireland is powering ahead with the clean energy transformation. This is our future. It has been my vision for Ireland for more than two decades, and it is indeed my vision for my home city and county of Limerick that we are at the heart of it. That is where our future is. In respect of that transformation, last month I was delighted to see Limerick move one step further along with the new partnership between ESB and the Shannon Foynes Port Company. The plans include an upgrade of the deepwater port, the restoration of a rail connection, the development of an offshore wind construction and plans for offshore wind and hydrogen production on a massive scale. Just today, the Government has granted the foreshore licence to permit the development of the major subsea electricity cable across the Shannon Estuary. Once completed, this will transport renewable electricity from the south west of Ireland to the east, and the cables will connect at the substation at Moneypoint, where significant investment and upgrades are under way to facilitate our green energy future.

We are in the middle of our energy transformation. It is an exciting time for my own part of the country, the mid-west, and for Ireland as well, notwithstanding the huge challenges we have. The new industries will bring high-skilled jobs to our region and will have a significant economic impact on this country. It will ensure our regional towns and villages thrive and will lead to many spin-off industries.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I think the biggest con job that has ever been played on people is that neoliberalism convinced them that if we sold all of our State-owned infrastructure and energy companies, it would lead to competition and lower prices and things would be cheaper. I think we know from our experience that that is a complete and utter con job. Imagine what we would have had had we not sold them out. Looking at Norway, there are trillions in its sovereign wealth fund that are at the behest and support of the people. We sold Telecom Éireann. Its assets were stripped and it was left as a shell. ESB was opened up to competition and Bord Gáis the same. Our bin services were opened up to competition. All of that was cheerled by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and, in some councils, by the Labour Party. Costs have skyrocketed. Over recent weeks the cost of our brown bins has skyrocketed. I keep repeating this. We were told lies in Fingal County Council. We were told that we would only pay for what we threw away. What do we see in these energy companies? We see massive profits in the range of billions. CEO pay is many multiples of that of workers. In fact, CEOs were paid 399 times more than a typical worker in 2012. Since 1978, CEO pay has rocketed by 1,460%.

In relation to this Bill, we are 12 months down the line and it is clear the Government has acted in any way but urgently. The truth is the Government never wanted this Bill in the first place. In May 2022, the then Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, said, "A windfall tax on profits by Irish energy companies would undermine investment and Ireland's bid to become energy independent." Looking at energy poverty, household energy costs have more than doubled in the past two years, with the average home paying €2,000 a year for electricity alone. The situation is unsustainable. The Society of St. Vincent de Paul reported last year that there was a 40% increase in requests related to energy. We get such requests in our offices consistently. People are desperate when they get bills of €800 and €500 for their gas and electricity, respectively.

What do we need to do? We need to go further with this legislation and increase the amount of profits that can be considered taxable. We must make the legislation more robust in respect of avoidance. We will table an amendment to introduce clear guidelines on how the revenue should be spent and ensure moneys raised must be used to reduce the price of electricity for households.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I disagree strongly with the Chair of the Oireachtas Committee on Environment and Climate Action about the Opposition's position and the idea it is way too harsh and unfair on the Government. It is quite the opposite. It is not harsh enough. What is going on with this Bill is manipulation of the highest order to make it look like there is going to be a tax on the profits and the gains of the recent months but to help them to avoid paying it. When this Bill was discussed at the Oireachtas Committee on Environment and Climate Action, I had concerns, and I expressed them then, about how it would operate and whether it was the ideal mechanism to deal with the energy crisis, the price gouging and the profiteering we have seen. These concerns still stand and are actually worse in this finished Bill.

I have a few questions before I make my political points on some of the measures in the Bill and the measures that are absent from it. First of all, when we discussed the heads of the Bill at the committee, there was an attempt to cover those sectors not engaged in the fossil fuel refining and selling, etc., as distinct from renewables. The idea was that a cap on market revenues would be introduced to capture the profits of all companies, including the renewable energy companies. Where is that proposal, or will there be a different piece of legislation to capture the profits of the renewable energy companies, as distinct from the fossil fuel companies?

Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There will be a different piece of legislation.

Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will listen to the Minister of State's answer afterwards. Have we given up on that? I am sure the Minister of State has an answer to that question.

Second, the Act covers the activities in the fossil fuel sector "such as production or refining of natural gas, coal, petroleum or manufacture of coke oven products, carried on in the State". Again, I have a question. Does this sufficiently cover or capture all the companies who reaped windfall profits during the crisis and continue to do so? My main alarm and concern remains the same. The tax will be on profits above 120% of average profits in the years before the Bill. The tax will be 75% of those profits. Why? Why are they allowed to retain 120%, and why, even then, is the rate set at only 75% of those profits? Why is that happening?

