Eamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I think that if Deputy Murphy becomes Minister for Finance, he will look back and say the ESRI did not think big enough. I am sorry but I see a complete dearth of ambition here and the scale of change we need is not in the analysis presented. I am sorry for giving such a blunt assessment but I believe it is true. We need system change not marginal change and what the ESRI has presented is marginal change, which a carbon tax will do, but it is not big enough and not good enough on its own. It is not going to win the public over to us and it is not working. The Department of Finance figures show this, as clear as day.

Are we in agreement? I would be interested to hear the ESRI's assessment as to what exactly are we aiming for in 2050? Are we aiming for a zero-carbon energy system, a zero-carbon transport system and carbon neutral agricultural land use system with three decades? The scale of that change is immense. One has to change the industrial system at the same time. One has to change everything in two or three decades. Are we agreed on that? Is that where we are going? Does the carbon tax that has been outlined bring us anywhere near that in any sort of timeframe? Does Professor Barrett have an estimate of the fines we are likely to face, even in the short term? I think I heard some official say €500 million a year. Dr. Curtis is absolutely right that it is a sunk, wasted cost. Does Professor Barrett have a figure for that?

Is the challenge of our population growth being factored into this? The targets that were set, or have been given, are based on an old population. Our population is growing and this is going to make it even more challenging. Does Professor Barrett agree that sort of scale of change challenge is not reflected in the response we have here?