Michael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister and his team and thank him for his presentation. I said in the Dáil that I welcomed the Minister's initiative in putting forward this Green Paper. I could hardly do any less, having called for it for some two years now. I recognise it is not going to be easy to come up with a blueprint to ensure we have a sustainable, secure, competitive energy market that enjoys the support of the majority of people, particularly for certain projects in certain communities. However, I have already indicated in the Dáil that I want to work with the Minister and the Department on this because I share the vision that we have to maximise our use of renewable energy in this country.

I will be submitting a detailed response to the Green Paper. If I may, I will go through the six headings that the report hinges upon. The first is "Empowering Energy Citizens". Language is a funny thing. We sometimes take a condescending approach towards public consultation, and what we mean by public participation or consultation is that we make "them" understand the scientific facts. That is not what I would regard as "Empowering Energy Citizens". What I would look for is a way to give real power to local communities and to local government, representing local communities so they would become an intrinsic part of the whole wider energy strategy. It is not simply a question of conveying and convincing them that the science is right. It is a process of getting communities and local authorities engaged as part of the wider energy strategy. In that regard, I would be looking at issues such as micro-generation projects, the cost of connecting to the network and obstacles in the way of those who, in many cases, wish to put up their own money to help themselves to access energy that is renewable, that is micro and that serves a purpose for them. We have a lot of work to do under that heading of "Empowering Energy Citizens".

Under the second heading, "Markets, Regulation and Prices", and on the question of whether the CER should exist, European regulation has resulted in a fairly major overhaul of Irish and European energy markets. In our case, the ESB and Bord Gáis have been split into different companies, we have allowed some sections of those companies to be privatised and an area that was once under State control is now shifting to the hands of private companies. I know the Minister has said it is not his intention or wish that there would be increased privatisation but the same may not be said of another holder of the office. I will be arguing that, despite increased competition from the various energy companies and despite this push towards privatisation, energy costs have continued to rise. The CER should be doing more, or the process involving the CER should be doing more, to control the rising costs of fuel for families and for commercial consumers.

Under the heading "Planning and Implementing Essential Energy Infrastructure", I am concerned when I see the words "fracking" or "hydraulic fracturing" mentioned twice in the Minister's remarks.

I know the Minister will say there has been no fracking and that no decision will be made until the EPA reports have been prepared. However, I agree with Deputy Dooley on this issue. Even if we accept the denials of fracking causing damage in the countries in which it has already been introduced, it has not been tried on a small green island with a dispersed population and a reputation for agri-food based on clean and green. It is bordering on economic suicide to consider hydraulic fracturing given the nature of the island on which we are privileged to live. We should not even be preparing an EPA report because we should have prohibited it from the outset. The licence to explore was granted in the dark of night during the dying days of the last Administration. Serious questions arise about how and why that was done. We should not give any company the slightest glimmer of hope that we will allow fracking. These companies will take legal action against governments if they see the slightest sign that they invested money in projects that were prevented from proceeding. The further we allow them to proceed in their explorations, the greater the risk that they will take us to the cleaners. We should do the prudent and proper thing, and say "No, you cannot frack here."

I agree that we should investigate interconnectivity between the Six Counties and the Twenty-Six Counties, and between ourselves and Europe. It is a pity that the Government did not listen to Leitrim County Council 14 years ago when, on foot of a proposal I had prepared, it forwarded a motion to what was then the Department of Local Government to the effect that every motorway development should include a multipurpose service duct alongside the road. It would have added an additional 5% to construction costs but we would not now be having this debate about overhead wires. It shows the lack of vision and joined up thinking - I hate that phrase - among Departments that are working within their own bunkers and refusing to sanction an additional 5% in expenditure. It will now cost 100% more for a sister Department, all of which will come from the taxpayers' money.

It is important to ensure a balanced and secure energy supply based on a mix of renewables. We should not be relying solely on wind energy. The Minister has pointed out that the State is investing in trials of other options. We need to accelerate these investigations. We will have to put the energy system on a sustainable pathway. We have signed up to legally binding agreements on reducing our CO2 emissions and it is important that renewable energy is the focus of the debate.

In regard to economic opportunities, the State rather than the energy companies needs to be driving the energy agenda. The biggest risk to the vision set out in the Green Paper is that we fail to change that basic principle. I am not arguing that energy companies should not benefit from developments in this country but the State should be setting the agenda and making decisions based on the interests of Irish people and our energy security and sustainability. Development should not be at the whim of an energy company which will push a certain form of energy because it can get a higher grant for it. We need to take control of that horse. State companies like the ESB can play a role in developing energy opportunities. Any further privatisation needs to be opposed and it should be set out in writing that we will not allow it. All analysis needs to include an assessment of impacts of economic existing economic activities, such as agri-food, tourism and landscape and water management. I find it somewhat scary that when I speak to people who are involved in agri-food exports, tourism or water management they feel they should not have any concerns about the threat of fracking in this country. I do not understand that. No company will make money from poisoned water.