Gas (Interim) (Regulation) Bill, 2001: Committee Stage.
Section 1 agreed to.
SECTION 2.
I move amendment No. 1:
In page 4, subsection (1), line 16, to delete "consumer" and substitute "person".
I have to confess to a life-long aversion to the word "consumer" because it is such a vague term. I have often argued that we should replace it with the word "customer". What is happening here, however, is different. The term "customer" is being used in this Bill and I applaud it, but in this section "customer" is being defined as a consumer. There are a number of reasons against proceeding in that way and I wish to argue them through. One is that the term "consumer" is not defined in the Bill. The legislation defines the word "customer" and states that a customer is a consumer, yet it does not define what is a consumer.
More importantly, there is an error in the level of generality that is employed. It is not good grammar to define a term with a term of the same level of generality, once one has looked to a higher level for the appropriate term. In this case, I submit that the appropriate term at the appropriate level of generality is the word "person". The fact that a customer could be a company rather than an individual does not affect the issue because conventionally the term "person" covers individuals and what are called legal persons. The instance of a company as a customer sits better with the concept of "person" than it does with the concept of "consumer".
If one uses the word "customer" and then defines what a customer is by saying it is a consumer, one must also define the term "consumer" and we will get into terminology that is difficult. That problem could be solved if we said "person" in the knowledge that if it is a legal person a company would be covered by that term. This amendment improves the meaning and intention of the Bill.
I thank you, a Chathaoir ligh, and Senators for agreeing to take Committee and Remaining Stages of the Gas (Interim) (Regulation) Bill, 2001, today. Senator Quinn's contribution was thought-provoking. His proposal is to amend the definition of the phrase "final customer" by substituting the word "person" for "consumer". The word "consumer" has been used in this instance to mirror the definition used in EU Directive 98/30 which deals with the internal market in the natural gas sector. For reasons of consistency of language my preference is to retain the word "consumer" in the definition of "final customer".
I will not press the amendment at this stage. However, I received the same answer when I suggested that the word "consumer" fits uneasily and that it is being used in European terms. I ask the Minister of State to consider this matter before Report Stage to see if he understands the point I am making. The word "customer" is not the correct word, particularly when it means "consumer". Apart from anything else, it is bad English to define "customer" as "consumer" and then not explain what is meant by "consumer". This issue can be resolved by using the word "person" rather than "consumer". I will not push this issue, but perhaps the Minister of State will consider it before Report Stage.
At the risk of repeating myself, I understand what the Senator is saying, but people such as I will be in Brussels tomorrow, next week and in the future dealing at European level. We should stick with a consistency of terminology.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Government amendment No. 2:
In page 4, to delete lines 29 to 31 and substitute the following new definition:
" ‘shipping' in relation to natural gas, means the introduction into, the conveyance by means of, or take off from the natural gas system of natural gas by persons other than the operator of the relevant pipeline or facility being used for the purpose of introducing, conveying or taking off the natural gas;".
The purpose of this amendment is to expand the definition of "shipping" which is a specific type of supply activity in the natural gas market. Shippers provide a service to customers whereby they arrange for the transport of gas through the system on a customer's behalf. The amendment seeks to clarify that the term "shipping" does not include the activities of the operator of the pipeline or other facility used to transport the natural gas on behalf of the shipper.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 2, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 3.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 5, line 18, after "day" to insert ", not later than three months after the passage of this Act,".
This amendment seeks to inject some sense of urgency into the Bill. On Second Stage I made the point that it is late in the day to introduce an interim arrangement for the regulation of the gas industry given the amount of time which has passed since the other regulators were established and the period of over three years, if I remember correctly, which has elapsed since the passing of the relevant EU directive.
This being so, I am anxious to avoid further delay such as a situation in which the Bill is passed into law but those responsible for its implementation drag their feet in terms of putting it into effect. Realistically this Bill is likely to be enacted in the immediate run-up to a general election. It is an unfortunate, but unavoidable, fact of life that the period immediately before an election is one in which the machinery of Government tends to grind to a halt. If the business of forming a new Government is prolonged this stoppage continues. This is especially so if the election is followed immediately by a summer period – which is likely to be the case on this occasion. In the worst case scenario, we could see this Bill being passed into law and then sitting for six months or more before being implemented. This amendment would put everybody on notice that a more urgent approach is needed in this case. That is why I am suggesting a limit of three months for bringing it into operation.
I can understand the Senator's desire to ensure that the transfer of functions to the commission takes place within a realistic timescale. I share his desire, indeed his resolve, that that will happen. I can assure him that I will make the order appointing a day as soon as possible after enactment. However, before I sign the order under this section, I have a responsibility as Minister to ensure that the commission is appropriately and adequately prepared to undertake the additional functions which are proposed in this Act. While I would expect that this should occur within three months of the passing of the Act, I cannot agree to the inclusion of such a timescale in the legislation that would limit my discretion on this issue in this way.
I reassure the Senator of the air of urgency on this matter that I articulated at my parliamentary party meeting this morning. The liberalisation of the gas market is part of the programme for Government. That of itself is a factor which brings a particular air of urgency to this. I concur with the need for urgency which the Senator has articulated. While keeping the level of discretion that I need in deference to the CER and other aspects, this will happen.
I suppose I know what the Minister is saying and I know he does not want to be tied down to a three month restriction, but it is exactly the terms that he used that worries me. He wants to make sure everything is prepared. What happens in life – it certainly happens in business and in Government – is that there are priorities. Sometimes the long finger grows longer and longer. I am not going to press this but I would like to find some way whereby the Minister's intention is actually enforced. I suggested that we make it part of the Bill to enforce this in three months. In the light of what the Minister is saying I am not going to push that. I know his intention, but priorities do not always stay as priorities and other priorities take their place. I reluctantly withdraw the amendment because I know the Minister's heart is in the right place, but matters are not always in his own hands.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 3 agreed to.
Sections 4 and 5 agreed to.
SECTION 6.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 6, line 23, after "Act" to insert ", in the interests of the final customers of electricity or gas or both, as the case may be".
The amendment aims to assist the Commission for Energy Regulation in making the underlying motivation behind its remit a little clearer. We must remember that legislation such as this is used on a day-to-day basis by the regulators in deciding when and how they should act. In this case I want to make it very clear to the commission why it is being asked to promote competition.
