asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he will now publish the terms of the assurances received by him from the Electricity Supply Board that the board would consider sympathetically without threats of cutting off electricity supplies requests from consumers for leave to pay by instalments accounts for electricity which arose during the industrial dispute affecting the board's accounts department; and, if not, why.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Payment of Electricity Accounts.
30.
The terms of the assurance which I received from the ESB were given in reply to a question by Deputy FitzGerald on 30th April. For the information of the Deputy I repeat the relevant part of my reply.
The electricity accounts which the board are at present issuing to consumers cover electricity supplied only up to January, 1970. I understand from the ESB that among these accounts there is a very limited number which include arrears which were payable before the dispute began and which have not yet been paid despite numerous reminders. It is these cases which incur the risk of being cut off if payment is delayed. I understand from the board, however, that even in these cases the board are prepared to consider pleas of serious individual hardship and I would suggest to the Deputy that if he is aware of such cases he should advise the consumers concerned to go to their local ESB office and explain the circumstances; and I am assured that any genuine case will receive every sympathetic hearing.
Would the Minister have regard to the question, which asked him to state the terms of the assurances given to him, not his understanding or his declared understanding of assurances given? Would the Minister state now the form in which the assurances were given to him, whether they were in writing or orally, by whom they were given and the date upon which they were given; and if they were given in writing, if the Minister will now put a copy of the assurances before the House?
I shall do that certainly. However, I want to assure the Deputy, as I think he misunderstood my reply, that at no stage did the ESB assure us nor did I assure the House that there would be any such arrangement in regard to accounts that arose prior to the industrial dispute. It is only to accounts post-January, 1970, when the industrial dispute began to have an effect on the issuing of accounts, that this arrangement applies.
That is what my question says: "which arose during the industrial dispute".
The only accounts which have been sent by the ESB to consumers and in regard to which this facility was not granted were those which arose prior to the dispute. However, if the Deputy will furnish either the ESB or myself with particulars of any individual cases we shall investigate them. One or two have been furnished, but when they were investigated it was found the accounts arose before the industrial dispute.
Would the Minister answer the simple question: were the assurances he received from the ESB in relation to accounts arising during the dispute in writing?
I received a verbal assurance. I contacted the ESB myself.
Was it on the phone or in person?
I can get any assurance the Deputy wishes in writing and furnish it to both Deputy Ryan and Deputy FitzGerald.
Did the Minister ask for this assurance from the ESB?
Yes. I raised the matter with the ESB and they assured me that in regard to all accounts which fell due during the period of the industrial dispute and which amounted to sums which would not ordinarily arise, there will be a stalled repayment arrangement entered into with the consumers concerned, but this does not apply, naturally enough, to accounts which arose prior to the dispute.
That is not happening.
I should like particulars of cases, and I shall furnish Deputies here with copies of what I have stated in this regard.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce replied on behalf of the Minister last week and stated the Minister had no discussions nor had he given any instructions in this matter.
I have quoted here from the reply I gave Deputy FitzGerald, which is quite plain.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce stated last week that the Minister had no discussions nor had he given any instructions.
I am referring to the reply I gave to Deputy FitzGerald.
Is the Minister aware that if there are very small arrears arising since before the strike, even if that account is settled, if the remainder which arose during the strike is not settled, the electricity is cut off?
So far no electricity has been cut off. Any case that has been put forward to the ESB has been met fully, and instalment arrangements are in train in regard to accounts which arose during the industrial dispute. It would be unreasonable to extend this back to a period before the industrial dispute.
Is the Minister aware that when someone comes to cut off the electricity and the person in the house tenders an amount of money which covers the arrears arising before the strike, they are still told the electricity will be cut off within a matter of days unless they pay the full amount immediately, including the amount which arose during the strike?
Deputy FitzGerald submitted particulars of two cases to my Department and when both of these cases were investigated they were found to be unpaid bills that arose before the industrial dispute. I think the Deputy was informed of this position.
Is the Minister aware that in one case the person concerned had tendered all but £4 10s 0d of a bill of £78, and, nevertheless, was threatened with being cut off for not paying the remainder?
Will the Deputy furnish these cases to me and I shall deal with them in a sensible manner?
When someone is faced with the threat of electricity being cut off, is there no way it could be dealt with other than getting a TD to get on to a Minister to settle the matter? Should there not be some normal procedure for dealing with these cases?
My information is that the ESB has been very helpful in all this matter. However, they certainly will not allow the instalment procedure to apply to bills that bear no relation to the industrial dispute. If there are hardship or necessitous cases I shall be glad to hear about them. Let Deputies give me the particulars and we shall settle them.
That is not a suitable procedure.