Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important topic. I also welcome these statements. I acknowledge the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications for his work as EU ministerial representative at the loss and damage talks in Egypt. I thank the Irish officials whose work goes unseen but which was crucial to establishing a loss and damage fund.

Responding to the announcement of the fund, the climate change Minister of Pakistan, Ms Sherry Rehman, highlighted that the fund is not about some countries accepting charity but that it is down payment on an investment in our futures and climate justice. Her point about climate justice is really important.

Wealthier countries that account for just 12% of the global population are responsible for 50% of all the planet-warming greenhouse gases released from fossil fuels and industry over the past 170 years. Wealthier countries have contributed most to global warming. Many have built their economies and current national wealth on the back of considerable emissions. It is important that this be recognised and that funding be directed towards those countries that are now feeling the devastating consequences of global warming caused by these same emissions.

While the loss and damage fund was really positive, other aspects of COP27 were a significant disappointment. These included attempts to roll back on commitments made only one year ago at Glasgow and the inability to agree on strong language on the phasing out of fossil fuels - all fossil fuels. Advocacy group Global Witness highlighted that over 600 fossil fuel lobbyists were in attendance at the climate change conference in Sharm El-Sheikh. That is even more than the number who attended in Glasgow last year. Their agenda is clear: to delay the transition from fossil fuels and greenwash ineffective actions in order to protect their profit and keep a business-as-usual approach for as long as they can. Fossil fuel lobbyists have no place at the UN conference. We would not invite big tobacco lobbyists to a lung cancer conference, so we should apply the same standard here. The interests of fossil fuel lobbyists do not align with efforts to cut our emissions radically. The lobbyists got a sympathetic ear in Egypt. Their exclusion in the future would be one step towards reforming the COP ahead of the next meeting, which is to take place in one of the biggest oil-producing countries in the world. It is vital that the public have confidence in the process and that it not be seen as a talking shop or circus. On the international stage, at European level, Ireland should be advocating the reform of the COP to ensure it is sufficient and effective and that it works.

If Ireland is to play its part in combating global warming, it needs a radical shift in the pace of delivery. We are almost midway through our first carbon budget but one would barely know that based on the action being taken. Instead of our emissions reducing by an average of 4.8% each year in the first cycle, they increased by 4.7% last year and will rise again this year. How are we supposed to meet the goal of a 51% cut by 2030 if we are this far off track now? Enormous cuts will be needed year on year at the end of this decade to make up for these lost years. In reality, the scale of those cuts, when required, will be such that they will be impossible to achieve in a single year.

I agree with the comments that Ms Marie Donnelly, the chair of the Climate Change Advisory Council, made at the sidelines of the COP to the effect that we need to tackle urgently some of the low-hanging fruit when cutting emissions here. In her comments, she specifically mentioned shallow retrofits, which we in Sinn Féin have been saying represent a considerable missed and available opportunity. Deep retrofitting is not happening at the scale required. The Minister's own figures show that. It is not credible to think that families across Ireland have a spare €30,000 to deep-retrofit their homes. I am not sure when the Government will realise that. Shallow retrofits and attic and cavity wall insulation are quick and affordable. In Sinn Féin's opinion, the State should be offering the full cost. Think of how many homes could be upgraded really quickly for a fraction of the price of a deep retrofit. It would deliver immediate carbon emissions reductions, help people save on their energy bills and improve health and well-being in the State's coldest homes.

The numbers for shallow retrofits have fallen off a cliff. In 2011, even at the height of the economic crisis, 51,577 attic insulations were carried out. In 2020 and 2021, similar to 2019, before Covid, the figure had dropped to below 5,000 annually, representing a full decade of missed opportunity. At that pace, it would take 100 years to complete the works on the 500,000 homes that the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, has said would benefit from attic and cavity wall insulation. Therefore, I asked the Minister to heed Ms Donnelly's comments and focus heavily on shallow retrofits in the time ahead.

Another issue that could be resolved quickly but that has not been to date is the under-resourcing of our planning system. The wind and solar industries have been banging this drum for some time. Some vital green-energy projects are caught in the system for far too long. Sinn Féin proposed in its alternative budget increased funding for our planning agencies and environmental NGOs to speed up planning applications.

We need robust, thorough and quality planning procedures for renewable energy projects and decisions to be made in a timely manner. The renewables industry said the average decision time for a planning appeal is 60 weeks. The average decision time for a strategic infrastructure development, SID, is 69 weeks, versus a statutory objective to determine cases within 18 weeks. We need more inspectors, ecologists and legal and administrative staff. Offshore projects to develop offshore windfarms need to put together environmental impact assessment reports as part of their applications, informed by fish and marine life surveys, marine mammal surveys and years of bird surveys. Environmental NGOs play an important role in this. Therefore increased funding for them would help them to contribute to complex planning applications to ensure we protect our biodiversity as we expand our energy production.

It is the same when it comes to our ports. Four Irish ports failed to secure EU funding under the Connecting Europe Facility, but the State has not brought forward any alternatives. Belfast is the only port on the island currently capable of hosting the construction of offshore windfarms. If we do not invest and ready our ports now, we will lose jobs and supply chain business from multibillion euro projects to ports in Britain and elsewhere. Given the planning issues in ports, offshore wind experts I have spoken to are not confident that our 2030 target will be met and are mentioning 2035 more and more. I ask the Minister to assure the House that 2030 is still on target and there are plans to address the significant concerns around planning and port infrastructure. I mentioned foreshore licences, marine area consents and the establishment of the Maritime Area Regulatory Authority, MARA. There are key timelines that need to be addressed.

Regarding transport emissions, Sinn Féin has proposed an increase of 10,000 places in the school transport scheme to harness the demand for the system and take thousands of cars off the roads every day. This has been inexplicably resisted to date. There is significant capacity to reduce our transport emissions if we provide the service. We have consistently argued with the National Transport Authority, NTA, about the need to reduce fares to encourage people to use public transport. It told us that was not the case and that we do not get the type of response indicated if fares are reduced. It said there is no clear correlation. We know now there is a clear correlation because we have empirical evidence, based on the impact of the 20% reduction in fares, which has seen significant increases in the uptake of public transport beyond what the NTA expected.

Separately, in terms of solar, farmers have asked about reforming the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS, grant process to allow them to sell electricity to the grid and a change to the capital acquisition tax rules to encourage more solar on farms. Neither of those things has been considered. Farmers want to play their part but are not getting much co-operation in this area.

I refer to points made by the Minister at his party conference at the weekend when he discussed the increased ambition for solar energy, a doubling to 5 GW of the target included in the climate action plan and delivery five years ahead of what was originally scheduled. We keep having targets. It appears that, in the climate action plan there will be more targets, increased targets, shifting targets and a move away from electric vehicles, EVs, and offshore wind towards solar. We need delivery. We need the logistical or regulatory roadblocks and the planning and infrastructural barriers to be lifted. This needs to be a decade of delivery. That is what was demanded, not just at COP but at national level.

See this speech in context