Ms Sarah Clancy:

If any of us had the exact solution, we probably would not be running a PPN. We would be running something much more significant. Some of the resistance to climate measures is due to a lack of understanding of the real lived experience of people's lives. I come from Clare, where we have done good work recently on poverty, rural deprivation and so on in the county.

We have some very interesting information from people about their lives. It is said that education will help people to get out of poverty, but these people can totally disprove that because they are carers or single mothers whose children are in school between 10 a.m. and 12 noon. If they live in Kilrush, the bus to Ennis costs €23. The difficulty is getting a job that will allow a person to take the bus to Ennis for €23, for an hour and a half, that will pay more than the social welfare. The routes we are proposing to get people out of poverty are not practical for the circumstances they are in.

Some issues arise in regard to climate change as well. Let us look at the case of the carbon tax in County Clare. The fact of the carbon tax and how much it will be are a different issue but let us think about the narrative around it. I refer to someone with children going to school who has no access to public transport and medical services have been moved to a regional area to help rebalance Ireland so that we have concentrated cities. We are telling people that there is no other choice for them, but we are going to impose a carbon tax on them. That does not work. Even if the person believes in climate change, he or she cannot impact their behaviour. If they are in the lower socioeconomic ranks, they probably cannot change their car to an electric one, and if they could, there are no charging stations. We are proposing things that impact negatively on people's lives. We all understand that climate change impacts negatively on all of us, but just saying that we will take an equal approach to everybody, irrespective of the circumstances they are in, to achieve climate action is causing resistance and causing people to become more open to misinformation as well. If something appears to have only negative consequences, why would people opt into it? If the narrative was that they were going to have a warm, cosy home at the end of this and they would not have to pay any money upfront, and it would be healthier, that is an entirely different narrative. We are not getting that right. Climate action should create healthier more liveable communities with better resources, but if we do not try to address inequality at the same time, we will not get there. That is slightly different. I know there are entrenched interests also. I refer to the strong sectors in industry, farming and so on. There is a different approach to that. If we want ordinary people, who are not part of a particular stakeholder group, to buy in, we must examine how it will affect them and explain why that has to happen and what steps are being put in place to try to ensure that alternatives are presented. I know that answer was not short.