More worrying is the scope in this Bill for opt-out clauses and loopholes. Let us be honest, we can guess that a small army of consultants and tax advisers are, as we speak, working away at methods to avoid paying this tax. I think the estimates provided by the civil servants may be very optimistic, considering the scope the Bill gives an inventive accountant or sets of inventive accountants. First, any losses for the previous five years can be discounted. Second, the memo capital expenditure on the acquisition or construction of allowable tangible assets will be deductible in full. I suspect this will drive a horse and carriage through any amount that may be payable by these companies. Last, in the heads of the Bill there was a discussion that all moneys accumulated should be spent, in defined ways, on renewable energy or to reduce customers' bills.

That is not here, and from what I can see, and I ask the Minister of State to speak to this, all revenues collected seem to be under the control of the Revenue Commissioners.

I want to address some wider political issues. By definition, a windfall tax is a once-off and temporary measure. It cannot address the systemic problems that have led to this expensive profiteering. Since the crisis, like every Deputy here, I have been inundated with people who are scared, terrified of their gas and electricity bills and who must make the choices between eating or heating.

The story we are all told is that it is because of Putin and that brutal invasion of Ukraine. The reality is different, however. I disagree with the previous Government speaker. Yes, the illegal war did spark the crisis, but the flames caught because of the very way the European Union has built and developed a liberalised market. In Ireland, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael changed the remit of the ESB and facilitated competition in the energy provision. Therefore, even before this crisis, we could see that the promises of liberalisation and privatisation were pipe dreams. That crisis revealed all of that for us to see.

Last May, the Irish Independentreported that Irish prices were 26% higher than the EU average in energy. According to the report from Mr. Charlie Weston, "Electricity prices in Ireland are 26pc above the EU average, and are the fourth most expensive in the bloc. Only Germany, Denmark and Belgium are more expensive." Figures from EUROSTAT show us that, in April, the electricity prices in Ireland were a staggering 48% above the EU average, only behind Denmark and Belgium. That is from the EUROSTAT records. This is far from the rhetoric that Thatcher and Reagan made us all dream of, correcting all the wrongs and delivering value for everyone. This neoliberal revolution was meant to herald an era of dynamic energy companies, reduced prices, investment in the State and investment in the state of our technology. As with all neoliberal promises, however, what we got was very different. We got a plethora of competing firms, price rises, large profits for some and an attack on the traditional unionised workforces in companies right across this country and beyond.

Recent studies have also shown us that the creation of a market in the energy sector has also made it much more difficult. We have evidence of that again today with the announcement that a case is to be taken against the Irish State by the Lansdowne Oil and Gas company for the failure to allow the development at Barryroe. That is a very good example of why liberalisation has made it much more difficult for us, as a State, to take the measures we need to deal with the climate crisis, and how investment in renewables has been less than it would have been with a nationalised, State-owned and controlled energy company.

I want to plug something, and I will give the Minister of State a preview of it if he wants. I am holding a document People Before Profit just produced called People's Power: The case for nationalising the energy system. It has been put together very well and coherently and basically argues for returning the not-for-profit mandate to the ESB to allow that company to flourish and become a nationalised energy company in the renewable sector. After all, the Ukraine crisis has shown us that, ultimately, when we are faced with a crisis, private companies will do what comes naturally. They will use that crisis to advance their own bottom line to amass profits. We have heard it said many times that you never waste a good crisis. We have seen widespread profiteering in energy as well as in other sectors, such as food, retail, etc. Do not take my word for it, however, or the word of anybody in the Opposition. The International Monetary Fund, IMF, on Monday told us that, "Rising corporate profits account for ... half the increase in Europe’s inflation over the past two years as companies increased prices by more than spiking costs of imported energy." This is an opportunity for profits to be gouged and made to rise, and our answer to it is pretty poor. The IMF is no left-wing think tank. It is simply confirming the reality of how markets in general work and how the energy market itself works.

Bizarrely, the profiteering of renewable companies was built into how this Byzantine market was created, with the guarantee that they could charge whatever was the highest fuel cost on any given day regardless of what they actually paid themselves or what it cost them to produce the energy. The necessity for a windfall tax is clear. It is due in large part to the very way the European Union and Irish Governments have created a market and liberalised the energy sector.

The other thing that liberalisation did, of course, was to increase the numbers who suffer from energy poverty. This has been a feature of the globally driven market within the energy systems. It has reached gigantic proportions now with this crisis. According to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, and the Minister of State will know this, more than 400,000 households - almost 500,000 - are in energy bills arrears in this State. The once-off help with electricity bills has not ended or addressed that crisis in energy poverty in Irish households. Continuing with a market-based approach to energy provision guarantees it will remain a feature even after this crisis passes and even, despite the Government's claims, after the war in Ukraine ends.

