Eamon Ryan (Dublin South, Green Party)

I thank the Minister for accepting the proposed intent of my amendment No. 53, which I will not move, and for taking up some of the suggestions made by Deputy Broughan, in particular the proposal to refer any such direction to the Oireachtas joint committee in advance of a decision being made by the Minister, which is a welcome step in the right direction. I hope that the committees of the Houses can grasp the increasing opportunities for us to become involved in discussion on detailed policy issues as they are evolving rather than after the fact, which is often the case in this Chamber.

I commend and thank Deputy Broughan for the intent and purpose of his amendment No. 56, on which I concur with him. Amendment No. 49 indicates the stars by which we navigate in energy policy. The Green Paper is correct in highlighting the three-way algorithm, almost, between environmental considerations, security of supply and economic considerations. Deputy Broughan correctly pointed out that some other social considerations are not covered by the word "competitiveness". It is possible that the word "competitiveness" is too narrow in not considering the social justice issues that can come into the economic equation.

The gravity, scale and import of climate change is such that it supersedes the economic and security of supply issues. In the film "An Inconvenient Truth", the former US Vice-President, Al Gore, accurately portrays balancing the economy on one side and the environment on the other. A clear realisation has been reached that such is the scale and speed of change to the environment that some scientists are now predicting as a result of climate change that we cannot possibly have a healthy economy in those circumstances.

I agree with and commend the British Government and many others in recognising this in their stated energy policies. Everything starts and finishes with climate change targets. Obviously, economic and security of supply considerations must be taken into account. However, the sort of cuts that scientists estimate we must make to address the issue represent the star by which they are guiding themselves. Even if we try to adopt a different mode and try to buy our way out of the issue or ignore it, we can be fairly certain that, within the scale of time in which energy policy applies, the international scientific community will bring us back to that scientific reality. Therefore it makes sense for us to start now rather than wait to be forced into the issue.

The peak in oil production, which will undoubtedly occur within a matter of years rather than decades, requires a similar solution. Today 60% of our energy comes from oil. On a geological basis we know that once peak production has occurred, access to cheap oil will deplete each year by approximately 2% to 2.5% per annum. Coincidentally that equates to the reduction we will need to make if we accept scientific advice on climate change. We will need to make deep cuts in emissions as our part of international co-operation to address the issue. For two reasons coming from different directions we need to follow the same policy.

The fundamental stark issues ahead of us are not given sufficient consideration in the Commission for Energy Regulation or the Government and are not properly recognised in the Green Paper. Regardless of what wording we insert into legislation, we will only start to address the issue when we show real political will and leadership. We need to go beyond the short-term thinking of the next general election towards thinking, as Deputy Broughan outlined, what fundamental changes in energy need to be made over several governments. While that is for another day, I commend the Minister for these changes and I commend Deputy Broughan for his amendment No. 56, which I fully support.

See this speech in context