Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Nov 1976

Vol. 293 No. 10

Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Bill, 1976: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. Toal

I welcome this legislation. To my mind the rural electrification scheme was the best thing that ever happened in this country. Part of the credit for this goes to the legislators for the legislation passed in 1945. Now almost 30 years later the rural electricification programme is almost complete. Credit must also go to the ESB for implementing the scheme. It is fashionable these days to complain about semi-State companies but if the ESB were to fold up overnight the rural electrification will stand as a monument to them in the history of the State. Most of the credit must go to the people of Ireland who had the good sense to avail of this programme. Organisations such as Muintir na Tíre, Macra na Tuatha and community leaders from parishes and so on, had to put all their powers of persuasion behind this scheme to entice the people to avail of it, and this was no mean task. In rural Ireland especially there are very deepseated traditions, the attitude of "if it was good enough for my father it is good enough for me". This programme did more to change the life and carry rural Ireland into the 20th century than any other Government programme in the history of the State.

This legislation is designed to cover a few areas in Mayo and in Kerry where the programme has not been completed. Deputies from all parts of the country will welcome that. The cost to be voted by moneys from the Oireachtas is in the region of £700,000 and this is a small sum when one considers the benefit that will accrue to these people and the service that it will bring to these remote areas. In any man's terms electricity today is good value for money and it is good to see that a farmhouse in the country can be as comfortable and modern as anything in the city. Years ago when emigrants returned to visit their families, they were embarrassed and appalled at the conditions under which their folks were living. That has all been set aside now thanks to the rural electrification programme.

This legislation does very little for newly married couples who have the courage to start building their houses. The capital costs of having an electricity supply laid on to a new bungalow or other new dwelling in a remote area is prohibitive. It is unfair to ask any young people in a rural community to shoulder such a cost and I would ask the Minister to devote his energies to allaying the plight of these young people. The policy of this Government and of past Governments has been to restore as much community life in remote rural parts as possible and the best way this can be done is to assist these people in setting up homesteads in the country by making it as inexpensive as possible.

No amount of publicity should be spared in order to bring the attention of would-be householders to the importance of laying on a supply of electricity, and the importance of their consultation with the ESB before they decide on the site of their new house. Unfortunately young people and newly married people have not much choice when it comes to selecting a site. They plunge in, get planning permission and a loan from a county council or some other authority and in the middle of it they are saddled with the huge cost of getting electricity. The Minister should address his attention to this problem in the rural parts of the country. I welcome the Bill and, as I said, the rural electrification programme was the best thing that could have happened to this country and I commend the Minister for his work.

Mr. J. O'Leary

I welcome this Bill in principle. It serves a very useful purpose. It will enable householders and families to get electricity now and in the immediate future, which they would not otherwise have been able to get by reason of their economic position. I would have thought that there were more than 800 to 900 people or householders who would qualify under this Bill. I would think that the figure throughout the country as a whole, would be nearer to 2,000, and I am also under the impression that the amount of money required would be nearer to £1 million or £1.2 million than £300,000. I am very doubtful whether £300,000 provided under this Bill will cover all the applications which will be received by the ESB. The special service charges at the moment are much too high for the ordinary person in rural areas, particularly for the ordinary smallholder and the tenant or occupant of single rural council houses.

Capital contributions are now so high that I know of numerous cases where persons who had intended to build houses themselves did not do so because they could not afford to pay the capital contributions required by the ESB. This meant that these people went on to the local authority housing list instead. Up to now, there had been no subsidy whatsoever toward the erection of new houses. I am glad the Minister has recognised the seriousness of this and intends to make some concession.

In his opening statement he said it is intended to arrange with the ESB to introduce a scheme of deferred payments for costs of connection to the electricity supply in cases where subsidised terms are not available. I would ask the Minister to tell us when details of this scheme will be announced and whether this scheme will have retrospective effect. I would ask the Minister to be specific and to give as much information as possible. I hope the scheme will be operated immediately. Undoubtedly, there are numerous areas like the Black Valley and Ballycroy where it is impossible for people to meet the capital contributions and to pay the fixed charges. For this reason, this Bill is welcome. We on this side of the House have been pressing for a measure like this for some time.

There is no doubt that electricity is vital today in every home. It is now a basic amenity of ordinary life and, if we want our young people to settle down and live in rural Ireland, and if we want to maintain and increase the population in remote rural areas, it is vitally necessary that they have electricity. After all, it is virtually impossible to have a television service in a home where there is no electricity.

I am very dubious about the £300,000 provided in this Bill. As I said at the outset, I believe this money will not go anywhere towards meeting the need. It will cost approximately between three and four times this sum. I am sure that when all the applications are received by the ESB and the scheme is costed the sum required will be in the region of £1 million. Could the Minister not set a higher maximum figure in this Bill and let the ESB work within that figure? It would not be necessary for them to take up the whole sum.

Another cause of grave concern in many rural areas is low voltage. This matter requires urgent attention by the ESB and by the Department of Transport and Power. Nowadays each farm is practically a little industry and the modern farmer, the transitional farmer, the development farmer, or any farmer who intends to improve his holding, has many items of equipment which require electricity. In many of these areas it is virtually impossible for these farmers to operate because the voltage is so low. I know some districts where at evening milking time during the summer the voltage is so low that it is impossible to get good TV reception or for housewives to use electrical appliances in the kitchen. The same situation arises where small rural industries have been set up during the past ten years.

The ESB will require a large sum of money during the next few years and they should get this money soon in order to improve the working conditions of the agricultural community. The high capital contribution required by the ESB for single rural houses has had an adverse effect on the building trade. In many cases it has made it impossible for tenants of local authority houses to have electricity because they could not afford to pay the capital contribution. Neither could they afford to pay the fixed charges, in addition to furnishing the council house. For that reason the Minister should give us the details and get his scheme moving quickly for the deferred payment system in respect of new houses.

The Minister in his opening statement said that householders who refused supply under the final phase of the 1971-1975 scheme, because of the requirement to pay capital contributions, will be given a further and final opportunity to obtain supply on subsidised terms, but this time without having to pay a capital contribution. I should like the Minister to tell us if this applies throughout the whole country and if it applies to people who refused, even a few months ago, to pay a capital contribution.

