There is a matter which, perhaps, I should raise on the Fifth Stage of the Bill, but it might be as convenient to raise it now. When speaking on the Second Stage of the Bill, the Minister referred to the arrangements which had been made by the E.S.B. to utilise turf and said that in consequence of that Bord na Móna had proceeded with the development programme which presumed the consumption of a certain amount of turf each year. It turned out, after a close examination of the position, that the E.S.B. found they would not require all the turf they had previously given Bord na Móna the impression it would be necessary for the latter organisation to cut in order to fuel the proposed new generating stations.
The reason the E.S.B. found themselves in that position was the subject of some contention not merely on this Bill but on the departmental Estimates. Because of the Minister's statement on this matter on the last occasion, I want to put my view on record so that it can be read in conjunction with the Minister's view.
The position of the E.S.B. in 1955 was that they required a certain sum of money in order to develop their programme, the programme being contained in the White Paper of 1953. At the direction of the Government, the Minister for Finance and I saw the directors of the E.S.B. At that meeting, their whole programme was discussed, their financial requirements were ascertained and it then transpired, in the course of question and answer between the Ministers and the directors of the board, that in fact the board were planning for a plant development and plant utilisation scheme which, in fact, they would not be able to use if they adhered to the White Paper programme.
It was as a result of that statement by the directors and technicians of the board that the Minister for Finance and I said to the board: "Look here, if you believe the programme set out in the White Paper is excessive in so far as our national requirements are concerned, if you believe it will give you surplus plant which you cannot use, we suggest that you go back and examine the matter realistically, not in the light of the position in 1953 but of the realities and actualities of 1955". Having gone back and examined the whole matter, the E.S.B. came back to the Department and said: "Here is our estimate as to when we will require the particular plant for which we have got notional provision under the White Paper programme."
The revised programme of the E.S.B. showed clearly that they could not utilise in the prescribed period the plant for which provision was made in the White Paper. We said to them then: "Why did you embark upon a plant development programme in excess of what you can use?" The E.S.B. directors told us they felt themselves committed to the programme set out in the White Paper and did not feel free to depart from it.
I said to the directors: "You have got responsibility as the national electricity generating authority. It was your responsibility to tell the Government and the Minister for Industry and Commerce that the programme envisaged in the White Paper would lead you into a condition of over-planting." The whole defence of the E.S.B. for continuing to embark on the White Paper programme was that they felt themselves committed to it, that the White Paper was not their programme, but one put over on them, that the programme was based on the assumption that the demand for electricity would double itself in every five-year period.
That was a reasonable enough estimate if you took 1953 when, because of the hunger for fuel during the emergency and post-emergency periods, it was not possible for people to use electrical equipment as they were able to utilise it when fuel became available. On the figures for 1953, it could have been said, perhaps, that the demand for electricity in that year would double itself in five to five and a half years. That estimate assumed a substantial and continuing percentage increase in the demand. As it happened, of course, in 1954, 1955, 1956, 1957, the demand did not maintain itself at the 1953 level. It did not maintain itself here or in any other country in Europe because once you got over the upsurge in the consumption of electricity following the war and acute post-war period, the demand petered off so that our increased demand last year was, I think, in the region of 9 per cent.
As O.E.E.C. said, that was the average increased demand throughout Western Europe. As it is increasing only at the rate of 9 per cent. per annum, the demand will not double itself in five years, but in 11 to 12 years, and any planting programme based on the assumption, as the White Paper programme of 1953 was based, that the demand would double itself in five years was completely unrealistic in the light of subsequent developments. It is because of that that we asked the E.S.B. to review their programme.
Their reviewed programme showed that the board did not need the stations to which they were committed in the White Paper. In fact, the board told me, and I put it on record in the Department, that, with the plant now available and in sight, they would have a surplus of electricity generating capacity until 1961 or 1962, and that is allowing them a surplus generating capacity, not in theory but in fact, of about 30 per cent. between now and that year. Any revision that took place of the board's programme occurred because the board would be committed to an extravagant programme which in fact was not necessary and at a time when money was difficult to get not only here but elsewhere in Western Europe. Consequently, the correct thing to do is to retard development to our actual needs.