I applaud the fact that the Minister saw fit to include a competition proviso in this Bill. I remember arguing at length, unfortunately without success, to have a simple provision put into the telecom regulator's remit. I did not succeed and I am delighted that the Minister has done it on this occasion. Having taken this welcome step we need to go further and to make it very clear to the commission that our interest in competition is not an end in itself, but is a means to an end and that end is in the interests of the final customer.
There is nothing beneficial about competition on its own. Most think that business people believe competition is the Holy Grail. However, the value of competition lies in the final end it achieves. To set up competition as a god in itself, as this Bill in its present form does, amounts to being driven by ideology rather than practicality. It opens up the possibility that the commission will be forced to act in a way that ultimately is not in the interests of the customer. To avoid doubt and make life easier for the commission we, the legislators, should make it very clear to it that what lies behind the emphasis on competition in the Bill is the interests of the customer.
I hope I have explained my point. If we leave competition in its present form and do not stress that it is "in the interests of the final customers of electricity or gas or both, as the case may be", we virtually tie the hands of the commission by making a god of competition when we should be stating that we are promoting competition in the interests of the final customer. The Minister of State should take this into account and accept my amendment.
Again, I understand the sentiment behind the proposed amendment. I point out that a duty on the commission to protect "the interests of final customers for electricity or gas or both" is already provided for under the amendment to section 9(3) of the Electricity Regulation Act, 1999, as proposed in section 6(b) of the Bill. As such, the amendment may entail repetition. Section 6(b) states:
(3) It shall be the duty of the Minister and the Commission to carry out their functions and exercise the powers conferred on them under this Act in a manner which–
. . . . . (b) in relation to gas, does not discriminate unfairly between holders of licences, consents and Bórd Gáis Éireann or between applicants for consents or licences, and
(c) the Minister or the Commission, as the case may be, considers protects the interests of final customers of electricity or gas or both, as the case may be.
The amendment proposed by the Senator is, therefore, incorporated in the section.
I understand the Minister of State's point that this area is covered by the legislation, but the amendment reinforces it. The substitution of paragraph (a) by the following paragraph: “(a) to promote competition in the generation and supply of electricity and in the supply of natural gas in accordance with this Act” suggests there is something holy about competition. Adding the phrase, “in the interests of the final customers of electricity or gas or both, as the case may be,” strengthens that paragraph no end.
The phrase, "considers protects the interests of final customers", in paragraph 6(b), which the Minister of State just quoted, is a long way from stating that competition should be “in the interests of the customer.” I am referring not just to protecting customers, but also to using competition in the interests of the customer. I ask the Minister of State to accept the amendment.
As the duties are spelt out in the Bill, it is not necessary to repeat them. I regret I cannot accept the amendment.
Is the amendment being pressed?
While I will not press the amendment, there is a case to be made for accepting it. This matter is mentioned earlier in the Bill, but not specifically with regard to competition. The amendment would strengthen the legislation no end. I ask the Minister of State to reconsider between now and Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Government amendments Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.
Government amendment No. 5:
In page 6, line 25, to delete "(e) and (f)” and substitute “(d) to (f)”.
I trust that as Committee Stage progresses we will be able to be more co-operative in other areas. These amendments deal with the imposition of additional duties on the commission in the areas of safety and efficiency.
Amendments Nos. 5 and 6, which I propose, seek to extend the existing duty of the commission to promote safety and efficiency on the part of electricity undertakings to cover natural gas undertakings also. These two amendments deal fully with the issues raised by Senator Quinn in relation to safety in amendments Nos. 7 and 8 and the issue of efficiency raised by Senator Caffrey in amendment No. 9.
On efficiency in the wider energy context, I point out to Senator Caffrey the role of the Irish Energy Centre in promoting energy efficiency among industrial and domestic energy users in Ireland. The Sustainable Energy Bill, 2001, which was before this House recently, aims to establish the centre on a legislative footing with clear responsibilities for energy efficiency, and giving similar responsibility to the commission would merely lead to confusion. On this basis I propose that amendments Nos. 5 and 6 be accepted as they cover the position. Amendments Nos. 7, 8 and 9 are not required.
I am pleased the Minister has put forward amendments Nos. 5 and 6. My two amendments are the first of a number of amendments that are intended to emphasise the issue of public safety – I stress public safety – in this Bill. The events of 11 September in the United States brought home to all of us that we have moved into a new and more terrifying era – it is not the same world any more particularly where terrorism is concerned. Public utilities will be in the front line in this new era. We have heard about concerns in Britain regarding Sellafield and we will be discussing that tonight. I am talking about public buildings, transport facilities, electricity, gas and water networks. From now on, it is only prudent that we regard these vital parts of our infrastructure as being open to attack from terrorists in a way that we would not have even thought of last month.
Accordingly, in creating a legislative framework for any of this infrastructure we must make it clear to those who are charged with the regulation and operation of these facilities that the issue of public safety is not only part of their remit but that it should be in the forefront of their minds when they make decisions. We should spell out the issue of public safety in this Bill. I am not referring to technical issues of safety which are adequately catered for in this Bill. What I have in mind is the threat to public safety that can arise from a deliberate attack on some aspect of the gas or electricity network.
We must make it very clear that the responsibility of the regulators and the operators extends to these matters. I would not have thought of these amendments four or five weeks ago but since 11 September we must consider these matters. The terms used by the Minister do not provide for the effect that I have in mind. I am talking about public safety following the terrorist attacks of 11 September. The onus of responsibility should be on the commission and I urge the Minister to give consideration to what I say because this is a different situation from that one month ago.
Senator Quinn's amendment has covered what I intended with my amendment. The conservation of energy in all areas will be of paramount importance in the years to come and it must be embodied in the legislation. The commission must be made aware that it is part of its responsibility to ensure that we have the most efficient use of energy at all times.
I listened very closely to Senator Quinn on the subject of safety. We must agree with him when he talks about a new era. I have considered this issue and it is being addressed in terms of later amendments from Senator Quinn. In accepting later amendments on public safety I believe his fears for public safety will be addressed.
Senator Caffrey raised the issue of energy conservation and energy efficiency. This is a very important issue not least because of our commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. The Government has recognised this and has already embarked on giving a statutory basis to the Irish Energy Centre and beefing it up. It will be given the funding to spearhead that whole area. This is the role which will be allocated to the reconstituted Irish Energy Centre.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 6:
In page 6, to delete lines 27 to 35 and substitute the following:
"(d) to promote safety and efficiency on the part of electricity and natural gas undertakings;
(e) to promote the continuity, security and quality of supplies of electricity;
(f) to promote the use of renewable, sustainable or alternative forms of energy;
(g) to secure that there is sufficient capacity in the natural gas system to enable reasonable expectations of demand to be met; and
(h) to secure the continuity, security and quality of supplies of natural gas.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 7 to 9, inclusive, not moved.
