Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)

When amendments come at a late Stage, it is difficult for Opposition Deputies to do in-depth research on specific and significant developments. We are talking here about the major new strategic development of a company of significant historical and economic importance to many parts of the country. It is difficult to do the issue justice in the time available.

If the company goes to the limit of the €400 million borrowing requirement, will the Minister give us some idea of how that would leave the company? What sort of debt would that be as a percentage of assets? It would be interesting to see how exposed the company would be in that regard.

From my recollection of when Bord na Móna representatives appeared before the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, when asked why the company had not developed in the renewables sector or the co-fired biomass area, they said there was a legislative or regulatory block to doing so. In this amendment all we appear to be doing is amending the capital allocation Bord na Móna can borrow. Is there any other block or does the company seek any other regulatory change in terms of its operations? If not, why has the company delayed so long in taking a new strategic direction towards development of renewable power supplies and other products?

Given the latest scientific findings provided on an almost weekly basis in scientific journals about climate change, one of the main reasons for reducing the company's dependence on turf is that we urgently need to act responsibly for the benefit of the rest of the planet and our future and reduce our dependence on turf, which is one of the most carbon intensive fuels. If one of the main developments of the process of weaning ourselves away from the use of turf is to be to move towards co-firing of power stations with biomass rather than turf, who will have control or responsibility for that? Is it not a matter for the ESB rather than Bord na Móna? Bord na Móna may conspire or strategise to provide such fuels but the ESB, as the manager of the power stations, has the say-so as to the percentage of fuels and which fuels to use and the subsequent market arrangements. Please correct me if I am wrong on that. Due to pressures on this side of the House, I have not had time to go into the level of detailed research I would like before the House allocates a not insignificant amount of money to a State company.

See this speech in context