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

I thank the Senator for raising this matter.

I should outline very clearly that the Commission for Regulation of Utilities is an independent regulator. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities is independent of me as Minister and it sets its own processes for application forms, application fees, processes it will go through, guidance it provides for applicants and so on. It also is fair to state that it is a body that engages in very substantial public consultation whenever it produces documentation that is for the guidance of applicants.It published the documentation to which the Senator referred in March 2012. The latter remains the documentation to which applicants should refer.

Regarding the basis for the rulings of the regulator, it essentially interprets European legislation as well as our national legislation. In this instance, it is establishing the heat efficiency of the particular plant. The European documentation sets out the issues that must be considered. I am sure the Senator and the applicant have already had regard to those issues. This is a complicated matter by any standard. The regulator must examine several issues in the context of an application, including electrical, thermal and overall efficiency, power-to-heat ratios, electricity from the high-efficiency combined heat and power and primary energy savings. It does so in accordance with formula set out in the original directive and its annexes. The regulator has been transparent about what are the requirements. I cannot second-guess its assessment of an application such as this, no more than the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government can second-guess An Bord Pleanála when it independently assesses an application made to it.

The legislation clearly sets out that the regulator is not accountable to the Minister but it provides for accountability to the Committee on Communications, Climate Action and Environment. The independent regulator is accountable to the Oireachtas, as ought to be the case. I cannot shed light on why nothing has changed in the view of the promoters but they have not been granted the approval which was previously given. That is entirely a matter for the Commission for Regulation of Utilities to assess. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to provide an insight as to what difficulties this application may be encountering other than to point the Senator and the applicants to the very detailed guidance on what needs to be submitted, the calculations conducted by the regulator and how it weighs applications. The very detailed source document specifies the terms within which it operates.

I understand the Senator's enthusiasm to have the plant approved. However, in order to access state aid or aid through the various refit programmes it must, in addition to acquiring planning permission and EPA approval, fulfil certain criteria which are set independently, policed by the EU and administered by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities. Obviously, it is an important element in any project but there be an independent process to vet approval in any case where benefit is being conferred. It is not a political decision and nor should it be. That is the position as I understand it. The company must complete whatever requests have been made of it by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities in order to facilitate a decision being made in a timely way.