Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Good afternoon to our witnesses whom I thank for their contributions. It has been a really interesting conversation. Part of this discussion has prompted an analysis of the psychology of the sales strategies some of the companies are using, the consumer behaviour they are seeking to influence, and the impact that has on the market and our capacity as a State to reduce transport emissions associated with private car ownership. I want to state very clearly that I do not think anyone on this committee is under any illusion that the target of banning new internal combustion engines - originally our own target was to be from 2030; it is now 2035 - is because of the European Union internal rules.

The idea is not to replace all of the ICEs with EVs, and that is borne out, I believe, in the policies that have been adopted by the Oireachtas on the basis of the likes of the 2:1 expenditure that we are putting into cycle paths, footpaths, and public transport etc. I do accept, and I am looking at Professor Daly in particular, that it is very late in the day to be making that level of investment, since we have seen a dramatic reduction in walking and cycling both to work and to school, which is a matter of concern to all of us. That being said, the policies are there and with more proactivity on the part of the European Union on the regulation side I think we can make a significant change.

My own view of the taxation versus regulation argument that has been fleshed out in this conversation is that while I am sceptical about moving away from carbon-based taxation on vehicles I would like to see more movement on the regulation side. I would not be as sceptical - as I think it was Mr. Nix - about the EU's capacity to regulate out certain design choices car companies are making. To look at consumer electronics, for instance, there is the largest player, Apple, with its Apple lightning charger. Apple is now marketing it with its brand new phone as a brilliant idea it came up with when in fact it was the EU that regulated to remove the lightning charger and bring in USB-C. The interrelated point is, I believe that the European Union can regulate in, for instance, passenger safety through the Euro New Car Assessment Programme, NCAP, system which I think has been extremely successful in terms of occupant safety but also regarding the build quality of a vehicle.

Interrelated to that, we talked extensively about the weight and size of vehicles increasing, mimicking the American market, which I think is the main driver of this unless somebody more knowledgeable than I am can correct me. I think European consumers are the most discerning in the world. Perhaps the Koreans and Japanese would give us a run for our money but from a regulation point of view, for instance in food safety, and vehicle safety, all of those things are incorporated into the regulations. I believe that regulation is the way to resolve the issue of the massive increase in the number of SUVs that are on our roads. I am intrigued by the commentary related to Norway, in particular, and its approach. I would very much like to see the overall weight of vehicles reduced and the battery weight excluded. Ireland unfortunately, or fortunately, has a vast array of rural communities that are not readily served by public transport. They will be in the future but they are not readily served today. Therefore, different types of vehicles will absolutely be required for ten, 15, 20, possibly even 30 years. My view is, if we reduce the curb weight of a vehicle, minus the battery, and maintain the safety standard, then we will have a better approach to this.

It will not be a surprise to hear that I do not agree with Deputy Murphy's commentary and the idea that just because a person has money in their pocket that they cannot spend it, with the caveat that it should not impact upon the public good. I think it is important that from the start we regulate out weight as much as we can and improve what I think has been a very successful programme of NCAP, to include the likes of pedestrian and cyclists.

I will have to study the Norwegian and French approach. The Norwegian one of excluding the battery weight is intriguing because it would maintain the carbon taxation element of it that we already have, and it has the capacity to influence the European regulators. Is it the only policy that can be duplicated? Are taxation and regulation the only two changes that we could make to try to change consumer behaviour, notwithstanding the comments on the banning of advertisements?

Professor Daly mentioned that she is of the view that EV car sales had reduced as an overall percentage as a result of the removal of the grant from higher cost vehicles. I am not correcting her, but I am just offering the opinion that I do not think that is right because I believe EV car sales as a percentage of the market have increased steadily and are continuing to increase, which is of course a good thing. I do not know whether the influx of more smaller and cheaper EVs in the coming years will perhaps change that dynamic further. Perhaps Professor Daly could explore it a little better than I have.