Electricity Regulation (Amendment) (Single Electricity Market) Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 3, line 10, after "MARKET" to insert the following:
"AND FOR MECHANISMS TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS".
The aim of this amendment is to change the Title of the Bill by inserting the phrase "AND FOR MECHANISMS TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS". I thought it would be appropriate to amend the Title, particularly because in later amendments I am trying to insert some mechanism whereby the rights of consumers will be protected. On many occasions on the Order of Business in the past year, Deputies Durkan, Eamon Ryan and I have referred to the price levels relating to gas and electricity in particular. It was partly due to our campaigns in respect of CER that the price of gas was reduced and that the price of electricity was increased to the level originally envisaged.
A number of the amendments in my name deal with this issue. When the House debated what became the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, I tried to have it amended to the effect that a consumer panel would be provided within the Commission for Energy Regulation. This would have reflected the substance of amendment No. 1, namely, that the rights of consumers be taken into consideration.
A large part of the Bill deals with the regulation of the wholesale electricity market, the new all-island market of approximately 6,500 to 7,000 MW that is being created and the role of the SEM committee — the Single Market operator — CER and SONI, the Northern Ireland regulator, in determining prices of electricity. We have engaged in lengthy debates in the past 12 to 18 months on trying to protect the rights of consumers. In my view, householders and business consumers should be central to the development of the Single Market. After all, the basic rationale behind this development is that the electricity markets of the Republic and Northern Ireland are small and isolated. The southern market is obviously in transition and I have strong views regarding how it should evolve in the context of the future of the Electricity Supply Board and the development of competition in generation and the development of renewables as a source of electricity. I also harbour strong views on the development of the Northern Ireland market as an example to the South of a botched privatisation. Privatisation created the worst of all possible worlds for the Northern Ireland electricity consumer, with no competition and high prices for a decade and a half. This was due to the isolation of the Northern Ireland market. I wanted this amendment to be made to the Title so as to put in place a key responsibility for the Commission for Energy Regulation and the single electricity market operator to ensure consumers' needs would be paramount. The Bill must ensure the provision of secure and cheaper electricity supplies as a single all-island market develops. It is a great historic step and I commend the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, in that regard.
Consumers' needs must be highlighted from the start. All last autumn on the Order of Business I tried to raise the issue, that consumers' interests were not sufficiently addressed, with electricity and gas price rises. The mechanisms of the Commission for Energy Regulation are too inflexible to respond to changing market conditions and oil and gas price rises. I know we are a price-taker in the two island markets but a more responsive regulator is needed.
My other amendments seek to insert similar provisions to those in the United Kingdom, the most deregulated market in Europe, where OFGEM and energywatch encourage consumers to switch if an operator puts up its prices. There is no choice of supplier in Ireland. There was briefly with Airtricity but Veridian has not yet entered the domestic supply market.
I support this well placed amendment which recognises the need to provide protection for the consumer. In the past 12 months Members on this side of the House have repeatedly raised concerns that consumers' interests were second to all others. At one stage an increase was proposed in electricity and gas prices when the gas product was available free on the London market, yet no one took a blind bit of notice. The question as to why, in the face of downward international price trends, it was impossible to reverse the trend in such a small market was raised with the Commission for Energy Regulation. One brave Minister even told the House that he agreed with the proposal to raise prices.
The amendment must be taken on board, particularly when two jurisdictions come together to provide a single service for a small market. I had hoped these amendments would be taken on board on Committee Stage. However, the Minister of State was not in an accommodating mood then and we felt dejected. Now that the guillotine will be introduced for the Bill, the sharpness of the moment does not impress us. The guillotine was introduced by a medical doctor in order to ease the pain of those who disagreed with the French revolutionary administration of the time. I am not so sure it did and it certainly does not on this occasion.
We have pointed out that the regulatory system, as it stands, does not do this, a problem that must be addressed. There is a multiplicity of ways by which the interests of the electricity consumer can be protected; for example, through strengthening the integrity and security of the grid. If the grid's integrity is brought into question, the consumer will either have or not have a supply. Consumers in both jurisdictions must have ready and reliable access to electricity supplies at all times.
What is to prevent the same situation that occurred last summer when the prices for the consumer defeated the laws of gravity and went up when internationally they were going down? It is difficult for Members to explain the rationale of this to the public, particularly when they examine the international markets and come to their own conclusions. The amendment appropriately addresses the problems I have highlighted.
While I support Deputy Broughan's amendment, I wish to make a broad procedural point. With no disrespect to the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, he also took Committee Stage. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, was in the Chamber one hour ago for Question Time. This significant Bill covers a very technical area and it would benefit and improve the debate if the senior Minister took it. The House deserves an explanation as to why he is not available. This is the first legislation of its kind——
Will the Deputy speak to the amendment?
