Professor Michael McMahon:

We have spoken not just in the context of the climate and our ageing population but also with regard to good prudent planning in general. We would like to see more realistic forecasts on the budgetary side, given where we are in 2024, extending out to at least 2030. As the Deputy noted, that should not stop just before some of the biggest costs. There is definitely a role for trying to extend the forecast to a more medium-term scenario, as we have done occasionally in the past - although probably not every time. Longer term forecasting is also of quite a bit of value in the context of planning.

With regard to front-loading versus backloading, our main message would be around taking actions now in a planned way, not just because we can do smaller steps and build up to it, and, in doing so, potentially avoid some of the costs. For example, if we did more now and we were successful in achieving our climate goals, we would avoid the costs of non-compliance I alluded to earlier. There is an important role in the context of providing some form of policy certainty to households and businesses that are partners in this. I do not want to sit here and pretend that this is a purely a Government endeavour; it is a societal endeavour. Consider the household deciding whether to retrofit their property or companies thinking about whether to move more quickly to the electrification of any vehicle stock they have. It is about understanding the extent to which there will be infrastructure in place to facilitate that. It is about understanding that the household is not going to lose out in making the decision now by missing out on potential supports and subsidies that may be introduced by the Government further down the line. This is really a place whereby if there was a clear plan, ideally, cross-party and across government, to put in place some certainty, it would also help with the planning of the private sector. This is another reason that decisive action now would probably be helpful.