Section 6, as amended, agreed to.
Section 7 agreed to.
SECTION 8.
Amendments Nos. 23 to 25, inclusive, 30, 34 and 45 are related to amendment No. 10 and all may be discussed together by agreement.
Government amendment No. 10:
In page 7, line 31, to delete "or (c)” and substitute “, (c) or (d)”.
These amendments are designed to allow persons, in addition to BGE, to become involved in the supply of gas in towns and to be granted third party access rights in that capacity. Amendment No. 45 expands the existing amendments to the Gas (Amendment) Act, 1987 proposed in section 19 of the published Bill, to take account of the proposals to allow the commission to make an order under section 2(1) of that Act conferring on persons, in addition to Bord Gáis Éireann, the functions of a ‘town gas' company.
The 1987 Act was introduced following the demise of the original town gas companies, such as the Cork Gas Company and the Alliance and Dublin Gas Company. To date, BGE has been granted the sole power to operate in place of these town gas companies. The proposal to introduce competition into this area is based on the following reasons:
First, the proposed extension of the natural gas network currently being undertaken by BGE will bring gas to many areas of population not previously supplied by the network. This development presents an important opportunity for the introduction of competition into this area of the market and, by presenting opportunities to new market entrants, should encourage the growth of competition throughout the whole gas market. Second, my proposals to reduce the consumption threshold for eligibility for third party access rights to zero by 2005 to allow for full competition in the natural gas sector requires a mechanism to be put in place so that the commission may effectively regulate the domestic supply market. The framework established under the Gas (Amendment) Act, 1987 provides an effective interim solution for this purpose.
Among the changes being proposed to the 1987 Act by this amendment are the proposal to allow the commission to grant an order to any person, including BGE, to operate as a town gas company; the granting of the power to the commission to regulate the pricing policy of any person operating as such a company and the granting of the power to the commission to conduct a competitive process for the selection of a suitable person on whom to confer town gas functions in regard to a particular geographic area, where the commission considers it necessary.
The remaining amendments being taken with amendment No. 45 are being put forward to ensure that persons who are the subject of an order made by the commission under the 1987 Act may avail of third party access (TPA) rights under section l0(a) of the Gas Act, 1976, as amended by this Bill under section 11. The granting of TPA rights to such persons is a prerequisite for any person, including BGE, to be able to source their own gas for the purposes of operating as a ‘town gas' company.
In amendment No. 24, I am proposing to expand the exemption from the eligibility threshold for TPA rights, that currently covers operators of gas fired generating stations and small-scale combined heat and power (CHP) plants, to include persons operating as ‘town gas' companies. This recognises the fact that, within its first period of operation, while such a company is building its customer base, it would be unreasonable to expect it to attain the minimum consumption threshold which is required to avail of third party access rights. I propose, therefore, that amendments Nos. 10, 23 to 25, inclusive, 30, 34 and 45 be accepted.
My concern in this regard reflects a criticism which was voiced on the Order of Business by Senator O'Toole, who suggested that, while we are very happy to have the Bill initiated in this House, it was introduced before it was quite ready. The introduction of such a list of amendments so soon after Second Stage does suggest a criticism of the preparedness of this Bill – that the homework was not done ahead of time. I hope the Minister can put my mind at rest in that regard.
Yes, I believe I can put the Senator's mind at rest. In the preparation of this very important Bill, there was wide consultation. After it was drafted, there was further wide consultation and it has been very comprehensively examined at this stage to ensure that the aims of the Bill are fully comprehensive. Hopefully, when the Bill has completed its passage through this House and the other House, we will have a very adequate and comprehensive piece of legislation.
I accept entirely what the Minister has said and, of course, that is what we all hope. In voicing my criticism, I would feel happier if some of these amendments came about as a result of things said on Second Stage. The fact that this Bill was introduced last Wednesday, and now we have this list of amendments a week later, suggests that something happened in that week. Perhaps the eloquence of this House convinced the Minister to make all these changes, but I am not sure that these particular points featured greatly on Second Stage. I would hate to think this Bill was rushed in and that amendments were being cobbled together within one week. Perhaps it is just my suspicious mind at work.
I am glad to say that some of the issues referred to on Second Stage are embodied in the amendments now before us. This saves me putting down some of those amendments myself. I thank the Minister for taking on board some of the advice, if that is the right term, which I gave here last week.
On that basis – and I must admit I may not have followed everything Senator Caffrey said last week – I withdraw my criticism.
We are very grateful for the contributions last week from Senators in a very comprehensive and thought provoking debate. Perhaps we did learn more than a little from it and some of the content of that debate is incorporated in what we are proposing in the amendments today.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 13 is related to amendment No. 11. Amendments Nos. 11 and 13 may be taken together, by agreement.
I move amendment No. 11:
In page 8, to delete lines 29 to 32.
The acceptance of amendment No. 10 will entail the consequent deletion of subsection (5). Section 8(3)(i) states that the board shall have power "to subscribe or guarantee money for charitable or benevolent objects, or for any institution or for any public general or useful object". I never heard anything like that before. I totally disagree with this provision. I take the view that subscribing money for charitable or benevolent purposes should not be within the remit of any State body, except a body that is specifically set up for that purpose. When the State contributes to charitable or other causes, it should do it openly and transparently. I see no good reason whatsoever to necessitate the laundering of such contributions through the medium of a State body. This is a most unusual provision. I cannot remember seeing a provision like this ever before. I challenge the Minister to cite precedents. Even if they exist – and it may well be that they do – I argue that they are very bad precedents.
The real problem with this sub-paragraph is not that it applies to charitable and benevolent causes, but that it also extends to everything else as well. The board is also empowered to subscribe or guarantee money "to or for any institution"– note "any institution"– or "for any public general or useful object". This provision is open to abuse. Have we forgotten the instances that were uncovered of State companies subscribing generously to golf outings of political parties? Such contributions clearly fall within this provision. There is no way to rewrite this provision to avoid such abuse.