This is an important point. The legislation is being conducted in tandem with the Northern Ireland Office and the Houses of Parliament in Westminster. It shows disrespect to this side of the House and the negotiations——
We are discussing an amendment on Report Stage. The Deputy's contribution is more a Second Stage contribution.
Will the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, explain why the senior Minister who could be in the Chamber for Question Time is not present now?
That does not arise on the amendment. The Chair has ruled on the matter and I ask the Deputy to obey the Chair.
Will the Ceann Comhairle explain why it is inappropriate for me to ask why the senior Minister is not available?
The Chair does not spend the time of the House giving explanations.
I will raise it on every occasion I can because it is appropriate to find out why the senior Minister is not in the Chamber.
The Deputy will then be ruled out of order.
It does affect the quality of the debate and I mean no offence to the Minister of State.
I ask the Deputy to come back to the amendment. If he does not wish to do so, I will call on Deputy Ferris.
It affects the way this side of the House is seen. We deserve an answer as to why the senior Minister is not in the Chamber to take this Stage.
The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is travelling to Brussels for a European Council meeting.
I hope he generates more interest over there than he did in here today.
The Long Title is intended to encapsulate the Bill's purpose in general terms. The mechanisms referred to in the amendment are captured in its drafting. Section 9 establishes the protection of the interests of consumers of electricity, both North and South, as the principal objective of the Minister, the Commission for Energy Regulation and the SEM committee in the exercise of a single electricity market function. Specific provisions for mechanisms to protect the interests of electricity consumers are already contained in the Title and the amendment is, therefore, unnecessary.
I accept section 9 refers to the importance of consumers' interests. When the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006 was brought forward, we tried to plug the gap in regard to the role of CER and the needs of consumers. Representatives of CER attended a meeting of the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and offered an explanation for the incredible swingeing increase of 34% in gas prices and a possible 20% hike in the cost of electricity. Some of the background papers which I and other Opposition spokespersons have read point to glaring inconsistencies in regard to differences between household and business customers.
It should be there in headlights at the beginning of the Bill that consumers' needs are the key concern. The electricity generators and networks are there to serve consumers, and their needs should be central. The SEM committee, CER and SONI must keep them to the forefront of their view into the future.
Will the Minister of State tell us whether the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is on a scheduled flight to Brussels or is travelling there on the Government jet?
That issue does not arise.
I ask the Deputy to treat the House seriously.
I will ask a question of the Minister by written means if that is necessary.
We are on Report Stage of this Bill.
The Deputy must find other means to raise this issue. I ask him to resume his seat when the Chair is on its feet. We are on Report Stage and there is limited time to debate. I ask Deputies to stay within the rules of the House.
My only intent is to raise the quality of debate in this Chamber.
That is not true, it has nothing at all to do with the debate.
As someone who takes this issue seriously, I deserve the right to make a point that I believe is appropriate.
I ask the Deputy to resume his seat and allow the Minister of State to reply to Deputy Broughan's point.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 55; Níl, 75.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Boyle, Dan.
- Breen, James.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cuffe, Ciarán.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Enright, Olwyn.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Pádraic.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- McManus, Liz.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Murphy, Gerard.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Noonan, Michael.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Keeffe, Jim.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Eamon.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Twomey, Liam.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Níl
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Collins, Michael.
- Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cregan, John.
- Cullen, Martin.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McDaid, James.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donoghue, John.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Flynn, Noel.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Power, Seán.
- Roche, Dick.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wilkinson, Ollie.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G.V.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Stagg and Kehoe; Níl, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 2:
In page 3, line 15, to delete "(Amendment)".
Either the word "amendment" or the words "single electricity market" should be used.
Some of the provisions of this Bill replace existing provisions of the 1999 Act and some confer additional functions to those provided in the 1999 Act. It is, therefore, necessary that the provisions of this Bill are read together with the provisions of the 1999 Act and the title of the single electricity market Bill needs to reflect this position. It is, therefore, appropriate that the word "amendment" is reflected in the Title of the Bill and, accordingly, this amendment is not accepted.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 3, 8, 13 and 18 are related and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 3, line 19, after "provisions" to insert "subject to the agreement of all relevant parties".
We discussed this issue for some time on Committee Stage in the hope the Minister might consider introducing a requirement for parliamentary approval for proposals. There are reasons for and against that but, in the final analysis, parliamentary approval is the ultimate in democracy in respect of any proposal or legislation. As we have seen an increase in the number of bodies with quite an amount of autonomy, and apropos the debate on the previous amendment, the recognition by everybody of the supremacy of Parliament should be borne in mind. That does not, in any way, limit the degree to which the single electricity market operator, or otherwise, could carry out its functions or duties. It may mean that the respective parliaments, authorities or those who might be affected by decisions made in a positive or negative way would be alerted to the fact. That is the gist of all the amendments.
