Joint Committee on Social Protection, Community and Rural Development and the Islands díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 3 May 2023

Energy Poverty: Society of Saint Vincent de Paul

An Cathaoirleach

I have received apologies from Senator Mark Wall.

Members participating remotely are required to be within the precincts of Leinster House.

I ask members and witnesses to please turn off their mobile phones or ensure they are in silent mode. I ask members participating remotely to please use the raise-hand function on Teams if they wish to contribute.

During the session this morning we will discuss energy poverty with the representatives from St. Vincent De Paul, on their report on energy poverty entitled Warm, Safe, Connected?.

Energy poverty is an item of the committee's work programme under our community remit. This report brings to light the evidence that energy poverty impacts some groups more than others such as low income households; one-parent families; older households; children; people who are out of work due to ill health or disability; migrant and ethnic minority households; and members of the Traveller and Roma communities.

Action on this issue is required more than ever as costs have spiralled due to the cost-of-living increases and inflationary trends. This report makes a number of recommendations that the committee would like to engage on further, in a particular new consumer protection strategy from the regulator that provides a multiannual approach to increasing protections for customers in energy poverty and for vulnerable customers.

Measures are also needed to improve the protection of customers from the threat of disconnection. There needs to be a focus on supportive communication strategies that encourages engagement and recognises that households having difficulties in meeting their energy costs might need additional assistance to engage with the energy providers concerned. Affordable and sustainable repayment solutions should be offered to anyone in arrears, with greater monitoring of those repayment plans and an increase in protection for prepay customers. Customers on prepay meters live with much higher risk disconnection from their energy supply as a result of running out of credit on their meter. This requires clear direction and innovation from all of the actors involved and should include the provision of discretionary top-ups and a targeted credit paid to prepay gas customers who are experiencing particular financial hardships.

I welcome here this morning representatives from the St. Vincent De Paul, Dr. Tricia Keilthy, head of social justice and policy, and Ms Issy Petrie, research and policy officer. You are both very welcome here this morning.

Before we start, I must explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses with regard to references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present, or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts, is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that the witnesses comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I now call on Dr. Keilthy to make her opening statement.

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

We thank the committee for the invitation to present our latest report Warm, Safe, Connected? Priorities to Protect People in Energy Poverty. The report contains our recommendations across policy, practice and regulation to provide the best possible protection and support to people experiencing the worst impacts of the energy crisis.

In 2022 St. Vincent De Paul received more than 230,000 requests for assistance which was an increase of around 20% from the previous year. Requests related to energy increased by 40%. The first quarter of this year has seen an approximate 19% increase in requests for help overall, and an approximate 50% increase in requests for help with energy, when compared to the first quarter of 2022.

This year, we are seeing the levels and the concentration of need among people in energy poverty increase. People are seeing multiple bill cycles pile up and people are returning to St. Vincent De Paul for support.

Although the heating season may be coming to an end the situation continues to develop rather than abate. While usage may reduce into the summer period it will not become affordable. The fuel allowance season is over and the disconnection moratorium has come to an end. Over this winter, people on low incomes have faced impossible situations. Put simply, the choice will be between knowing the costs and arrears are spiralling, the next bill will be unpayable and finding money from the food bill to put twice as much towards the prepay meter or people having to cut back and go without the energy they need.

The extent of difficulties facing people is evident in the CSO data on deprivation from the first half of 2022. Focusing on households who could not afford to keep their home adequately warm, the national rate doubled from 3.2% to 7.4% of people between 2021 and 2022. Using population estimates, we calculate this to have been over 377,000 people. For rural households the rate increased fourfold. The highest rates were seen for one-parent families, people with disabilities and unemployed people. The rate for renters almost doubled to 13.5% with three times that of owner-occupiers.

The Society of St. Vincent de Paul welcomes the measures that the Government, CRU suppliers and civil society have taken which includes a new energy action plan; targeted lump-sum payments to social welfare recipients; extended consumer protections; and energy suppliers setting up or contributing to hardship funds. However, there have been missed opportunities and measures that need to go further. The society's report contains six policy recommendations and six recommendations directed towards suppliers and the regulator. Today, we will focus on a selection of these policy recommendations.

On the fuel allowance and social protection, we know that core social welfare rates have not kept up with inflation. While a combination of universal and targeted payments have provided essential supports to people, they leave the guaranteed rate of social welfare devalued and people with no certainty about what their income will be in the future. We need to see both core social welfare rates and the fuel allowance adjusted in the coming budget to match inflation, at a minimum, and a commitment given to take an evidence-based approach to increases, which is rooted in the cost of a minimum essential standard of living.

