John Lahart (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. McCabe and Ms Capozza for their contributions. The OECD report contained some thought-provoking and policy-provoking suggestions, many of which I have articulated over time. I will make a general point on this and get the OECD response. Almost all the significant initiatives in Ireland, whether in relation to retrofitting, the purchase of electric vehicles or the extension of the bike to work scheme to e-bikes, require the purchaser to have a lot of cash upfront or significant savings. They can be described in a general way as middle class incentives.

There has been an exponential rise in the sale of e-bikes. A good e-bike costs between €2,500 and €3,000. Applicants to the scheme must pay that money upfront before availing of the tax benefits. People need between €35,000 and €40,000 to get a decent fully electric vehicle before availing of the incentives. Those who do not have savings or are not on large incomes may have to take out significant loans to cover the cost. Over time, they can reap the benefits and rewards of reduced running costs but they have to borrow or have the money upfront. That precludes a significant proportion of people from investing or taking advantage of the incentives.

Similarly with house retrofits, people need significant cash on hand or savings. The incentives are considerable. I will give an example. I put a good boiler in my house a year and a half ago. I had to have €3,500 to get the substantial benefits. If I had not had that money, I would have had to borrow it. Not an awful lot of people have that amount of cash on hand. I had to save for a few months to get it. All the schemes are all front-loaded towards people of means. That is restrictive and precludes many people. I would like to get the OECD representatives' views on that.

Transport formed a major focal point of Ms Capozza's presentation. We have included e-bikes in our bike to work scheme. People have to shell out between €2,500 and €3,000 to get one of these e-bikes, which are game-changers for shorter distances. I know many people who have taken them and say anecdotally they no longer drive to the local village for coffee because they get there more accessibly with an e-bike, and it is much easier than the push bike. This has been transformative. In Belgium, which I think is the leader in this area, any money employers spend on electric bike infrastructure is subject to tax relief of up to 125%. If an employer buys an e-bike for an employee and ensures the employee is not arriving to work in a car or if an employer invests in electric bike infrastructure, such as bike lockers, showers or charging facilities, the cost can be written off in full. This comes at very little cost to the State and means the bike is free or close to free for the employee. The scheme here is exclusive as it applies to those who have money. The tax incentive in the bike to work scheme is considerable but people must have the money upfront to purchase the bike, which makes the scheme restrictive.

The witnesses are brave to come here and talk about this subject. Any person who thinks about it for any length of time realises that the more people move to electric or hybrid cars, the less tax they pay. Transport taxes are high in Ireland, as are excise duties. The witnesses rightly point out that these costs will have to be moved over to tolls - no, thank you - or more road taxes to decarbonise society.

I and many other members were local authority members for many years. The State has a database of fuel users who benefit from the fuel allowance. Why does the State not bulk purchase either gas or electricity for these fuel allowance recipients and get a much more significant deal for them? Most of it goes on carbon. Given the significant stock of social housing - my local authority has 10,000 social housing units - I do not see why those local authorities have not bulk bought energy for their social housing tenants since energy was deregulated. What are the OECD representatives' views on those matters? The question on fuel and State engagement in bulk purchasing is directed at the representatives of TASC as well. It would be laborious, as I was told by council officials, but imagine the savings a local authority could secure for its tenants if it bulk purchased their gas and electricity.