Vol. 367 No. 3
asked the Minister for Energy if he is aware of the very considerable savings accruing to the ESB in respect of exchange rate improvements; the low cost of oil and coal; the amounts of those savings; and the plans he has to ensure the benefits are passed on to the consumers.
25.
asked the Minister for Energy if his Department have an estimate on the reduction in the price of electricity as a result of the increased use of coal in electricity generation; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 25 together.
I am aware that significant savings are accruing to the ESB from exchange rate improvements and fuel prices. I announced reductions in electricity prices arising from these savings in the House on 11 March. I am keeping the question of possible further reductions under review. It would not be appropriate to provide a breakdown of savings under individual headings especially since the price reductions were based on net savings after taking all other relevant factors into account. Furthermore, the figures for individual headings fluctuate frequently in response to both international price and currency movements and fuel consumption choices. All relevant developments are monitored on a continuous basis. As I have stated previously, the total cost of the price reductions which I announced is estimated at £30 million this year and at least £36 million in a full year.
I cannot understand why the Minister cannot give some of the facts which were asked for in this question. First of all, let me put to him a straight question in relation to savings on the foreign borrowings in dollars to the ESB. It has been well established over the last six months what the depreciation of the dollar has been. On average it would probably come out somewhere in the region of 30 per cent. I cannot understand why a straight question such as that cannot be answered by the Minister.
Even since the date of the reduction various fluctuations have taken place and to attempt to estimate the effect would be quite misleading because of the constantly changing position.
Looking back over the last six months, would the Minister accept that any changes that have taken place would make for an improvement on the figures he gave earlier this year? I find it unacceptable that the Minister cannot give me a reply to one item on the list I gave to him, that is, the savings in the devaluation of the dollar against the púnt. That is a straightforward question and the information should be available. If it is not available I can only assume that if the Minister gave those facts it would be clearly shown that the benefits accruing are not being passed on to the consumer and are not being adequately provided for in price reductions given to industrial and commercial consumers in the past month or two. Housewives will have to wait until September before they get any reduction.
Despite the plausability of the question put by the Deputy, I am not inclined to accept his proposal. The decision that was announced on 11 March was the correct one at that time. I said on a number of occasions since that if further improvements take place they will manifest themselves in a further reduction in the price of electricity. We had a Private Members' Motion on this topic and I outlined in detail the reason for weighting the reduction in favour of the industrial area because of our lack of competitiveness in industrial costs. I explained in great detail why the ESB had targeted the reductions in that area. The domestic consumers will be getting the benefit of the reductions in September. If further benefits accrue they will manifest themselves. If present trends continue we can look forward to further reductions in electricity prices.
The only way I can monitor on behalf of the consumers and the taxpayers is by the information given in reply to my questions. I am asking for the facts and I can weigh that against the reductions the ESB will offer. In the absence of that information, because of the Minister's unwillingness to disclose it, I have to assume there have been very substantial savings that are not being passed on.
I have to steer the Deputy in the proper direction. He may not listen to my advice, but he is making an incorrect assumption. As a former Minister for Energy, the Deputy is well aware of the ESB balance sheet and the considerations that have to be taken account of. There is the balancing of the commercial and domestic interests by the ESB. That is being done in the best interests of both the ESB and the consumers.
Can the Minister give a timetable for the increased use of coal in electricity generation? Does the reduction in oil prices in any way affect the ESB timetable for use of more coal?
The decision by the ESB to put a major concentration on coal at Moneypoint will not be affected by current trends in oil prices. Coal usage is about 60 per cent, and the reduction in price achieved was by virtue of the coal content of the fuel package.
Would the Minister accept that 63 per cent of Ireland's electricity is now generated by oil and that in the last year there has been a 30 per cent to 40 per cent fall in the price of petroleum? Putting those two figures together, will the Minister accept that the rather miserly figure of £30 million passed on to the consumer is only a fraction of what would have been possible? Does he accept that the real solution is to restructure the ESB's balance sheet, which is now showing total borrowings of more than £1,000 million? The real job is to restructure that balance sheet and pass on the 30 per cent to 40 per cent fall to the consumers.
The Deputy mentioned the oil content of the electricity generating programme.
I said that 60 per cent of electricity is generated from oil usage.
At the moment it is only 12 per cent of the fuel package. That is for 1986-1987.