On energy costs, we are particularly concerned that households that receive the working family payment and those recently unemployed have not been adequately recognised as needing support as they do not receive the fuel allowance. Not extending the fuel allowance to recipients of the working family payment impacts approximately 103,000 children in these households.

It is essential that we have a targeted mechanism to provide stability on prices for people on low incomes. A targeted social energy tariff for those on means-tested benefits would provide a flexible medium-term solution that complements cash transfers by the Government until a point in which households in energy poverty are able to access more affordable energy either through better insulated homes or lower energy prices. Social tariffs are in use in EU countries to provide Government with a mechanism to target supports and ensure people on low incomes are guaranteed an essential service at affordable levels. This could be done through a reduction in the overall bill cost or a unit rate through Government subsidisation and windfall taxes.

An important commitment in the new energy poverty action plan was to extend the definition of vulnerable energy customers to encompass people on very low incomes, which requires legislative change. This is important as it offers extended protections from disconnections and being moved to the most economic tariff for customers' payment choice. A commitment was given that this would last two years but we have reached the end of this winter and have not seen this aspect progressed.

There is currently a significant gap in the supports available to people in energy poverty and struggling with energy costs. This gap has been apparent through the crisis. We believe the gap will become more acute as we consume energy changes as an essential response to the climate crisis. People in energy poverty usually face a combination of high costs or difficulties with the energy market, issues with housing or heating systems, and income issues. We, therefore, propose that, as part of a just transition, the Government funds a new service of community energy advisers who are present in local areas and provide one-to-one tailored support.

They will be able to make sure that people are able to navigate the energy market, link with financial supports and avail of the energy efficiency measures available to them, including simple, quick-win measures at home. This is an essential missing link and we are trying to help link people with that essential support.

I thank the committee members for their attention and we are happy to take any questions they may have.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Dr. Keilthy not just for the opening statement she read here this morning, but for the report the Society of St. Vincent de Paul has completed. This is an issue of huge interest to this committee both from a social protection perspective and a rural development perspective. Ms Keilthy highlighted in her opening statement the impact of energy poverty on urban versus rural households. There is a disproportionate impact on rural households.

In the report, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul makes the point that oil-fired central heating is a big challenge because of the significant cost associated with it. We have seen a significant increase in the cost of oil-fired central heating and home heating oil. Four in ten households across the country are reliant on that. Do the witnesses have any data on solid fuel? One of the challenges faced in rural Ireland, and in particular across the midland counties, is that there is still a substantial number of households that are very reliant on solid fuel. There has been a significant increase. Naturally enough, changes such as the ban on smoky coal will have a financial impact in relation to this. Could the witnesses comment on the discrepancy they see between urban and rural? How much of that is made up of the types of fuels used and the fuel choices? Can they comment on that?

On a broader issue, I note that the Society of St. Vincent de Paul has focused - and rightly so - on the financial impact this has on families. We saw in this morning's headlines that there were more than 700 people who were lying on trolleys in our accident and emergency departments. When I was energy Minister, I commissioned a piece of work from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. We are still waiting on the publication of the report. However, the related headline figures have shown that people in fuel poverty who have chronic health conditions, particularly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, COPD, and asthma, have seen a significant improvement in their health outcomes by carrying out the retrofitting of their homes. It improves the warmth of their homes and reduces the costs of heating their homes. It makes their homes warmer. As a result of that, these people have ended up getting sick less often, being admitted to hospital less often and being prescribed fewer medicines. When they were admitted to hospital, their stays in hospital were shorter and they were discharged far quicker back into their homes, rather than into step-down facilities. As we know, in terms of the figures we saw this morning, a considerable number of that is made up of people with chronic illness and particularly chronic respiratory conditions who spend disproportionately longer in hospital.

The reality is that people within lower-deprivation categories and those who are on lower disposable income are more likely to suffer from chronic conditions. They can become disproportionately sicker as a result of those chronic conditions. Could the witnesses comment based on the work they have done, not just from a financial perspective, but from a health perspective, on these households?

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

I will take the question on solid fuel and Ms Petrie might take the question on health impacts. Certainly, the fuel type that is available to people in rural communities is having an impact on the incidence of energy poverty.