Let me make it clear that I have no objection whatsoever to companies, whether State bodies or otherwise, making contributions in pursuit of their marketing objectives. That is expenditure carried out in pursuit of the company's fundamental commercial purpose and it does not need special or separate authorisation. This provision authorises payments made that have nothing to do with the organisation's commercial purpose. In the case of State companies, such payments should not be made. To facilitate them in legislation is to open the door to abuse and corruption. We should strike this subparagraph from the Bill and, with it, subsection (5) which is consequential on it. I would like to hear the Minister's defence of this. I would prefer if he said it had been thought through and that he would accept the amendment.
Section 8(3)(i) of the Gas Act, 1976, provides that the board of Bord Gáis Éireann may make subscriptions for charitable, benevolent and other public, general or useful purposes. In other words, this provision already exists in the Gas Act, 1976. This provision is subject to subsection (5) of the same section which requires that any subscription over a certain amount must be identified with the purpose for which it is given in the company's annual accounts. It is good that public companies are allowed within reason to make subscriptions of this nature which include those to charitable or benevolent institutions. Subsection (5) which requires subscriptions over a certain amount to be specified in the company's annual accounts is a necessary balancing mechanism ensuring that such donations or subscriptions are open to public scrutiny. It is also a useful mechanism for ensuring that the actions of the board in this regard are reasonable.
I reiterate the provision already exists in the Gas Act and this is merely being repeated here for the sake of clarity. Incidentally, in regard to subsection (5), the figure beyond which must be specified in the company's annual accounts is the small figure of €2,000.
I am sorry but I cannot let this go. The Minister has not covered the part which concerns me. Do I understand that with this provision in the legislation, the commission could make a contribution to a political party's golf outing? Is this the purpose of it? Will the Minister tell me it is not possible to do that? If that is what this is and if it enables a contribution to a golf outing – I am only taking that as an instance of a political party – is that bad?
Senator Quinn has come back a second time so he feels very strongly about this. He put his case very vividly and robustly. I remind him that this refers to Bord Gáis, not to the commission. In view of the Senator's contribution, I will reflect on this provision.
I thank the Minister. On the basis of his reply, I will not push the amendment at this stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Government amendment No. 12:
In page 8, to delete lines 44 to 48.
This amendment proposes the deletion of section 8(4) of the Gas Act, 1976, which was originally provided for in the Act at a time when town gas was being extracted from coal. The provision no longer has relevance in the context of the modern natural gas system. This amendment provides for its deletion.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 13 not moved.
Section 8, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 9.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 14 and 15 are related and may be taken together by agreement.
Government amendment No. 14:
In page 10, between lines 34 and 35, to insert the following new paragraph:
"(b) a company (within the meaning of the Harbours Act, 1996),”.
The purpose of these amendments is to update the list of bodies to which pipeline builders must have regard when building pipelines. The amendments propose the insertion of additional paragraphs into the revised sections 39(A)(6) and 44 of the Gas Act, 1976. The new paragraph seeks to ensure that in addition to having regard to the representations of the bodies already listed in these subsections, holders of consents to build pipelines must also have regard to representations made by a company within the meaning of the Harbours Act, 1996, when constructing their pipelines. Companies established under this Act replaced nine of the 22 original harbour authorities. The new companies were given greater power and freedom to operate under a commercial mandate. For that reason, I propose that amendments Nos. 14 and 15 be accepted.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 15:
In page 11, between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following new paragraph:
"(b) a company (within the meaning of the Harbours Act, 1996),”.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 16 and 17 are related and may be taken together by agreement.
Government amendment No. 16:
In page 12, line 25 to delete "and".
These amendments seek to amend the existing section 40(A)(7) of the Gas Act, 1976, to take account of the fact that Ireland has ratified the so-called Espoo or Transboundary Convention. The convention applies to situations where proposed pipeline projects are likely to have significant effects on the environment of the state which is party to the convention. The revised subsection (7) is set out in full in the amendment for the purposes of clarification. However, the actual changes to the text proposed are minimal and consist only of the insertion of the phrase "a state which is party to the Transboundary Convention", with related phrases, into the body of the original text where this is necessary.
The Transboundary Convention was drawn up under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. While the provisions of the convention mirror the requirements under the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, it offers enhanced consultation procedures allowing states affected by developments to have their concerns reflected in any decision made on such developments. I propose that amendments Nos. 16 and 17 be accepted.
I hoped Senator Caffrey would have jumped to his feet and said: "Thank you, Minister for taking into account what I proposed last week", but there is no sign of him doing so. Amendment No. 17 is a long amendment which we did not even know about last week. I am concerned that the legislation was introduced in a hurry last week. It is unusual for long amendments amounting to two or three pages to be tabled as quickly as this. Perhaps Senator Caffrey will put my mind at rest or, if not, perhaps the Minister will do so.
Senator Quinn is correct in this instance.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 17:
In page 12, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following new subparagraph:
"(iii) by the substitution for subsection (7) of the following subsection:
‘(7) (a) Where the Minister considers that a proposed pipeline, which is the subject of an environmental impact statement in accordance with a requirement of or under subsection (1) of this section, would be likely to have significant effects on the environment in another Member State of the European Communities or a state which is party to the Transboundary Convention or where the other state concerned considers that the said pipeline would be likely to have the said effects and so requests, he or she shall, as soon as possible, send to that state–
(i) a description of the proposed pipeline and any available information on its possible effects on the environment in that state, and
(ii) information on the nature of the decision which may be taken, and shall give that state a reasonable time to indicate whether it wishes to furnish views on the said effects.
(b) Where a Member State of the European Communities or a state which is party to the Transboundary Convention which has received information pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection indicates that it wishes to furnish views on the likely effects on the environment of the proposed pipeline, the Minister shall, if he or she has not already done so, send to that state–
(i) a copy of the environmental impact statement, and
(ii) relevant information about the procedure for making a decision on the application or notice concerned.
(c) The Minister shall enter into consultations with a Member State of the European Communities or a state which is party to the Transboundary Convention to which information was sent pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection regarding the potential effects of the proposed pipeline on the environment in that state and the measures envisaged to reduce or eliminate such effects.
(d) The Minister shall notify a Member State of the European Communities or a state which is party to the Transboundary Convention to which information was sent pursuant to paragraph (b) of this subsection of his or her decision on the application or notice concerned.
(e) In this section “Transboundary Convention” means the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context done at Espoo, Finland on 25 February, 1991, and' ”.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 18 and 19 are cognate and may be taken together.
