Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 21 November 2018

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action

Third Report of the Citizens' Assembly: Discussion (Resumed)

2:00 pm

Photo of John LahartJohn Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for the work they do in the service of the planet and our future. There is an issue that is worth clarifying. All of us raised interesting questions. I found the witnesses' presentations stimulating. They were far too short, so we will have to do some reading outside this committee. Agriculture production methods have been transformed and that has led us to where we are now, but Dr. Aubert asked who will give us the reverse transformation?

It is important to say it will be innovators, entrepreneurs and business people who will do it and lead.

I am particularly taken by one of the last points Dr. Aubert made about household budgets and food. One of the figures given in a presentation indicates that we waste 30% of the food we produce, which is a horrifying statistic. I am very taken by the suggestion that household domestic expenditure on the weekly food basket has been dropping. I presume it is being replaced by spending on consumer items, including the plasma television screens or iPhones. It would be a useful exercise for the committee to focus on that. The suggestion is there is a price to be paid for the changes we must make and there is scope to pay the price if we change our consumption habits. It is really important.

Our President was recently inaugurated. I will not ask any political questions of the witnesses but I was very taken by a couple of the points that the President made in his inauguration speech. He spoke about a generation younger than mine made up of "post-consumers". They are not as absorbed by consumerism as my generation and the one immediately following mine has been. They do not want plastic or disposable items. They want food and products of integrity far more than my generation would have been used to. They are demanding it and certainly pushing change. He also spoke about intergenerational injustice. While I champion and support these perspective, they also sound very western. We want to deny emerging economies all the things we have taken for granted as consumers over decades just as they are growing. Perhaps the three witnesses could comment on that. Dr. Aubert mentioned four contrasting pathways and I am sure there is much detail in the paper. Will he summarise those four contrasting pathways to the 1.5° Celsius figure and give us a little more information on it?

We are quite deep into the debate at this committee, which arose from the Citizens' Assembly, to which the witnesses have referred. The bulk of the early presentations was almost an attempt to convince us once again that climate change is happening. I know we moved from global warming to the term "climate change" but is even more language needed to convey the importance of the matter and the potential catastrophe that awaits? The witnesses are speaking with the converted here and my thinking is there was no need to reinforce the idea as to what happens if we hit the 1.5° Celsius or 2° Celsius increase; there clearly is such a need. Even with the United States, the issue of climate change converges with economics and politics, leaving major challenges. There are questions in those comments so will the witnesses respond to them?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.