Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Tuesday, 18 January 2022

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Action

Carbon Budgets: Discussion (Resumed)

Photo of Bríd SmithBríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I thank all of our guests for attending and for their submissions. I want to ask a number of questions, first of all, of the Department of Transport. Would the officials agree that the public service obligation, PSO, levy in this country compares poorly to those in other European states?

It is a key mechanism for reducing fares and moving towards more frequent and cheaper public transport, which would attract people away from private cars. However, the only concrete figure in the climate action plan seems to be of a further 1,500 low-emission buses as against 1 million EVs. This does not inspire confidence in the ability to increase our public transport journeys. The estimate is quite low, that is, a 2.9% increase in public transport journeys by 2042. I would have viewed this as very unambitious for one of the key sectors that must see a reduction in emissions. In terms of the amount of money being ploughed into State subsidies for EVs versus subsidies for public transport, we would be far better off investing more in public transport, which is more sustainable than the purchasing of EVs, the production of which can be bad for the environment.

I wish to ask a question of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. There is a target to upgrade 36,500 local authority houses, with 2,400 to be done this year. A spokesperson has said that the greatest barrier to doing the work to date has been Covid. If we come out of Covid, do the officials believe that we will reach the target? Given that the average cost per house is between €56,000 and €75,000 and that a small number of workers are available, is it achievable? The State's commitment is very small.

The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine's submission is littered with the word "sustainability", yet it clearly says that the Department refuses to even countenance cutting the national herd or dealing with the question of the growth in the number of animals. Instead, the Department says that the growth will continue and it will rely on future as-yet-unproven technologies to deal with agricultural emissions. The officials will see from the ongoing concerns of and protests by ordinary farmers that those farmers feel they are being put upon and have to pick up the tab for the big agricultural production companies. Will the officials comment on this point, please?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.