Government amendment No. 18:
In page 12, line 42, to delete "(4)" and substitute "(3)".
I did endeavour to explain this and perhaps did not get this across to the Senator as well as I ought. The revised subsection (7) is set out in full in the amendment for the purposes of clarification but the changes in the text proposed are minimal. We felt it was better to put in the full text so it does not incorporate as dramatic a change as might be portrayed at first sight.
Amendments Nos. 18 and 19 seek to amend two incorrect references to a particular provision in subsection (3)(b) of section 9.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 19:
In page 12, line 48, to delete "(4)" and substitute "(3)".
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 20:
In page 13, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following new subsection:
"(5) (a) Without prejudice to the procedures for the giving of consents for the construction of pipelines set out in regulations made under section 39A(5) (inserted by this section) of the Gas Act, 1976, the Commission shall, where it considers it appropriate, or at the request of the Minister, conduct a competitive process for the purpose of selecting an applicant from whom an application for consent shall be considered for the construction of a pipeline in a particular area or for a particular purpose.
(b) The Commission may make regulations relating to the conduct of such a competitive process, and such regulations may include–
(i) the period of time allowed for the submission of expressions of interest by prospective applicants,
(ii) the criteria for the pre-qualification of applicants,
(iii) the period of time allowed for the submission of applications,
(iv) the criteria by which applications will be adjudicated,
(v) the lodging of a bond (if any) by the successful applicant, and
(vi) any other matter which the Commission considers appropriate and necessary for the holding of a competitive process underparagraph (a).(c) Before holding a competitive process under paragraph (a), the Commission shall undertake such preliminary examinations, as it considers appropriate or the Minister requests, including the carrying out of economic and technical feasibility studies of a proposed pipeline or pipeline routes.
(d) Where a competitive process is conducted under this subsection, the Commission shall not be obliged to select an applicant where it considers that no applicant is suitable.".
This amendment proposes additional new power to the commission regarding the provision of pipelines. Paragraph (a) provides that the commission, where it considers it necessary or where directed by the Minister, shall conduct a competitive process for granting consent for the building of a particular pipeline. This amendment is aimed at a number of different situations.
In cases where the commission receives one or more applications for the building of a particular pipeline in a particular area or is aware that others may be aware of building such a pipeline, the commission will have the power to hold a competitive process to ensure that the most efficient and economically viable proposal wins out at the end of the day.
Second, where the commission perceives there is a market opportunity for the building of a pipeline in a particular area or for a particular purpose, in this case the commission can use the mechanism of a competitive process to alert the market of the potential opportunity and seek expressions of interest in building the pipeline.
Third, where the Minister or the Government seeks to arrange for the provision of natural gas to a previously unsupplied area, for example, the provision of gas to the northwest, the Minister may request the commission to initiate a competitive process to choose the best person to construct the necessary pipeline.
Paragraph (b) provides the power to the commission to make regulations regarding the holding of such a process, thereby ensuring transparency for all participants. Paragraph (c) seeks to allow the commission to carry out whatever preliminary investigations in relation to the proposed pipeline that it considers necessary prior to the holding of a competition and paragraph (d) allows the commission to decide not to grant a consent to any applicant where it considers none is suitable.
This measure will yield benefits for consumers and I propose that it be accepted.
This is an admirable amendment and I congratulate the Minister of State.
Section 9, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 10.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 21, 39 and 40 are related and may be taken together by agreement.
I move amendment No. 21:
In page 13, subsection (1), line 18, after "publish," to insert "including publication by electronic means".
This amendment is put forward in the spirit of the Government's declared policy on e-government, with which I wholeheartedly agree and enthusiastically support. For over a year I have been monitoring almost all new legislation that comes before the House from the perspective of the Government's own policy on e-government and I have reminded Ministers that the coming of the Internet requires us to take a new approach to what publication means in legislative terms. This would not have mattered three or four years ago, even two years ago, but there has been a dramatic change.
The reason we should require – and I use the word "require"– publication by electronic means, which I am advised is the drafting term to be used for publication on the world wide web or Internet, is that it is a way of making information accessible to a far greater number of people than by any other means. Making information immediately accessible is the real benefit. We have not yet reached the stage where publication on the Internet will be enough on its own to reach everybody but we have long passed the point where we can ignore that medium as a way of releasing information to the public.
One advantage of electronic publication is that there are easy methods of updating it. That is particularly relevant to the information referred to in this section. To avoid misunderstanding, I stress that this is not merely an enabling amendment, empowering the publication of the information electronically, as such an amendment would not be necessary; there is nothing to stop anyone from doing so. The point of the amendment is to require electronic publication and the basic reason for requiring such publication is to enhance the level of accountability in matters such as this. The Internet is used for many purposes but one important aspect of its potential is the way it can bring everyone information quickly and at very little expense which would otherwise be much more difficult to access.
I said earlier I had been making this argument in respect of new legislation for some time and for the most part I am pleased that Ministers have accepted my point and my amendments. I hope it will not be too long before that message gets through to the parliamentary counsel who actually draft the Bills, so they incorporate the requirement for electronic publication in every new Bill as a matter of course.
When I proposed this a couple of times last year I made the case about the logic of information being required. Someone in Donegal might in the past have had to come all the way to Dublin and go in somewhere to see a proposal. I know such matters might have been published in Iris Oifigiúil but this would enable people to do so from their own home. It is not an enabling provision but a provision which insists that this should be by electronic means, as most information is now being provided in multiple ways and the old ways are not enough any more. I urge the Minister of State to accept this amendment.
I share the Senator's enthusiasm for electronic publication but I am loth to regulate the activities of the commission to the detailed level which the Senator is seeking. In the case of publication of codes of operations and gas capacity statements, it is a matter for the commission to decide how best this should happen, taking account of its relevant duties. In the case of audited accounts of gas undertakings, the provisions in section 14 are sufficient.
Senator Quinn's proposal, which seeks to impose an additional publication requirement on natural gas undertakings – this is a potent point – would only serve to discriminate against players in the gas industry in comparison with other sectors of the economy. I do not know if the Senator's persuasive powers succeeded with legislation in the economic or commercial area but consistency in the commercial and business sector is important and I would not like to see discrimination against the gas industry in comparison with other sectors of the economy.
