Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 92: To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will direct the Commission for Energy Regulation to reconsider its requirement of rebranding for ESB and Bord Gáis and review the reconnection and disconnection fees for those struggling to pay utility bills; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37802/10]

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

As part of the electricity deregulation process, the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) commissioned market research, which indicates that there is confusion among electricity consumers as to the separate identities and roles of ESB as owner and operator of the electricity network and ESB as an electricity supplier.

This is of concern because ESB Networks must provide, and be perceived to provide, the same level and quality of service to all customers irrespective of their electricity supplier.

It is vital for consumers to have full confidence that they can switch supplier without any impact on the quality of their network service. Therefore, as part of the deregulation process and the delivery of real competition, ESB is required by the CER to rebrand its electricity supply business.

ESB would also, in any case, be required to engage in some form of rebranding as part of the implementation of EU Internal Energy Market Third Directive. Member States are obliged under the Directive to ensure that there is absolute clarity for consumers as to the separate identities and functions of the energy network operator and a related energy supply company within a single utility. For this reason, rebranding needs to be addressed for both ESB and, in due course, BGE.

ESB has advised that rebranding will have an estimated cost of between €6 and €8 million. The CER has also confirmed that there is no plan to include the costs of rebranding in ESB's regulated revenues in the period 2010 to 2012.

ESB has made it clear that the company will introduce its new brand in a practical and cost effective way without causing inconvenience, expense or confusion to customers.

Once full electricity market deregulation has been introduced, expenditure on advertising and marketing, and whether these costs are met from electricity revenues, will be a commercial decision for all competing suppliers including ESB and BGE. The deregulated market will maintain constant pressure on all costs incurred by suppliers, who will be competing vigorously on price offerings to customers.

Turning to the gas market, there is no specific proposal or timescale or firm costings as yet for rebranding. However, with the successful development of competition in the retail gas market, the CER intends to publish for consultation, in the coming weeks, a roadmap for gas market deregulation. The question of rebranding is likely to be addressed in that context.

In the context of delivering full competition in the gas market and delivering on EU requirements, all concerned are committed to ensuring any rebranding of BGE is done in a fully cost effective and transparent way.

Like all Members of this House, I am deeply concerned at the number of electricity and gas disconnections that have taken place in 2010. The key message for people who are in genuine difficulty with their energy bills is to make immediate contact with their supplier. Suppliers will work with customers to agree a payment plan before the unpaid bills begin to accumulate and therefore well before it gets to the point of disconnection.

I believe that all options to address this issue need to be considered and I am gratified that the CER has agreed to review policy on disconnections. This review will specifically look at how the costs of disconnection are allocated across the industry and to the customer. I welcome this review and look forward to its publication.

Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 93: To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the timeframe for the energy affordability strategy; if it will require legislation; the way he intends to address the problem of fuel poverty here; the number of homes that were part of the warmer homes schemes for 2008, 2009 and to date in 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37782/10]

Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 107: To ask the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his plans to develop a national fuel poverty strategy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27926/10]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 93 and 107 together.

My Department is working closely with the Departments of Social Protection and Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in consultation with the inter-Departmental Steering Group to finalise the affordable energy strategy. I expect the Strategy to be submitted to me shortly with a view to bringing it to Government in the coming weeks.

The affordable energy strategy will be the framework for building upon the many measures already in place to protect households at risk from the effects of energy poverty, which include the thermal efficiency-based measures such as the Warmer Homes Scheme (WHS), which provides significant energy efficiency improvements in low-income homes.

It is not envisaged that additional legislation will be required at this stage. The necessity for legislation to underpin aspects of the strategy in the future will be kept under review.

The number of homes that were upgraded under the WHS in 2008 were 5,343, 16,240 in 2009 and 15,764 to date in 2010.