Section 1 is a commencement provision which allows the Minister to bring into force certain provisions in the Bill at the appropriate time, or else to bring the entire Act into force on the same day. It is a standard feature in Bills and facilitates the appropriate implementation of the legislation. Consultation is unnecessary so the amendment is unnecessary.
Amendment No. 8 proposes that any change to the definition of the department be subject to approval by relevant authorities. This provision will only have effect if there is any change to the current constitution of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment in Northern Ireland and would allow us to reflect the change in our legislation. The provision does not confer any power in this jurisdiction to effect such a change in Government departments in another jurisdiction and it would not, therefore, be appropriate for our legislation to require consultation on this matter.
Amendment No. 13 suggests that section 4 of the Bill be amended to provide that the SEM committee comprise such members as stand appointed to it from time to time by the relevant authorities. The Schedule to the Bill sets out how appointments to the SEM committee are to be made, with specific provision as to the statutory consultation required to be undertaken. This amendment is, therefore, unnecessary.
Amendment No. 18, proposed by Deputy Durkan, relates to section 5 of the Bill which provides for the drawing up and publication of working arrangements. These working arrangements will set out the procedures to be adopted by the commission for the making of decisions with regard to SEM matters. They will also describe how the commission will work together with the Northern Ireland regulatory authority in the exercise of their respective functions relating to the single electricity market. Deputy Durkan's amendment proposes that relevant parties be consulted prior to any amendment being made to these working arrangements which will be adopted by the SEM. The Bill provides that any decision as to the exercise of the relevant functions of the commission relating to an SEM matter shall be taken on behalf of the commission by the SEM committee. Due to the independent nature of the SEM committee it is therefore not appropriate to require it to consult beyond the current provisions of this Bill. Therefore, the amendment cannot be accepted.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 4, line 7, after "Ireland" where it firstly occurs, to insert "as approved by the respective Parliaments".
The same principle applies, but the reference to relevant authorities has been substituted by a reference to Parliaments. It proposes recognising that issues may arise from time to time which may not be in accord with the policies, vision or plans of the relevant authorities or Parliament, whether in this jurisdiction or in Northern Ireland. Many amendments have been tabled and we do not have much time so I will conclude.
I support Deputy Durkan's amendment. The Minister and the Taoiseach indicated there would be a new Oireachtas committee. I presume it will come into being in the next Parliament, the 30th Dáil. Given the SEM is an all-Ireland body and operates under the implementation bodies established under the Belfast Agreement, can the Minister guarantee that the new Oireachtas committee dealing with the affairs of the implementation body will be established, so that our successors in the next Dáil, along with the Westminster Parliament and, I presume, our colleagues in the Northern Ireland Assembly, when it is reconstituted after the elections, will have the opportunity of raising issues that may arise, under the operation of the SEM? Deputy Durkan has tabled many amendments in this regard but his fundamental point, for which I commend him, is that the people should be supreme. We are their representatives in a parliamentary democracy and there should be a mechanism for Dáil approval so the final say will not rest with bureaucrats.
The Minister of State and the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, explained the role of ministerial directives and civil servants gave us very useful briefings, before the Bill came forward, on the difference in culture between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom, arising from the fact the UK has gone down a more competitive market route than we. Can the Minister of State assure the House that it was not the type of throwaway phrase the Taoiseach has always given but that it will lead to real Oireachtas accountability?
I do not accept the Taoiseach would make throwaway remarks on Northern Ireland. The SEM is outside the remit of the Good Friday Agreement. Deputy Broughan raised this matter previously and I have tried to obtain information on what the Taoiseach said. As soon as it comes to hand I will pass it on to him.
Now that we are dealing with the Bill it would be useful to know whether we were going to have an all-Ireland committee for the all-Ireland market.
Unfortunately, we do not. There is a dearth of information.
I am seeking clarification.
Perhaps the Minister of State will have it before 7 p.m.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 5 not moved.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 6, 23, 47, 48 and 50 are cognate and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 4, between lines 16 and 17, to insert the following:
"‘SEM operator' means the Single Electricity Market operator;".
