Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

When we talk about what is measured and resources, it strikes me that, while there is infinite inflexibility in regard to how we approach the monetary aspect, there is a hard resource limit in regard to the planetary boundary limit. There is a shadow cost to carbon, that is, not in the economic sense. Sometimes I wonder whether we try to fit carbon into the economic model rather than recognising that the economic model needs to operate within a hard and non-negotiable limit in terms of carbon. The question of which fits inside the other really matters. Perhaps Dr. Ehnts will comment on the importance of that in the context of our new fiscal rules such that they will understand themselves within that constraint, rather than having it as a kind of an add-on factor that can adapt itself to the fiscal aspects.

Dr. Ehnts mentioned that we have not had the issue of overspending for some time. Will he comment on the idea of the annual framework? There was almost a move back to having a quarterly report and a market-mood response. If that same kind of a timeframe is brought in to any new fiscal rules or economic governance framework, how could it curtail us in taking five-year or ten-year investment actions, where the rewards and the necessary changes are going to come in five or ten years? There is much focus on the suspension of the fiscal rules to allow investment to bridge the crisis, and there may be some arguments, which Dr. Ehnts might comment on, for that needing to be extended for a period. Nevertheless, there is also a strong argument that after the protection role, there is the transformation role. A crisis is not always a matter of responding and keeping what you have in a holding pattern but rather about responding and making heavy investment to make a big change, as may be required on climate.