I cannot accept the Minister of State's views on this. Anyone who thinks that ways of publicising information can be limited to the printed word is out of date. A significant number of people now obtain information by electronic means and all legislation passing through this House should be published in that format. I made this proposal a number of times during the previous session and was successful on occasion. Although I cannot recall the detail of the proposals, I will obtain them and forward them to the Minister of State.
It is impossible to foresee a scenario in which electronic communication will not be insisted upon in the future. Electronic communication is a common and normal means of communication and I cannot believe that Bills will only be published in print. All legislation should be published in electronic format. I cannot believe the Minister of State's comment that this proposal discriminates against the gas industry as we will insist on all legislation and accounts being published in this format. It is unacceptable to think that we can avoid publishing legislation electronically and the Minister of State is living in a fairy tale land if he believes this to be the case. I urge him to accept this amendment.
In the light of the Senator's comments, I will accept amendments Nos. 21 and 40, but, given my earlier comments which I firmly believe on possible discrimination against natural gas undertakings, I do not intend to accept amendment No. 39.
I am disappointed the Minister of State is not prepared to accept amendment No. 39 in relation to annual accounts which states that whether publication takes place under subparagraph (a) or (b) of section 14(1), it shall cause the annual accounts to be published by electronic means at the same time. Although I thank him for accepting Nos. 21 and 40, I feel strongly that annual accounts should be published by electronic means as it is difficult not to envisage all semi-State bodies doing so in future.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 22:
In page 13, subsection (1), line 20 to delete "design and operational requirements" and substitute "design, operational and other requirements".
This amendment to section 10(1) which seeks to clarify the codes of operation for gas pipelines and other facilities includes issues other than those relating to purely technical, design and operational requirements such as financial terms and conditions for the use of such pipelines and facilities.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 10, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 11.
Government amendment No. 23:
In page 13, between lines 40 and 41, to insert the following new paragraph:
"(b) a person, including the Board, in respect of whom an order has been made under section 2(1) of the Gas (Amendment) Act, 1987, for the purpose of carrying out the functions conferred on the person by the order,”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 24:
In page 14, line 16, after "(1)(b)” to insert “or (c)”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 25:
In page 14, line 17, to delete "(c)” and substitute “(d)”.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 26 and 27 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Government amendment No. 26:
In page 14, line 31, after "shall" to insert ", subject to subsection (8) of this section,".
These amendments deal with agreements between an applicant for third party access rights and the relevant pipeline operator in regard to the ownership of the proposed connection to the operator's pipeline. It has been pointed out in submissions received on the Bill that the ownership of such connections is, in the first instance, a matter for agreement between the relevant operator and the applicant. The provision allowing the commission to specify in regulation terms and conditions which may be contained in such an agreement is, therefore, inappropriate and likely to create confusion. This provision is being deleted by the proposed amendment No. 27. Amendment No. 26 makes it clear that the commission may intervene in any dispute on this issue when requested to do so by the applicant.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 27:
In page 14, line 41, to delete "and ownership".
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 28 and 29 are related and may be discussed together by agreement.
The Minister of State addressed my concerns comprehensively in section 9 and I do not intend to move these amendments.
Amendments Nos. 28 and 29 not moved.
Government amendment No. 30:
In page 15, line 15, to delete "or (c)” and substitute “, (c) or (d)”.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 11, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 12.
Government amendment No. 31:
In page 18, to delete lines 27 to 47 and, in page 19, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute the following:
" ‘11.–(1) (a) The Minister may, from time to time, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, give the Board such general directives concerning the financial objectives of the Board, as he or she considers appropriate.
(b) The Minister may, from time to time, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, direct that the profits of the Board in a year specified in the direction shall be applied in such manner (including application for the benefit of the Exchequer) as is specified in the direction.
(2) (a) The Commission may, from time to time, examine charges, and the costs underlying such charges, or any proposals to alter such charges, for natural gas supplied by the Board to customers other than persons mentioned in section 10A(1) of this Act.
(b) Where it considers it necessary following an examination under paragraph (a) of this subsection, the Commission shall issue directions to the Board in relation to either or both the nature and the amount of any charge or proposed charge referred to in that paragraph.
(3) In performing its functions the Board shall–
(a) comply with any direction under this section, and
(b) have regard to any directive under this section concerning its financial objectives'.”.
Amendment No. 31 seeks to amend the revised section 11 of the Gas Act, 1976 set out in section 12 of the Bill. The amendment proposes, through the insertion of a new subsection (2), the transfer to the commission of the Minister's powers over the charges made or proposed by BGE to those customers who, for the time being, are not eligible to avail of the third party access rights under section 10A of the 1976 Act. It is considered necessary to transfer these powers to ensure there is consistency in the regulation of all charges and tariffs related to natural gas. The establishment of the commission as the sole regulatory body with the power to oversee this area will help to ensure the required consistency is achieved.
The wording used in the proposed new subsections 2(a) and 2(b) is based on that used in regulation 31 of the European Communities Internal Market and Electricity Regulations, 2000 – S.I. No. 445. I should point out that this regulation provided for the transfer to the commission of the Minister's relevant powers in relation to that similar part of the electricity market.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 32, 33, 35, 36 and 41 are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I move amendment No. 32:
In page 18, line 34, to delete "appropriate." and substitute the following:
"appropriate, or
(c) matters relating to public safety aspects of the natural gas network.”.
All these amendments pertain to the public safety issue I raised earlier. Their inclusion would strengthen the Bill in a necessary and desirable manner.
The proposed amendments relate to the issue of public safety in the area of natural gas. Amendments Nos. 32 and 33 represent a duplication of the existing power of the Minister, under section 38 of the Gas Act, 1976, to make safety regulations in regard to the board's transmission and supply activities. I cannot, therefore, accept these amendments. However, I thank Senator Quinn for his proposals in regard to the remaining amendments mentioned.
In the case of amendments Nos. 35 and 36, it is clear that all licence holders should have a specific obligation in regard to public safety and I am, therefore, pleased to accept these amendments. In regard to amendment No. 41, while it had been my understanding that the existing reference in the text to "technical safety" would, by its nature, ensure the safety of the public, I accept the Senator's amendment as being a useful clarification to the text of the Bill in this instance. I propose, therefore, that amendments Nos. 32 and 33 not be accepted and that amendments Nos. 35, 36 and 41 be accepted.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 33 not moved.
Section 12, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 13.
Government amendment No. 34:
In page 19, line 10, to delete "or (c)” and substitute “, (c) or (d)”.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 35:
In page 20, line 26, subsection (13)(a), after “environment” to insert “and public safety”.