This is a technical amendment which follows a long debate on Committee Stage. The issue depends on which expert consultant one engages. The Minister's expert advice is that the amendments are unnecessary but we have our expertise and it shows that, in a democracy, there can be two opinions. We must be precise in determining which advice is correct. Given the technical nature of the amendments, I spoke with my expert again and feel that amendment No. 6 is relevant. It clearly indicates what is meant by the SEM operator. In recent times it has become quite common for an abbreviation to be given, as well as the full title, though I do not know why that is the case. Perhaps the Minister of State has been inspired in the period since Committee Stage, so that he will now embrace the amendments and save us all the consequent debate.
I am always inspired after listening to Deputy Durkan. The term "single electricity market operator" is the title ascribed to the EirGrid-SONI contractual joint venture which will carry out this function. The title is reflected in both this Bill and the corresponding Northern Ireland legislation and must be uniform in both. I consulted with the Parliamentary Counsel following Deputy Durkan's raising of it on the previous occasion. I am advised that the counsel intentionally refrained from abbreviating the term "single electricity market" in all but certain references to it in the Bill in the interests of ensuring the legislation is more reader friendly, particularly with regard to the clarity necessary when referring to the licence functions of the market operator. I am also advised there is no legal requirement to have uniform abbreviations throughout the legislation and that it is editorially undesirable to do so. Therefore, I cannot accept the amendments.
That appears somewhat inconsistent. I am mindful of other legislation that could be used. Why can we not continue using SEM? It appears somewhat inconsistent that both terms would be used. Perhaps the Minister of State's reading of it is correct. SEM is referred to throughout from section 4. In other legislation we stuck with whatever abbreviation we used. I presume a legal problem will not arise in the future.
The Title of the Bill is set out in such a way as to make it clear that the function being referred to is that of the market operator. That is what I am advised.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 not moved.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 5, line 2, to delete "Article 8" and substitute "Article 9".
This is a minor technical amendment to reflect the renumbering of the provisions in the Northern Ireland Draft Order in Council.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 5, line 8, after "as" to insert the following:
"Coiste Margadh Leictreachais Aonair or in the English language".
The Chair will appreciate the purpose of this amendment, which is to amend the title by inserting "Coiste Margadh Leictreachais Aonair or in the English language". On Committee Stage the Minister said he would re-examine it. It would seem appropriate that in all-island legislation the first language would be included.
Following reflection and consultation on the matter raised in amendment No. 10, I am of the view that such a translation may cause difficulties with the corresponding Northern Ireland legislation in that the title of the SEM committee must be uniform in both pieces of legislation to avoid any confusion. Additionally, the SEM committee will be a sub-committee of the Commission for Energy Regulation and not an independent statutory body in its own right. Accordingly, there is no legal requirement to translate the title of the committee in the legislation.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 11 is in the name of the Minister of State and Deputy Durkan.
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 5, line 10, to delete "shall be comprised of" and substitute "shall comprise".
Deputy Durkan tabled a technical amendment on Committee Stage which suggested the substitution of the existing drafting of "The SEM Committee shall be comprised of such members as stand appointed to it from time to time" with "The SEM Committee shall comprise of such member...". Having consulted with the Parliamentary Counsel, I am agreeable to this change and, accordingly, I am proposing this amendment to section 4. I do listen to Deputy Durkan sometimes.
I applaud this move on the part of the Minister of State. It is a clear indication of his recognition that the Opposition has something to say on this subject——
——and I congratulate him. It is something we will remember for a long time.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 12, 17, 19, 46, 63, 64 and 68 are related and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 5, line 12, after "time" to insert the following:
"and the Commission may include representatives of the relevant trade unions on both sides of the border and a representative of electricity consumers".
The purpose of the amendment is to ensure union recognition and contribution as well as consumer contribution. That would be in the interests of the consumer and promote the harmonisation of work within the system.
These amendments suggest that specific provision be made for representatives from industry, consumer groups and trade unions to be included on the SEM committee and consulted in the appointment of members of the SEM committee under section 1(a) of Schedule 1 and the independent members under section 2.
Having reflected on the points raised by the Deputies I would like to offer the following clarification. The principal objective of the Minister, the Commission for Energy Regulation and the SEM committee in the exercise of their functions is to protect the interests of the consumers of electricity both North and South. The SEM committee, which will be the independent decision making arbiter of the new market, will take decisions on all matters relating to the wholesale electricity market. The Commission for Energy Regulation is not currently structured to reflect specific consumer representation and as a sub-committee of the commission it is necessary that the SEM committee mirror that parent structure.
One of the key requirements of the role of the independent member to the SEM committee is the ability to act independently of interests in either jurisdiction. I am of the view that the independent member to the SEM committee should be appointed on the basis of objective assessment of the independence of interests in each jurisdiction, their experience and expertise in regulation and energy as appropriate and their ability to fulfil a complex role. The number of candidates who will be able to fulfil this role is likely to be limited but there is nothing to prevent members of the mentioned groups being appointed to the role should they fulfil such objectives.
