Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 Jul 1968

Vol. 236 No. 1

Committee on Finance. - Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Bill, 1968: Second Stage.

Minister for Transport and Power (Mr. Childers)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.

The purpose of the Bill is to authorise the increase to £50 million of the existing statutory limit of £42 million on the expenditure which the Electricity Supply Board may incur on the electrification of rural areas.

Expenditure on the rural electrification scheme at 31st March, 1968 was nearly £41½ million and the Board will soon reach the existing statutory limit of £42 million. The Board is at present doing a systematic post-development scheme in the course of which all unconnected householders will have a further opportunity of taking supply. The increase of the limit to £50 million should enable the Board to complete the scheme. This will take another five years as the Board will have to go back over the areas already covered by the post-development scheme so that all householders will have an opportunity of taking supply at the improved terms recently announced. I shall refer to these improved terms later.

The number of rural houses connected at 31st March, 1968 was 334,000, which is about 87 per cent of the estimated total of 384,000. By the time the scheme is completed, electricity at a reasonable cost will be available to 97½ per cent of rural homes and, on the ESB's estimates, approximately 92 per cent of the existing total of rural houses will have accepted the terms offered. I may mention that, of the number not expected to take supply, nearly half could have it at the normal standard charges, that is to say, without any special service charges, and a great many others at very little more than the standard charges.

The Government have been concerned to arrange that, within practical limits, electricity is available to the maximum number at reasonable charges. The ESB system of charges consists of a fixed charge, to meet the costs which arise from connecting the consumer to the supply, and a unit charge, which is the charge for the actual current used. The charge per unit is the same for all rural consumers. In some cases, because of the high cost of connection, the normal fixed charge related to the size of the premises, is not sufficient to meet the annual fixed costs to the ESB and the ESB find it necessary to impose special service charges. The Government considered the question of these charges.

It has been argued that special service charges should be abolished and that everyone in the country should be entitled to electricity at the same cost— on the analogy that letters are delivered at a flat rate to all rural as well as urban areas. However, this is not a valid comparison. The delivery of letters to isolated areas does not involve heavy capital outlay and substantial annual maintenance costs, irrespective of the use made of the service. A flat rate is therefore possible. In the case of the telephone service, however, which is an analogous service and which, like electricity, involves heavy capital costs, the customer in an isolated position has to pay an additional charge because of the extra costs involved in providing the service and then pays the standard rental and rate for calls made.

Similarly an electricity consumer in an isolated position, who receives current at the standard rate, must expect to contribute to the extra high cost of connecting him to the electricity distribution system.

If there were no special service charges the ESB would have to incur heavy capital expenditure in bringing supply to very isolated houses —in some cases the capital cost could be £1,000—and then receive an utterly inadequate revenue from the connection. In these areas the very substantial subsidy from taxpayers and consumers which would be incurred would be out of all proportion to the benefits received. Indeed the ESB have found that many of the isolated houses are inhabited by old people and seem likely to be abandoned when the present tenancy ceases. The heavy capital expenditure involved in providing supply would in such cases be wasted. I may say that in one form or another special service charges are to be found in electricity tariffs the world over.

Nevertheless, the Government are very conscious of the fact that the special service charges payable by some rural consumers were very high. It was estimated that at 31st March, 1967, there were about 22,500 unconnected houses the special service charges for which would add 50 per cent or more to their two monthly fixed charges. I do not know what the upper limit might be, but over the 22,500 houses the average two monthly fixed charge would amount to about five times the normal charge based on the size of the premises. The Government, therefore, have decided to reduce the level of special service charges. Where special service charges, as previously calculated, are over half the normal charges, reductions are being granted. The consumers who will gain most benefit are those who would have to pay the highest special service charges; in many cases these charges will be reduced by a half to two-thirds and even more in some cases. Those whose charges, as previously calculated, were only slightly over half the normal charges will gain small reductions; special service charges which are half or less of the normal fixed charges remain unchanged.

To show clearly how much rural consumers are going to benefit, I think I should give the House some typical examples of the reductions which will result. The occupant of a county council cottage paying, two monthly, 14/- fixed charge and £1 15s 6d special service charge will have his special service charge reduced to 11s 5d. A consumer, similarly housed, but who because of higher connection costs, was previously liable for a special service charge of £2 12s will have it reduced to 16/-. A consumer with a mediumsized farm paying, two monthly, £1 5s fixed charge and £2 14s special service charge will now pay a reduced special service charge of £1. A large farmer, with a fixed charge of £2 5s and a special service charge of £2 18s 4d will now pay a special service charge of £1 9s 11d. The House will see therefore that the reductions are quite substantial.

