asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he is aware that the ESB have notified the owners of houses in seaside resorts which are used only in the summer (a) that the reconnection fee has been increased from 10/- to £1 10s. and (b) that in addition the bimensal fixed charge on the premises will be charged whether the premises are occupied or not; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The fixing of charges for electricity and for services rendered is, subject to the provisions of Section 21 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1927, the sole responsibility of the Electricity Supply Board.

I am, however, informed by the Board that where a seasonal consumer insists on disconnection during the winter the reconnection fee to be charged in future will be 30/- instead of 10/- as heretofore, and that the bimensal fixed charge will as heretofore continue to be charged even when the premises are not occupied, as long as these premises remain connected.

There is no question of a duplicate charge being made. Either the premises remain connected and the bimensal fixed charge is payable or the premises are disconnected, in which case this charge is not payable, but a charge of 30/- is made for reconnection.

The Board state that the former arrangement, whereby a fee of only 10/- was charged for disconnection and reconnection, had become uneconomic and, because of the high peaks of activity at the beginning and end of each season, was dislocating normal district work.

Does the Minister tell me that the ESB cannot, without disrupting their normal work, connect and disconnect the few dozen houses at seaside resorts which have to be connected every year at the beginning of the season and disconnected at the end of the season? Do the ESB say they cannot do it without disrupting normal work? Is that their excuse for the exorbitant increase in charges?

It is not an exorbitant increase.

It is three times——

It costs money, if the person insists on being disconnected and reconnected. The Board have assessed the cost of that particular exercise at 30/-.

It is a 300 per cent. increase in charges for work which takes not more than five minutes in each house. In most seaside resorts, there are 20 or 30 houses—sometimes more —that have to be disconnected at the end of a season, for example. All that work could be done in one day. Does the Minister not agree that it is exorbitant to increase the charge to 30/-? Does he further agree that it is reasonable that the ESB should now be allowed to charge people for houses that are disconnected because, no matter what they have told him, I have a letter in my possession saying they will continue the charge whether or not the house is disconnected? I shall supply it to the Minister for his information later.

What about gas?

The increase is 200 per cent., not 300 per cent.

There is enough gas in this House. Would the Minister mind repeating what he has just said?

I was not given a chance. The Deputy was shouting across the floor of the House.

It was Deputy Meaney——

It is not for me to say whether or not the charges are reasonable. Under the statute——

——the Minister has no function——

——this House has charged the ESB so to arrange their charges that their annual revenue shall be sufficient, and only sufficient, to meet all outgoings properly chargeable to such revenue. They have assessed the cost of this operation at 30/-. I have no reason to dispute the accuracy of that assessment.

Surely we are not going to lay it down as a principle that, in the light of the ESB Acts, the ESB can make any charge they like for service to anybody, without the Minister for Transport and Power accepting any responsibility to Dáil Éireann for the propriety of the charge? That surely would be to carry the principle far beyond what the statute provided.

The ESB are obliged, like other semi-State bodies, to submit their accounts to this House. Any member of this House has a perfect right to dispute them. They are under that control all the time.

Surely we have never established, under the ESB Acts, the proposition that the ESB are independent of the authority of this House or anybody else? It is a public service operated under the authority of Parliament and, in the last analysis, answerable to Parliament for the proper discharge of its duty.

I have said that.

With the permission of the Chair, I propose to raise the subject matter of this Question on the adjournment.

I shall communicate with the Deputy in the course of the afternoon.