I do not like the idea that the ESB will be given the power to increase the annual or standing charge of £36.40. There is no guarantee that this standing charge of £36.40 payable in six two-monthly instalments by these householders will not be increased to up to £100 per annum. Some system should be devised whereby these charges could not be increased without reference to the Minister for Industry and Commerce or some other authority. The Minister went on to say:

The appropriate capital contributions which these householders would otherwise have had to pay to the ESB under subsidised terms will be paid on their behalf to the board out of the Vote for my Department.

Does this cover the whole country, and does it cover each householder who applied before and who was refused under a subsidised scheme?

A time limit should be imposed on the ESB for the operation of this Bill. There is no fixed period for it, as far as I can see; in other words, it could drag on for anything from one year to five years or even longer. Financial provision should be made so that the ESB could complete the scheme within a period of 12 months or so from the date of the commencement of the Act. There is no reason why the whole country could not be covered by 31st December, 1977, and this should be built into the Bill. We may have an amendment to that effect on Committee Stage. I do not like a Bill of this sort without a time limit for its operation. This is vital in the interests of the householders and of the districts concerned.

I agree entirely with the Minister that there should be prior notice to the ESB by persons, including farmers, who intend to build homes or, indeed, any structures which will require the use of electricity. This is only fair to the ESB and also to the people themselves so that they will know well in advance what the cost will be. It would also give the ESB an opportunity to make adequate provisions for power in that area.

I hope the terms of this Bill will be implemented as soon as possible and that the Minister's announcement about the scheme of deferred payments in respect of new houses will also be introduced without delay. A start should be made by 1st December and the whole scheme completed by 31st December, 1977. There is a great sense of urgency about the implementation of this Bill in an improved form. As I said before, it took many Dáil questions and promptings from the Opposition to get this far. I sincerely hope there will be no more need for pressure from this side of the House to get the scheme moving.

Mr. White

I would also like to compliment the Minister on the Electricity (Supply) (Amendment) Bill, 1976. It amazes me to hear Deputy O'Leary talking about promptings from the Opposition when I remember that the Opposition had the power for 16 years to do this and it is only since the Minister for Transport and Power came into office that it has been decided something drastic should be done. What the Minister says is probably quite true, that 98 per cent of all rural houses have so far been connected with the ESB, but what he has failed to state is that at least 10 per cent of western seaboard houses have not been connected. It is not new for us to hear about connection charges of £1,500, £1,800 and even £2,000. All the western seaboard Deputies will welcome this measure whereby at long last they will get an electricity connection at the right price.

Admittedly, this Bill still has not gone far enough. People in western areas should get electricity at the same price as it is available in the towns and in the cities. It is a form of discrimination that because you live in the country you have to pay a substantial connection charge. Perhaps one of the things the Minister could do in co-operation with the Minister for Local Government is that, when people in country areas apply for planning permission, it should be stated on the planning applications returned to people that they should take into consideration the ESB charges. Too many people are ignorant of the fact that they may have to pay very high charges, especially in respect of new houses. It should be a very simple matter for the planning officers in the area concerned to deal with this matter.

Sometimes people living in an old house decide to build a new house 100 yards away from the original house. It is unfair that these people should be asked to pay for an ESB connection even though they are changing to a new house in close proximity to where they were living. Such work should be done free. The Minister also stated that people who refused connection under the rural electrification scheme will now be given electricity at the subsidised rate. Does that include people in those areas who did not apply at the time; perhaps a neighbour of theirs applied and was refused?

It should be the policy of the ESB, as far as possible, to ask the farming community to bring underground cables to their new houses. If the farmers dug the trenches and got the ESB to connect the wires, it would work out much cheaper for them. At the moment the ESB seem to be insisting on too many poles, which are unsightly.

The cost of installing transformers should not be a charge on new houses. Recently it has become common for transformer charges to be included in the costings for new connections. I welcome the Minister's suggestion that there will be deferred payments for connections to new houses. It is high time this was done.

Mr. Hussey

I welcome this Bill in that it goes some way towards helping householders who, through no fault of theirs, live in areas where up to now it has not been possible to extend electricity supplies. In his speech the Minister mentioned two areas in particular —Ballycroy in County Mayo and Black Valley in County Kerry. I understand that areas in County Galway, particularly an area near Woodford, were to be included in this Bill. I hope these areas will not be excluded from the scheme.

The sum of money that has been allocated for the scheme is not adequate. The ESB will probably find they have insufficient funds to complete the service. I am sure all Deputies would be willing to vote for a larger allocation for this most important scheme. People in backward rural areas are very often deprived of essential services such as the rural electrification scheme, the group water schemes, the school transport service and the telephone service. There are no backward rural areas now because people can communicate without difficulty. The lack of electricity hinders the development of farms and businesses. Nowadays electricity is an essential part of life. It has been proved conclusively that farms will use more electricity in future. In recent years we have seen the advent of large farming enterprises such as milk parlours, pig fattening units, poultry houses and glasshouses. Because of the nature of the soil, farmers in rural areas have a greater need for such enterprises and for that reason it is essential that they have electricity.

Every Deputy is aware of the large number of representations made in regard to electricity supply by people building their own houses. The charge in some cases has been prohibitive. Recently I received a letter from one of my constituents who was asked to pay £1,000 to have supply extended to his house. That anybody should be asked to pay such a large sum of money for electricity in this day and age is ridiculous. Nowadays young people do not want to be without electricity. They cannot be blamed for this because there is a great dependence on electricity in a modern home. Will this Bill cater for young people who are now building their homes and who may be faced in a year's time with a large bill for the installation of electricity? Having built a house it is a shock to discover that the electricity will not be connected unless a large sum of money is paid to the ESB.

The problem of low voltage in certain areas has been mentioned. I know it is a problem in my constituency. A number of farmers have complained that they have not sufficient current for their milking machines. The planners of the rural electrification scheme in 1946 could never have envisaged such a great demand for electricity. At that time most people were satisfied to have electric lighting. The normal contract for wiring a house at that time was for lighting and a few sockets. The ESB should ensure that three-phase supply is made available in all small towns. It would be an incentive to industrialists and to locals to establish businesses. There is a great need for the establishment of industries in our smaller towns. If this were done it would reduce the number of young people on our unemployment list. Concessions should be given to employers who use a large amount of electricity. The electricity bills of such people are considerable. We know they have risen steeply in the past few years. Possibly the ESB or the Government could find some way of allowing them some concession on their bills if they are creating employment.

