Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)

Ar dtús báire, ba mhaith liom buíochas a gabháil leis na Teachtaí Neamhspleácha as ucht seans a thabhairt dúinn an ábhar tábhachtach seo a phlé agus cúpla tuaraimí a nochtú. It is regrettable that, when one examines the coverage of this debate to date, it has been very lame in that it has covered the Government position to a significant extent. Even the commentaries do not seem to give adequate opportunity for critical analysis of what the services directive is proposing, whether it is amended or otherwise.

The issue will come back to haunt the House unless we consider in advance the effects it will have and the conditions in which it will operate. Freedom of movement of goods is a well established principle but it is one that has grown out of a profound taking for granted, I could say, of the way in which those goods are to be transported. In some quarters it is selectively seen that, if one is free to move goods, one is free, as it were, to prevent people moving around as they follow the opportunities for labour and employment, try to improve their lot or escape exploitation if it affects them. The debate must focus there. One cannot have free movement of goods if one does not have free movement of people. If one will be restrictive about how people move around, it is valid that one should be conditional about how the goods move.

In addition, account must be taken of the fact that it is not feasible — perhaps it is on paper — to strip away all barriers. For example, an RTE programme last night was hosted by Mr. Vincent Browne. He listened to views from people who had been or lived in India. In that country, while it appeared that people were working in decent jobs, their conditions were appalling. They were effectively living in tents. Rent was so high that they could not afford to have a roof over their heads. The only reason they did not die in those conditions was that the weather was sufficiently warm to survive outdoors and still have a so-called decent job. That is a symptom of the type of challenges we are facing. As many homeless people will testify, we do not have the climate where one could have a decent job and sleep in a tent. If one is to take away barriers we will have conditions that obtain in India. We must consider what we are asking people to accept.

If globalisation is the agenda, we must realise this trend was built on mass transportation. We have grown so accustomed to transportation that it is now seen as a commodity. In turn, this raises the question of how we will cope without fossil fuels as it is recognised that peak oil production has been reached.

Climate change will affect food production as well as weather. World grain yields have been falling over the past four years and we have the lowest grain reserves in 30 years. Every 1% rise in temperature creates a 10% drop in world grain yield. This is an issue that must be taken in the context of this directive, which does not simply deal with accounting or the rules on how work is carried out. If one reads Lester R. Brown's book Outgrowing the Earth: The Food Security Challenge in an Age of Falling Water Tables and Rising Temperatures, one realises that if water is essential for life and we are taking oil for granted, we must seriously consider localisation rather than globalisation as our objective. If we do not do this we are sentencing many more people to poverty, including ourselves.

See this speech in context