asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he is prepared to increase the annual subsidy to the ESB with a view to lessening the amount being demanded from rural consumers in respect of special charges.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Rural Electrification.
42.
The Government have always been concerned to ensure that within practical limits electricity is available at reasonable charges to all those desiring to take it. A comprehensive review of rural electricity charges was carried out in 1968 as a result of which the Government arranged for a reduction in the higher special service charges, in some cases by as much as one half to two thirds. The reductions then arranged applied to existing as well as future consumers.
The question of rural electrification was again examined last year following which the Government approved a programme of expenditure of £18 million on rural electrification during the four years ending 31st March, 1975, towards which the State is making available a subsidy of £10 million. This is the maximum that can be made available in present circumstances and compares with a subsidy of £17 million paid towards expenditure of £49 million on rural electrification in the 25 years to 31st March, 1971.
I dealt very fully with the question of rural electrification in my Second Reading Speech on the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Bill, 1971 which gave statutory authority for the Government's proposals. I might add that the reduced terms arranged in 1968 are being continued in the new programme.
Would the Minister consider it fair to ask rural dwellers for up to almost £1,000 capital if they require the installation of electricity and also to inform them that special charges—in some cases I know of exceeding £1 a week—will be imposed as well as the capital contribution? Surely in 1972, 48 years after the setting up of the ESB, it is completely out of place to ask rural people, mainly living in isolated areas and mainly people in the lower income group, for this kind of capital contribution and special charge? I think it is completely unconstitutional. Why not scrap it and give these people justice?
In a matter of this kind one cannot have it both ways. The fact is that in 1970-71 the ESB lost £3¼ million on rural electrification. The reality is that the consumer has to carry the cost in any case.
What chance is there for, say, a widow in a rural area looking for supply and being asked to make a deposit of the dimensions described by Deputy Murphy? There is no chance in the world of her getting supply.
I agree that in isolated areas it is a very serious financial problem as far as the ESB are concerned. That is the reality of it and let us not run away from it.
A widow is being asked, and this would be a modest amount, for £37 to be paid down before she gets electricity supply. How can she get it?
I should like to deal with particular cases.
Can the Minister say when the ESB departed from the post-development scheme by looking for a capital charge as well as the special service charge? The Minister knows the ESB are now looking for £1,000 capital charge from widows in Kilgarvan, County Kerry. Where will they get it? There is a post-development scheme going on there.
There are particular cases where this has always obtained because of the remoteness of the particular consumer who wants to be linked. This is a reality and a fact and I do not have to elaborate on that. It is common sense. The fact is that the ESB are losing £3¼ million a year on rural electrification and the consumer throughout the nation as a whole has to pay for that.
Question No. 43.
Is the Minister aware that a widow living on the Dublin-Belfast road between Balbriggan and Drogheda has been asked for £580 of a capital sum.
I would have to consider the particulars of that.
I have already given the particulars to the Minister's Department and they said they were very sorry but they could not do anything about it.
Question No. 43.
Will you allow one more supplementary question?
The last one was a very long one.
Will the Minister not accept that when the Board was established in 1924 it was with the intention of providing service on an equitable basis for all people in the country? Naturally those in isolated areas had to wait at the end of the queue. Is it fair, after waiting for 48 years, that these kind of charges should be imposed? Surely the Minister will agree that it is time to have a review? Irrespective of the losses which the Minister claims have been sustained by the ESB those people who are still without service should get justice, fair play and their constitutional rights and should get what the ESB proposed to give them when it was established so many years ago.
To get the record right the ESB was established in 1945 by a Fianna Fáil Government.
It was a white elephant then.
I understand that it is agreed that no questions shall appear on tomorrow's Order Paper. The remaining questions from today will be carried over to next Tuesday.