asked the Minister for Transport and Power whether he approves in cases where the normal fixed charge under rural electrification is £1 7s. 6d. the addition of a post-development charge of £2 10s. 4d., making a total of £3 17s. 10d. every two months.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rural Electrification Charge.
21.
Under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1927, by which it was established, the Electricity Supply Board is empowered to fix rates and scales of charge for electricity without reference to the Minister.
I would mention, however, for the Deputy's information, that under the Rural Electrification Scheme where the normal fixed charge is, after taking account of subsidy, insufficient to meet the Board's annual charges arising from the connection, the Board rather than refuse supply altogether, offer it subject to an additional charge called the special service charge.
During the initial development of an area under the Rural Electrification Scheme the Board are able to offer more attractive terms than under post development work as labour and materials are then more conveniently available. The fixed charge and any special service charge in a domestic premises connected during post-development are generally something over 1½ times the corresponding charges for connection during initial development.
Does anybody in the House think that, where the normal fixed charge in a rural area is £1 7s. 6d. payable every two months, in any circumstances it ought to be increased to £3 17s. 10d. payable every two months in perpetuity? Surely that suggests a serious defect and we ought not sit down and shake our heads saying: "We have no responsibility."
I have been very anxious in reviewing the question of rural electrification to ensure that the E.S.B. charges are equitable and reasonable and calculated on a sound basis. There is very much extra cost in installing electricity in an applicant's house in contrast to doing it by groups. I am satisfied that the E.S.B. accountancy in this regard is accurate. I know of very few cases where they have been found to make an error in the calculation. The Deputy knows the particular case and there is no need for me to mention the name. The individual concerned did not wire his house at the time the main development was taking place. That is what caused the increased charge to be levied.
I supplied the Minister with the name in the case and the reference to the correspondence with the E.S.B. The charge was £1 7s. 6d. The applicant was then told that if he wired the house, he would be given the service for £2 10s. He then indicated his readiness to take the supply at that figure and the engineer called, and because the house had not already been wired, he was told that now he must pay £3 17s. 10d.
I think I had better send the Deputy full particulars of this case.
I think I have them.
As I have said, I am quite willing to refer the matter to the E.S.B., on the chance that they have made a miscalculation. It is an absolutely scientific assessment and each individual must be able to pay this service charge of £4 14s. per £100 per annum on the capital cost of installation.
Perhaps the Minister would refer it back. It looks very queer to me.
Does the Minister not recollect that before he got into office on that occasion, the Taoiseach solemnly promised that these special charges would be abolished?
Does the Deputy not recollect that he refused to do it?
I recollect that the Taoiseach solemnly promised, but of course he went back on it as soon as he got the votes.
He restored the 20 per cent. subsidy the Deputy took away.
That did not affect the Minister.
It did affect me.
The Minister for Finance should know enough about his files to know that.
(Interruptions.)