Deputy White mentioned the possibility of placing wires underground. This is a very good idea and something the ESB should follow up, particularly in many towns they are wiring at present. Those of us who travel through Tyrrellspass on our way here have seen the job done in that town. It is a credit to the people involved that they have placed both telephone and ESB wires underground. I am sure there are many other areas that could do likewise. All those wires hanging around can be unsightly as well as being dangerous in stormy weather. One cannot exbilit pect the ESB to be continuously checking on these wires, particularly in winter.

The deferred payments system is very welcome and the sooner it is introduced the better. At least it will afford people who are unfortunate enough to have to pay this capital charge an opportunity of doing so by instalments. It is indeed a welcome move and will be appreciated by the people concerned.

I welcome the Bill. It is time that the people living in rural areas for whom this Bill is designed were given some chance of enjoying the services the rest of the community have enjoyed for a long number of years.

Mr. Staunton

I am pleased to have an opportunity of making a few remarks on this Bill. I am particularly interested because, as the Minister said in his speech, one of the two areas which he picks out as being the most disadvantaged in the country at present in so far as the provision of electricity is concerned is the village of Ballycroy which is in my immediate county council area and in the Dáil constituency of West Mayo, which I represent. There has been a very serious problem in that village for many reasons.

In general terms I agree with those speakers who have referred to the good work of the ESB over a number of years in developing rural electrification. As the Minister has stated, over the past 30 years nearly 500,000 houses have been connected at a total cost of £80 million, £27 million of which represented State subsidy. In a small country of limited resources that is a very considerable achievement. Looking at other countries in Western Europe, at a much greater stage of development than ours, the comparison is very favourable in that apparently connected to the rural electrification grid are somewhere between 98 per cent and 99 per cent of householders here.

I want to compliment the Minister —and I am not saying this in any political sense—on the introduction of this legislation because of the singular personal interest he has taken in this issue. We went to him some two or three years ago, especially in regard to the plight in Ballycroy where some people of very limited means were quoted as much as £900 capital charge on top of special service charges and fixed charges. Of course, relative to their means, it was a hopeless position; it was an imposition many of them simply could not afford. I am pleased to say that the Minister was very receptive. He met these people in Ballycroy. He saw conditions for himself. Subsequently in Dublin, senior officials of his Department met representatives of the Ballycroy community. Subsequent to that again the Minister, in his office, met these people in a formal delegation from the area and promised something would be done about it. I am glad we are now seeing the result of these discussions and representations.

The remarks of Deputy J. O'Leary suggesting that it required many Dáil questions and that he hoped there would not be need for any more pressure from the Opposition benches were quite wide of the mark. From the very beginning Peter Barry was completely receptive to this——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister.

Mr. Staunton

And did a very good job. I beg your pardon; it is due to my limited tenure in this House. Forgive me.

Mr. P. Barry

I sometimes have to look around to see whom Deputies are talking about.

Mr. Hussey

The Minister does not mind. He could be called worse things than that.

Mr. P. Barry

He could indeed.

Mr. Staunton: I have found certain misconceptions in relation to this Bill. I had copies sent to some people interested in it. In particular they referred to the note regarding the £700 which is contained in section 2, subsection (1) (b) which says:

(b) in respect of which the capital cost of such connection at the date of such quotation exceeded £700, and

Apparently there has been some confusion there. Some people have misread the Bill and have been led to believe that the meaning of this subsection is that capital charges up to a level of £700 must be borne by householders; that, for example, in the instance of the quotation in the village of Ballycroy to which I referred if say, householders had received a capital charge demand from the ESB amounting to £600 they felt they were eligible for that concession and that it was only the sum above £700 which was being nullified by the introduction of this Bill. I realise, from discussions with the Minister, that that is not the intention of the Bill. We need to spell out, in the interests of the people involved, the fact which the Minister states in his speech: that no capital contribution whatever will be required from householders under this scheme. I think I had better repeat that no capital contribution whatever is required. It merely makes provision for a situation which had existed up to now where capital charges up to the level of £700 will be built into the annual charge. As the Minister states that amounts to an annual charge of £36.40 which, broken down, represents about 70p a week or 10p a day. To reiterate the position: it is inclusive of the usual fixed charge and the special service charge and there is no requirement of a capital contribution. This scheme will be of immense value to the parties involved.

In the Minister's speech he continues to speak about the fact that it is a onceand-for-all scheme. I want to re-echo that because some years ago we were involved in the rural electrification of a number of villages outside Westport in County Mayo. Unfortunately, in some of those villages, when they received quotations from the ESB, due to what they thought were high charges at that time, they declined the offer and did not go ahead with the electrification of certain villages. Naturally the social demands for electricity were great and, three or four years later, they reconsidered the matter, when charges had gone up by perhaps 50 per cent. Of course the vicious circle was operating. Again, at that second stage, they decided they could not afford it, so they did not take it. In some of those villages they got quotations on a third occasion—eight or ten years after the first—when charges were about three times greater than they had been a decade before that. We saw the real need of getting electricity into these villages and enlightened people saw the necessity for it. We had a series of meetings and persuaded people, despite the cost, to have it connected. Of course, they have never looked back because it is a vital amenity and villages will die unless they have an amenity as basic as electricity.

The same thing applies here. I want to sound a warning note lest there be any danger of apathy in areas such as the Black Valley in Kerry, Ballycroy in Mayo or other parts of Galway and the western seaboard. This could be a once-and-for-all scheme and it might not be that simple to come back in five years or a decade hence with further subsidisations by the Government of the day. We should tell the people affected in those areas that it is vital in their interest to take up the offer in this Bill with total acceptance of it as far as possible. I will play my part in my part of the country to persuade those involved that they should enthusiastically respond to this scheme and attempt to get total acceptance of it. It is a very good deal and it may not happen again with rising costs and constraints on future budgets.