This Bill we are dealing with today effectively is an admission of failure. It is failure of the political ideology that allowed the profiteering of the energy sector in the first place, the failure of the State and regulators to stop it, and the failure to tackle aggressively the philosophy that made this possible. We have not seen the last of price gouging and profiteering from the energy sector. The Bill, in that sense, is little more than a plaster for a gaping wound. I do not think it is fit for purpose and it needs a huge amount of amending.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I commend the Minister of State and his Department on bringing forward the Bill and the work that is ongoing with this and associated Bills, which I understand will be published this summer. Like others, I lament the fact it has taken some time for this Bill to reach the House, but I know the committee had a small hand in that today.

I, like other Members of this House, am acutely aware of the impact the cost-of-living crisis is having on the lives of people we represent. The energy market saw significant disruption following the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia in January 2022. This caused huge uncertainty regarding the production and supply of energy. This has resulted, unfortunately, in soaring energy prices that are ultimately shouldered by consumers. Home heating and electricity are base needs, leaving consumers with little or no option but to meet the rising costs of energy.

We also know that the initial shockwave to the market has subsided, and prices involved in the production and refining of fossil fuels have fallen significantly since their peak in 2022. Despite this, the energy companies have taken in extraordinary profits well above what they might have imagined prior to the invasion of Ukraine. The vast majority of them have not reacted to the reduction in production costs and are passing them on to their customers.

This Government, since the onset of war in Europe, has brought in significant measures to protect people and businesses across the State. These measures saw an investment of €2.4 billion in supports for consumers in 2022 and a further €2.5 billion in one-off supports contained within budget 2023. These are not just headline figures. They have made an enormous difference to hundreds of thousands of families throughout the country and, as we have committed, we will do more if we need to in the coming budget, and I am sure we will.

The introduction of an electricity energy credit, for example, made a significant impact and helped to give consumers breathing space with regard to meeting their energy bills, while also contending with the rise in the cost of living. The temporary solidarity contribution contained within this Bill will allow us the option of using the resulting proceeds to implement further supports, where necessary.

I believe the energy crisis experienced in Europe and the wider world underscores the necessity for us to further develop clean renewable energy here at home. By developing our wind sector, both onshore and offshore and, indeed, the solar energy sector, we can boost our ability to adapt to changing international outlooks and respond to emerging crises as they occur.

Importantly, these efforts will also result in cheaper household energy bills in the long term.

Through these measures, we can also change the relationship we, as a State, have with energy use and production, shifting our culture from an import-based model to a more self-sufficient model, and perhaps one day becoming a major exporter of energy. That day is not too far away. Even today, I received notification from Irish Rail of a significant study, supported by Europe, resulting in it progressing studies up to the stage of lodging a planning application for the construction of an offshore renewable energy facility at Rosslare Europort. My colleague, the Chair of the Oireachtas committee, mentioned an undersea cable in respect of which permission has been granted today in the Shannon Estuary. These are welcome and timely developments.

It would be remiss of me to speak to this Bill without recognising the wider cost of living crisis being experienced by homes across Ireland. I welcome the falling rate of inflation. Data released by the CSO at beginning of this month show that inflation is now at 5.4%, down from a peak of 9.6% last summer. Inflation in Ireland is currently below the European average of 6.1%. However, these numbers remain problematic for many families and businesses and we must continue our work to support consumers and further drive down the cost of living.

As we look ahead to budget 2024, I believe, as I know my Fine Gael colleagues do, that the best place for people's hard-earned money is in their own pockets. While there is a need to provide support such as reducing energy costs, maintaining reduced public transport costs, ensuring that we hold supermarkets to account, reducing the cost of childcare and schooling, and much more, we must also aim to ensure that households take home more of their income at the end of every month. This will allow us to build a sustainable framework to allow both Government and individuals to respond to what the future might hold for all of us.

In conclusion, I think certain members of the Opposition probably do not understand and probably cannot even spell neoliberalism, let alone define it.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Name them.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

One of the biggest constraints we have in this country is the left's obsession with trying to label people who are not on the left with them. They throw in various comments to suggest that we do not know what we are doing. A real anti-European was expressed too in the time that I have been sitting in this Chamber. It was covert but fairly obvious. We need to challenge those remarks. If one looks at the Irish economy's output and the number of jobs, people and families it has supported over the last 30 years, it has grown by six or seven times. Our average incomes have increased. Our quality of living has increased.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is falling now.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Health outcomes have increased. Educational output and prowess and our foreign affairs prowess in the world have increased. We now have a life expectancy that is one of the highest in Europe. All of these things are down to collective agreements that we have made and the Irish people have voted on. For those opposite to claim there is some conspiracy to put down the small people is complete nonsense. It is the opposite. It has its flaws of course, but so do all forms of politics on the political spectrum. This one works because it is a hybrid of many.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Certainly, as a small person, I hope nobody has any intent of putting me down. Deputy Martin Browne is next, but I am sure Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú is substituting for him.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was not.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Murchú is not substituting. We will move on to the next speaker.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. When requested. I should probably start by spelling-----

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Into the breach.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Once more into the breach. I should probably start by spelling neoliberalism but I am not going to put myself to that sort of test right about now.

Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Go on. I dare the Deputy.