We know that if people are reliant on oil as their main heating source, which rural communities are more likely to be, the fact that they have to pay quite a large amount up front can cause difficulties for those households. The movement to pay the fuel allowance on a lump-sum basis has helped, but over the winter period, particularly this winter and the winter before, we saw households having to supplement more with solid fuel as their heating source. Again, that is expensive and can cause health and well-being difficulties for people.

The other issue we see as regards rural households is that the energy efficiency of those homes can be much lower. Maybe they are larger homes, which are more difficult to heat. Those two factors can have an impact. We have also seen the knock-on impacts of higher transport costs for people in rural areas, meaning they have to cut back on other areas of the household budget. As regards addressing some of those issues, it is about ensuring that the homes are energy-upgraded, insulated and warm and that, while we transition to a low-carbon economy, people still have options that are affordable and no one is forced into energy poverty as a result of that.

Ms Issy Petrie

It is really important to highlight that energy poverty is a health issue as well. That is very much seen by SVP members in terms of not only the impact, as the Cathaoirleach said, of housing quality on people's health and the amount of energy you can afford and how warm you can afford to keep your home, but also the high levels of energy poverty among people with ill health. An important aspect of this to highlight is the mental health impact of the energy price crisis, which I think is coming up a lot for SVP members in terms of seeing people go through the distress of bills they know they just are not able to meet - those sums just will not add up - or, for those on prepay meters, just feeling like it is self-disconnection. The extreme self-rationing that can happen among people on prepay meters is becoming unavoidable. There is a great deal of distress and anxiety caused to people at the moment. Mental health and energy poverty are really closely linked. It is important to highlight those health impacts because tackling energy poverty, whether through the market, through incomes or through retrofitting, is also about investing in people's health and investing long-term in public health.

An Cathaoirleach

May I pick up on Ms Petrie's last recommendation? It is quite innovative. Members of the committee who deal with these issues on a day-to-day basis with their constituents see the value of having that conversation with people. It is not just about taking simple steps to reduce energy costs. I have been amazed by the number of people who find themselves in financial difficulty - not necessarily just people on social welfare - but who, when you go through their bank statement with them, find out that monthly payments for services, maybe online services where they may be charged €5 for this service and €4 for another service, add up. There may be a huge amount of money going out on, let us say, incidental services that are not necessarily core to the running of their home or meeting their day-to-day needs. They may have signed up for a particular service 18 months ago or two years ago and never realised that they are still paying for it today and that there is a cumulative effect in that regard. My question to the witnesses is about the community energy advisory service. We have this on the financial side in terms of MABS, but it does not seem to be reaching the numbers of people it needs to reach in terms of MABS and basic financial management that could help people's finances.

Turning to the SVP's recommendation in respect of the community energy advisers, do the witnesses envisage that, as a service, that would be available solely to people in fuel poverty or across the board? I think there is a lack of awareness and understanding and a lack of independent advice available to people right across the board in respect of managing their energy bills. It is welcome that we have reduced the VAT on solar panels by €1,000 this week by removing the VAT on them altogether, yet I have here in front of me correspondence in respect of a constituent of mine who is in abject fuel poverty and who has applied for the warmer homes scheme. It will be 24 months before they will be able to avail of it. They have to go through another two winters before these works will be carried out. We seem to be pushing ahead with the retrofit grants for homeowners who can afford to carry out retrofitting, yet there seems to be a delay in actually delivering for people who are in fuel poverty. In the context of the community energy advisers, one of the simplest things any household can do to retrofit and the one that has the single biggest impact is to insulate the attic. It costs very little to do that, and it probably would make financial sense if the community welfare officers were to pay for that to be done in the homes of people in fuel poverty today rather than people waiting 24 months for a retrofit to be carried out in their home when they are struggling to meet their electricity bills today.

My question is about these community advisers. First, do the witnesses envisage them being available across the board or specifically to people who are in fuel poverty? Second, do the witnesses envisage them having access to a fund or to a team of contractors who could deal with the low-hanging fruit of the lagging jacket on the copper cylinder or insulation of the attic, which in themselves would have a significant impact on the overall cost of keeping the home warm?

Ms Issy Petrie

It is very much that complexity of managing our energy needs that is the reason we see this clear gap for energy advisers. I think we are all aware of that as we choose tariffs, look at our houses or manage our bills at the moment. There are very clear reasons, for people in energy poverty, it is that much more complex and that much more pressured. We would see this as a targeted service. There is probably also an argument for a service that everybody can access, but we are speaking specifically to the needs of people in energy poverty, linking them in with the grants that are available to them, with financial services like MABS or with a community welfare officer. That is not to say we do not all need support to navigate energy at the moment, but there are also changes coming down the line.

