Amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, have been ruled out of order.
Electricity Costs (Emergency Measures) Domestic Accounts Bill 2023: Committee and Remaining Stages
SECTION 1
Amendment Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, not moved.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2
Amendment No. 4 has been ruled out of order.
Amendment No. 4 not moved.
Section 2 agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
SECTION 4
Amendment Nos. 5 to 7, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 7, line 9, to delete “assigned”.
I will address amendments Nos. 5 to 7. Following publication of the Bill, an anomaly was found within the text of section 4 "functions of the distribution system operator" in relation to this No. III scheme. This amendment is required to enable the distribution system operator, DSO, to notify each supplier of meter point reference numbers, MPRNs, that has low-usage electricity that it is not held by a registered vulnerable customer or a holder of a hardship meter. When ESBN takes a snapshot of all MPRNs in the country due for payment under the scheme, it will also flag any accounts with electricity usage below 150 kW per quarter for four consecutive quarters. This threshold is being used to identify low electricity consumption levels of a potentially vacant house. Once this information is flagged by ESBN, electricity suppliers will then withhold the credit payments from these accounts. Without this amendment, the ESBN will not be in a position to advise suppliers that a MPRN with low usage is a registered vulnerable customer or a holder of a hardship meter. This could result in payment being inadvertently withheld from an eligible household and on that basis I propose the approval of this amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 7, line 11, to delete “and”.
Amendment agreed to.
Ryan; Eamon
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 7, line 12, to insert the following:
“(ii) the meter point registration number for each low usage electricity account which is not held by a registered vulnerable customer or a holder of a hardship meter account, and”
Amendment agreed to.
Section 4, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 5
Amendment No. 8 has been ruled out of order.
Amendment No. 8 not moved.
Amendments Nos. 9 and 15 are related and will be discussed together. Amendment No. 15 is consequential on amendment No. 9. If amendment No. 9 is negatived, amendment No. 15 cannot be moved.
I move amendment No. 9:
In page 8, after line 40, to insert the following:
“(3) Electricity suppliers shall remove any arrears limits placed on pre-pay meters until the Minister directs otherwise.”.
In the interest of brevity, and given the Second Stage debate, I withdraw amendments Nos. 9 and 15 with a view to perhaps reintroducing them on a further Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 5 agreed to.
SECTION 6
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 9, between lines 4 and 5, to insert the following:
“6. (1) Where an electricity supplier refuses to make an electricity costs emergency benefit payment then the final customer may request the electricity supplier, on or before 30
June 2024 to review its refusal.
(2) The request under subsection (1) shall state the reasons why the person making the request wishes the refusal by the electricity supplier to be reviewed.
(3) The electricity supplier shall within 28 days of the request under subsection (1), take into account the reasons stated in the review request and shall—
(a) affirm the refusal to make the electricity costs emergency benefit payment, or
(b) on being satisfied that the final customer is or is eligible to be registered as a vulnerable customer or is the holder of a hardship meter account, make the electricity costs emergency benefit payment.
(4) An electricity supplier shall inform the final customer who made the request under subsection (1) of the electricity supplier’s decision under subsection (3) in writing within 28 days of the request for review.
(5) Where the electricity supplier makes a decision referred to in subsection (3)(a) it shall when informing the final customer concerned under subsection (4)—
(a) state the reasons for the refusal, and
(b) specify the period (being not less than 60 days from the date on which the final customer concerned is informed of the decision under subsection (4)) within which an objection, under section 9R(1)(e) of the Act of 1999, may be made to the Commission.
(6) Where, following a review under this section, an electricity supplier determines that an electricity costs emergency benefit payment will not be applied to a domestic electricity account, the final customer may make an objection, under section 9R(1)(e) of the Act of 1999, to the Commission.”
This is a straightforward amendment which tweaks a welcome measure within the Government's Bill regarding the review mechanism. This amendment makes the review procedure more robust, enhances consumer protection and provides more certainty to customers. The amendment mandates energy supplies to respond to a request for a review within a specified timeframe of 28 days, rather than the "as soon as is practicable" on which there may be a question mark and technically could mean anything. The amendment also seeks to provide more definitive timelines for raising complaints to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, subsequent to the supplier enhancing predictability for ordinary workers and families and it strengthens the disputes resolution mechanism.
I wish to support this amendment because language is very important in all legislation but "as far as practicable" was not good enough here because we know some of these big companies are very hard to engage with and they are intimidating, not deliberately, just by the fact of what they are. It is important for customers to be able to engage with them and get a timely response and a review when they feel they are unfairly treated. Therefore, I am supporting this amendment as well.
I am afraid I cannot accept proposed amendment No. 10, which relates to section 6 of the Bill and the review by electricity suppliers for customers who did not receive payment under the scheme. While I very much thank the Deputy for the suggested additions, I do not intend to accept them. The proposed amendments of Part 3 and Part 4 seek to include a limit of 28 days for a supplier to consider a review request, and 28 days to respond in writing to review requests. While I recognise the merit and the motivation of this amendment, it could cause unintended consequences for electricity suppliers and consumers. Setting a limit of 28 days for a supplier review and response could prove difficult to implement and to adhere to if issues arose. I understand that previously with scheme I and scheme II there was a large increase in call volumes to energy supply call centres regarding the operational roll-out of the credit. This caused problems such as an increased wait time for customers and it is not something to which we should add during the winter months. By permitting the review to be carried out as soon as practicable after receipt of the request, this provides the flexibility required for dealing with requests so it is proposed not to accept the amendments.