The introduction of an approval system involving consumer groups and-or trade union groups, both North and South, while also providing for the foregoing qualifications, is likely to be unwieldy to say the least. It would impose a major administration difficulty in the operation of the SEM committee and the likelihood of agreement on the appointment of the independent member would be remote.
I am also of the view that specific legislation provision for consultation with the various interest groups mentioned is neither necessary nor appropriate. There is nothing to prevent the Minister consulting with such groups as he deems necessary as part of the appointment process.
Consultation with the regulatory authorities regarding appointment by the Minister to the SEM committee applies due to their technical expertise in the sector and is key to ensuring the proper functioning of the SEM committee. However, the Bill is the first legislative step towards the establishment of an all-island energy market where such consumer representations may feature and will be considered in the context of future legislation.
I was not aware that my amendments Nos. 17 and 19 were in this group. I support the principle of Deputy Ferris's amendment No. 12. These two amendments are the reason I sought in the earlier vote to amend the Title of the Bill. Amendment No. 17 proposes to insert a new subsection (7) which states: "The SEM Committee shall always take full cognisance of the impact of Committee decisions on household and business electricity consumers and shall refer in this matter to the relevant statutory consumer protection agencies within the Commission and the Authority".
There is grave dissatisfaction with the workings of the SER. I referred to SONI in that regard earlier but I should have referred to the Northern Ireland regulator. In this Bill, the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill we passed recently and the amendment to the 1999 Act there should be a forthright system to protect the rights of consumers. That is still not in place, making these amendments central to the Bill.
The 1999 Act, which established the Commission for Energy Regulation and set out its functions, refers to the interests of consumers but it does not ensure that consumers are at the heart of the process. I tried in amendment No. 19 to insert in section 9(3) of the 1999 Act that it shall be the duty of the Minister and the commission to establish a representative consumer panel of not less than 15 persons within the Commission for Energy Regulation which will be continuously consulted on energy market pricing policy. The more competitive British market has such a mechanism. Deputy Ferris's amendment calling for consultation with relevant trade unions on both sides of the Border and representatives of electricity consumers could also be a mechanism for ensuring this will be the case.
Consumers feel far removed from consideration, as the Minister of State saw when he attended meetings of the Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources when Mr. Tom Reeves and his colleagues were present. Often the anger consumers have felt throughout the lifetime of this Government was a result of the lack of control arising from the refusal of the Minister to answer to the Dáil and the CER's lack of a mechanism to listen to consumers. On the CER website and documentation on the increases for the ESB before Christmas, there were generation portfolios, costs over the previous two years and elaborate mathematical schedules to demonstrate the need for a 20% increase, which subsequently became 13%, but there was no mechanism whereby consumers were represented.
Consumers should be at the heart of the process. The SEM committee must resolve many technical issues but I called a vote earlier on amendment No. 1 because I want these provisions to be inserted into the Bill. The next Government will have to re-examine the CER. If there is an all-island market, the SEM may develop into an all-island regulator or act for both the regulator in Northern Ireland and the CER in the Republic in an all-island regulatory body. We will move in that direction after 1 November and something more forthright than the 1999 Act will be necessary. I called a vote on this during the Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill a few months ago because electricity generation and distribution and energy security should be for business and household consumers and no one else.
I support these amendments. We discussed this at length on Committee Stage and the Minister did not agree with us. We are creating a new market and new procedures and it is important to recognise in such circumstances we can over-legislate but that can be changed. It is better to be safe than sorry. We would be acting in the interests of people in both jurisdictions if we accept the amendments.
Amendment No. 46 calls for the insertion of "or consumer needs". We must incorporate these needs more graphically than has been the case so far. It is of importance to consumers in both jurisdictions. It would not weaken the legislation to ensure the needs of the consumer are recognised. All other needs are recognised, those of market forces and regulators. This system is supposed to generate competition and openness and open markets in favour of the consumer so why are we so sensitive about excluding him? He is the person who expects us, as legislators, to provide for him. That applies equally to the consumer in Northern Ireland.
If in future there are rises in gas and electricity prices against international trends, how will it be explained to the consumer? No one is willing to explain it anymore. The Minister will not explain it in the House and the regulator will state it was his considered opinion that prices should rise. We welcome the opinion of the regulator, the SEM and the relevant Ministers in both jurisdictions, but the consumer interests, along with trade unions and other relevant bodies, are of vital importance so we must insert this condition now.
