Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Yes, please. I fell off the call there. I do not know what happened. I only caught the end of Deputy Naughten's contribution. I understand where the Deputy is coming from, but throughout the hearings we have had on the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Bill 2021 we have been told to listen to the science. We have also repeatedly heard all parties telling the Government that it needs to have a tighter legal framework which puts more legal obligations on Ministers to ensure they are accountable for delivery in their sectors. These are solemn international treaties that we have signed up to and we must deliver on our obligations in that regard.

There has been a desire from most of the Opposition to have legislation that can be litigated. However, the Oireachtas cannot be brought to court for failures.

There is something of a dilemma here. If people want legislation which honours a treaty that the Government has entered into, want us to listen to the science as determined by the CCAC and want a tight framework according to which Ministers must be held to account by the Oireachtas and the wider public for the delivery on this global challenge, there is then a dilemma if we are going say that we want to have the opportunity to decide to reject the climate budget that is determined by the science and want a different approach to be taken. I can see the argument that Deputy Naughten and others are making. However, some of the very same people who are making that argument here today were strenuously making the opposite argument that we need to listen to the science and nail down Ministers because Governments are recalcitrant and will always fail, and we need to create a very tight legal framework for them. If we then say, with one leap, our hero is free, because the Oireachtas can reject it, the whole thing goes up in smoke.

There is a dilemma for the committee members here. I have had some doubts myself about creating these legal straitjackets. We are politicians and must be given a bit of freedom, but most of the contributions we have heard have been in favour of making that straitjacket tighter and the obligations greater. That has been a theme that has been coming across in contributions made by Opposition members in committee as we have considered this Bill. It is again reflected here. There is a scepticism of Government. It could be argued that the Oireachtas may decide that the science will not apply after all.

While I can understand the arguments that Deputy Naughten and others are making, there is a line. The Oireachtas is responsible for making laws. That is the responsibility of the Oireachtas and we have to decide "Yay" or "Nay" on this. However, it is not repugnant for us to decide that these treaties are so important that when we enter into them, and when the science pronounces on how we should proceed, that he Government has an obligation to push on with that and it is our job, as Members of the Oireachtas, to hold it to account for its work.

We need to give serious consideration to what the Minister of State is saying. Most of the arguments that I have listened to over the last six months have come from a very different perspective. The arguments are for more tight controls and a tighter straitjacket on Government to show that it will honour the commitments that were made in Paris. That has been a strong theme. If we believe that, the Minister of State's arguments deserve to be listened to.