Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I will be quick. Things started to go wrong for the world in the past 60 years. Some 100 years ago, human beings did not have much impact on the planet, as far as I can see. Eventually, technology advanced to the point where we could do all kinds of things, and lift people out of poverty, but it then went too far. We got to the point where people did not have to fix their shoes any more. They can be made by a robot in a factory on the other side of the world and transported using single-use resources. We could replace and buy them for a small amount money and it is much cheaper to buy new than to fix. We got into this consumer economy where many people were able to meet all their material needs. They had enough food, heat and so on. They then thought they would buy lots of clothes and cars or do lots of stupid things that use lots of energy and so on. Our society has changed from one that barely had any impact on the world to one that is threatening it. This debate was not being had in this House 100 years ago. It would have been stupid then to think that human beings could have any effect on the world they lived in; that was something God could do.

We are here because our technology has succeeded too well. What is the answer to that? Consumerism is the disease. It is the idea that we have enough to eat but if we get a second dinner, we will be twice as happy and if we have five cars outside our house, we will be five times happier than if we had one. We all know in our hearts that is not true. When the idea of a circular economy began to grow, a couple of things helped it to happen. The first was Donald Trump. He was the anti-example of these kinds of ideas. He was the person who said that we should go back, put the world back to the way it was and do all these terrible, stupid things. Donald Trump really helped positive ideas because he is such a stupid man. He had such clearly idiotic views that he made the opposite argument just by standing up there. His declaration that he was going to fight with China and Europe and declare economic wars began to damage the whole system of globalisation. We then had a pandemic, which meant China was not able to export goods, things got blocked in the supply chains, things stopped working and we now have a war.

This whole idea that we can rely on goods to come by ship or aeroplane from the other side of the world, from some mine or extracted from some place, and arrive on our shelves is broken. We have seen and know instinctively that we cannot rely on that. For our own sovereignty and safety, we need to have an economy that works within our own country or continent so that we can get things locally. The idea of a circular economy is that in the future, when our shoes wear out, we will not buy a really cheap pair of shoes that were made in the Congo, but will go and get them fixed. This is a return to the way things used to work in Deputy Bruton's parents' day. It is an economy where, when a person's television is broken, he or she does not just say, "Brilliant, I'm getting a new TV with more features", but finds somebody who can fix it, which is sort of a strange thing. That is the basic idea.

One thing young people have that is an advantage is impatience. They must be absolutely bored to death hearing everybody going on and on and all the shouting. They want to see action and something actually happening. I have been in the Dáil for two years. There is a lot of chatting and many people who like doing a lot of talking. There is less going out to do things and change things. We need both. When I see people throwing tins of beans at paintings with glass on them or whatever, that is a really effective thing to do. It draws attention but words also help. When we think of David Attenborough making his speech as a man in his 90s, or Greta Thunberg when she was 15 or 16 years old, it was the power of their words that moved people. That was what made all the people in the Dáil suddenly change their mind compared to ten years ago when there was just lip service or people were openly denying that climate change was happening. It was those two people, David Attenborough and Greta Thunberg, who turned everything around because they made such powerful speeches and persuaded people.

Are politicians liars when they say they agree with people and that they are with them on climate change? It is a problem of priorities. We can say that we want to do something about climate change and we totally agree with young people, but first we need to build this motorway, we need to do this other thing and we have all these other priorities ahead of climate action. When someone agrees with you but there are other things that are way more important to them than that on which they agree with you, then it will never happen. We are at the point where people agree in theory but in practice they will try to stop the wind farm in their area or will build a motorway in their area because it is something popular. The next stage is the action stage and getting people to actually do things.

We will only do this by working together. It is very tempting for me as a politician to turn on people I disagree with. If I turn to Deputy Paul Murphy and say, "Paul is saying this thing", and instead of stating the reasons I disagree with him, I say that he is a liar and stupid, what then happens is squabbles start that distract from fixing the problem. When we see politicians personally attacking each other, undermining and attacking each other's character, that is then the end of being able to solve things. We need to debate, row and argue with each other but do so in such a way that we end up fixing something together.

I thank the young people who are present. Their impatience, energy and willingness to go out is what will work, as will their boundless creativity and the fact that they can say, "Why don't we try this thing?". It is very hard for an older person to change their ways but young people can. Please keep working. I am very proud of them.