Mr. Greg Muttitt:

My apologies for leaving early but I have to catch the last ferry that will get me back to London today without flying. As we are discussing the climate emergency, that is my preference. I have a couple of questions for Mr. Collins on the other country comparatives. Mr. Collins said that France would have 50% nuclear in its generation mix by 2050.

My question is about at which scenario the Department is looking because, under both the Hollande and Macron governments, the target was to reduce the proportion to 50% by 2025, although recently it was suggested the year might be pushed out to 2030. We expect it to be a lot lower by 2050. In one sense, all of the challenges associated with replacement make it more difficult for France than Ireland.

Reference was made to the analysis of the differences between the Irish case and those of France, New Zealand and Costa Rica. I was wondering whether the Department had also considered the similarities, particularly the fact that all three were significant importers. None of them is an exporter of oil and gas. All three have combined the restriction on new exploration with aggressive measures to expand the use of clean energy resources. Has this been considered?

The final question is on a comparator that is not a country. There is a very obvious difference. I am referring to the World Bank Group which announced in December that it would be ending the provision of finance for oil and gas extraction in order to align with the Paris goals. Has the Department, in its study of the Bill, produced or published an analysis of why it believes restricting supply does not affect the achievement of the climate goals by contrast with the analysis of the World Bank and quite a large number of economists who have argued that both must be addressed?