Ciarán Cuffe (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party)

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 6, between lines 42 and 43, to insert the following:

10.—(1) That Ireland, in co-operation with our fellow members of the European Union and the OECD, will provide a lead in reducing our own level of emissions.

(2) To this end the Government commits itself to reducing the level of recorded greenhouse gas emissions within the country by 15 to 30 per cent by 2020 in accordance with targets already agreed by the European Union heads of state in spring 2005.

(3) The Government commits itself to reducing the level of recorded greenhouse gas emissions within the country by 2050 to a level which is between 60 and 80 per cent lower than the corresponding level of emissions recorded in 1990.

(4) Such a target is accepted as being consistent with what will be required internationally for the average increase in global temperatures to be maintained at less than two degrees.

These three amendments attempt to alter the course of the ship of State, as contained in the Bill. We should look at the bigger picture because this is not just about buying carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol. It must be about reducing our emissions. Sadly, whenever the Green Party has tried to raise this matter in the House we have been thwarted by the Government which has voted down our proposals to limit such emissions and introduce an annual reporting mechanism. It is interesting to examine the end game in all of this. It is not so much a question of where we are this year or where we will be in 2008 or 2009, but where we want to end up. We must look at the long-term position. Most commentators, from Sir Nicholas Stern to President Bush, agree we need to begin reducing emissions.

The European Council of Ministers has stated strongly that we must consider reductions in the order of 20% or 30% by 2020, and higher reductions thereafter. There is a moral obligation on Ireland to take the lead in this matter. We are now a wealthy country and have had phenomenal economic success over the last 15 years. While I applaud that success, we must move towards the next phase of our economic development, which involves engagement with the most pressing environmental and political issue of the day, namely, the future of our planet. I am not suggesting that we can turn the ship of State today or tomorrow, but we need to make significant reductions of the order of 3% per year. The urgency of the problem dictates that we should run an annual check-list on our emissions and make changes where necessary.

At a fundamental level it would have been prudent to implement, for instance, the European building performance directive now, rather than put it on the long finger. It would also be prudent to make a massive investment in public transport now, rather than later. We need to make radical changes in capital spending and check annually on whether we are meeting the targets we set for ourselves.

The first part of amendment No. 5 seeks to ensure we provide the lead. Ireland has provided the lead before now, at the United Nations in the 1950s and early 1960s. We had a good reputation internationally as a voice of diplomacy, separate from the power blocs of Soviet Europe and the Americas. We led the way, showed that we could provide leadership as a neutral country and did so through the United Nations. This pressing environmental issue creates a need for us to do this again.

We must consider a firm target for 2020. We can haggle over whether it should be 15%, 20% or 30% but we must unilaterally set a band width here and now for Ireland, not for Europe. We must also examine where the country will be on this issue in 40 years time and to do this it is necessary to set targets for emissions reduction.

If our forefathers in the early 1920s had seen where Ireland could be in the 1960s they might have set their sights higher. Rather than engage in a cold war through economic and social insularity they could have embraced the bigger picture and achieved huge changes early on in the formation of this State. Leadership can now be provided at an early stage on this issue by looking ahead to 2050 and examining how reductions can be made. I do not know how we will do this but I know the issue must be tackled in every Government Department, in the office of the Taoiseach and in the office of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. We must reduce emissions.

We must take the advice of scientists who say we must limit the growth in the warming of the planet to two degrees. We should start with the science and work back from that point because the important thing is that science is telling us what we must do. This means significant changes in Government policy are needed, not in five or ten years but now. We need leadership from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government in this regard and that is the thrust of amendment No. 5.

Amendment No. 6 suggests that each year the Minister should address this House and the Seanad to explain where we are going on this issue, where we have done well, where we have done badly and how changes will be made. I ask the Minister to explain to us how reductions will be tackled. How can he look the people of Ireland in the eye and say a 7% increase in transport emissions is sustainable? The Minister knows this is not the case, as do I, and he must make changes in his capital spend to address the issue. If he does not, we will. The Irish people want change and are mad as hell about this; they do not want to have to fork out their money to comply with protocols, they want policy changes sooner, rather than later. This is why we want the Minister to report to this House every year on whether we are achieving targets.

There is uncertainty about where we will be on this issue in 15 and 40 years time but we must examine where we will be in five years. I was horrified when I saw a graph in one of the Minister's press releases in recent weeks which projected the ongoing purchase of carbon credits until 2012 with no end game in sight. This is deeply worrying and it is not about the €270 million to be spent between now and then — that figure could rise to €1 billion. The Irish people do not want to continue paying these bills in five, ten and 20 years time; they want to see policy changes now and that is why I am tabling these amendments to the Bill before us today.

See this speech in context