Ms Marie Donnelly:

It is a similar question to the one from Deputy Ahern. LNG, as a security of supply option now, makes sense if we do not actually deliver on the recommendation of the council, which is to rapidly phase out fossil fuels. If we could rapidly phase out fossil fuels, we would do that more cost effectively, more efficiently, than building an LNG terminal. It is a balance of timing. Can we phase out fossil fuel so we do not depend on importing gas fast enough so we do not need the terminal or are we going to be too slow which means we will need the terminal? That is the key issue the council is concerned with. We understand security of supply is a concern but, equally, if we really did put our minds to phasing out fossil fuels, we would not need an LNG terminal.