I appreciate the Minister of State's acceptance of the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 36:
In page 20, subsection (13)(c), line 31, after “the” to insert “safe”.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 13, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 14.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 38 is cognate upon amendment No. 37 and both may be discussed together.
Government amendment No. 37:
In page 22, subsection (1)(a), line 24, to delete “1999” and substitute “2001”.
These amendments seek to take account of the enactment earlier this year of the Company Law Enforcement Bill, 2001. This Act is included for citation purposes with the previous Companies Acts. The proposal, therefore, amends the existing reference in section 14(1)(a) and (b) of the Bill from the “Companies Acts, 1963 to 1999” to “Companies Acts, 1963 to 2001.” I propose that the amendments be accepted.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 38:
In page 22, subsection (1)(b), line 28, to delete “1999” and substitute “2001”.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 39:
In page 22, subsection (1)(b), line 34, to delete “applied,” and substitute the following:
"applied, and
(c) whether publication takes place under subparagraph (a) or
(b) of this subsection, it shall cause the annual accounts to be published by electronic means at the same time.”.
I understand the Minister of State is not accepting the amendment. I will withdraw it for consideration on Report Stage.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 14, as amended, agreed to.
Section 15 agreed to.
SECTION 16.
I move amendment No. 40:
In page 24, subsection (1), line 35, after "publish" to insert ", including publication by electronic means,".
Amendment agreed to.
Section 16, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 17.
I move amendment No. 41:
In page 25, subsection (1), line 5, after "technical" to insert "or public".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 42:
In page 26, subsection (7), line 14, to delete "not".
In view of what happened with Eircom, we have reached a stage where disadvantaged areas are being left out when semi-State companies are being hived off. It appears that commercial viability is the sole criterion considered in terms of extending services to rural areas and areas where normal commercial criteria would not warrant such a move. I refer specifically to Knock Airport, where a public service obligation contract gives the people of the north west access to an air service to Dublin. If this was based solely on commercial criteria, there would be no such air service. By including the word "not" in section 17, we are ensuring disadvantaged areas throughout the country will become more disadvantaged and that the services they should be given will not be extended to them because of the current emphasis on the need for commercial viability. I am sure the Minister of State will give serious consideration to this amendment.
As a Deputy representing a rural constituency, I recognise from where Senator Caffrey is coming. However, I have made it clear on previous occasions that I do not favour assisting the development of uncommercial extensions to the gas network by means of an increase in tariffs or, as the Senator proposes, the imposition of a public service levy on natural gas undertakings. The net effect in either case would be the same. It would mean the imposition of an additional burden on existing gas consumers and have a detrimental effect on national competitiveness. Where funding for such uncommercial extensions is to be made available, it must be done in an open and transparent way. A public service obligation is not an appropriate mechanism in such circumstances. For those reasons, I regret that I cannot accept the Senator's amendment.
I am disappointed that the Minister of State has not even indicated that there might be some justification for change in this area. I would like him to give further consideration to the matter before Report Stage.
I believe the Senator is au fait with the Government's plans to extend the natural gas infrastructure to the north west. The proposal to extend the network to the north west does not involve a public service obligation. Meritorious cases such as that to which the Senator refers can be dealt with, openly and transparently, in other ways.
I am extremely sympathetic to the principle Senator Caffrey is espousing. In view of the migration of people from isolated rural areas, there is no doubt that these communities will, at least in the short to medium term, suffer disadvantage. There are merits in the case put forward by the Senator and if I were representing his constituency, I would be pushing that case as forcefully as he is attempting to do.
Issues such as this must be examined in the long-term. Given the evolution of competition in the semi-State sector and the rapid changes in markets in Ireland and elsewhere it would be a significantly retrograde step to go down the road of imposing public service obligations again. I have contradicted my original comments but, while I am very sympathetic to the strong principle espoused by Senator Caffrey in terms of addressing depopulation in rural areas, going down that road could establish a precedent that would lead to a number of retrospective claims and this would not be in the interests of fast-tracking the comprehensive development of the gas network .
The proposed extensions are meritorious and laudable and need to be accelerated. However, there are isolated communities which can be reached by the existing network but it is not commercially viable. Such communities could make a strong claim. On balance the greater good is serviced by accelerating the development of the network and I support the Minister of State on that basis.
Senator Caffrey's heart is in the right place but I agree with the Minister of State. If this provision is not included, a future Minister or Government will try to impose obligations. This would not be healthy commercially or in terms of good governance. Such a decision should only be taken in accordance with legislation which is transparent. I understand Senator Caffrey's view and his desire to address this issue but I accept the Minister's decision.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Section 17, as amended, agreed to.
Section 18 agreed to.
SECTION 19.
Government amendment No. 43:
In page 28, between lines 17 and 18 to insert the following new paragraph:
"(d) in section 23(2), by the substitution for ‘£550,000,000' of ‘€1,100,000,000 (£866,320,400)' ”.
The amendment seeks to increase the borrowing limit of BGE as provided for under section 23 of the Gas Act, 1976. The proposed increase is required as a result of the company's proposed capital expenditure programme comprising the upgrade and expansion of the transmission and distribution network.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendments Nos. 46, 47 and 48 are related to amendment No. 44 and all may be taken together by agreement.
Government amendment No. 44:
In page 29, to delete line 18 and substitute the following:
"(ii)by the substitution for paragraph (1) of Article 5 of the following:
‘(1) There shall be paid to the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources on every application for an acquisition order in relation to the provision of an upstream pipeline such fee (if any) as the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, may fix.'.".
These amendments relate to upstream pipelines which carry gas from its source whether it is under the sea, on the sea bed or on land to a processing plant or terminal. Amendment No. 44 seeks to take account of the transfer of functions in regard to upstream pipelines to the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources under SI 389 of 2001. The amendment seeks to allow the Minister to fix fees for dealing with applications for compulsory acquisition orders relating to such pipelines subject to the approval of the Minister for Finance.
