Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 23 February 2021

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action

Decarbonising Transport: Discussion

Photo of Brian LeddinBrian Leddin (Limerick City, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Murphy and the other witnesses for their opening statements and for attending today's session to inform the committee about the issues at play when considering how best to reduce our national transport emissions, which are the fourth highest per capitain Europe and which comprise 20% of our overall national emissions. This meeting is confined to a maximum of two hours. I propose that each member be given two minutes to address their questions to the witnesses to ensure that all members get an opportunity to pose their questions and to allow witnesses sufficient time to answer. We will have a second round of questions if there is time. Is that agreed? Agreed. I will take members in the order in which they raise their hands. While the clerk is noting the order, I will start off the questioning.

Given the scale of the challenge ahead in achieving at least 51% decarbonisation in transport by 2030, there is a fear that our planning policy is not aligned with our ambition. In other words, is the national planning framework fit for purpose? As Mr. Cussen pointed out in his opening statement, the national planning framework commits to securing an average of 40% of all new homes on brownfield and in-fill development land, with this average to rise to 50% in cities and to fall to 30% in towns and villages. However, this indicates that 50% of homes are to be developed around cities and 70% around towns and villages. This seems to pull against the principles of compact growth and the town centres first approach. It will also continue our problem of urban sprawl, which beds in dependency on cars. This dependency is at its worst in towns and villages, given the lack of public and active travel options. As Mr. Cussen points out, we must away move from promoting sprawling estates and scattered housing which, to quote Mr. Cussen, will "never work from a public transport and active travel perspective."

All three witnesses mentioned the approach of avoid, shift and improve. Dr. O'Mahony commented that the commitments in the national planning framework and the NDP must be seen as a floor of ambition rather than a ceiling and that it is not consistent with the scale of the challenge we face. The highest priority in this approach is given to avoiding, which is to say avoiding the generation of longer trips by preventing low-density development and repairing the sprawl we already have. As Dr. O'Mahony points out, this approach channels virtually all future development into the existing footprints of our cities and into revitalising the physical core of the villages and towns of rural Ireland.

I address this question to all three witnesses; is the national planning framework fit for purpose when it comes to achieving our targets for the reduction of transport emissions? I also have a question for Mr. Cussen in particular. We have seen evidence of local authorities enabling schemes that are quite dependent on cars at the periphery of urban centres through local area plans but it is claimed on paper that they are aligned with the national planning framework, NPF. As regulator, is Mr. Cussen prepared to intervene in such cases to prevent their development if they will lock in dependency on cars and greenhouse gas emissions?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.