Professor John Sweeney:

I agree with almost everything said there. In terms of leakage and extraterritorial emissions, these should be handled actively in our negotiations on new trade treaties. We have not really encapsulated climate considerations fully in, for example, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA. We would have concerns about the energy charter in terms of how it handles climate considerations. Most importantly, we must recognise that the EU Green Deal specifically mentions border adjustments. That is a very useful phrase the Government should pursue with the climate Bill to ensure we do not have some of the problems to which the Senator referred. The indications are that it will not be pursued as actively as climate people would like, but that is something that should be addressed, although not necessarily in the Bill.

Regarding the sustainable economy, that is a very useful phrase to have. "Sustainable" is a word that is much misused, but it conveys a little better the concept than simply using the word "leakage".

Having interim methane targets would be very useful as a domestic guide but not as something we would be capable of reporting. Having internal minimum targets is useful, but we must have some form of enforcement or sanction to tackle those.

If I may refer to Deputy Bruton's comment on changing communities, communities are already changing. We have seen this in recent years. The pressure is coming from young people and the community. What they are looking for is leadership on this issue. That leadership is what this Bill should also be about, providing the way ahead to crystallise the ambitions and the objectives which the wider community is increasingly now expressing.

In terms of sanctions, we have to change community attitudes. Even when it comes to our current circumstance regarding how we tackle Covid, we have seen that we need a little carrot and a little stick. It may well be useful in this area as well to encourage change to take place.