Ruairi Ó Murchú (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. We know exactly where we are with regard to this legislation. The problem we have had with the idea of a windfall tax is that it took the Government a hell of a long time to realise this was the way to go. It was not until the conversation was properly happening within the European Union that we got to where we are now. Correct me if I am wrong, but the fact is that over a three-year period, the Government is providing an allowance for 20% extra profits. Above that, we are talking about 75%. There is an allowance for a huge amount of profit by energy companies. Sinn Féin would be saying that the 75% needs to be 100%. We need to deal with the reality. We know about the cost-of-living crisis. We know the huge bills that people are paying. The fact is that one would need the use of a barter account or a contract that was negotiated by Noel Kelly to be able to pay the sort of bills that people have. People might say that is possibly a cheap shot at this point but that is the reality of what people are facing. They are facing huge bills and costs.

We got slammed a number of times about the fact that we talked about an element of price fixing. The idea of the windfall tax was that it would be leverage on the energy companies which would keep them honest. With the passing of time, our ideas have been seen to be right in the context of where we are going. Obviously, we will propose a number of elements to try to make this legislation into something that is better for people. There is an element of it being too little, too late. Even at this stage, we need to improve what people are facing. It is not exactly unpopular to say that energy companies have been making far too much money for too long and need to be held to account, but that is the reality of where we are at this point. We need this action to be taken as soon as possible.

We have all spoken here many times about the great strides that need to be made to turn us into a wind superpower. We obviously have the capacity with our offshore wind. We really need to make sure we have this planning-led model where all the pieces are put in place as soon as possible. A number of people have commented that we are dealing with the fact that we do not have the powers we would like to have relating to the entire energy sector because of privatisation. It has not worked out very well for people. Unfortunately, we are where we are. I would like to think, with regard to this legislation, that we could have something that was harder biting for the energy companies and which provided that extra support for the Irish people.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are some wind superpowers in this Chamber at the best of times. We are finally discussing the windfall tax on 29 June 2023, as we approach the close of the first half of the year. After months and months of promises about the windfall tax, we are actually finally debating it. In the first instance we were told that it could not be done, then we were told that it was a competency of the EU, then we were told it would be delayed. Proposals and discussions have been mentioned practically every week in the media or this Chamber since last June.

It is an incredible situation while, at the same time, functional governments in other countries managed to introduce a windfall tax well before Christmas last year and those windfall taxes are reaping their harvest as we speak by reducing the costs of energy by putting pressure on those companies and also in creating revenue for the countries. The Italian Government introduced a windfall tax last year and collected €4 billion. Germany and Spain introduced their own windfall taxes in December. It seems that even the British Tory Government has a stronger social understanding of the world than the Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government. The Government of the UK has made companies pay extra taxes on supernormal profits for at least the past six months.

Thankfully, we have managed to drag the Government kicking and screaming to this point. My worry is, however, that we could still be months away from this windfall tax being implemented. This is just part of a process. When will the tax actually come into play? Maybe the Minister of State will tell us when the Bill is likely to proceed through the whole Oireachtas, be signed by the President and be in place. That is an important question.

The primary reason for Bills such as that before the House is to put pressure on energy companies to stop making supernormal profits.

That is the reason for these taxes. In the first instance, we do not want companies to charge excessive prices for energy, or at least we should not want them to. A windfall tax ensures that if a company does proceed to charge supernormal profits, we will tax them, and that should act as a deterrent to companies doing that. The first objective is to prevent these companies from penalising citizens. As we have seen, companies have charged really high profits in this energy market over recent months. They have been profiteering. There has been greed and an instinct to make hay while the sun shines.

A lot of that has to do with the fact our energy market allows for that. In economic terms, this country has dysfunctional markets in energy, insurance, housing, banking and the food sector, which allow for a small number of players to make massive profits and exert enormous power over the rest of the markets. There does not seem to be either a Government instinct or a Government competency seeking to fix those markets in order that they would work properly and that there would not be this type of inordinate power in the hands of just a few organisations. I urge the Government to strive to resolve those imbalances and oligopolies that exist in so many markets in Ireland. In the first six months of last year, Bord Gáis Energy saw its revenues rise to €784 million from €484 million in the previous year, while its operating profits soared by 74%. The ESB Group made an operating profit of €847 million in 2022. This is a semi-State company making what amounts to a lottery win every day of the year. Is it not a great country that allows this to happen? The Government said it was fine. Sure, it is getting the dividends from the semi-State company in the end, but that is not the point. Those electricity prices were pushing families at the edge of existence to their limits. They were closing businesses.

