“It’s a historic day, a real success, a step forward” for the most precarious, greet Friday November 12 on franceinfo Manuel Domergue, director of studies of the Abbé Pierre Foundation, after the announcement by EDF of the end of power cuts for its customers in unpaid situation throughout the year. These have already been banned since 2008 and for all electricity suppliers since the adoption of a law on the winter break. Instead of these cuts, the company will reduce the power supplied to these customers, in order to guarantee a minimum service while pushing them to pay their bills.
In 2019, 280,000 households were deprived of electricity for unpaid bills, all suppliers combined, according to the national energy mediator. The latter, Olivier Challan Belval, defended this Wednesday before the Economic Affairs Committee of the National Assembly the establishment of a “right to a minimum supply of electricity” for the most precarious households. Manuel Domergue calls on other electricity suppliers to follow EDF’s example.
franceinfo: The Abbé Pierre Foundation has been calling for an end to power cuts, regardless of the season, for several years. EDF is therefore going in the right direction?
Manuel Domergue: It is a historic day, a real success for millions of households who live with the sword of Damocles in the event of unpaid bills, to no longer have light and therefore electricity. It means it’s over, they will always have light, no matter what. Enough to recharge your phone, your computer, enough to keep food or medicine cool. So, this is a very important day. Obviously, it’s not a victory that will solve all the problems. But we still have the impression of having taken a step forward in dignity. But this only concerns two-thirds of households. The other electricity suppliers must also get involved, and for them, this is not a very important financial effort. Because in the end, households that are already applied a reduction in power instead of a cut regulate their situation, as when they are cut off the power. It is already a fairly important signal for a household to have a reduction in power. It’s really not the luxury of living on 1,000 or 2,000 watts.
Can’t we heat ourselves with 1,000 or 2,000 watts?
It’s really a minimal measure, and that’s why I’m saying it’s not an extraordinary victory either. This is the minimum that society owes everyone, good or bad payers. Whatever happens, minimum electricity coverage, minimum service. Indeed, we cannot heat ourselves, when we have an electric heater, with 1000 or 2000 watts. There are also a lot of household appliances which require power, and which will not be able to work. It is therefore still a punishment that remains strong. And it is also to say that people will not be disempowered, if ever there was this fear. No one who can afford their electricity bill is going to have fun staying with 1,000 watts, because we don’t live well with it.
How can other suppliers be encouraged to follow EDF’s example? Do we need a law establishing a minimum right of access to electricity?
Today, there are two suppliers who no longer cut off the electricity. A very small supplier, Plüm energy [qui revendique 90 000 clients], and now EDF. If the others don’t want to go, only the law can get them there. Next week, we have a meeting organized by the Ministry of Energy Transition, with suppliers, Enedis and the Abbé Pierre Foundation. The subject will undoubtedly be discussed. Afterwards, one can think that the ripple effect of EDF will perhaps lead the other suppliers, both for image reasons, and then also for commercial reasons, to follow the incumbent operator. Perhaps households will go to EDF rather than to competing suppliers because they know that in the event of a glitch, EDF will not turn off their lights.