Martin Brady (Fianna Fail)

I agree with the previous speaker. Every businessperson and householder I have met in recent months made the point that the cost of energy, particularly as it relates to business, is too high. This cost is one of the major overheads which affects all businesses.

I have never spoken to a member of the public who fully understands what the PSO levy involves. This mechanism was never explained to energy customers or the public at large. There are some Members of this House with whom I spoke earlier who know nothing about it. The levy was not explained in an adequate fashion and there is much confusion in respect of it as a result.

Competition should drive down prices but this has not happened in the energy market. The cost of electricity has increased. Householders and businesses are obliged to consider their budgets. Service providers should be conscious of this fact and take it into account. I am not sure whether, in the motion before the House, Senator Coffey is stating the PSO levy should be put on ice temporarily until matters resolve themselves and in order that householders and businesses might enjoy some breathing space. I believe that is the approach he is suggesting. On the other hand, if I heard him correctly - he can clarify the position for me later - the Minister is stating that if we do not proceed with the PSO levy, we may not have a continuous supply of electricity, particularly if difficulties arise in respect of oil or gas supplies. The Minister also appeared to indicate that if we do not diversify into the area of alternative energy, we could find ourselves in a bad situation.

It seems Senator Coffey is posing the question as to whether we should give people more time and diversify at a later stage when we are in a better position to do so. Individuals outside the Houses have suggested to me that perhaps we should not proceed with the PSO levy and that the ESB should increase its prices in order to pay for the cost of diversification. I am of the view that this is a risky approach because, irrespective of who operates the mechanism, customers will end up in the same position.

We do not want a situation to develop whereby other countries might perceive Ireland, if it does not proceed with the PSO levy or diversify into the area of alternative energy, to be refusing to co-operate in respect of dealing with climate change. That is not an issue but it has been mentioned.

Senator Coffey also mentioned Airtricity and wind turbines. It is true that Airtricity has provided a number of these throughout the country. They interfere with television reception and those people affected are receiving no assistance from the company, so we should look into the matter. The Senator also mentioned the old system of ESB disconnections where an electrician would call out. That still happens and I witnessed it approximately eight months ago when I met a constituent. The ESB employee called out but we made an arrangement; he rang his office and did not disconnect the customer. The employee may have acted on his own but it was nice to see the gesture.

I am very reluctant to go along with the motion in the current circumstances, although I empathise with many of Senator Coffey's points.