Declan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for the presentations. I am sceptical, to say the least, about this. Generations of teachers like myself and people generally have been talking about climate change for 50 or 60 years. We spoke about the possibility of a type of Armageddon if we did not deal with it yet we, the politicians, and the professionals are still grappling with it. Mention was made the other day about the need to reinforce the curriculum. Most people know this has been coming down the line.

I will try to be specific in my questions. Other members have asked some that I wanted to ask but on the implications for revenue of the reduction in oil and diesel as a result of this change, have the witnesses done any calculations on that? Is there a need to climate proof a budget similar to gender proofing to ensure we can have a clear statement of intent?

I said on the previous day when we discussed the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council that nobody likes to pay additional taxes. The reality is that there are some who can afford to do that but there are always those who cannot. We have figures to show that on an annual basis 28% of the population are experiencing fuel poverty, which is a specific concern of mine. Mention was made of 30% or 50% of the carbon tax being returned to them. I would like the witnesses to comment on that.

Dr. Curtis spoke about people not taking up various schemes. Organisations like the Society of St. Vincent de Paul would suggest that community energy advisers should be brought in immediately to lower socio-economic income areas to make those necessary savings. Some local authorities have been proactive on that already. Will the witnesses comment on that and how we can ensure that, in making the transition to a low carbon economy, it is fair and socially just?

I want to make two final points as I will not contribute again. The witnesses spoke about retrofitting, and we hear about the skills and expertise that is needed. Have they done an assessment as to whether that type of manpower is available? I doubt that it is, particularly if our economy continues to grow at the current rate.

Mention was made by Dr. de Bruin from the ESRI that this would have a greater impact on rural areas than urban areas. Has she examined the issue of the need to increase the rural transport system?

Last but not least, in the previous debates on this issue the sceptic in me asked where people will go with the electric cars after the cars' lifetime. It is a simple question. The reality is that the car will be clapped out. There will be no competition. If one buys a car from a particular dealer they will tell one to put it on a scrap heap. The people I speak with who own a diesel or a petrol car and who are struggling will find it very difficult to make ends meet. For anyone who bought a family car for €18,000 or €20,000 in recent years, there is no scrappage scheme that will compensate them in respect of that loss of revenue. We need to cost this properly.

I smiled when Dr. de Bruin spoke about a technical study. In terms of the language used in it, I have said previously that if we want to encourage people who do not understand the need to make these adjustments to understand it, we need to use less difficult language.

That brings me back to those who can afford to make these changes and those who cannot. We need to speak to the ordinary people.

I mentioned energy advisers who could help people understand that they can make savings. In the explanations given to date, I do not believe that message has got across to those who need to take corrective action. The witnesses might comment on that.