Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will read the note first and then deal with the issue. I appreciate the Deputy's concerns about the need to review the possible impact of the biofuels obligation levy on indigenous producers and also her concerns about the bigger picture of the impact of the growth in the use of biofuels in the food needs of developing countries. It is something very close to my own heart. It is part of NORA's role to administer the biofuels obligation scheme. Section 30(1)(a) and section 30(2) of the National Oil Reserves Agency Act 2007 provide that the agency, "If required by the Minister ... shall provide the Minister with information in relation to ... the performance of its functions ... in such form and within such period as the Minister may direct." It would appear that the issue raised by the Deputy could be addressed via the existing legislation. Furthermore, in section 31(2) of the National Oil Reserves Agency Act 2007 there is provision for the chief executive of the agency to account to the Oireachtas and committee for the performance of the functions of the agency. Therefore, a more user-friendly and immediate approach may be for the committee to request the agency to brief it on its functions and the administration of the biofuels obligation scheme, including the issues Deputy Smith has raised. In turn, this could inform the format of the information the agency could be asked to provide to the Minister under section 30 of the Act. During such discussions, information may emerge on what existing or future economic research, whether at national or EU level, will be undertaken or planned. On that basis, I propose to reject the amendment.

I do not disagree with the principle of the amendment tabled by Deputy Smith. I do not know if she has had an opportunity to look at the annual report of NORA on the biofuels obligation scheme. I can give her a copy of it when the committee's proceedings end today. There is a lot of very detailed information about where the biofuels come from and the percentages that come from different parts of the world. The most significant percentage of our biofuels obligation, which is 18.5%, comes from the UK. Denmark is a big supplier as well. Quite a lot of them are developed countries.

I do not know if that addresses the issues the Deputy is talking about. The difficulty is the bulk of what comes in comes from other EU countries. Where does it come from before that? Is it generated in those other EU countries or other developed countries? Is it generated in third countries or developing countries? It is not that easy to find that information. We do not have country of origin information on biofuels like we have with beef. It is very easy, at the press of a button, to find out exactly where beef is coming from and how much of it is being imported from specific countries.

I suggest the Deputy should have a look at the annual report of the National Oil Reserves Agency, NORA. She should ascertain whether there are insufficiencies in the detailed report it produces on the biofuels obligation on an annual basis and we then can consider how to best address that. This committee could bring NORA before it and the agency could explain what it does and what information is available to it. I honestly think this is a far broader issue. While some people present are quite critical of the European Union, this is something that could be appropriately addressed at European Union level whereby the Union itself could ascertain what is the source of the biofuels coming in and what impact it is having on the communities involved. I am conscious of this issue with regard to biofuels and the same issue could be raised regarding the wood chip and biomass being imported into both Ireland and the European Union. It is not just direct imports but imports via second countries. We may be purchasing either wood chip or biofuel that is coming in from another EU country but the issue is from where it is being sourced in the first place. It is a complex issue and the capacity and resources are not available to NORA or any other agency in Ireland to deal with that. The carrying out of a thorough investigation of what is going on probably would be more appropriately dealt with at EU level and there would be huge merit in doing that. I suggest members should look at the contents of the NORA report that is presented annually. NORA could be brought before the committee to establish whether there are other additions to the reporting mechanism that can be improved. If the capacity is not available at an Irish level to provide whatever requirements there are, over and above what is being provided by NORA at present, then it can be looked at in a European context.