In my county, Meath, for example, Tara Mines laid off people yesterday and contractors did so on the previous day, totalling 800 workers, in large part because electricity prices are so damn high. Tara Mines' second highest cost, after labour, is electricity. Electricity prices in this country are the highest in Europe, twice the European average per unit, which is incredible. The same mining company operates in Sweden with pretty much the same cost of inputs at every other level, but its electricity prices are so much lower there that it is able to operate. Two and a half weeks after those Tara Mines job losses, the Government has not come up with the goods to fix the price of electricity for the mine. It has not sought ways to reduce that, and that is absolutely wrong. Moreover, there is a problem on the part of the Green Party when it comes to Tara Mines. Tara Mines put out a request for the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, to meet it a number of times to talk about these issues, but he did not. It also put out a request for the Minister to meet regarding the renewal of the licence to mine in Meath, but he did not. The whole licence process took months on this occasion and diverted the management's attention significantly away from the rest of the business for that period, yet the licence itself is far shorter.

It is important the Government get real about these types of jobs. Meath is different from every other county for a lot of reasons, but this reason in particular is not a good one. More Meath workers leave the county every day to go to work than stay in the county to do so. That happens in no other local authority area. The largest employer in one location in Meath is Tara Mines, which has now closed, and that is only there because of an accident of nature. I urge the Government to get real about lowering the cost of electricity for families, small businesses and the hundreds of jobs tied up in companies such as Tara Mines.

The truth is Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party have resisted the reduction in the prices of fuel and electricity, and I honestly believe, as I have said previously to the Minister of State, that the Green Party ideologically seek high energy prices. The idea of carbon tax, for example, is to create high energy prices. High energy prices reduce demand, a key objective of the Green Party. It is no accident, therefore, that Ireland is in the worst place in terms of electricity prices and other energy costs. It is a policy outcome desired by the Green Party and other political parties. Fianna Fáil is an ideological husk and does not necessarily have a belief in anything, so it will go in any direction, but the Green Party tail is wagging the Fine Gael dog in this case in the context of energy prices. It is an important issue that the Government is looking to keep energy prices artificially high, not just through companies and what they charge but also through the level of taxes on energy the Government is taking in during an energy crisis and the worst cost-of-living crisis in living memory.

Parliamentary questions we in Aontú tabled show shocking figures for the levels of VAT, excise duty and other taxes the Government has taken in. It has taken in more VAT on fuel and energy during this cost-of-living crisis than ever before. Logically, during an energy crisis, a government would take in less tax to help people, but the Government is taking in more than ever before. That is stunning in the extent to which it is hurting people. The data show the total excise receipts in respect of fuel and energy for the past five years. For mineral oil tax, solid fuel, natural gas and electricity, the Government raked in €2.3 billion in 2022. Natural gas carbon tax reached a record high of €94.5 million, an increase of 13.4% since 2021 and of 89% since 2018. VAT on electricity reached record a record high of €381 million, with an increase of 40.4% since 2021. Gas taxes, too, reached a record high of €79 million, while those on home liquid petroleum gas, LPG, did likewise, at €14.8 million. There were also record highs in taxes on oil and petrol, diesel and solid fuel of €299 million, €382 million and €61 million, respectively, with VAT on auto LPG up as well. In total, VAT on all energy increased by an average of €27.48 million in a cost-of-living crisis.

There is a cruelty at the heart of the Government both allowing energy prices to remain so high among both companies and semi-State bodies and ensuring they will remain high by taking more tax on all of them than ever before. Is that not cruel? Is it not the opposite of the policy lever that should be pulled during a cost-of-living crisis? The Government is making and taking more than it has ever done before. This issue wrecks my head, to be honest, because I have raised it a number of times. Of course, the Government trots out the line about how it gave back money with the energy credits and here and there. If we add up all the energy credits the Government has given back, they amount to less than the increase in VAT and energy taxes on fuel in the past year. The Government took money out of one pocket, therefore, and it put some back in the other, but it is expecting a clap on the back for that. That is incredible. In any event, it should not be about taking money from people's pockets and giving it back. It should be about reducing the burden on people from costs.

Living standards in Ireland are falling, and that is an indictment of the Government. The amount of money workers can earn after adjusting for inflation fell last year. Fine Gael, at least, would like to pride itself on being the party of ambition for people expecting to earn more, but the Fine Gael-Fianna Fáil-Green Party Government has made people worse off in the past year. It is startling and it is having a significant impact on people's lives. The Government is not just part of the problem; in many ways, Government policy is the problem in the context of the cost of living, energy prices and taxes.

What is the outcome for families? Hundreds of thousands of families are living from overdraft to overdraft and many of them max out before their wages fall into their bank accounts at the end of the month. We have families in hock to moneylenders across the country, families going without food and other things and many families staying awake trying to work out what bill they can pay and what they can leave off till the next month. We are the sixth most expensive country in Europe and our communities are left behind. Twenty percent of the population is living below or at the poverty line, which is an incredibly high figure. Families' food bills on average are €1,000 higher than they were last year and grocery price inflation is still nearly 16%, which is an excruciating figure for families on a monthly basis. Rip-off Ireland is back with a vengeance and it is brought to you by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party. The most frustrating element of this has been the fact that the Government has stood idly by for so long and allowed this to happen. It has taken a phenomenal length of time for this simple Bill to get to the floor of the Dáil.