The SEM Bill is the first legislative step in the establishment of an all-island energy market. It puts in place a single wholesale market for the island of Ireland. As a result of issues raised on Committee Stage, we gave this serious consideration because there is merit in the issues raised by Deputies in the context of the long-term establishment of an all-island energy market. The appropriate time to debate these issues, however, is when legislation is being introduced to deal with that all-island market. The SEM committee has a purely technical regulatory role in the operation of the wholesale electricity market and in that context the types of representations being proposed would not be appropriate.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 57; Níl, 73.
Tá
- Allen, Bernard.
- Boyle, Dan.
- Breen, James.
- Breen, Pat.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burton, Joan.
- Connaughton, Paul.
- Cowley, Jerry.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Cuffe, Ciarán.
- Deenihan, Jimmy.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- English, Damien.
- Enright, Olwyn.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Hayes, Tom.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Hogan, Phil.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Kehoe, Paul.
- Kenny, Enda.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McCormack, Padraic.
- McEntee, Shane.
- McGinley, Dinny.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McGrath, Paul.
- McHugh, Paddy.
- McManus, Liz.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Murphy, Gerard.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Neville, Dan.
- Noonan, Michael.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O’Dowd, Fergus.
- O’Keeffe, Jim.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Perry, John.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Ring, Michael.
- Ryan, Eamon.
- Sargent, Trevor.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Stanton, David.
- Timmins, Billy.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Níl
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Collins, Michael.
- Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cregan, John.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Fahey, Frank.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McDaid, James.
- McDowell, Michael.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Flynn, Noel.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Roche, Dick.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wilkinson, Ollie.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G.V.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Ferris and Finian McGrath; Níl, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 13:
In page 5, line 12, after "time" to insert "by the relevant authorities".
Amendment put and declared lost.
Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 are cognate and may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 14:
In page 5, line 16, to delete "a" and substitute "an".
These are technical amendments on which we had an exchange of views on Committee Stage. I am informed this is a technical and grammatical change which would be appropriate but the Minister of State does not agree. When doctors differ, peculiar things often happen. I would like to hear the Minister of State's views on the subject.
I have consulted the Parliamentary Counsel in the matter.
The provision, as drafted, is correct. The drafting is consistent with the provisions of the draft Northern Ireland orders in Council and there is no reason the provisions in both pieces of legislation should diverge unless it is absolutely necessary that they should. As the drafting is legally correct, there is no merit in amending it. Accordingly, the proposed amendment cannot be accepted.
Question, "That the words proposed to be deleted stand", put and declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.
I move amendment No. 15:
In page 5, line 19, to delete "a" where it secondly occurs and substitute "an".
Amendment by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 16:
In page 5, line 24, after "Market" to insert "or the interests of the Commission".
I moved this amendment on Committee Stage. It seeks to insert the words "or the interests of the Commission" with a view to strengthening the legislation. I considered this was necessary at the time and still consider it is appropriate to bring it forward on Report Stage. I await the Minister of State's opinion.
The SEM committee is being established under the provisions of the Bill and the corresponding Northern Ireland order in Council to take regulatory decisions with regard to the new single wholesale market on behalf of the CER in the South and the NIAUR in the North. The function of the SEM committee is to take decisions in the best interests of the market, thereby establishing and operating a competitive wholesale market on an all-island basis. To take specific cognisance of the interests of the commission would be contrary to an all-island decision-making process set out in the legislation, both North and South. Therefore, the amendment cannot be accepted.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 17:
In page 5, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
"(7) The SEM Committee shall always take full cognisance of the impact of Committee decisions on household and business electricity consumers and shall refer in this matter to the relevant statutory consumer protection agencies within the Commission and the Authority.".
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 18:
In page 5, line 45, after "time" where it secondly occurs to insert the following:
", subject to prior agreement between the relevant parties".
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 19:
In page 5, after line 47, to insert the following:
"6.—The Act of 1999 is amended by the insertion after section 9(3) of the following:
"(4) It shall be the duty of the Minister and the Commission to establish a representative consumer panel of not less than fifteen persons within the Commission for Energy Regulation which will be continuously consulted on energy market pricing policy.".".
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 20:
In page 6, to delete lines 5 to 7 and substitute the following:
""(5A) Where the Single Electricity Market is in operation, subsections (3), (4) and (5) shall not apply in relation to a matter which is a SEM matter.".".
This is a minor technical amendment which I flagged on Committee Stage. It is for reasons of clarity to ensure the Commission for Energy Regulation considers the same range of duties in the exercise of its SEM functions as the NIAUR in Northern Ireland.
Is that the reference to the 1999 Act?
Does that mean effectively that issues relating to sustainability and the environment, the subject of Deputy Eamon Ryan's amendment, will be disregarded by the SEM? If they are, amendment No. 34 is critical.
