asked the Minister for Transport and Power whether the Government have completed their examination into the extension of the rural electrification scheme.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rural Electrification Scheme.
8.
The Government have practically completed their review of the rural electrification scheme. They have been concerned to arrange that within practical limits electricity is available at a reasonable charge to all those desiring to take it. In fact, electricity is supplied at the normal fixed charge to about 93 per cent of the rural households already connected.
For those households still unconnected, supply is at present offered at the normal fixed charge to some 40 per cent and to a further 20 per cent at special service charges not more than half their normal fixed charges. Experience of the current post-development scheme shows, however, that only about half this 60 per cent are interested in taking supply. The remaining 40 per cent of unconnected households must at present be quoted rather high special service charges because of the high cost of connecting them. The average special service charge for the houses in this 40 per cent would be nearly four times the normal charge. It is now proposed that substantial reductions will be made in the special service charges of the 40 per cent. The capital cost of making the connections cannot be ignored, but the intention is that those who have been quoted extremely high special service charges will have them reduced by a half to two-thirds. The reductions to be made will apply also to existing consumers paying high special service charges.
The completion of the present post-development scheme will require the raising of the total expenditure on rural electrification by £8 million to £50 million, and I hope to introduce the necessary legislation shortly.
As I have indicated above, it is anticipated that there will still be some rural houses whose owners will not wish to take electricity at the moderate, or at least very much reduced charges at which it will now be available to them. For those whose special service charges as reduced will still be greater than their normal fixed charges a grant for the installation of bottled gas is available instead of the rural electrification subsidy. It is proposed to raise the maximum grant to £35. This should provide a complete installation in almost any house.
Will those persons who have been constrained to refuse supply on the ground of the excessive special charge be notified that under the revised scheme they now can get the electricity at the reduced charge? That is to say, have the ESB kept a record of the persons to whom they offered light and who refused it because they could not afford to pay the special charge? If they have kept such a record, will these people be notified of the new terms on which the ESB are prepared to offer them light and power?
Of course, the ESB would have a record of those people to whom electricity was offered and who did not take it at the high charge. As I stated, we have practically completed the review and are arranging for this at present. We shall bear that particular factor in mind.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary consider notifying them?
Will the Parliamentary Secretary state what grounds exist for retaining any part of these special charges? Surely he realises that these special charges have hindered the development of rural electrification to a great extent? Is it not time now to act upon the recommendations made from the Labour Party benches time out of number to abolish those charges altogether? Why not make a job of it and abolish them?
As I have stated, out of the 60 per cent of the unserviced houses even as it stands, without the increased subsidy now being offered, only half are expected to seek electricity. It is not the special service charge which is keeping the majority of the people from taking it.
Surely the Parliamentary Secretary realises that the special service charges in a stated number of cases——
We cannot have a debate on this question. The Deputy may put a question.
I am asking a question which I am entitled to ask. With all due respect to you, Sir, surely the Parliamentary Secretary appreciates that there have been representations from public representatives and from local councils with a view to securing the abolition of this special charge which I have maintained here again and again——
The Deputy is now making a speech and not asking a question. I am calling Question No. 9.
——should be abolished? Will it be abolished in the foreseeable future? That is a fair question. This is the place to get that information and it is our job as Deputies——
This is not a time for making speeches, but for asking questions.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary say——
On a point of order, will the Parliamentary Secretary be allowed to answer the supplementary question put to him before another supplementary question is allowed?
That is a matter for the Chair. Deputy Sweetman.
It is a matter for the Chair, and the Chair should then allow it to be put.
I am calling Deputy Sweetman, if he wishes to put a question; otherwise I will call Question No. 9.
Do I understand from the Parliamentary Secretary that the existing special services charges will be reduced to the figure now announced?
Yes.
The existing ones for houses already serviced?
I have stated that.
I could not follow the Parliamentary Secretary.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary say what period of time will be allowed to people to make up their minds whether they will accept or reject the new arrangement?
This is a specific problem which exists at all stages, as we know, following a canvass of various rural areas. A programme of expansion has been going on all the time. It must be accepted that it is at the stage when expansion is going on in any given area, when these new installations are proceeding under these new proposals that new people seeking connection will be given this opportunity.
People are often sorry afterwards.
Agreed.
Will you allow the Parliamentary Secretary to answer my supplementary question, Sir?
I allowed the Deputy to put three supplementary questions.
I asked a supplementary question and you precluded the Parliamentary Secretary from answering it.
I am calling Question No. 9, in the name of Deputy L'Estrange.
Your ruling is questionable.