These reductions are being introduced by agreement with the ESB and do not require amending legislation. It was therefore decided to introduce the revised terms immediately—as from 1st June, 1968 for new consumers. Existing consumers will benefit from and including their accounts for the September/October and October/November billing periods. These are the earliest dates from which it is practical for the ESB to introduce the modified charges. By the end of the post-development scheme, the reductions will add about £300,000 to the Board's annual loss on rural electrification. This will have to be borne by the Board's consumers generally and no increase in the statutory State subsidy payable to the ESB is contemplated.

The ESB while they are forbidden by law to make profits, are, also by law, required to avoid losses and the additional loss expected on the extension of rural electrification will require to be met by surplus revenue from existing consumers.

Any householders who did not accept supply because of the high special service charges when the ESB were re-canvassing their areas and who now wish to obtain connection, may get in touch with their local ESB offices. I think I should stress, however, that while some householders may be able to get supply at the revised terms without delay, people in general will find that they will have to wait until the ESB come to do their areas. In carrying out the post-development scheme, the ESB are re-canvassing the country in a planned sequence of areas so as to ensure orderly development and to keep costs to a minimum. Any departure from the planned arrangements upsets the Board's programme and increases the costs involved. Preference for any area can be arranged only by delaying supply to other areas. It is clearly impossible for the ESB to connect immediately all who will now seek supply. The Board expect that it will take them nearly five years to give all unconnected householders in the country an opportunity to take supply at the revised terms.

As I have explained, the new arrangements for rural electrification are going to mean substantial reductions for those who would have to pay high special service charges. There may be some householders, however, in areas isolated from the Board's network, who will consider even the reduced charges still too high. For these people we are increasing the subsidy for the installation of bottled gas to £35. The former subsidy of £10 was intended to provide only a basic installation. In this way it was the equivalent of the rural electrification subsidy which provides only for the connection of a premises as far as the meter, leaving wiring and fittings on the consumer's side of the meter to be provided by the consumer himself. The higher subsidy of £35 will pay for a more complete bottled gas installation. It should cover the basic equipment and three, or perhaps more, consumption points, depending on the circumstances, which may be used for lighting, heating, cooking or other appliances. This grant will be available to all rural householders whose special service charges for electricity, under the revised terms, would still be more than 100 per cent of the normal charges. Inquiries about the increased grant, which does not require amending legislation, should be addressed to my Department.

While the cost of rural electrification is high, the benefits to the rural population are considerable. It has spread the amenities of modern living all over the country. This is clearly illustrated by the fact that there are now 140,000 television sets, 240,000 electric irons, 160,000 electric kettles as well as many thousand washing machines, electric cookers, refrigerators and storage heaters in rural homes. On the other hand, electricity has provided the rural population with greater opportunities for relaxation to enjoy these benefits, with the aids which it has made available for easier farming and simultaneous increased farm productivity. In milking, for instance, the use of electric milking machines has increased from about 18,000 in 1963-64 to nearly 30,000 at present. There has also been an increase in the use of electric milk coolers. Piped water is, of course, essential for efficient farming operations and this is easily provided by electricity; about 60,000 electric water pumps have now been installed.

I think I need say no more about the benefits of rural electrification. As I have said, the purpose of the Bill is to authorise the ESB to incur the capital expenditure necessary to complete the current post-development scheme. The present proportion of rural households connected, 87 per cent, must be considered very good when one has regard to the fact that our farmhouses tend to be isolated and not sited in groups as in some countries. Over the next five years we expect to raise the proportion to about 92 per cent, with connection available to many other houses which could bring the total even closer to 100 per cent. At that stage we should be among the most advanced countries in the matter of rural electrification. In fact with the revised charges and the continuation of the subsidy, the Government is seeing to it that practically every unconnected householder in the country will now be able to enjoy the benefits of electricity on reasonable terms.

I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Lindsay

Of the value of rural electrification we must all be very keenly aware, and it is for this reason that we on this side of the House welcome any legislation that proposes to increase the scope of rural electrification and, consequently, increase the many amenities that flow therefrom. I personally am extremely glad that concessions are being made in the case of special service charges. For very many years now, I have been pleading the cause of the people so affected, and particularly so as I come from a part of the country, and represent a constituency, where there are many isolated villages and, indeed, isolated houses and where the special service charge has proved to be an extremely heavy burden. In fact, apart altogether from its being a burden, it has prevented many people from availing of the service by reason of their fear of not being able to meet the charges.

I can see the value of the Minister's argument that the postal service is not strictly analogous having regard to the lack of comparable capital outlay. At the same time, the telephone charges argument is not quite valid because people in isolated areas, where there is a sub-post office, have the advantage of making their telephone calls from the post office at the same charge as people in much more advantageouslyplaced positions. Nevertheless, I do not think any great advantage can be gained by arguing the pros and cons of matters of this kind. It is satisfactory that, once the money is made available, the special service charge is reduced and the burden, therefore, lightened.

