Caít Keane (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegation for the presentation. I will not dwell on targets, as we have had much discussion about them, but in the submission the target is an 80% to 95% reduction on 1990 levels by 2050. Is that a realistic objective? The delegation obviously believes it to be if it has made the recommendation. Nevertheless, we have a large agricultural sector.

The delegates have argued that we must change the direction of agriculture in this country, yet Food Harvest 2020 identifies a potential 12% increase in emissions. As legislators charged with implementing provisions in this area, we have a duty to ensure any recommendations we make are realistically achievable. Do the delegates have further recommendations on how the target they have set out might be achieved? It is fine to set a target; the challenge arises in finding ways to meet it.

The delegates made no reference to EU proposals regarding compensation for loss and damage. As organisations concerned with climate justice, I would assume this is one element of their agenda. Why then have they not recommended compensating countries which, through no fault of their own, are most affected by climate change? When one looks at the footprint per head of population for some of these countries, it is nowhere near the corresponding figure for Ireland.

A 4% rise in temperatures will result in a decline in crop yields. Given our location, there is a possibility that Ireland might be better suited to cope with that change than are some other countries. Certainly, a 4% rise would result in a huge decline for countries at the Equator, Mediterranean countries and so on. Might it fall to countries in more favourable geographical locations to compensate those experiencing the greatest decline? In other words, is it possible that Ireland might in future be charged with feeding a greater portion of the global population?