Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)

I join with the comments of the Leas-Chathaoirleach regarding our cousins from Australia, who are very welcome. Unfortunately, I must deal with these rogues on a more immediate basis.

While I am impressed by the intent of the amendment proposed by Senator O'Reilly, I cannot accept it. This is a complex area. I have sympathy with Endesa but I do not think it would be equitable to make a special case. Although Endesa purchased the generating station and the associated allowances for a significant sum, this purchase and the underlying assumptions made by Endesa in the valuation process were commercial judgments and risk assessments made by a private sector firm. A number of factors have changed since Endesa made its valuation and purchase decision, including falling electricity demand and falling electricity market prices. These factors also have an impact on companies that have recently invested in and built new generation stations. This is the nature of commercial investment decisions. At the time of the Endesa purchase, there could be no certainty about the future price of carbon and no commitments were given to any party that generators would continue to be able to benefit from the single electricity market committee decision. The single electricity market committee decision specifically stated it was up to governments to recover windfall gains from generators arising from the decision. As such, any preferential treatment to exempt an individual firm would not be justified.

Investment in new power generation tends to have a projected lifespan of over 30 years. This levy is simply recovering a temporary windfall over the next two and a half years so any effect it might have on investments with such a long projected payback should be minimal. Endesa is likely to pay small amounts under this levy since generating stations are rarely dispatched by the market operator. This legislation carries through the Government's commitment to ensuring a transparent, non-discriminatory and competitive electricity market. In the long run, upholding this commitment is far more important than providing for preferential treatment in this case. I can understand the intent of the amendment but I cannot accept it.