Mr. Frank Maughan:

The next one on my list was our position in relation to the IPCC and its role in supporting the United Nations process and negotiations. Ireland is a very strong supporter of the work of the IPCC. We contribute financially each year to the IPCC. Many of our scientists actively participate in the IPCC, and we work very hard through our colleagues in the EPA to make sure that that is promoted within our academic community as a way of highlighting the importance of climate science. It was of course disappointing that the COP in Katowice could not provide a stronger endorsement of the 1.5°C. Of course, members will be aware of the background and the parties who were involved in preventing that. We very much welcome each report as it has been published. I know the committee recently had interactions with a number of experts, for example, in relation to the IPCC's land report. That is something we are very committed to continuing to support into the future. It is currently preparing the next assessment report, which I think is the sixth report. It will come out very soon. That will help to provide even more clarity and definition to the negotiations, which have to come.

The Senator asked about credits and the use of credits. Here we touch again on the Article 6 issues and the complexity of Article 6. This was something that was discussed by some of the earlier witnesses.

It is certainly the case that Ireland secured a number of credits from transactions a number of years ago as part of our Kyoto Protocol compliance. We intend to use those for compliance with our effort-sharing decision requirements for the period up to 2020. That is the position we have signed up to as an EU member state. I refer to the EU compliance framework for the period after 2020. Up to 2030, the effort-sharing regulation framework does not allow international credits to be used, and that is the position for the European Union. That reflects the European Union's position also in relation to the ongoing negotiations on Article 6. There is no desire within the European Union, albeit some other parties have a different perspective, to allow Kyoto Protocol credits to be used as part of the Article 6 framework. That is one of a number of open issues for discussion around Article 6, but we are very much of the position, alongside European Union colleagues, that that framework has to be as environmentally robust as possible, because the entire regime of Paris and the philosophy of the Paris Agreement is very different from the philosophy of the Kyoto Protocol. It requires ambition in all countries, not just in the developed countries. How the Article 6 rules are constructed to reflect that and to avoid issues like double-counting and to ensure integrity is absolutely essential and crucial.

On the question of political statements, the Senator asked me to pre-empt what the Minister may wish to say at the COP, and I cannot do that right now in terms of what the Minister will say in the national statement. It is too soon to tell. I would also note that the Minister's views on the role of gas as a transition fuel are on the record, and the Taoiseach made an announcement in relation to exploration at the United Nations Climate Action Summit in New York, and there have been subsequent announcements by the Minister in terms of how the Government plans to take that forward into a new exploration regime.

On the position of the United States, clearly it is disappointing it has taken the position it has taken. That is obviously an internal domestic matter for the United States. There is a view among other parties to the Paris Agreement that the level of ambition that has been shown by people at the state level of the United States, reflects very much the objective of what is known as the global climate action agenda to involve non-party stakeholders both in the negotiation process and in the process of stepping up and making commitments. There is a view that the ambition we are seeing at the state level and even at the city level is going to make quite a significant contribution on the part of the United States to the objectives of the Paris Agreement, notwithstanding that at the federal level it has withdrawn from the agreement.