I want particularly to stress the necessity for reducing these special service charges in isolated areas. I hope this step is but an earnest of further early reductions. Some of our best tourist amenities are available in these isolated areas. If the special service charges were not so high, people might go in more for the chalet service, under the aegis of another Department, and guesthouses, which Bord Fáilte assist, and, altogether, tourist development in general.

I am pleased to see the amount of subsidy for bottled gas increased from £10 to £35. I think, for the moment at any rate, bottled gas is really a concern of the islands, more or less. I think nobody on the mainland, however awkwardly placed, should be deprived of electricity as we know it by reason of the special service charge and the burden thus created.

We, in the rural parts of Ireland, shudder a bit at the Minister's assertion that, in most houses in isolated parts of the country, there are old people. This is true of a great many of them. I shudder because, to me, this amounts to an acceptance of the trend which is becoming a permanent feature of our countryside that, where the old people are, the young people will never return and we can look forward to seeing on our promontories, our hillsides and in our valleys the ruins of houses where once young people lived and grew up and left and the houses are now falling into disuse. It is a poor outlook for rural Ireland but it is the pattern that is taking shape. I am sure the Minister deplores it just as we all deplore it. I am sure he does not welcome it. Nevertheless, any argument in favour of any piece of legislation that presupposes the acceptance of such a state of affairs as a permanent part of our future is certainly something about which we must feel far from happy.

The Minister talked about the convenience of rural electrification from the point of view of farming. That is so. He talked in terms of milking machines, milk coolers, and so on. On the smaller holdings, where cows are still milked by hand and where they are fed in the byres, rural electrification has tremendous advantages, particularly to the housewives who generally do these things by hand. People do not now have to go out at night with the storm lantern and the problem of candles flickering and blowing out does not now arise. Instead, by the simple manipulation of a switch, they have the comfort and security which rural electrification brings to them. All in all, I think the progress of the Electricity Supply Board, since its modest beginnings, has justified the faith of its promoters— whether it be the provision of power to houses, power to factories, and so on. Whether it be the giving of light and power to the most remote areas in the land, it is a tribute to the faith of the promoters in this concept from the beginning.

For these reasons, I welcome the Bill and look forward to the time, in the not so distant future, when there will not be any special service charge and, thereby, no burden and the little irritations that cause all of us to receive complaints from time to time about these kinds of things. This is a good measure. It should be accepted by the House. It will give considerable comfort and great amenities to our people.

Mr. Corish

I do not think the Minister will have any trouble with this measure. His comments and those of Deputy Lindsay are very appropriate to the future of the proposal contained in this amending Bill. If nothing else, it will reduce the number of questions on the Order Paper with regard to the special service charge. If we had that sort of debate, I am aware the Minister could accuse the inter-Party Government of introducing these fixed charges: we could have counter argument and accusation across the floor of the House. The main thing is that something is being done.

I join Deputy Lindsay in expressing the hope that it will be possible for the ESB, through the Minister for Transport and Power, in time, to abolish in its entirely the special service charge. I read his brief, according as the Minister read it, and was fearful that, with all the arguments he was putting up as to why this charge should not be abolished, it would be increased or at least left alone. It was a pleasant surprise, after all his arguments over a good number of years, to note that he came down on the side of having it reduced. I do not know what the real effect will be on individuals but, from the example the Minister has given, it seems to me it will be pretty substantial indeed and certainly will be welcomed by those people in the rural areas who complain bitterly about these special service charges—particularly those to whom the Minister referred, the people who would not at all accept electricity because the all-in cost would be too big for them.

I do not think the Minister's analogy of the telephone service and the eleclarl tricity supply service is valid. Electricity is a necessity. Power is a necessity. I know that we can get turf and coal and that we can use candles, and so on, but, in 1968, it is absolutely essential that, as far as possible, all our people, no matter what their occupation or where they live, should have the modern advantage of electricity. Not everybody wants a telephone. I suppose that 95 to 99 per cent of the people who want a telephone want it because of the nature of their business but practically everyone in the country, particularly in the isolated areas, has a local post office where telephone calls can be made.

There are a few matters on which I should like the Minister's views. I think it can be said that, when the Minister for Transport and Power is asked to give a view he gives a very objective view—particularly in a cosy debate such as this where we all agree on the measure that has been introduced. I have always been concerned about the grave possibility of the effects of defective wiring in houses, particularly. I have no great criticism to make in that respect but there are a number of amateurs going around the country who are providing the wiring of houses, cottages, residences and places of business. There should be some strict supervision by the Electricity Supply Board, as the agent of the Minister for Transport and Power, or, indeed, by the Department of Transport and Power itself.

