Thomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Petriccione for his contribution, about which he already has been asked very detailed questions. I have a number of questions on the strategy and about one of his earlier answers. He said the Commission is looking at how the policy will develop to 2030, and that it will be able to react then to see if it needs to change and have a more detailed structure. At what point will the Commission react? Will it be at 2030 or earlier? Mr. Petriccione used an example of the roll-out of electric vehicles.

With regard to the long-term strategy and its legal status, I am not certain how the Commission can force member states to comply with it. Will the witnesses address that further? We are very slow to respond even when there is a way to force us but if there is no way to force us, I do not know how we will ever respond at all.

Will the witnesses address the 1.5°C goal and reduction targets? Now is the time to react on that. The Commission is saying that if the strategy is successful, it will not achieve that but will show that it can be achieved. Surely it needs to aim to achieve that now to be effective in making that happen, especially with the reduction in stranded assets that could happen if the target was set now rather than waiting to 2050.

With regard to the use of fossil fuels in the EU's strategy, how does the Commission view the ongoing use of fossil fuels?

There cannot be a transition fuel. What are their views on the strategy in the context of Ireland? It seems we are interested in developing alternative fossil fuels and offshore gas fields and dressing this up as being for security when that is actually not the case. How does it contribute to the overall European aims?