What the Cathaoirleach said about contractors and those quick-win measures is really important. It is about recognising that a full retrofit is really important and will ultimately be the most effective thing, but there are lots of steps on the way that can make a significant difference to people's costs and will be more achievable for people in different situations. I also think part of what a community energy advice service could offer us is an education and communication pathway to people. We see this as a very local service whereby people really know the people they are supporting and know the particular issues they are facing.

The advisers would be able to offer people tailored, one-to-one advice. They could also provide feedback on what is happening with people, including particular sticky situations they are facing and the types of issues that recur. There would be a communication pathway going both ways.

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

We see such a service offering holistic support, which would involve looking at the entire energy needs of the household. It would be about making sure people are on the best tariff available to them and are availing of any grants for which they are eligible. It would involve looking at whether there is a fast-track process for availing of supports. When it comes to a just transition, it is important from our point of view to start with those who are furthest behind and prioritise the targeting of retrofits in that regard. As I said, it is about ensuring people have all their entitlements, including the fuel allowance, an exceptional needs payment and so on. It is about offering reassurance and providing information. People on a very low income know to the cent how much money is coming in and going out of the household. Sometimes, a change in circumstances may lead to an unintended consequence by way of an impact on people's income. Having information, advice and reassurance from a trusted person in the community has huge potential to ensure people are getting all the supports and services that are available to them. In addition, as Ms Petrie said, this type of engagement helps to point up any gaps in provision.

Deputy Joan Collins

I thank the witnesses for engaging with the committee on these issues. As noted, the disconnection moratorium has come to an end. All members of the committee should be raising that with the Minister, particularly with reference to people who have registered as vulnerable energy users. As the witnesses pointed out, householders may have built up cumulative bills over the winter. They might think it is all over now and they are okay as they will not have to use as much energy now that winter is over. However, people could be disconnected during the summer and will not then have access to energy in the coming winter. This is a really important issue and one the committee should raise formally with the Minister.

On progressing the management of vulnerability, the witnesses referred to the requirement for legislative change. Have they drawn up any legislation, or even the bones of legislation, to deal with people on very low incomes who are vulnerable energy customers?

Community energy advisers sound similar to community welfare officers in the role they would play. The concept is good, of having advisers in the community able to deal with people who are particularly vulnerable to energy poverty and are struggling with energy costs. As far as I know, there are no such advisers in place in communities and I do not know whether the Minister is willing to put them in place. Will the witnesses indicate whether such people are, in fact, in place in some communities? Will they update us on what we need to do to push this on and get more of them into communities? Such a service would play an important role, particularly for people on low incomes who are really struggling to pay their bills. Again, we should act quickly to engage with the Minister on the ending of the disconnection moratorium. If people are disconnected now because they cannot pay their bills, it will have a huge impact next winter on those who are most vulnerable.

In regard to retrofitting, the Chairperson mentioned that rural communities are particularly affected by the VAT on home heating oil. I acknowledge this is a huge issue for people in rural areas. However, it is also an issue in cities. If the allocation to the Dublin councils to retrofit housing and provide a wraparound service remains the same year on year, their whole stock will not be retrofitted until 2032. That is outrageous and it is another issue we must raise.

If the Government were serious about this, it would have effective policies for putting money into councils to encourage them to get the local authority retrofits done much more quickly. I will leave it at that and allow the witnesses to respond.

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

I thank the Deputy for her questions. I will speak a little about the disconnection moratorium and then Ms Petrie might comment on vulnerable customers, community energy advisers and retrofitting.

We are still not seeing the true impact of the ending of the moratorium. It was lifted at the end of March and people with very large bills may be entering that process at the moment. We know from our engagement with suppliers that cutting customers off is absolutely a last resort. The data show that disconnection levels have remained low, including when the moratorium was lifted last year. There are protections under the energy engage code such that people who engage with their supplier will not be cut off. However, there is important work to do around communication and ensuring people are aware of the protections, including the hardship funds that can help them and the payment plans of which they can avail. The reality is that energy is an essential service and we need to view it as such. People's supply absolutely should not be cut off for any reason. It is really important that there are sufficient protections for people and that they are not going without heat and light.