Regarding amendment No. 5(b), the Deputy seeks to provide an extended 60-day period for a review decision to be referred to the CRU. The Bill has provided 28 days for this referral. The scheme will end on 31 July 2023. Suppliers will return unallocated funds to ESBN which in turn will forward these moneys back to my Department. It is preferable that these moneys are returned to the Exchequer as soon as practicable. There is no obvious reason or benefit as to why they should be extended, therefore I propose to reject the amendment.
Amendment put and declared lost.
Section 6 agreed to.
SECTION 7
Amendment No. 11 has been ruled out of order.
Amendment No.11 not moved.
Section 7 agreed to.
Sections 8 to 13, inclusive, agreed to.
NEW SECTION
I move amendment No. 12:
In page 14, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following:
“Reporting
14. (1) The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the application of the Electricity Costs Emergency Benefit Scheme III and the Submeter Support Scheme to address high electricity costs.
(2) The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the application of the Electricity Costs Emergency Benefit Scheme III and the Submeter Support Scheme compared to emergency measures adopted in other EU states to address high electricity costs.”.
This amendment has the effect of requiring the Minister to review and report the use of electricity credits to address the high energy prices. In fairness, some of these were exacerbated by reasons outside of the Government's control such as the war in Ukraine and international factors, and then there are other elements which are unique to Ireland. I propose that there would be two elements to this.
The amendment proposes that the Minister "shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, prepare and lay before the Dáil a report on the application of the Electricity Costs Emergency Benefit Scheme III and the Submeter Support Scheme to address high electricity costs" and that the Minister shall "prepare and lay before Dáil Éireann a report on the application of the Electricity Costs Emergency Benefit Scheme III and the Submeter Support Scheme compared to emergency measures adopted in other EU states to address high electricity costs".
The amendment calls for a period of reflection during which we look at the performance of these measures as a policy intervention here and how they compare with what is adopted by other countries. I made a point on Second Stage which I believe is relevant here in a wider context. The Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, is looking at this and it is important that the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, the Department and the Minister are very conscious of it. There are unique factors in Ireland that contribute to the high cost of electricity. Some of these are outside of the control of the Government. Some of them are within its control, whether in terms of the design of the schemes we have, the design of our systems, the nature of our grid and the nature of the energy market that we have here. Many people point towards the price of electricity in Ireland before the market was deregulated. We are embarking on a massive and very important energy transition and I again refer to the Wind Energy Ireland presentation in the audiovisual room. Consistently when it asks people for their perspective on wind energy, and we might more broadly say renewables, the number one reason that endears people to this notion is the prospect of reduced electricity bills. We are seeing the opposite. Relatively the prices are reducing but we are seeing the price of renewables increasing. This is something that must be tackled if we are to deliver on the shared collective objective of energy independence and security.
I thank Deputy O'Rourke. Section 10 of the Bill requires the CRU to report to me as Minister on the performance of the distribution system operator and electricity suppliers in their respective functions under the legislation. We also intend to have a post-enactment scrutiny report, to be published approximately 12 months after the passing of the Bill. Under the energy poverty action plan approved by the Government in December 2022, which is overseen by a cross-departmental steering group chaired by the Department, we have quarterly progress reports and an annual report to the Government to outline the activity and progress under the various strategy actions. What the Deputy suggests in his amendment complements and enhances this and I believe it would be a good addition to the Bill. I will be happy to accept the amendment as proposed.
I apologise I got distracted. Did the Minister say he will accept the amendment?
Yes. It was the shock.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 14 agreed to.
TITLE
Amendments Nos. 13 and 14 have been ruled out of order.
Amendments Nos. 13 and 14 not moved.
Amendment No. 15 cannot be moved.
Amendment No. 15 not moved.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments and received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank the Deputies opposite for allowing the speedy passage of the Bill. Irish householders will be appreciative of it. While the Leas-Cheann Comhairle was reading out the Title I was watching how the officials were literally following the letter of the law because that is what we are drafting.
This legislation is not insignificant. It is a €1 billion payment to the Irish people from the Irish people to help us through the very difficult period we have in the world today with high energy prices. I thank the departmental officials for their work and help in delivering the Bill. I very much look forward to the Seanad debate and, I hope, the swift passage of the legislation. It will allow us to see payments for people's bills before Christmas.
We have seen the application of this mechanism in the past year and a half or two years when bills have been so high. When people are not able to pay electricity bills, the arrears tend to creep up. Every time we have applied this measure the most noticeable and dramatic effect is that it has allowed households to cope. It causes a dramatic drop in the number of households in arrears. It is for this reason it is significant and it is important that we get the letter of the law right.
We accept that the Bill went through speedily and everybody supports it. We welcome the payments, supports and mechanisms for people to get the payment. While it is an effort, we are not tackling the elephant in the room, which is the exorbitant prices being charged in this country in comparison to our EU colleagues. We have the highest prices by far. We can blame the climate crisis or whatever but the Minister's actions in shutting down peat stations and the bogs-----
This part of the debate is strictly about what is in the Bill.
Yes, I know. I have acknowledged the Bill has its supports, which are acceptable, good and positive, but we are just fooling around with people's money. We are taking money off people and literally robbing Peter to pay Paul and allowing the big moguls to gouge all they like.
I do not wish to interrupt the Deputy but the debate at this point is confined to what is in the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.