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

I thank our guests for their submissions. I admired not only their passion but also their focus on practical action. That is important. They are largely speaking to the converted in this room. What creates problems for the ambition that this committee shares is that among voters, only 6% regard climate as one of the top priorities for them when it comes to voting. That is an extremely low percentage. Like many of the big changes that have happened in our society in recent years, young people persuading older people of the need to rethink is important. That is something our guests are doing very actively. They are shifting the impression that people have formed from all sorts of historical things. I agree with our guests about green schools and curriculum change. Those are things that shift the balance. Even among people of our guests' age, only 13% believe climate is their top priority. That is something we need to change.

Our guests said that climate change mitigation measures will bring higher costs to everyone and that is what people are shying away from. I think that is overstating the case. I am old enough, unfortunately, to remember when everything was mended in the house, when things were not thrown away, when stuff was repaired and kept going. That was the standard way people behaved. They did not have a high consumer lifestyle. There is scope for doing things that are cheap and effective, and which have a very good climate dividend. To bring people with us on this journey, perhaps we should be starting there. Some 50% of houses do not have enough attic insulation. That pays for itself in two years. Some 162,000 houses have cavity walls but do not have them insulated. They are mainly low-income families. We can chase after things that really make a difference.

Climate action is also well aligned with other ambitions that people hold, such as for a strong and vibrant regional and rural Ireland. If we get a circular economy going, as our guests have outlined, it can play into other ambitions to have a more integrated, urban quality of life and a stronger rural approach.

With the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Calleary, in attendance, I must say I would love to see his Department become an ally of the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, on the circular economy.

I was delighted to hear Áine's emphasis on it. Doing that would be much more holistic than looking just at the climate because it would also take in biodiversity, water quality and damage to our broader environment, but it would also be less confrontational because it would get sectors to think about how they can fix the way they behave and still deliver a quality service. Sometimes, the climate debate can be very finger-pointing. I wrote the draft report on the circular economy for this committee. I think it has immense potential and I was delighted to hear the comments here. It talks about the redesign of sectors from top to bottom and does not look just at fossil fuels. Let us not forget that 45% of our emissions come not from fossil fuels but rather from other materials we use or lifestyles we have.

I very much support the idea of improved labelling, although carbon footprinting might be a leap too far in one move. There should be other things we start with putting on labels that are easier to measure. There is significant dispute even about the carbon footprint of a steak; it is not something everything agrees on. Nevertheless, there is information we could put on labels in the short term as move towards the ambition Garret outlined. I thank him for his insightful contribution. I hope it will help our work.