We have seen an issue with prepay meter disconnections specifically relating to self-disconnection, which is when people run out of credit and their supply cuts out. There has been enough of a buffer for people on electricity prepay meters over the past year due to the Government credit. The big gap or vulnerability has been for users of prepay gas meters. The technology used is older and people cannot do as many top-ups. During the past winter, we have seen households really struggling, with regular disconnections and a lot of self-rationing. We cannot have another winter of that. We need a working group comprising the regulator, suppliers and the Department to come up with a strategy to prevent disconnections on prepay gas meters. That is a priority for us and we would like to see it highlighted and pushed forward. There are things that can be done on the gas networks side, but we also need to look at the technology to ensure this cohort of customers do not miss out on supports for another winter.

Ms Issy Petrie

We submitted a recommendation for legislation on protections for vulnerable customers to the consultation on the energy poverty action plan. Vulnerable customer protections are really important both in offering additional protections from disconnection and a preventative protection whereby there is a requirement to move customers to the most economic tariff for their payment type. We were very pleased to see a commitment to extend the vulnerable customer definition to include financial vulnerability. However, that commitment was time limited to two winters, one of which has passed. We have not seen progress on that, which is disappointing. It is an important mechanism into the future and we would like to see it continue beyond the two years for which a commitment was given. As well as protections, it offers a flag to suppliers in the market as to which customers need support. It is important to keep that mechanism operating in the market.

I am not sure whether we have included research on community energy advisers in the report. We certainly can send on some of the research we have done into examples elsewhere.

In Manchester, I think they are called green energy doctors, and there are examples in Scotland where they are locally based and respond well to people's needs. They provide good examples of what we could see.

An Cathaoirleach

It would be helpful if the committee could be furnished with that.

Deputy Joan Collins

That working group is something we can push for with the regulator, the suppliers and the Government. That is important and, especially in the case of the gas networks, it needs to be dealt with.

Has the charity received queries regarding the use of prepaid meters, including for electricity?

If a person gets a smart meter, he or she has to look online for networks and choose a tariff or plan that will offer the best value depending on when that person tends to use the most electricity. Has that issue arisen for people who might not be computer savvy? Smart meters are being installed everywhere now, including for electricity. I had mine installed only about a month ago and I have yet to examine the electricity network’s website to see how the meter works, so I am thinking about people who are vulnerable with respect to computer literacy and so on. Has that issue reared its head in the form of the charity getting calls about it?

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

That is certainly an issue about which we have been concerned. We made a number of submissions before the smart meter roll-out began to ensure there were sufficient supports to allow people to understand how to use the meters correctly. The other issue relates to ensuring people are on the best value tariff for them such that they are not paying more than they should be and that they will be able to get the most out of the smart meter. This is a good example of where community energy advisers, who would be able to ensure people were getting the most out of the smart meter, could play an important role. In the long term, the roll-out of smart meters should make things better because people will not get bill shocks and so on, but we need to ensure they are set up correctly, with people on the appropriate tariffs. That is something we have been raising with the regulator and are concerned about but, at the same time, advice and information that is clear and accessible for everyone should be made available.

An Cathaoirleach

What has been the response from the regulator?

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

It is on the regulator's agenda. It understands this may be an issue and is engaging with the consumer stakeholder group on it. Smart meter roll-out is kind of a standing item on that agenda. It is about suppliers ensuring they are reaching out to their customers to explain which tariffs are available, what would be best for the customer's use and so on. Where people are on low incomes, are out of work due to an illness or disability, are unemployed or are caring, they will be at home for longer, so some of the time-of-use tariffs will not suit their needs. It is about a two-way communication process to ensure the suppliers engage such that people will be aware of what they can access and which tariff will best suit their needs.

Deputy Joan Collins

That will involve detailed communication between individuals and the networks. How can the networks ensure they will get to those vulnerable people? Dr. Keilthy spoke about how community energy advisers can play that role, and I fully agree, but as things stand, how can we communicate this information better with the people who need it?

Dr. Tricia Keilthy

Our advice relates to the supports and systems that are currently available to people. The Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, for example, is a great resource in the community that can offer people advice, but it is a complicated issue. Again, it is about ensuring people are not left behind and ensuring our policies are cognisant of their needs. That is where the consumer protection strategy comes in, whereby the regulator will ensure policies are developed with this in mind in order that we will not leave people behind.

Senator Róisín Garvey

I welcome our guests. Clare County Council, for one, had access to funding to retrofit the social housing stock, so I am not sure if I agree with the point about needing to give money to local authorities. It is a question of getting the local authorities to spend the money and do the work.