I welcome the guidelines given to the ESB by the Minister as far as the capital cost for the provision of electricity to new bungalows is concerned. The building of new houses, with high costs, is a very great hardship on young married people in particular. In addition to building the houses they have to provide outhouses, pathways and decoration. The receipt of a bill from the ESB amounting to anything from £300 to £700 can be very crippling to young married people at a very difficult stage in their lives. It is economic good sense to introduce this system of deferred payment. It is a question of working out a reasonable return for whatever the investment is and arranging that the householders will pay the same sum on a deferred basis. It will not put them under pressure to go into the banks or lending institutions to borrow money. It will not put them under pressure to sell their land or use their savings. This is a very good scheme which is overdue and I welcome it.

The Minister, in his final remarks, referred to the building of new houses. In my experience after people have built new houses they get crippling bills from the ESB for installation. The ESB are in a monopoly situation and possibly, because of lack of competition, some people think their charges are too high. Presumably they have to look for a return on their own investment and they are beholden to the Minister. Their job is probably not as simple as we would like to think. At the same time it is common sense that people building houses should inquire from the ESB, especially if they are living in an area where it might seem there are difficulties, the cost of providing electricity before the bricks and mortar go up. This might affect the siting of a house on a few acres of land that somebody owns and it might affect the general attitude of people. Such people should get at least a rough quotation of the cost involved before the building starts.

I am very enthusiastic about the introduction of this Bill. All of us should persuade all the householders in the areas which have been referred to and other areas in the country to respond to it so that the level of electrification in the country goes up to 99.9 per cent.

Mr. Calleary

Like other speakers, I should like to welcome this Bill, belated and incomplete as it is. It will bring great relief to some people who have given up all hope of getting an ESB supply. There are, however, some questions I should like to ask. Will a person building a new house who has not been given a quotation under the terms of this Bill be covered by it or does the Bill only refer to those who got quotations in the period 1971 to 1975? I see the Minister nods. Do I take it that anyone who got a quotation before 1971 will not be eligible under this Bill?

Mr. P. Barry

They would have got a quotation.

Mr. Calleary

Some have not.

Mr. P. Barry

Everybody who has not will get one.

Mr. Calleary

Another question I have specifically applies to rural areas where the local authorities are rehousing people. Will those people be entitled to the new concessions? Will they get the benefit of the terms? How can we justify any person who is considered eligible for a local authority house being asked to pay contributions like some of those being asked now by the ESB, contributions of up to £500 and £600? Will the Minister ask his colleague, the Minister for Local Government, if they do not qualify under this Bill, whether the Department of Local Government would consider taking the full charges into account in the actual cost of the house? Unless we are prepared to continue to hold out hope that there will be a continuation of subsidisation, contrary to what the Minister said in his speech, then it will mean the end of many rural areas.

Deputy Barrett referred to the cost of the transfer of electricity supply from an old house to a new one. All of us have come across this. We also find in some areas that connections are not being made to new houses for many months. We find that where new houses are erected adjacent to old houses, built within 20 or 30 yards of them, the owners are being asked for contributions of between £300 and £400. How can this cost be justified? Are the ESB improving the service locally at the cost of some of those people?

The Minister in his speech laid particular emphasis on the necessity for contacting the ESB in regard to building sites. I agree with him and would like to say that I have always advised people to do this. However, when there are exorbitant charges, even where houses are near power lines, what is a person to do? Surely it is reasonable to presume that the ESB will give a reasonable quotation if a farmer gives a site to a son or daughter adjacent to his own house? I wrote to the Minister during the past week about the case of a son who is erecting a house on a site he got from his father quite near to the power lines on two sides. This man has been given a quotation of £652 for a connection.

Section 2 (1) (b) states:

In respect of which the capital cost of such connection at the date of such quotation exceeded £700.

Deputy Staunton said that there is a certain amount of apprehension about this. The applicants who have never been notified of the actual capital cost will only have been asked for a capital contribution. Does the Minister envisage the ESB contacting everybody who applied for terms? Such people may only have been asked for a capital contribution of £300 to £400 and from what the Minister explained in his speech the actual capital cost of such a connection could be greatly in excess of £700. Those people may not be aware that they will qualify under the terms of this Bill.

There appears to be contradictions in the Minister's speech. He stated:

To leave them unconnected to the rural network now would, to some extent at least, vitiate the whole purpose of the rural electrification scheme which was to bring the benefits of electricity to all parts of rural Ireland. This scheme was not limited, and was not intended to be limited, only to the parts of the country where connection was relatively inexpensive.

Further he went on to say:

This is a once-for-all scheme of limited application intended to deal with a special case of localised hardship....

Then further on:

... further expenditure other than that now proposed——

I take it he is specifically talking of the sum of £300,000 mentioned in section 2 (4). Later he said:

When the work has been finished subsidisation of electricity supply in rural areas will then finally come to an end and normal economic unsubsidised terms of supply will apply from then on.

If the Minister and the Government continue to hold to this view we here will have done a great disservice to rural areas. We, as legislators, have no right to tell people where they are going to live. We have no right to declare desert areas with just a few village oases around. It is our duty to give equality of opportunity to all. The sum of £300,000 mentioned is very little in present-day terms. In the Minister's speech and in the Bill itself there is a certain finality about this figure. Will the Minister explain in his summing-up if the sum of £300,000 is all that is going to be spent? Like other Deputies, I am convinced that this will not be enough. If the Minister could assure the House that money will be provided to cover everyone who had applied, then the Bill would be far more acceptable, to me at least.

In addition to the Ballycroy area there are other areas in Mayo. I have attended meetings in areas where people can look out of their doors and see Bellacorick power station a few miles away across the bog and where they have been asked for sums ranging from £450 to £1,850 two years ago for connection. Does it mean now that these areas will not get the new terms under the Bill? At the moment in one of these areas the county council are building three houses which will be wired for electricity, but the tenants have had to look for quotations for gas and for generators. Do I take it that these people would be offered the new terms? If not, when does the Minister expect to see the deferred payment scheme in operation? Like Deputy J. O'Leary and others, I urge the Minister to insist that the ESB would in the very near future publish and publicise the terms of this scheme.