They are provided for in section 9(b) of the SEM Bill.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 21:
In page 6, line 22, after "and (3)" to insert the following:
"subject to the approval of the relevant Ministers in the relevant jurisdictions".
Amendment put and declared lost.
I move amendment No. 22:
In page 6, to delete line 35 and substitute "to be a minimum or maximum".
I have tabled this amendment because it would add precision to the Bill in identifying precisely a minimum or maximum threshold. I await the Minister of State's response.
The amendment proposes amending section 9BA(2)(b)(ii) to establish a minimum and maximum threshold for the purpose of licences under subparagraph (iii) which provides for licensees who produce below a minimum level of 10 megawatts. Such licensees can produce up to a threshold and have a choice with regard to whether they participate in the SEM. It is clear from the current drafting of subparagraphs (i) and (iii) that this is what is meant. The proposal which would set a reference to a minimum or maximum is not appropriate and would only lead to confusion, particularly as there has never been any intention to provide for a maximum threshold. The proposed amendment is, therefore, unacceptable.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 23:
In page 7, lines 5 and 6, to delete "Single Electricity Market operator" and substitute "SEM operator".
This is a technical amendment to which I previously referred. I referred to a couple of other relevant and associated sections.
Question, "That the words proposed to be deleted stand," put and declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.
Amendment No. 24 not moved.
Acting Chairman
As amendments Nos. 25 and 35 are related, they may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 25:
In page 9, line 14, after "protect" to insert "and give the highest priority to".
This amendment reflects earlier amendments and the discussion on the protection of consumers' interests in the revised section 9BC of the 1999 Act, on which we had a vote. I want to change the words "protect the interests of consumers of electricity in the State and Northern Ireland supplied by authorised persons" to "protect and give the highest priority to the interests of consumers of electricity in the State and Northern Ireland supplied by authorised persons". This should be central. Amendment No. 35 is to page 9, line 49, where I want to prioritise the interests of consumers.
As I stated, the principal objective of the Minister, the CER and the SEM committee is to protect the interests of consumers of electricity, both North and South. Its designation as the principal objective gives it priority status. It is not necessary, therefore, to confer additional priority. I cannot accept the amendment.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 26, 30, 32, 36, 37, 40, 52 and 59 are cognate and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 26:
In page 9, line 15, to delete "the" and substitute "this".
We had quite a discussion on this amendment on Committee Stage. It seeks to introduce precision to the description. The term "The State" is used in the Bill. The amendment would substitute the word "the" for "this". When talking about another jurisdiction, it is appropriate to use the words "this State" which is in no way derogatory. It merely recognises that there are references to two states. I do not propose to delay the business of the House but there are two jurisdictions, which is why we should have a joint approach.
Article 4 of the Constitution provides that "the name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland". All references to the State in the Bill are, therefore, correct in accordance with the definition used in the Constitution. This is a standard drafting provision in legislation. Therefore, the amendment is unnecessary.
Question, "That the word proposed to be deleted stand," put and declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.
Acting Chairman
As amendments Nos. 60 to 62, inclusive, are related to amendments Nos. 27, they will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 27:
In page 9, line 16, to delete "appropriate" and substitute "appropriate,".
I do not wish to delay the proceedings of the House other than to mention that this amendment is similar to another introduced by the Minister on Committee Stage. It concerns the introduction of a comma or apostrophe at the appropriate location. The Ceann Comhairle will be happy to learn that we had an enlightened debate on this precise issue on Committee Stage. As the result was inconclusive, I do not propose to delay the proceedings of the House other than to ask the Minister of State if, in the interim, he has appreciated the wisdom of what took place on Committee Stage and will now embrace it in the fashion in which it was intended?
As we know, the Chairman of the Select Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy O'Flynn, suggested that I consider some of the drafting amendments tabled by Oppositions Deputies before Report Stage. I have consulted the Parliamentary Counsel on a number of such amendments and I am satisfied that the drafting of the Bill is appropriate, relevant and consistent with standard drafting practice. Amendment No. 27 proposes the insertion of an additional comma. The advice of the Parliamentary Counsel is that the insertion of a comma as suggested by Deputy Durkan in the amendment would change the intended meaning of the provision as drafted. Therefore, the amendment cannot be accepted. Amendments Nos. 60 to 62, inclusive, also proposed by the Deputy, which concern the insertion of additional commas in section 18, cannot be accepted for the same reason.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 28:
In page 9, line 19, after "sale" to insert ", distribution".
I will withdraw the amendment unless the Minister of State, in his wisdom and magnanimity, wants to take it on board.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
I move amendment No. 29:
In page 9, line 26, to delete "reasonable".
