asked the Minister for Energy if he is prepared to subsidise the cost of the installation of electricity for private householders in view of the great financial burden being imposed on people building new houses, particularly in rural areas.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Electricity Installation Cost.
28.
The Government consider that they have gone as far as can reasonably be expected at the present time in subsidising provision of electricity supply.
In regard to rural electrification, the ESB have informed me that about 99 per cent of all rural householders are now connected to electricity supply. Since 1946 almost £100 million has been spent on rural electrification schemes. Moreover, quotations by the ESB for connection to electricity supply in rural areas, including supply to newly-constructed dwellings, provide for payment by the ESB of the first £160 of the connection cost together with half of the amount by which that cost exceeds £850. A scheme of deferred payments also operates whereby connection costs may be spread over a five-year period. The amounts quoted for connection of homes to the electricity supply are directly related to the costs involved in making supply available. The costs can vary greatly from location to location and depend to a great extent on the distance of the house from the nearest supply point.
I refer the Deputy to the electrification scheme, which is part of a package of measures being considered in the EEC context which is designed to stimulate agriculture in the less-favoured areas of the west of Ireland. This scheme will be implemented over a ten year period. Beneficiaries will be required to contribute 20 per cent of the cost. The EEC Commission is currently considering an outline programme for the various measures in the package. This programme must be approved before detailed measures, including those for electrification, can be considered and implemented. The priorities criteria and selection procedures relating to the electrification scheme have not yet been decided. Therefore, it is not yet possible to say who will ultimately benefit under the electrification scheme. The scheme will be widely advertised in due course and it will then be a matter for those interested to make application for assistance.
Would the Minister agree that, particularly in relation to new house applications, applicants are being forced to build their houses as close as possible to existing power lines in order to cut down the cost of the installation of electricity? When does the Minister expect that the measures in relation to electrification for rural Ireland will be implemented by the EEC?
On the first point, the ESB have been at pains to advise people building their homes to try as far as possible to find a site near existing power lines. For obvious reasons, this is not always possible. So far as the second point is concerned, in April.
Why have the benefits of the rural electrification scheme been withheld from the most rural of the rural, namely, the people who live on islands off our coast? Why have they not been able to get electricity on the same terms as people who live in boreens or on the side of a mountain?
I do not accept that there has been any discrimination against the islands. On the contrary, specific schemes were introduced for the islands.
Is the Minister not aware that the cost per unit of electricity for people on many of the islands off our coast, and many of the Gaeltacht islands, is considerably higher than the cost per unit available to people who benefit under the rural electrification scheme?
This question relates to the subsidisation of the cost of installation rather than the cost per unit.
Could the Minister explain the rationale between the more favoured treatment given to rural and urban consumers particularly in relation to deferral of payment for connection? Is he aware that it can cost — and has cost in at least one case of which I am aware — up to £400 to connect a consumer to the ESB within a couple of hundred yards of the GPO, and that there is no possibility for would-be consumers, however indigent or however straitened their circumstances, to defer any part of the capital cost because they have to live in the city?
I am not aware of the case the Deputy mentioned. If the Deputy would care to put down a question, I will have it examined.