Another anomaly at the moment is the case of the outskirts of village areas. It appears that the ESB have drawn an invisible line around these areas and that they have one scheme of charges for people just inside that line and another for people just outside. This may not be the time to raise this, but it causes considerable frustration among people when one neighbour is quoted one system of charges and another person 50 yards down the road is quoted another.

There are other matters which could be better dealt with on Committee Stage, but we are all worried that the figure of £30,000 is a final figure. We would ask the Minister to consider amending that in some way on Committee Stage. If the terms quoted in this Bill were applied to all I do not think there would be any way in which the £300,000 could be stretched. Mention has been made of young couples building houses. The rural electrification scheme as we know it should remain when the provisions of this Bill are fulfilled. If not it is essential that terms of the deferred payment scheme be published as quickly as possible.

Mr. Kenny

My first statement in this historic Chamber will be somewhat brief and to the point. I can speak with authority only on my own experience and knowledge of the local situation. It is fair to say that the seeds of this legislation really came to fruition in the mind of the Minister for Transport and Power on his visit to the Bellacorick area as a consequence of the bye-election last year. This area is portion of a much larger area which has repeatedly been ravaged by the twin scourges of emigration and unemployment, one being synonymous with the other. When there is suitable employment emigration figures tend to drop drastically. This is an area which still bears the scars of neglect by successive Governments down through the years.

The people there and in similar areas have characteristics of Irish quality, some of the finest characteristics that go to make up our Irish culture and as such have long been entitled to this basic necessity which the rest of the country take for granted. So it was on his personal visit to the area that the Minister saw for himself and experienced at first hand the everyday frustrations and complications that people there have to contend with. Political disinterest for so many years so disturbed the Minister on the occasion of his visit there that he made a public commitment to introduce the necessary legislation to extend the supply of electricity there as soon as possible. He deserves great credit for the manner in which he has done this because he has shown the Government's continuing commitment to the growth and development of these areas. He has also shown that public commitments by Ministers such as himself are not idle or false promises.

The basic point of the Bill is that it will provide service where no service existed before. It is a service at a price. It would be perfect in theory if supply could be extended to every area for nothing, but in practice the factual and financial positions are often quite different. The main complaint of local people in areas such as this was that they would have to pay a large capital contribution before the installation of power. This Bill proposes that any amount of money incurred in the installation cost over £700 will be borne by the State and that the £700 can be paid in instalments over a period of years. This will alleviate the fear of having to make a large capital contribution while, at the same time, providing a service together with its related outlets. This is an important point because agriculture and education have become increasingly important.

Our most valuable asset is probably the top ten inches of our topsoil. The areas that will benefit under this Bill are frequently very isolated and have poor agricultural quality soil. However, they can still be brought to a level of much greater potential than they have at present. It is true that education is becoming an essential for survival. In this jet age it is essential that everybody should receive every educational opportunity possible. Although I do not agree with everything that appears on television, it is important that young people have the opportunity to benefit from decent educational programmes. This is impossible without a suitable supply of electricity.

The introduction of payment on a deferred basis for new houses will be a tremendous help to young couples throughout the country and to many of our emigrants who are returning. I would ask the Minister to ensure that details of this scheme are published as soon as possible so that it will have the wholehearted support of thousands of people throughout the country. With the crippling cost of electrical installations people have found themselves in dire straits and unable to meet the charges.

There was mention of the lack of power in certain areas and the necessity for supplying three-phase electricity. I would draw the attention of the Minister to an area in County Mayo that has recently received Government support. I am referring to the Ballyglass area outside Belmullet where a major harbour is presently under construction. An essential prerequisite for future industrial development in the area is three-phase electricity and I would ask the Minister to look into the matter at his leisure.

It is sad that lines of electricity supply should determine where people build their houses. Of course we must take into account the financial cost of installation in a house that is not built in a suitable location. Although I agree entirely with the suggestion that prior consultations be carried out with the ESB—as Deputy White has said, that could be done at the planning stage—I think it is sad that a person should have to build a house not perhaps in an area he might wish but somewhere that is close to the electricity supply.

The question of underground cables is important. Electric poles, pylons and a mass of wires do not add to the beauty of the countryside. Although the cost would be astronomical if policy were to be changed to put all cables underground, a start could be made with the connections to new houses. The people concerned could dig the trenches themselves and put in the outside covering for the cables. Our country is small. The percentage of connections is very high and compares favourably with Britain and the United States.

I welcome the Bill. The Minister deserves credit for the principle and the terms of the Bill. The greatest benefit is that not alone will it ensure that areas not previously serviced will now get electricity but in addition many thousands of people will be able to move into their houses without the fear of having to pay an exorbitant and astronomical capital contribution.

Mr. Callanan

First, I should like to comment on the Minister's statement and wish to point out that Woodford, County Galway, is not mentioned. I presume it is included?

Mr. P. Barry

If I were to mention every individual place——

Mr. Callanan

I understood there were only three places: Kerry, Woodford and Mayo but there may be more, Deputy Kenny referred to County Mayo. I think Deputy Hogan O'Higgins, myself and a deputation from Woodford made some impression on the Minister also regarding the real need of the Woodford area.

I am worried about how far the provisions of the Bill extend. We are told that the capital charge is being abolished but that is not so. It is only funded and there is a charge of £36 per year. However, there was no mention of when this £36 will finish. In addition, many of the people in the Woodford area are over the £1,000 figure. I presume they will have to pay the capital charge over £700?

Mr. P. Barry

I would want to know how the figure of £1,000 is broken down. Is that the capital contribution asked?

Mr. Callanan

As far as I know a capital contribution of up to £1,000 was sought in some cases. I want to know if they will have to pay over the £700 figure in addition to the £36 per year mentioned in the Minister's statement.

Mr. P. Barry

I will explain it as best I can when I am winding up.

Mr. Callanan

I should like very much to get that information. I have a statement here that was given to a person in Loughatorick. Under the old scheme it would cost him £850 but the charge mentioned by the Minister is less than what the ESB quoted. This person was told it would be £1.50 per £100 every two months which worked out at £10.50 as a service charge on the £700. However, according to the Minister the cost would be about £6 service charge on the £700 every two months. The man would also be liable to a fixed charge of £3 as well as a domestic charge of £3. According to the ESB he would have to pay £16 every two months but according to the Minister the charge of £10.50 could be reduced to £6 leaving a charge of £12.50. This is based on the assumption that his capital charge is only 700. I Should like the Minister to tell us in his reply if he will be charged more if he is in excess of the £700.

