Ms Justice Mary Laffoy:

I will be somewhat long-winded in my response as I have given some thought to that issue. I hope the Chairman does not mind if I make some general observations. These are matters that came to mind while I was preparing for this meeting. I am conscious that the task of the committee as set out in the Dáil resolution of last July, at which I have looked, is different from and more difficult than the task performed by the Citizens' Assembly. A second point of which I am conscious is that things have changed somewhat since the assembly's two meetings and deliberations ten and 11 months ago. It is important that the committee take on board the national adaptation framework, which was published in January 2018, some time after the meetings of the Citizens' Assembly on this issue had taken place. A draft version of the framework was in existence in October and November of last year. Of course, the national development plan, which features in the resolution, was published after the assembly made its recommendations. The resolution outlining the role of the committee asks it to assess the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly and the current situation against the background of the draft integrated national energy and climate plan and with reference to the national development plan and the national adaptation framework. Those plans did not form part of the consideration of the issue by the Citizens' Assembly as they did not exist at that time. I was a little puzzled about the national energy and climate plan because it must be considered in the context of an EU regulation which is also referred to in the resolution. The secretariat asked the Department for an update on the situation and we got a very useful note from the Department which indicates that the State must submit the first draft of that plan to the European Commission by 31 December 2018. I mention these matters merely to emphasise that the committee has a specific obligation to look at certain matters that the Citizen's Assembly was not asked to examine and which did not exist during our deliberations.

On the recommendations, I have already outlined the position in regard to agriculture and the concerns referred to in the Chairman's question. I urge members to read the very useful final paper delivered to the members of the Citizens' Assembly before they voted, which was a presentation by Professor John FitzGerald, who, as members know, is chairman of the Climate Change Advisory Council. His conclusions are summarised at page 87 of the report, to which I draw the attention of members. The recommendations of the members of the Citizens' Assembly in regard to agriculture clearly reflect what was stated by Professor FitzGerald. In general, our approach reflected what members heard and, in particular, what Professor Fitzgerald stated at the very end of his presentation. His paper is included in appendix F to the report at page F484 and is worth reading. It states that in order to move to becoming a leader it is the view of the advisory council that:

Ireland needs to take urgent action to move the country back onto a sustainable path, so that it will at least meet its target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. To do this action is needed across all sectors of society and the economy.

He outlines that there needs to be leadership from the Government and citizens. I emphasise that he sees such leadership as leadership by us all. Specifically on agriculture, he states that there needs to be a focus on "how land use change could help reduce net greenhouse gas emissions and implementing policies to reduce the carbon footprint of the agricultural sector". I may be beginning to bore the committee but I point out that the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly reflect the information it was given by the experts.

I will briefly mention three other matters. I ask members to look at ancillary recommendation 2 in regard to plastic packaging. It is one of the issues on which the Citizens' Assembly could have spent more time if such had been available as it is of great importance.

The following is my personal view, with which members might not agree. In the consideration of the eighth amendment by the Citizens' Assembly, an entire Saturday was assigned to hearing from advocacy groups, which was very helpful. However, we did not have time to hear from advocacy groups on climate change. I note that it was indicated during the first meeting of the committee that it will hear from the environmental pillar. It is my view that there may be some benefit from hearing advocacy groups on both sides of any particular argument.

I ask the committee to take on board is what we say in the ancillary recommendation 1, which relates to the manner in which the public is kept informed about the necessity to tackle climate change. In this context - I will not read the recommendation which is AR1, as the members can do so themselves - it would be useful to refer the committee to the focus in Mr. Joseph Curtin's paper on societal acceptance. We have to have a framework in which society as a whole accepts what needs to be done to deal with climate change. That paper is contained in appendix F, at page F74, and we have summarised what he said in the report at page 65. It is wise to have regard to the members' suggestions as to how we could get societal acceptance for the changes. I hope that I have not taken up too much time.