Mr. John McCarthy:

I thank the Deputy. Sometimes, the words "targets" and "objectives" are used interchangeably. In some people's minds, they are different. Targets are often referred to in terms of legislative provisions that are legally binding, justiciable, etc. The National Economic and Social Council, NESC, has undertaken development work that will lead to a national low carbon roadmap, which must be taken together with the Bill. Instead of specifying targets in legislation, the intention is for the statutorily based roadmap to be the vehicle for setting out the overall national ambition. I would not want members to have the sense that the absence of targets in the legislation means that we have no vision for 2050. The sectoral roadmaps being prepared for agriculture, transport, energy and buildings are based on the work of the NESC. There is a clear overall ambition for the energy, buildings and transport sectors, that being, as close to zero carbon as can be achieved. The objective for agriculture is carbon neutrality. The energy, buildings and transport objectives are in line with the EU's low carbon roadmap to 2050. It is in the sectoral roadmaps, which will ultimately form the national roadmap, rather than in the legislation that the national ambition will be set.

I agree with the Deputy regarding the urgency of action. This issue was mentioned in each opening statement. Even for 2020, the urgency of action is abundantly clear from the EPA's projections, which were published in recent weeks. As members will have seen from one of the graphs in Dr. McGovern's presentation, the emissions reduction target for 2020 is 20%. Even in the best of the two scenarios displayed, we will only achieve a 10% reduction. We need new policies and measures to address this gap of at least 10%. Given the evolving debate on 2030 and onwards, the emissions reduction ambition is only going in one direction.

The sectoral Departments are the owners of their sectors. They know them best. It will be a matter for them in their sectoral roadmaps to address issues of cost benefit analysis and appropriate paths to 2050. This reflects another of our themes, in that, while this is challenging, it is also an opportunity that we need to grasp if we are to be in the right place in terms of reduced emissions by 2030, 2040 and 2050.

Under the roadmap, it was envisaged that the heads of the Bill and the NESC report would be before the committee by the end of 2012. Members received it in late February, approximately two months behind schedule. We envisaged a report back from the committee by the end of June. We are in discussions with the Chairman and have indicated that we are happy to provide further latitude, given the fact that we were a couple of months late in providing the material. The intention was to finalise the heads by the end of the year, but that timeframe may stretch a little in light of the delay. Subsequently, the Bill will enter the drafting process. It will then be a matter of how quickly it passes through the drafting process and is laid before the Oireachtas.