asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will make representations to the E.S.B. to utilise their surplus revenue for the purpose of subsidising the wiring of houses in Gaeltacht areas.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Rural Electrification.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether, in view of the fact that the E.S.B. is now showing a profit, he will make representations to the board not to impose an extra charge in future in respect of connections to houses in rural areas, and, in particular, to dwellings in the Gaeltacht and congested districts of County Donegal and the western counties.
I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 6 and 7 together.
It has already been announced that the satisfactory financial position of the E.S.B. has made possible the discontinuance of the subsidy from the Exchequer for rural electrification. The board will, in future, bear the full capital cost of rural electrification. The presumption in the Deputy's questions that the board would still have surplus revenue sufficient to cover the cost of the concessions mentioned is unwarranted. The fixing of charges is a matter assigned to the board by legislation.
Is it not a fact that, while the fixing of charges is the responsibility of the board, under existing legislation no profit should be shown by those charges and that, if a profit is now shown from such fixed charges, it arises purely and simply out of the increased use being made of electricity in recent years as a result of the doubling of staff by Fianna Fáil 12 or 18 months ago and that, if there is surplus, that surplus is, under law, the property of the consumer and should be passed back as such to the consumer?
The position is that the surplus which has been yielded on the accounts of the E.S.B. will now be utilised by the E.S.B. to make this service—the provision of rural electrification—available to those who desire the installation of electricity under the rural electrification scheme, without any obligation to tax the taxpayer in respect of a subsidy while the E.S.B. have a surplus on their ordinary account.
Will the Minister state if this action now contemplated is, in fact, legal under existing legislation and will he not consider that these people who in the past were asked and in the future will probably be asked, to pay an extra charge, due to the fact that they reside in rather remote localities and so do not come within the circuits established by the E.S.B., these people who are also taxpayers, should not be asked to pay an extra charge for supply of current to their houses?
The position is that the House gave the E.S.B. power to fix its charges and to balance its accounts taking one year with another. I have no power under the statute to direct the board what it should do in particular cases in particular areas. That is a matter for the board. The board is pursuing a policy which it has been following for a great number of years and having regard to the fact that the House gave it authority to fix charges generally and in particular cases, I do not propose to intervene in the matter or to direct the board to discharge its functions in a particular way, in view of the absolute discretion in the matter of the fixation of charges which the House gave to the board.
Will the Minister not abide then by his own ruling and refrain from directing them to give money back to the Government?