I want to make clear that I welcome the Bill, especially the provision dealing with deferred payments. Every Deputy should do his best to get the people to avail of it. It will be a very heavy burden on some people living in the mountains if they have to repay, according to the ESB £16.50 but according to the Minister £12.50 every two months, provided his capital charge is only £700. This man's capital charge was £850. I assume he will have to pay the extra £150. I am puzzled about the man who has a capital charge of £1,000 and is allowed £700. Does he have to repay the remaining £300? These questions are not explained in the Bill and I would like the Minister to clarify them. No matter how we try, I do not believe we will be able to sell this to the people living in the mountains when the charges are so high.

I welcome the Bill and the deferred payments. Any money that can be given to subsidise the installation of electricity in new houses in rural Ireland is money well spent. Some people appear to be encouraging those living in rural areas to leave. A young man getting married will budget for the price of building his house, but he will not budget for £1,000 to instal electricity. As has already been mentioned by some Deputies the man who had electricity in his house but changed his residence is charged £200 a pole. These are the facts.

As I said, I welcome the deferred payments, but I think we should go further. I have been pressing for this for a very long time. Present day thinking seems to be to get people out of rural Ireland and into villages and towns. They are not being given an incentive to build houses where they want to live. I realise there are isolated houses the ESB cannot serve. It will cost excessive amounts to bring electricity to certain villages and the ESB should assist these people.

I understood that a special once-for-all grant would be given to these areas under this Bill, but that is not what we are giving. We are giving a funded loan. How long will it take to repay the loan? How far will this loan of £300,000 go? When electricity is installed in rural areas it should be possible to use it on a farm, for business purposes and so on. Electricity is of vital importance to rural Ireland. We must not quibble over a few million pounds if we are to keep our rural environment as it should be and as we want it.

A famous American statesman said: "Oh liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name." I say: "Oh efficiency, what crimes are committed in thy name." We should do all we can to keep our people in the rural areas. Instead, we are bringing them into the towns where there are no jobs for them. Every incentive should be given for people to build houses in rural areas. They should build where they want to, and not where the planners say they must.

As I said, a person building a house does not budget for an installation fee of £1,000. This Bill is providing for deferred payments. When will it come into operation? What will be the interest rates? How much interest will be charged on £1,000? How long will it take to repay? These are very. important points. We must tell the people what the system entails and how long it will take to repay. The same applies to the £36 on the funded grants being given to these areas. I would like the Minister to clarify these points.

This is a Committee Stage Bill and there are many points which will need to be debated. Local authorities build houses and instal electricity. Sometimes they do not pay the full rate if it is too high. Will local authorities be included in the deferred payments system? Sometimes one could build an extra house for what it costs to instal electricity in four or five local authority houses.

This is a very clever Bill. It looks lovely on paper but to my mind it is deceptive in the sense that we are getting nothing for nothing. Let nobody cod themselves about that. Now you have the deferred payments but the period over which these payments will be made is not stated. It may be for years or it may be forever. I welcome the principle of the Bill but I do not believe it goes far enough. I am not concerned with why the Minister's predecessors did not do this. I am concerned with keeping the people in rural Ireland where they themselves want to stay. They should be given every encouragement. I know there are isolated houses that could not possibly be connected.

Underground cables were mentioned. I believe these would be an excellent idea because the poles are unsightly. Indeed, underground cables might be cheaper because at the moment the fee per pole is around £200. The Bill is slightly deceptive in that it does not spell out how long people will be paying and it does not say if the State will make a great deal of money ultimately out of this. This may be an investment and not a grant. It should be by way of grant in isolated areas and I trust it is not the intention to use these areas for the purpose of making a profit.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

I welcome the Bill. There is one area in my constituency that is included. It is the Lough area in Woodford. I have been aware for a long time, for the last 19 years, before ever Deputy Callanan came into this House——

Mr. Callanan

I was at it outside the House.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

Good man. People living in this area, who applied for connection, were told by the board to wait until they recanvassed the area when they would be quoted more favourable terms. They waited patiently for some 15, 16 or 17 years and then discovered the terms quoted were astronomical, anything from £800 to £2,700. That was the top quotation in the area. Now the Woodford area, the Loughatorick area, is high in the mountains. The farms are small and the farmers are very industrious, hard-working people. They are a very proud people and they are quite prepared to pay a fair figure. They do not want anything for nothing. But they will not allow themselves to be crucified. That is how they looked on the situation up to this and so this Bill will be a great help to them.

The figures Deputy Callanan quoted as given to the people in Loughatorick were given to them by an official of the ESB and their fear now is that they will have to pay approximately £16 every two months plus the ordinary payment for the current they consume. That sort of bill is just not on. There is no way these farmers could pay that kind of money.

There is a number of school-going children in this area. Deputy Hussey talked about the necessity for having electricity on the farm. As a farmer myself I am all in favour of electricity on the farm but every Member who has spoken so far has spoken from the man's point of view. No one has referred to the need for electricity in the house. Do Members realise how hard it is to iron their shirts without electricity, to wash their clothes without electricity, to cook without elecricity? I suspect they do not. I suspect they think we all buy drip dry, but even drip dry have to be ironed. Take it from me-I have spent hours at it. Looking around this House I notice all the shirts are beautifully ironed so I presume Members' wives are using electricity.

Mr. P. Barry

We do them ourselves.

Mr. Gallagher

And we wash them in persil.

Mrs. Hogan O'Higgins

Unlike Deputy Callanan, I do not believe the Minister is trying to deceive us and I am sure he will clarify the position when he comes to reply. I welcome the deferred payment system. I appreciate that people should consult with the ESB before they locate their houses but very often location is a matter of Hobson's Choice; one either builds on the site one has or one does not build at all. I suppose every Member has had the experience of constituents telling them they have beeen quoted £X for connection and they cannot understand this because the electricity is just across the field. They are told that this is a transformer charge. It seems to me everyone is being charged for a transformer. Being ignorant of the way electricity works one just accepts that this is so, but the cost of connection from the old house to the new house is much too high. It should be a nominal charge.