There are issues with this Bill and I will talk about them later but I will set out the context of the financial situation we are in. We see all this hardship and the Government and the energy companies profiteering and gouging but the background context is a Government that is revenue-rich. The Government is saying that we will have up to €65 billion in budget surpluses over the next number of years so this is not an austerity situation for the Government. It has the wherewithal to be able to help but it is making a conscious decision not to help in any way. We could have €65 billion over the number of years and we have 670,000 people living below the poverty line and 160,000 people in arrears on their gas bills. We have all this money and yet we have a massive capital investment problem. We have a housing crisis that is a national humanitarian crisis that has been allowed to continue for years. It needs capital investment to resolve the supply issue yet the Government will not focus money on that area. Nearly 1 million people are on hospital waiting lists. We heard today about young children waiting in pain and agony at significant detriment to them for a simple scoliosis operation and yet the Government will not put in the necessary investment. Hundreds of thousands of people are in commuter hell. People are commuting from Munster, Connacht and Ulster to Dublin on a daily basis for well over three hours a day. What is the Government's response? It is going to increase the tolls tomorrow and increase them again by the end of the year. Then the Government, which increased excise duty three weeks ago, will increase it in September and October. The Minister is really putting the squeeze on citizens who are trying to work. The increase in tolls is a tax on work. It is highway robbery by the Government but, again, it is part of the ideology that wants to use the stick to put people off the roads without putting the alternative of public transport in place for those individuals.

I understand that IFAC and the ESRI have rightly identified potential dangers relating to overheating and constraints around significant investment into the country but we must remember that for the past ten years, Ireland had the lowest capital investment ratio in Europe. I made a mistake - Romania had the lowest while we were second lowest. Capital investment ratios have increased recently, which is good, but most of that capital investment is just dealing with the capital depreciation that occurred over those ten years. We are miles away from actually meeting the needs of a growing society we have. We forget this. The Government trots out the line that it is spending more money on this and that but the population is significantly higher so it needs significantly higher investment. I accept that current spending does create problems, particularly corporation tax because it is unstable in Ireland. The reason why corporation tax is unstable in Ireland is because we are significantly dependent on the FDI sector in terms of those receipts. If we had a more balanced economy with more indigenous businesses which were stickier in terms of location, that corporation tax could be used for the general purposes of the country because it would be far more stable but because of the over-reliance on FDI, we have this instability in corporation tax and, therefore, a fear among economists of using that corporation tax for investment in Ireland.

One-off capital investment is not dependent on stability. It can be invested in and will not create an ongoing need that would create an investment hole if corporation tax disappeared. I appeal to the Government. We now have choices in terms of what to do with this rainy day fund, the windfall tax, corporation tax etc. What we need to do is make sure we invest in the necessary infrastructure to make sure we have housing, health and proper transportation systems. The Government will say that it is not prudent to have these types of investments at times of constraint yet it is talking about major tax cuts for high-income earners in the next budget. On one level the Government talks about prudence and at the next level, it talks about injecting significant money into the economy, which would increase inflation.

I welcome the fact that we are discussing this Bill. It is late - damagingly and hurtfully late - but we need to make sure the Government uses every lever, not just this, to put pressure on the energy companies to reduce the excess profiteering that is happening to make sure we give families a break and to let businesses do their job and keep their employees working.

Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will open my short contribution by saying that when we consider the situation in the upper echelons of RTÉ and Horse Racing Ireland, not to mention the national children's hospital, it shows how valuable clarity is and how often it is best noted by its absence. The Bill before us also lacks that clarity on how the proceeds of this windfall tax are to be distributed and used. We in Sinn Féin are anxious that they be used for the people who need them most. Among those are the people who get up early in the morning and the people who are lucky to get their head down at all because they are carers 24-7.

It is quite a development in society and quite a legacy of this Government that people who work so hard and contribute so much are the same people who walked around their homes wearing their coats to keep warm last winter, not that switching the heat mattered much to them because the standing charges fleeced them anyway. Constituents in north Kildare who contacted me about the increases in standing charges were in shock and disbelief when they found out that these standing charges were not regulated. It is nice work for those who can get it. The energy companies did it and they could get it while at home people suffered for the privilege of keeping the light on and being able to cook a dinner. These are the people who need help.

Sinn Féin has been on the ball on standing charges. My colleague Deputy O'Rourke and I have tabled a Bill on the regulation of standing charges which is currently on Second Stage. People are facing higher standing charges while trying to save money by reducing their consumption of energy. It is not always about money; it starts with a bit of care, thought and understanding about how people are living, which at the height of the energy cost crisis was in high anxiety, cold and pain. We are looking for clarity here and we will table amendments so that we know where the money is going and to ensure it goes to people who need it most.