It is perfectly true, as the Minister said, that at one stage, when I sought to get the E.S.B. to schedule one of the Offaly bogs—Derrygreena—so as to enable Board na Móna to erect a turf-briquetting plant there, the E.S.B. said this was required for, I think, a 100 megawatt plant and they did not want to give it up. Bord na Móna, however, wanted to get it, because the Derrygreena bog was one capable of producing briquettes and every bog cannot produce briquettes. The E.S.B., however, said they would have to keep the Derrygreena bog. Subsequently, when they revised their programme they did not intend to provide for the full utilisation of the Derrygreena bog and their proposals—as the Minister can ascertain from the Department— involved a postponement of the utilisation of the capacity of both Boora and Derrygreena. They said: "In any case, if you take Derrygreena from us, we will have to put up either a coal or an oil-fired station at a later date."
I did not want to see a coal or an oil-fired station erected, if we could manage to keep the E.S.B. down to a programme of utilising our turf deposits. Reluctantly, I had to allow the E.S.B., on the strength of its technical representations, to keep the Derrygreena bog. That was before the E.S.B. had revised their programme. When they came to revise their programme, they then said that the revised programme did not provide for the fullest utilisation of the Boora and Derrygreena bogs. Consequently, we gave Bord na Móna rights to operate turf-briquetting plants on those two bogs and Bord na Móna were told to proceed with the erection of turfbriquetting plants on both Boora and Derrygreena.
The E.S.B. plea, then, that it needed the full production capacity of both bogs was still based on their belief that they were committed to the White Paper programme. When the shackles of the White Paper programme were taken off, they said: "We do not need the two bogs at the moment, we cannot utilise them fully at the moment", and they even dropped the suggestion that the giving of any portion of either Boora or Derrygreena to Bord na Móna would involve the erection of a coal or an oil plant in lieu of either the Derrygreena or Boora bogs.
Those are the facts. Papers in the Department of Industry and Commerce will prove those to be the facts. The Minister for Finance will, I have no doubt, testify—the members of the Government to whom the matter was reported can testify—that the E.S.B. programme as set out in the White Paper was a programme which gave them a capacity which they could not use and that they have to-day generating capacity sufficient to meet all their requirements and provide for a surplus up to 1961-62. As I say, when the Minister makes the point that the E.S.B. wanted to erect an oil or coal station in lieu of the bog station, when portion of the bog was given to Bord na Móna, all that was part of their belief that they were committed to the White Paper. More than once I said to the directors of the E.S.B. that the responsibility was on them to report to the Department if they felt they were committed to a programme of production which they could not utilise and they were remonstrated with for not having brought those facts to notice.
Of course, proof that all that was right, that the revision of the programme was right, is to be found in the fact that nobody proposes now to alter the E.S.B. programme for the next five years, because the E.S.B. programme for the next five years is such as to meet our ascertainable demands. Now, if the present programme meets our demands then the earlier programme would have been excessive. I am sorry it was excessive, I am sorry the circumstances necessitated a revision of the earlier programme, but it would have been the grossest waste and inefficiency not to have revised the programme, once the demand for electricity did not stand up to the 1953 anticipation—and that anticipation was, I think, an overoptimistic one. It was pitched too high and to have continued to try to implement it in circumstances in which money was not easy to get would, I think, have been a most wasteful and unjustifiable course of action.
Because we wanted to avoid the waste, to avoid having surplus plant which we could not use, the board were asked to revise the programme to which they felt committed in the White Paper. The revision of that programme represents a realistic approach to the whole problem of our electricity requirements and I presume —not having heard anything to the contrary from any member of the Government Front Bench—that the Government is satisfied now that the present E.S.B. programme is one which takes care of the national electricity requirements.