The area to which I referred earlier, Loughatorick, is possibly the prettiest area in the whole of County Galway once you reach the top of the hill and look across to the Shannon, which produces so much of our electricity. The strange thing is that these people living beside the Shannon have no electricity at all. All that area is incredibly beautiful and so I believe connection should be made by way of underground cables. That should be encouraged.

I fear like others that this £300,000 will not be enough. If the Minister finds it is not enough, will he be prepared to seek further finance to carry out this absolutely essential work? We are now approaching the end of the century and it seems ridiculous that people, just because they live in remote areas, should be deprived of electricity. We simply cannot continue without electricity on the farm and in the house.

Mr. Kitt

I should like to compliment Deputy Kenny on his maiden speech. When I was in college with him I never imagined the day would come when I would be complimenting him here in this House. He certainly made the case for the people in the West.

I welcome the general principle of the Bill but, like other speakers, I cannot see how £300,000 will be sufficient. I cannot understand why the Minister was so vague about the number of householders who would benefit. He said precise figures are not available but the ESB have estimated that, in all, there are some 800 to 900 householders in these and other isolated areas.

Like other Deputies, I wonder why only two areas were mentioned. I understood that the Woodford area would be included in the terms of this Bill. I hope the Minister will give us a list of the areas which will benefit. It must be obvious to him, from the number of parliamentary questions tabled last week, that Members are anxious to know the areas that will benefit from the scheme. I would also be obliged if the Minister would give us a breakdown of the elements contained in a typical quotation from the ESB for installation. Is it the case that the cost of poles is the big factor? If that is so I wonder how it is that a final quotation for the installation of a telephone is not as high as a quotation from the ESB. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs also make use of poles in the installation of telephones—I accept that it takes a long time to have a telephone installed—but if poles are the expensive factor I would support the suggestion that the ESB use underground cables. Poles are unsightly and must be replaced quite often and this is another factor in favour of using underground cables.

We are all aware that more people are anxious to live in rural areas. From a practical point of view those who wish to erect a house in a rural area can obtain a site cheaper than if they wanted to buy one adjacent to a town or city. In many cases in rural areas parents or relations give sites to their children with the result that the heavy expense of purchasing a site is avoided. However, even with this advantage young couples anxious to live in rural areas must be prepared to spend a lot of money to gat electricity into their house. I welcome the proposal to permit people to pay for this installation on an instalment basis. I understand that because quotations for the installation of electricity are so high local authorities have not proceeded with housing schemes in rural areas. It is sad to think that people cannot get a house in an area in which they are anxious to live. It appears that the ESB and the Department of Local Government will in future be telling the people where to build their houses. ESB quotations may become the criterion for housing schemes, local authority and private housing schemes. I hope this trend will cease soon.

Deputies complained of low voltage in some areas. A farmer in my area told me that at times there is not sufficient power to enable him to boil an egg on his electric cooker. If we are to provide a service it should be a good one. I have received many letters from the local ESB office, in relation to the Woodford area in particular, to the effect that they were awaiting the introduction of this Bill to see if it would give relief to certain categories of consumers. I hope that its introduction will mean that many people in rural areas will be able to avail of the facility for which they have been waiting so long.

Mr. Finn

I welcome this Bill. It is about time such a measure was introduced and it is a move in the right direction. We all agree that the amount of money being made available will not be sufficient but the Minister has made a start. Many young married couples who have been asked to pay up to £500 for connection to the electricity supply have approached me to see if it would be possible to have that special charge reduced. In fact, some couples have been asked to pay as much as £1,100 for connection. Young couples find it difficult enough to raise the money, from local authorities and building societies, to build a house without having to face the enormous charge for connection to electricity. The fact that this must be paid in cash is also a great burden on people. I welcome the provision whereby people will now be able to pay the connection charge on an instalment basis.

An effort should be made to provide electricity for old age pensioners and disabled people. Many old age pensioners in my constituency cannot afford to pay the special charge with the result that they do not have light or heat. That is a sad situation. In many isolated areas in Mayo the county council only allocated £100 towards the cost of installing electricity with the result that those involved have to pay up to £400. Those people are entitled to be housed by the county council and in many cases large families are involved. I know of a family who have not moved into their new house because the county council cannot afford to pay the full amount for the installation of electricity.

I am sure this Bill is being introduced as a result of representations made by rural Deputies to the Department of Transport and Power. Another matter brought to my attention is that in some rural areas the voltage is not high enough for farmers to use their milking machines. I accept that when this is reported to local ESB offices every effort is made to rectify the position but I have seen in my own townland the lack of power which results in television sets going off. We are going through a serious financial situation throughout the world and the Minister must be complimented from that point of view for providing this money to help the people who need it. If one goes into a pub in any town in Ireland one will find it packed, and nobody should begrudge a penny or two to help to provide electricity for those who have not got it.

Mr. Daly

Although welcome, the Bill is but a feeble effort by the Government to help in this vital area. The provision of electricity in rural areas is a social service. It is also necessary to provide the infrastructure for industry in rural Ireland. It seems to me that there is an implication in the Bill that development in rural areas finished in 1975 and that by then we had completed our obligations in regard to the provision of electricity. That is not true.

In the past year people have been quoted figures of between £1,000 and £2,500 for connection with electricity supply. These are enormous sums for such people. I agree enormous work in this field has been done in recent years but there are still many rural households unconnected. There is nothing in this Bill to help people to pay the enormous sums demanded for connection.

Deputy Hogan O'Higgins referred to mountainous areas in Galway and North Clare. I know places within a few miles of Ardnacrusha where people have got quotations of £500, £600 and £700 in the past year and this Bill will not help them. We cannot write them off and forget them. The Minister must provide subsidies for them and continue subsidisation in the next few years. Instead of the £300,000 this Bill will provide, we should be talking in terms of £3 million if we are to do this work properly. I have had representations from people in Lissycasey who have been quoted subsidised terms but they still find the cost too high. They have been given until 31st December to agree to take the supply. Can that period be extended and will those people benefit by the provisions of this Bill?

