Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

In the renewable sector as a whole, Ireland has invested heavily policy-wise and, in general terms, in the wind energy sector, but we have not done as much as we might have in the wave and tidal energy sector. I accept that they are at an early stage in terms of development, but they have been at that stage for some time. The Minister has rightly identified the emergence of hydraulic fracturing as an opportunity to generate energy closer to home and that seems to have taken some of the smart money in developing an alternative energy source away from the wave and tidal energy sector. I am a little concerned that we are, to some extent, starting to buy into this.

I note the Minister's comments on the context in which we are competing with the United States. We have always competed with the United States which has always had a cheaper source of energy available in terms of its oil drilling business and this has not prevented us from developing our industrial sector to date. While I accept that it is a challenge, our unique characteristics on the western side of Europe give us an advantage, if we could get our heads around investing a little more in wave and tidal energy projects. Clearly, the markets have not advanced the moneys needed. It will take a progressive approach on the part of the Government at some point to really make it happen.

On the fracking issue, the jury is out in some countries. From what I have seen and the general view, for a country as small as Ireland with a strong tourism industry, it is just not an option. I know there are exploratory licences, but we would have done better from the start if we had just said: “No, thanks, we are not interested.” While l accept that it is always important before one makes a final decision to look and see, from what is available from other countries, we should be at the point of saying it is just not for us. I can understand why it works in parts of the United States where there are vast tracts of land that are entirely depopulated and if there is a level of destruction of the environment, it is manageable and can be contained and the impact is relatively limited. I am not an individual who jumps on the bandwagon and says, “Not in my back yard” - quite the opposite. However, in this instance, we must consider the potential impact not just on drinking water but on the visual amenity of the country which we market very strongly as a green destination from a tourism perspective. Wearing my hat as Opposition spokesperson on tourism, I would be deeply concerned about anything that might emerge in that regard.

On LNG, liquefied natural gas, what is the Minister’s view on the decision of the regulator to include a cost for the gas interconnector in respect of the LNG project at Ballylongford? This has effectively prevented the project from going ahead, as he knows. He has noted that the Green Paper is strong on the issue of competition. The LNG project would have provided for a level of competition and assisted with security of supply. It was unfortunate, therefore, that the regulator took the decision it did in that regard.

In a broader context, does the Minister believe there is still a need for a regulator in the energy sector? Have we reached a point where we can move on from it and allow the market to effectively dictate the supply of energy?