In Clare, we set up a community energy agency, or social enterprise, that gives free workshops throughout the county to help individuals. There is a gap here. The SEAI has community energy officers but does not take people by the hand to figure out what is best for their individual home. Rather, it tries to get the entire community to do it, which means it is then down to volunteers and is complicated. There is a missing piece in regard to helping individuals. We have had packed audiences any time we have held the workshops anywhere the county and turned away lots of people. As a result, more than 300 individuals have got solar panels. We got low-percent loans from the credit union that can be paid back, and the savings on even the smallest system can cover the payback of the loans.

There was no retrofit programme or anything else before the current Government, so while it might not be happening as quickly as we would like, more than 38,000 houses have benefited one way or another from the retrofit programme. That said, we need to do a lot more. There is much more investment in apprenticeships to help more people access the programme and the fuel allowance has increased. While there is a delay for the middle group, at least it is happening, because it was not happening previously.

Ms Issy Petrie

On local authority retrofitting, we definitely recognise that is happening and going forward, as is the better energy, warmer homes targeted grant. It is about recognising the pace of that and in the intervening period, helping people who are going to continue to live in homes that have not accessed retrofitting.. As the Senator said, accompanying measures need to be put in place to ensure the sufficient workforce is there in order that we can pick up the pace on those retrofitting targets as we go.

As for community energy supports, it is good to hear that is available, and the interest in it shows that the gap is there. As the Senator suggested, that detailed, one-to-one support would clearly be in demand.

Senator Róisín Garvey

One thing the Society of St. Vincent de Paul could do is call on local authorities to access the money that is there to retrofit the housing stock separately from the retrofit programme of the SEAI. Deputy Joan Collins mentioned local authorities, but the issue is not that the money is not there. It is that the local authorities are not making it happen quickly enough. It is different from the SEAI.

Deputy Joan Collins

No, in respect of Dublin City Council, we got a report stating it would not be able to finish the retrofitting of all its tenants until 2032 with the money it is receiving annually, so that money needs to increase to allow it to get more done.

Senator Róisín Garvey

Okay. I wonder whether the council has requested more money. It is not the issue in Clare, although I suppose every county is different.

Deputy Joan Collins

Yes, other counties could be different, but it is certainly the case in Dublin City Council.

An Cathaoirleach

There is definitely an issue with Dublin City Council, where the proportion of local authority housing is significantly higher than in other local authorities. Nevertheless, the drawdown by local authorities is an issue not for the Society of St. Vincent de Paul but for us. We all have colleagues on local authorities, and the responsibility is on us to provide leadership and ensure that funding will be drawn down by every local authority.

We must also ensure they do not implement a policy of penalising people who are already in financial difficulty and in arrears on their rents by refusing to provide them with the retrofits of their homes, which historically has been the case. People who were already in financial debt were further penalised. Their neighbours' homes were insulated and their homes were left to the end of the list. That was not an effective policy either.

In terms of drawing on the submission and looking at where we go from here, I note the evidence we have heard today, pointing out that we have an estimated 337,000 people who cannot afford to heat their homes adequately. We are talking about the population of Cork city, Limerick city, Galway city and Dún Laoghaire saying they cannot afford to keep their homes warm at the moment. It is a phenomenal number of people. It is an issue that needs to be urgently addressed. The committee will write to the Minister, asking her to expedite the enactment of the legislation that has been committed to by Government. It is imperative that happens.

Second, this committee will write to our colleagues on the Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action, to which the regulator is accountable, asking it to bring the regulator in and to invite representatives from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul to attend that hearing to address specifically the issues relating to prepay gas meters and the need for a new customer protection strategy to be put in place. These are not issues for the Minister; they are issues for the relevant Oireachtas committee. We will write to the committee requesting that it brings representatives of Society of St. Vincent de Paul in, along with the regulator, to look at these specific issues and the associated issues regarding smart metering as a matter of urgency. I think it requires that level of priority at the moment.

I think the proposal on the community energy advisers is a very constructive one. It could be dealt with in a number of ways, including through the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Ryan, or through the Minister for Rural and Community Development, Deputy Humphreys. We will take the proposal up with both Ministers and see if an effective scheme can be put in place to address this particular issue, either through the SEAI or through some of the community employment and Tús schemes. It is an issue that needs to be addressed now. We cannot wait until it becomes a big issue again in the run-in to next winter.

I thank Society of St. Vincent de Paul in particular for taking the time to put this report together. We look forward to its submission regarding the examples from the UK on how the community energy adviser system works. We will use that as part of our submission to both Ministers. I thank the witnesses for their time today.

Sitting suspended at 10.23 a.m. and resumed in private session at 10.27 a.m. and in public session at 10.54 a.m.