Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Carroll. I want to focus on a couple of areas around that question of targets. As I understand, because Ireland is a laggard and has not met its previous targets, I do not believe that will give us a free pass. It might mean that we need to have a higher nationally determined contribution. Is Mr. Carroll suggesting that this would require us to be reducing by 55% to 60% from 1990 levels in order to be achieving the 55% that the EU is discussing?

It would be useful to clarify that.

I will come back to the question of the level of ambition. As we know, this direction from the Commission has gone through two of its stages. It has been through the European Parliament and it is on its way to the European Council. Mr. Carroll might confirm if that will happen in December. First of all, has Mr. Carroll a sense of what position Ireland intends to take on some of the key changes that were made in the European Parliament? For example, while there were proposals that the level of ambition should be raised to 65%, I believe a compromise proposal was agreed by the European Parliament of 60% by 2030. Similarly, there was a requirement that all future legislative and budgetary proposals had to be consistent with the Union's climate objectives. There was an amendment passed for the creation of an independent European scientific advisory body on climate change, and similarly, indeed, a greenhouse gas budget in 2021. It would be useful if Mr. Carroll could give an indication of what position Ireland will take in relation to these amendments to the Commission's proposals from the European Parliament when it goes to the third part of the process in the Council. That would be important.

It would be helpful if Mr. Carroll could confirm that he believes we are on track for these measures to be in place in 2021. There was some mention in the communication that it might be delayed because of Covid-19 but I understand it has gone through the European Parliament. It only has to go through the Council. If anything, the Covid-19 crisis has underscored the need for action on the science. Otherwise, it could lead to targets being raised further. Could Mr. Carroll also comment on the debate on it being net zero versus gross zero, and provide his perspective on it? We have heard the argument in relation to net zero. Also, in terms of other reductions, he might comment on whether they should be net or gross.