I again ask the Minister of State why he simply will not accept the amendment.
The wording in section 9 of the Bill reflects the need to ensure all reasonable demands for electricity are met. This is meant to exclude demands that may in some way be unreasonable and, therefore, impossible for the State to meet. Accordingly, acceptance of the amendment could expose the State to the risk of being sued for not discharging a requirement beyond its control. It should be noted that the current provisions of the Bill are consistent with the wording of the relevant Internal Market directive. Therefore, I do not accept the amendment.
At the height of the winter season, Christmas, for example, could somebody say these were unreasonable demands? If one of the Minister of State's successors had to explain why there had been a blackout, this could get him or her off the hook in respect of security of supply.
I do not think so but I must seek clarification.
This could apply to any product.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 30 not moved.
I move amendment No. 31:
In page 9, line 31, to delete "the subject of conditions" and substitute "the subject of conditions or obligations".
This is a minor technical amendment to ensure all statutory obligations are incorporated in the exercise of the functions of the Minister, the CER and the SEM committee as opposed to just licence conditions, as currently provided. This drafting is also consistent with the provisions of the Northern Ireland draft order in the Council.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 32 not moved.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 33 arises out of Committee proceedings. Amendment No. 45 is consequential on amendment No. 33 and both may be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 33:
In page 9, between lines 46 and 47, to insert the following:
"(f) having need to ensure that no further privatisation of electricity generation or supply takes place when the Single Market comes into effect.”.
I am trying to ensure the electricity supply is retained in public ownership rather than being privatised, thereby ceding control over the supply, pricing and so on.
I support the amendment and the important principle Deputy Ferris is seeking to insert in section 9. The evolution of the electricity market in the years ahead will be critical and a competitive market with the lowest prices will be important. However, it is also a concern that the networks, in particular, and key generation assets could end up in private ownership. Deputy Ferris is seeking to ensure that will not happen and that it should be provided for in legislation. I support him.
This is a technical Bill, which is intended to introduce a legislative framework for the establishment and operation of a single wholesale electricity market. Its intent is to provide only for matters essential for that purpose. Matters concerning privatisation are outside the intended scope of the Bill and cannot, therefore, be addressed in the context of single electricity market legislation. I cannot accept these amendments.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 28; Níl, 72.
Tá
- Breen, James.
- Broughan, Thomas P.
- Burton, Joan.
- Costello, Joe.
- Cowley, Jerry.
- Crowe, Seán.
- Ferris, Martin.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Healy, Seamus.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Lynch, Kathleen.
- McGrath, Finian.
- McManus, Liz.
- Murphy, Catherine.
- Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
- O’Shea, Brian.
- O’Sullivan, Jan.
- Pattison, Seamus.
- Penrose, Willie.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
- Sherlock, Joe.
- Shortall, Róisín.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Upton, Mary.
- Wall, Jack.
Níl
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Andrews, Barry.
- Ardagh, Seán.
- Blaney, Niall.
- Brady, Johnny.
- Brady, Martin.
- Brennan, Seamus.
- Browne, John.
- Callanan, Joe.
- Carey, Pat.
- Carty, John.
- Cassidy, Donie.
- Collins, Michael.
- Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cregan, John.
- Curran, John.
- Davern, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Dempsey, Tony.
- Dennehy, John.
- Devins, Jimmy.
- Ellis, John.
- Finneran, Michael.
- Fitzpatrick, Dermot.
- Fleming, Seán.
- Gallagher, Pat The Cope.
- Glennon, Jim.
- Grealish, Noel.
- Hanafin, Mary.
- Harney, Mary.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Hoctor, Máire.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kelleher, Billy.
- Kelly, Peter.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Seamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Conor.
- McDaid, James.
- McDowell, Michael.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- McGuinness, John.
- Martin, Micheál.
- Moloney, John.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Moynihan, Michael.
- Mulcahy, Michael.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
- O’Connor, Charlie.
- O’Dea, Willie.
- O’Donnell, Liz.
- O’Donovan, Denis.
- O’Flynn, Noel.
- O’Keeffe, Batt.
- O’Keeffe, Ned.
- O’Malley, Fiona.
- O’Malley, Tim.
- Parlon, Tom.
- Power, Peter.
- Power, Seán.
- Roche, Dick.
- Sexton, Mae.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Wilkinson, Ollie.
- Woods, Michael.
- Wright, G.V.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Ó Snodaigh and Stagg; Níl, Deputies Kitt and Kelleher.
Amendment declared lost.
I am required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: "That the amendments set down by the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and not disposed of are hereby made to the Bill; Fourth Stage is hereby completed; and the Bill is hereby passed."
Question put and agreed to.