One shudders to think what might happen if this defective wiring, which must exist in many thousands of houses throughout the country, were the cause of an accident through fire, with consequent loss of property and more seriously still, loss of life. This is particularly so in the case of older houses and establishments. Electricians in the local areas would confess that they would not have an idea where to start in regard to the electrical wiring of these houses. It must be defective. People are reluctant to have an examination because it would cost quite a lot not only for the examination but for the renewal of the wiring and fittings.

I have raised this on other occasions but I do not think it can have had many results from this or any other Minister. Let me again stress that there are laymen who are wiring houses and who are not doing a proper job. There are houses which were wired years ago and the wiring in which could lead to loss of life and loss of property. Either the Minister for Transport and Power or the ESB—it is difficult to know which would have the responsibility— should advertise this danger of accidents through fusing, on television and on the radio. Those of us who have the benefit of receiving three stations on television see such warning on the BBC and on Independent Television. People are warned about taking certain precautions particularly before retiring at night in order to ensure that these accidents will not happen, particularly when they cannot be quickly and readily recognised. It is most important that there should be a warning and supervision. There are people who do not know whether the wiring in their homes is safe. As far as I know, although I would not be too positive about this, the ESB say that they have no responsibility in this matter. Who has responsibility? If it is the owner, let us make that very clear, that the ESB are not responsible for wires fusing or for any other defects that may cause an accident.

I also wanted to mention the question of support for the board's exhortation to people to use more electricity. In the factories and on the farms this is being done and one can relate the amount of electricity used to the charges made. Whether it is used or not, there is always the fixed charge or the bi-monthly charge. Unfortunately, there are people who are paying a big price for electricity merely because they have lights or use it for televisionor the radio which consume virtually no electricity. To get the maximum value from the installation of electricity one should go to great pains to employ all the machines and gadgets one can, within reason. I have often seen ESB Bills for about 16s 6d or 22s for two months and then discover that between the fixed charge or the special service charge the people are paying £2, £3 or £4. These people would be better off using paraffin oil or candles. On the other hand, they buy coal or other types of fuel, or use other methods to generate power. Anybody who has electricity in his house, office or on the farm should use it to the greatest possible extent to get the greatest possible advantage from it.

Finally, I want to pay tribute to those employed in the board and although I am not very conversant with the work being done by those in the offices of the ESB I feel I should pay tribute to those who in emergencies have to work late into the night or maybe into the next day to ensure that the electricity supply will be preserved. It should be said of the ESB that when there are breakdowns through storms, freak storms or otherwise, that the speed with which they can get on the job and have supplies resumed is amazing. Therefore, we should express the thanks of this House to those engaged in the field and those who make it possible for us to have a continuous supply of electricity. I congratulate the Minister in the step he is taking but might we hope that he will return in the near future and abolish the special service charge entirely?

Mr. Childers

I should like to thank the House for the very kind reception they have given to this Bill. The question of abolishing altogether the special service charge has been raised. I have discovered that the special service charge exists in most countries and if one were to look at the future very optimistically and express the hope that we might have a very considerable development in industry, the impact of that would make it possible for us to make a further adjustment but it would be wrong for me to offer any specific hope of a reduction or any change in the present arrangements within the next two or three years. Deputy Lindsay spoke about our attitude towards the stabilisation of the population in the West and that we should not carry out policies on the basis that people eventually are likely to leave a vacant house when they leave it. This is a feature of life in every country in the remote rural areas of Europe and there is nothing uncommon about it. The extension of rural electrification as proposed in the Bill will add one more measure to the many measures the Government have been taking to effect what might be described as the maximum stabilisation of the population in the West consistent with realities. Other policies include the establishment of growth centres for industry and tourism and other things which do not affect us in this Bill. We are doing all we can with the £35 bottled gas subsidy and the reduction in the special service charge and we are taking very definite steps towards bringing electricity to people in the remoter areas or bringing them energy in one form or another, either gas or electricity.

Deputy Corish raised the question of the possibility of defective wiring in many rural areas. In fact, the owner is responsible for the wiring in his house. The ESB undertake to inspect the wiring up to the meter which they install in the house and they will inspect the internal wiring on request. I am glad to say that the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards are considering the question of providing standards for the quality of wiring used under various circumstances. I will take up Deputy Corish's proposal that we might have some public relations on RTE in connection with the danger of defective wiring. I note that it has been done on the BBC and I will ask the Department to see what can be done about this.

Deputy Corish also spoke of the value of people making the maximum use of electricity. He will be aware that there is a publicity campaign on RTE, and also local publicity campaigns, conducted by the ESB and when selling various appliances they go around and put equipment on an experimental basis in various houses in the country in order that the greatest possible use can be made of electricity in the way Deputy Corish suggests.

I agree with everything Deputy Corish said about the splendid emergency service and the breakdown service of the Electricity Supply Board. It has a very fine reputation in that regard and can compare favourably with any other electricity services in Europe. I thank the House for their reception of the Bill.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.