We want proper accountability here and, in that context, we propose that this legislation should go even further and increase the amount of these vast profits that are taxable because it is utterly disgusting that these energy companies were able to profit from a brutal war and an energy cost crisis that has hit people so hard here. People in our European state hit hard by energy costs are looking at people in other European states who are now benefiting from lower wholesale prices in the market and are asking, "Why not us?" In government, Sinn Féin would ensure that they got benefits and ensure that energy companies could no longer see the hard-working public as their cash cow, or should I say herds of cash cows. It is just not on. In energy and every other aspect of life it is time for something new and better. Our State needs serious change.

Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, Independents 4 Change)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy to be speaking on the Energy (Windfall Gains in the Energy Sector) (Temporary Solidarity Contribution) Bill 2023. I support the introduction of the windfall tax on energy companies. Despite the pressure the Opposition put on the Government a year or 18 months ago, it did not do so then. The Bill clearly does not go far enough. It applies a 75% tax on everything over a 20% annual increase which provides a built-in 20% increase in profit and the company gets to keep 25% on everything else. These are companies which in the middle of an energy price crisis and in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis decided to raise prices even further so they could gouge more profits from already struggling people.

Some 377,400 people in this country were unable to keep their homes warm last year and up to 40% of the population fell into fuel poverty. A huge amount of that pain was down to deliberate decisions by massive corporations to gouge prices and make billions of euro off the back of it. I think we should go after every cent they made given all the pain people felt last winter.

In addition, the Bill does not go far enough because it only targets one sector in a whole system that is engaged in price gouging and profiteering. Earlier this year Oxfam's Survival of the Richest publication reported at least 50% of inflation was caused by price profiteering. It called this as much of a cost-of-profit crisis rather than a cost-of-living crisis.

The European Central Bank has now reported that it also believes that about 50% of inflation has been caused by rising profits. The CSO has reported that Irish company profits are up by 17.7% on this time last year. Food and energy corporations have seen record profits and are making record payouts to their shareholders and billionaire owners. The consumer price index, CPI, for groceries has increased by 13.1% in 12 months with bread, a basic staple, up 18%. Data from supermarket watcher Kantar shows that could be more like 17%.

Meanwhile, 677,000 people are living below the poverty and more than 30% are struggling to make ends meet. This is a deep cost-of-living crisis. On one hand, there are people facing serious hardships that show no sign of letting up. On the other hand, giant corporations are making record profits off the back of increased prices, increased margins and increased profits. That is deeply wrong. This is the kind of situation where any decent government would step in to make sure money that has been gouged out of people's pockets is recovered in full.

Last month, the Taoiseach ruled out a windfall tax on supermarkets. He said he needed proof that there was price gouging. Ask anyone on the street and they will tell you price gouging is going on. If you really need proof, legislation should be brought in forcing these companies to publish profits, so we can get that proof and ensure this never happens again. Every cent these companies have gouged from ordinary people should be taxed and put back into people's pockets.

Points have been made about the privatisation of our energy and our health service and the attempt by Fine Gael and the Labour Party to force people to pay for water, and potentially create water poverty. The news in the past couple of days about Thames Water clearly points out that the position adopted by the mass movement of the Right2Water campaign was absolutely correct. Fine Gael and the Labour Party would have been well on their way to privatisation had they implemented that in 2014 and 2015. Water was privatised as part of Thatcher's era of the neoliberalisation of our services on the basis that they would be more dynamic, and more money would be put into them. In England customer water bills have increased by 40% above the rate of inflation. Thames Water is £55 billion in debt, versus £65 billion in dividends paid out to its board. I am pleased that the people of Ireland stood up against the attempt of the Government. What we need now is a referendum to keep our water as a public service.

Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputies for their contributions today and on Tuesday. As Deputies said throughout this debate, there is significant financial pressure on households and businesses as a result of continued high energy prices. The Government is aware of this, and as previously stated, has introduced a range of measures and supports. I am confident the legislation before the House today will provide for a fair collection of revenues from fossil fuel companies, which have generated unexpected surplus revenues as a result of the war in Ukraine. The collection of these temporary solidarity contribution proceeds can then be distributed to alleviate some of this financial pressure on energy consumers. Governments in other members states have introduced this temporary solidarity contribution before now. However, had this Government implemented a temporary solidarity contribution in a similar manner to other member states, the result would have been that little if any contribution would have been collected and distributed to energy customers.

Through this Bill, the Government is seeking maximise the collection of a temporary solidarity contribution while balancing concerns about security of energy supply and impacts on future energy investment. The Bill also provides robust powers to the Revenue Commissioners to ensure timely and efficient collection of a temporary solidarity contribution. It is important legislation that demonstrates the Government's commitment to collect revenue from windfall gains generated by companies as a result of high energy prices. These can then be distributed to households and businesses that have been negatively impacted by those same high energy prices.