In his opening speech the Minister said that all householders in areas where work remains to be done, whether already quoted terms or not, who applied and qualified for subsidised supply before 31st March last, will get supply on subsidised terms. Will that apply in the case of the people I have mentioned? Later in his speech the Minister said that when the present work has been finished subsidisation of supply in rural areas will come to an end and normal economic or unsubsidised terms will apply from then on. People who have already applied for subsidised electricity should be told whether they will qualify under this Bill. I should like an assurance from the Minister that advertisements in local newspapers will make people aware of the position.

It seems strange the Minister did not give figures of the number of households involved. I would have thought he would have had up-to-date figures. As I have said, the Bill is welcome but it does not do anything to meet the needs of young people who have been getting quotations of between £1,000 and £2,000 in the past year. There does not appear to be anything in the Bill to help them.

Mr. Leonard

Although I welcome any additional assistance to provide electricity for rural areas, I do not think there is much encouragement in this Bill because the amount of money is too small. I fail to see how £300,000 will help to provide the service required. We have been told that the number of houses in rural Ireland which have electricity compares favourably with Britain and America. We should not be satisfied until every house in Ireland has been connected.

I was disappointed that the Minister did not make reference to new houses. Many new house builders who paid for the service through direct or indirect taxation were missed out during the operation of the subsidised scheme which has now been discontinued. Admittedly, the ESB made every effort to draw attention to the fact that the scheme would discontinue. Notwithstanding all the advertisements a number of people in all areas failed to avail of it and many of them cannot afford to pay the extra charges. I believe that a survey should be carried out and some assistance should be given to ensure that those people get a supply of electricity. There is an inadequate supply of electricity particularly in milk producing areas where milk parlours and so on require additional power. When called upon, the ESB make great efforts to supply the required electricity but their lines and transformers are not strong enough and stop-gap measures are introduced to keep a plant going. The ESB must replace those lines and transformers in order to ensure a sufficient supply of electricity to those areas.

Great work was done in rural Ireland following the war when people began to realise the benefits of an electricity supply. Organisations such as Muintir na Tíre and other groups went around the country canvassing so that people would accept the ESB. Those people had arguments to contend with and in many cases they could not convince the people of the benefits that would result and in many areas it was well into the 1960s before they had rural electrification. Electricity is essential at present and a survey should be done in relation to the conditions of the lines of the rural areas and also in relation to the lighting of villages because in many cases they are inadequately lighted. The ESB are doing a survey in my county at the moment in relation to the requirements of villages.

The Minister said that at his request the board has agreed to introduce a scheme for deferred payments for the cost of electricity. This is to be welcomed but is it fair that people who have contributed to the ESB as a semi-State body by way of direct or indirect taxation now find that they will not be eligible for assistance towards the cost of electricity once the subsidised scheme is finished? The deferred payment scheme is a help but interest must be paid. Even at a deferred rate there would be a sizeable interest to pay on, say, a sum of £900. New house builders should be subsidised in relation to electricity. The ESB report for the year ended 31st March, referring to the rural electrification scheme 1975-76 said that during the year 3,964 new rural customers were connected under the final phase of the subsidised rural electrification programme bringing the total number of customers under the scheme to 405,000. The applicant in 1976-77 will get no assistance; they can only avail of the deferred payment system.

Mr. P. Barry

Could the Deputy explain?

Mr. Leonard

A person building a new house and applying to the ESB for electricity is not subsidised. These people have contributed towards provision of electricity for other people and they now find when they go to erect a house they will not be subsidised. That is a very big expense when you take into account the increased cost of sites and building generally. In fairness, when a person is about to erect a house and applies for planning permission he is also advised to apply to the ESB for an estimate for the connection of the electricity in case he might have to meet a very large bill for electricity if the house was not convenient to ESB power or a transformer. One is still faced in rural areas with the problem of securing building sites and, in many cases, people are unable to acquire a site which is fairly convenient to ESB power lines. They are faced with going to another area where there is a very heavy charge for the connection of electricity.

Mention has been made of the cost of underground cabling. The ESB report instanced the case of Tyrrellspass in County Westmeath where the electricity network was placed underground as part of the European Architectural Heritage Year project. I should like to ask the Minister the cost of this work and if he has an estimate of the probable cost per consumer of such work.

It is very important that electricity networks in regions of scenic beauty should be underground, but one would first need to ascertain the cost of this work. I should like to know if the Minister has considered asking the ESB to implement a programme for the replacing of existing networks underground in tourist areas. Would it be cheaper for all further developments to be placed underground?

When canvassers were trying to interest people in rural electrification, one of the arguments used when giving estimates of probable ESB charges was that, when the initial cost of full rural electrification had been met, people would enjoy fairly cheap electricity. There was no talk at that time about the cost of replacing either the telegraph poles or the electricity poles and wires. The Minister and the ESB should have this matter examined. A survey should be carried out on the need for replacement of those lines.

The Minister mentioned the Ballycroy area in County Mayo. Another speaker mentioned the Mayo by-election. I was glad to hear by-elections could bring such results in their wake. We had a by-election in Monaghan and many promises were made—not by this Minister—which did not materialise or come to fruition.

Mr. Gallagher

As one of the people who have been urging the Minister over the past two years to do something about the situation which exists in the areas mentioned in the Bill——

Mr. P. Barry

Deputy Gallagher came to see me with the late Deputy Kenny about this. Is that not right? So it pre-dated the by-election.

Mr. Gallagher

Yes. We welcome this Bill even though it is belated. It is most encouraging for us to hear in the Minister's speech of the great work done by the ESB over the past number of years in the provision of rural electrification. We are all aware of the many benefits which come from the provision of electricity. Tourism in my own area would not have developed to any great extent without the ESB.

Even though I discussed the Bill on radio with the Minister, I am not quite clear on exactly what is involved. I have a letter from a person who was quoted the sum of £2,880 as a capital charge. Will this man now be in a position to have his capital charge suspended and to pay a standing charge of £36.40 in six two-monthly instalments? ESB bills are couched in legal terms and, for a person who has no legal training, it is not easy to understand what exactly is meant. My first reading of this Bill gave me the impression that it referred only to people whose capital charges were in excess of £700. I should like the Minister to explain these matters to the House when he is replying. The Minister referred to rural areas and the position faced by people who are now building new houses in rural areas.

Debate adjourned.

Business suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.