Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Our primary objective in embarking on this consultation process is to identify, from the insight of stakeholders and experts who have been active in this area for a long time, any deficiencies in the proposed legislation. Where do the delegates see the benefits from the Bill? What is positive about it from their perspective? We are in a progressive minority in Europe in embarking on this process. While some states, including Austria, France, Sweden and the United Kingdom, have legislated in respect of climate change, many others have failed to take any action. Will the delegates guide us through the aspects of the Bill they see as representing progress, as opposed to the current position where there is an absence of any legislation?

What is the witnesses' view on the proposed climate change commission? We have looked at the model of the Fiscal Advisory Council, which is a robust and respected body comprising an august group of wise and independent heads formed to advise the Government on fiscal policy. It is a welcome innovation. However, in one case, where it made recommendations to Government on front-loading deficit reduction, its advice was ignored. This was the correct decision, in my view, because of the social cost that would arise from following its recommendation.

That was one instance in which the council's advice was not taken because of the impact on broader policy. Where would the delegates stand in a situation where an advisory body on climate change, mirroring some of the functions of the Fiscal Advisory Council, had one of its recommendations rejected by the Minister, whether in this or future Executives, simply because it did not fit with his or her policy direction or preferences?