I will now respond to some of the questions and issues raised by Deputies. Deputy O'Rourke queried the deduction of losses incurred on capital expenditure from contributions. Losses from before 1 January 2018 and after 31 December 2023 cannot be deducted from the temporary solidarity contribution, and will not be taken into account in the calculation of the TSC. This will increase the revenue collected. Losses within the baseline period of 2018 to 2021 used to calculate the temporary solidarity contribution can be taken into account. However, if the average taxable profits for 2018 to 2021 is negative, then for the purpose of calculating the amount of temporary solidarity contribution, the average tax for profits shall be zero, and not the negative figure. In effect, this would lead to the 75% rate being applied to all profits generated by a company that has been loss making in the baseline period. It would not benefit from the 20% increase on average taxable profits in the temporary solidarity contribution period. There is an allowable deduction for capital expenditure incurred on the acquisition or construction of tangible assets in the years 2018 to 2023 that meet certain criteria. This deduction is proposed as a measure to address concerns of impacts on security of energy supply and investment in capital works.

Deputy Whitmore queried the rationale for the 75% rate for the temporary solidarity contribution. If the temporary solidarity contribution were to be levied at a rate of 33%, it would not collect a significant portion of the windfall gains. For instance, if profits doubled, an increase of 200%, then a 33% rate would only apply to 80% of the increase, as a 20% increase is allowed for. It would thus only collect 26% of the increase in profits. In contrast, the cap on market revenues, also provided for in the Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1854, is effectively a 100% charge on windfall revenues above a threshold. This would collect a significant proportion of the windfall gains. A rate of 75% for temporary solidarity contribution is considered fair and appropriate, to ensure that where significant windfall gains are made, a substantial portion of those windfall gains will be collected by the State without impacting on energy security or investment. As the Deputy mentioned on Tuesday, this Government's rate is in excess of the majority of other countries in the EU. The 75% rate is one the highest, if not the highest rate, for temporary solidarity contribution being applied in Europe.

I understand Deputy Tóibín raised a separate issue with regard to my invitation or otherwise to Tara Mines. I reassure him that I never at any stage refused an invitation. In fact, I was due to visit the mines prior to the closure. I will work with my colleagues across Government to make sure we see them back in production as soon as we can.

Questions were also raised about when the allocated revenues would be redistributed. I expect that is something we will be able to achieve in the autumn period once we have seen how some of the first period revenue is collected. Deputies also raised the question as to why there are two separate Bills for dealing with the solidarity contribution. In the early autumn we will be dealing with the market cap legislation. The honest response is that they were complex pieces of legislation. To deliver them in a timely manner, it was decided to introduce the solidarity contribution Bill first, and then follow with the publication of the second Bill, which I expect will be before the summer recess. I look forward to introducing it in the House in the autumn. They are separate and distinct in their effect, and I do not think it takes from either that they come in separate timeframes.

Deputies also raised concerns about the energy market, at both European and national levels. They set out the need for reform, and the resourcing of the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU. This Bill is not the legislative vehicle to address those concerns, but I understand such concerns. I am aware that the European Commission recently published a proposal to revise the rules for electricity market design. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities is an independent statutory regulator, whose functions include regulation and reform of the electricity market, regulation of the natural gas market, security of supply, consumer protection, upstream and downstream gas and electricity safety and economic regulation of water services. The CRU is legally independent in the performance of its functions and is entirely accountable to the Oireachtas.

Deputies raised concerns about the actions of the Government to address the impact of high energy prices on households and businesses. I reiterate that this Government acknowledges this negative impact. In recognition of this, a €2.4 billion package of supports was introduced during 2022, and an additional package of one-off measures worth €2.5 billion was introduced in budget 2023.

In February, the Government announced a €1.2 billion package to help families, businesses, pensioners, carers, and people with disabilities. There is a simplified application process for the temporary business energy support scheme, and the level of relief has been increased to 50% of the cost of the eligible energy bills. Between the first and second electricity benefit schemes, more than 2.1 million households will have automatically received €800 of income support through their electricity bill at a total cost of €1.59 billion between quarter 2 last year and quarter 2 this year. In 2023, a total of €235 million will be spent on Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, dedicated energy poverty schemes and local authority retrofits. This funding will target some 6,000 free upgrades and the warmer homes schemes, and a further 2,400 B2 retrofits of local authority homes next year.

The Bill before the House seeks to maximise the collection of temporary solidarity contribution from windfall gains made from fossil fuel production and refining activities while balancing energy security and investment concerns. The current estimated proceeds, which are €200 million to €450 million, must be distributed in accordance with the Council regulation. The cross-departmental energy poverty steering group will be consulted on the distribution of proceeds and the specific nature of these distribution measures will be agreed by the Government in the context of budget 2024.

I acknowledge the significant work of the Attorney General, his officials and officials in the Revenue Legislation Services who worked with my Department to draft this important legislation. I also thank the members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action for their work on the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the energy windfall gains in the energy sector Bill. I thank the Deputies for their interest and look forward to discussing the Bill in further detail on Committee Stage. I commend the Bill to the House.