Amendments Nos. 46, 47 and 48 seek to clarify that the rights which were extended under section 20 of the Gas (Amendment) Act, 2000, to holders of consents for the construction of upstream pipelines will continue to apply to such persons following enactment of this legislation.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 45:
In page 29, lines 34 to 45, to delete subsection (2) and substitute the following subsection:
"(2) The Gas (Amendment) Act, 1987, is amended, on the appointed day–
(a) in section 1 by the insertion before the definition of ‘the Company' of the following definition:
‘ "Commission" means the Commission for Energy Regulation', and
(b) in section 2–
(i) in subsection (1), by the insertion after ‘confer on the Board' of ‘or any other person',
(ii) in subsections (2), (4), (5) and (6), by the insertion after ‘the Board' of ‘or the relevant person', in each place where it occurs,
(iii) by the substitution for subsection (3) of the following subsection:
‘(3) A person, including the Board, in respect of whom an order has been made under subsection (1) of this section shall publish each year separate audited accounts showing the full financial position relating to the performance of the functions conferred on him or her by the order, including details of the contract for purchase of natural gas and a general description of the tariffs for sale of natural gas to customers.',
(iv) in subsections (6)(a) and (b), by the substitution for ‘section 8(7)' of ‘section 39A (4)', in each place where it occurs,
(v) in subsections 6(b), (c), and (d), by the deletion of ‘, with the consent of the Minister for Finance,', in each place where it occurs, and
(vi) by the insertion after subsection (6) of the following subsection:
‘(6A) The Commission may, from time to time, give a person, including the Board, in respect of whom an order has been made under subsection (1) of this section such directions concerning the pricing policy of the person as to the sale of natural gas to customers and the person shall comply with such directions.', and
(c) by the insertion after section 2 of the following section:
‘(2A) (a) Where the Commission considers it appropriate, it may conduct a competitive process for the purpose of selecting an applicant in respect of whom an order under subsection (1) of section 2 of this Act may be made.
(b) The Commission may make regulations relating to the conduct of such a competitive process, and such regulations may include–
(i) the period of time allowed for the submission of expressions of interest by prospective applicants,
(ii) the criteria for the pre-qualification of applicants,
(iii) the period of time allowed for the submission of applications,
(iv) the criteria by which applications will be adjudicated,
(v) the lodging of a bond (if any) by the successful applicant, and
(vi) any other matter which the Commission considers appropriate and necessary for the holding of a competitive process under subsection (a) of this section.
(c) Where a competitive process is conducted under this section, the Commission shall not be obliged to select an applicant where it considers that no applicant is suitable.'.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 46:
In page 30, to delete lines 21 to 39 and substitute the following:
" ‘(a) save to the extent that this section has application to section 26 of the Principal Act, a person–
(i) in respect of whom the Minister has, prior to the appointed day (within the meaning ofsection 2 of the Gas (Interim) (Regulation) Act, 2001), imposed a requirement under section 40(2) of the Principal Act,
(ii) who, prior to the aforementioned day, has obtained the consent of the Minister under section 40(1) of the Principal Act,
(iii) who, from the aforementioned day, has obtained the consent of the Commission under section 39A(1) of the Principal Act, or
(iv) who, from the aforementioned day, has obtained the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources under section 40(1) of the Principal Act,
in relation to the construction, or construction and operation of a pipeline, as the case may be,',".
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 47:
In page 31, line 10, to delete "or".
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 48:
In page 31, to delete lines 11 to 24 and substitute the following:
"(ii) who, from the aforementioned day, has notified the Commission in writing of his or her intention to make an application for the Commission's consent under section 39A(1) of the Principal Act in relation to the construction of a pipeline and in respect of which notification the Commission provides a certificate to the person, after having made such enquiries, if any, as the Commission thinks appropriate, stating that the notification demonstrates abona fide intention on the part of that person to give such a notice or make such an application, or
(iii) who, from the aforementioned day, has notified the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources in writing of his or her intention to make an application for the consent of the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources under section 40(1) of the Principal Act in relation to the construction of a pipeline and in respect of which notification the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources provides a certificate to the person, after having made such enquiries, if any, as the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources thinks appropriate, stating that the notification demonstrates abona fide intention on the part of that person to give such a notice or make such an application.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 19, as amended, agreed to.
SCHEDULE.
Government amendment No. 49:
In page 31, between lines 29 and 30, column 3, to insert the following:
"Section 27 (in so far as the functions relate to the provision of distribution and transmission pipelines)".
The amendment provides for the transfer of the Minister's power under section 27 of the Gas Act, 1976, to the commission. This section relates to the construction, maintenance and repair of pipelines. The Minister's power relates to the settlement of certain disputes that might arise between a person laying a pipeline and a local authority and given the Bill's proposals to transfer this area to the commission's area of responsibility in respect of distribution and transmission pipelines the powers under section 27 should also be transferred to the same extent.
Amendment agreed to.
Acting Chairman
Amendment No. 51 is related to amendment No. 50 and both may be discussed together by agreement.
Government amendment No. 50:
In page 31, lines 42 to 47, column 3, to delete "Section 2(1)(a) and (b) (in so far as the functions relate to the supply, transmission and distribution of natural gas and the provision, maintenance, repair and replacement for those purposes of pipelines)” and substitute “Section 2(1), (4), (6) and (7)”.
These amendments propose the transfer of all the Minister's powers under section 2 of the Gas (Amendment) Act, 1987, to the commission. These powers relate to town gas functions. The draft legislation proposed to transfer these powers only to the extent that they relate to the provision and maintenance of distribution and transmission pipelines. The proposal would have led to a complicated arrangement whereby both the commission and the Minister would have had to make orders to confer different functions on a person wishing to operate as a town gas company. Such a complicated system is likely to lead to inconsistent regulatory approaches being taken and this could hinder the development of the market and adversely affect investor confidence in this area.
Amendment agreed to.
Government amendment No. 51:
In page 31, column 3, to delete line 48.
Amendment agreed to.
Schedule, as amended, agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment.
Acting Chairman
When is it proposed to take Report Stage?
We have not been given an opportunity to table Report Stage amendments.
It was agreed on the Order of Business that Committee and Remaining Stages would be taken today.
I propose a five minute sos so that I can table three amendments.
Is there a difficulty with that? It was agreed on the Order of Business, but the Senator is being reasonable in asking for a five minute sos to table amendments. I do not have a problem with it, but is it in order?
Whatever the system is, I want to table amendments I withdrew on Committee Stage to give the Minister of State time to reflect.
The Senator wants five minutes to prepare and table his amendments.
Acting Chairman
Is it agreed to suspend the sitting for five minutes? Agreed.
Sitting suspended at 4.40 p.m. and resumed at 4.45 p.m.
