Committee ‘not told’ about RHI alternative that cost £200m less

AN Assembly committee was never informed about a cheaper scheme to a botched green energy subsidy which could have saved the taxpayer £200m, an inquiry has heard.

Patsy McGlone, the former chairman of Stormont’s Enterprise, Trade and Investment (ETI) committee — which was tasked with scrutinising proposed legislation for the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) scheme — said government officials never advised members about the less costly option.

Yesterday the SDLP MLA (right) said that had the committee been told about the cheaper alternative, it would have “triggered questions”.

Mr McGlone was giving evidence to the public inquiry into the RHI scandal, which led to the collapse of Stormont 12 months ago.

The inquiry heard that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI), whose minister at the time was DUP leader Arlene Foster, was aware of a green energy option that would have delivered the same amount of renewable heat, but for £200m less than the preferred RHI scheme.

However, the option, called the Challenge Fund, was not the preferred choice because it would have been difficult securing the money in the short term for it.

Mr McGlone said he was very surprised that details of the cheaper option had not been presented to the committee.

“It is probably one of a number of items I’m very surprised about in how this whole scheme has been handled and managed,” said the Mid-Ulster MLA.

He added: “Savings of that magnitude, particularly at times when budgets are being constrained, that certainly would have triggered a reaction from the committee. It would have triggered questions. I have no doubt about it.

“Those levels of savings were not presented.”

The Assembly member said that the committee had relied upon the “professionalism and integrity” of DETI officials for information about the proposed RHI scheme.

“The scheme was being referred to by both the officials and the minister as successful,” he said.

Mr McGlone said that at the time the committee was asked to consid- er legislation for the RHI scheme, he had no concerns.

However, he added: “Looking back now (on the evidence presented to the inquiry) I have multiple concerns. It appears internal management was completely askew.”

The inquiry was told that green energy group Action Renewables had raised concerns with DETI officials that the scheme was potentially open to exploitation and suggested the insertion of an additional band of funding.

When asked what the committee did about the warning, Mr McGlone replied: “I can’t say what the committee did at the time about it.”

He added that “retrospectively” the advice from Action Renewables should have set off warning bells.

Mr McGlone also said he could not recall if department officials had told the committee that OFGEM had advised them to amend the scheme to reflect controls in a similar scheme in Great Britain.

The RHI scheme offered to subsidise the cost of its claimants’ fuel — mostly wood pellets — for running new renewable heating systems. But the fuel cost far less than the subsidy they were receiving, effectively meaning that users could earn more money by burning more fuel.

❝ Looking back now I have multiple concerns. It appears that internal management was completely askew