Dáil debates

Thursday, 22 November 2007

Climate Change and Energy Security: Statements

 

11:00 am

Photo of Liz McManusLiz McManus (Wicklow, Labour)

The Minister delivered a very different speech from the script circulated, so I will respond to the two speeches. Nobody doubts his genuine views on climate change. It is worth noting that thanks to environmental groups, including the Green Party, the message has been taken on board. I am very conscious of the fact that within this House there has been a significant shift in terms of attitude and approach to what is the biggest political challenge facing us. It is important now for the Minister to talk in terms of implementation. It is easy for us to trade statistics and percentages across the House, but that does not lead us where we need to go.

The evidence from the most recent report of the IPCC, the International Panel on Climate Change established by the United Nations, is unequivocal. The human contribution to global warming is not in doubt. Let us take it as given, the evidence is overwhelming. For a long time that was not the case. For ten years the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats tried to ignore this and deliberately bought their way out of their responsibility to face up to the challenge. They had a kind of pollute now, pay later approach, which meant significant sums, hundreds of millions, had to be put aside to pay for carbon allowances. We can all see now what is coming. At Bali, a process will take place that will lead to much higher limits and targets being set. We will have to live up to these and will not be able to simply buy our way out. If we tried to do so, that would cause suffering to our economy and taxpayers, and, most important, we would not be playing our proper part in trying to protect the planet.

Other countries are changing. It is interesting that Australia, which refused to sign the Kyoto Agreement, has now, because of public pressure, begun to implement a ban on conventional light bulbs. How many Ministers here will it take to change a light bulb? These are the kind of questions we need to pose. Both Sweden and New Zealand have already committed to becoming carbon neutral. In the United Kingdom, as soon as the IPCC report was issued, Prime Minister Gordon Brown responded by stating he was ready to consider increasing his government's target of a 60% cut in Britain's carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 to an 80% cut. He talks about Britain becoming a world leader in the new technological revolution to beat global warming.

What, however, has our Taoiseach to say? What do we hear from him? The silence is telling. Unless the Taoiseach drives this from the top, we will fail. Whatever agreement follows the Kyoto Agreement will need to be signed by Prime Ministers. It is not sufficient to have just Ministers for the environment on board if we are to bring in the changes needed. In choosing to enter Government with Fianna Fáil, the Green Party had to sacrifice many of the promises it made before the election. I understand why it entered Government, but it will not be forgiven, if at the end of its term of office, it has failed to make the breakthrough on climate change. To reduce our carbon emissions to the necessary levels will require courage, leadership and new thinking. It will only happen if there is a concerted effort from all the key Ministries, led from the front by the Taoiseach.

The inconvenient truth is that we cannot depend on the Green Party Ministers to bring about the transformation needed. No disrespect intended, I do not doubt their sincerity, but they will not be able to turn the tanker around unless there is a fundamental change from all the relevant Ministries. That can only be led from the top. For example, the Minister for Finance has been asked about the promised carbon budget. We do not know what shape that will take and it is valid for us to ask questions on that and receive a response. We need to know how the commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 3% per year will be accomplished. Getting information from Ministers on these matters, including the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, can be problematic.

The impression we get is that no attempt to address this matter was made in the preparation of the programme for Government; no attention was given to the structural formation required in the Government to bring about these kinds of changes, for example, the linkages between the Departments of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Transport and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The linkage we need to have going through Government in terms of policy and delivery does not exist. Rather, there is a fragmentation of responsibility, which is a concern and should be addressed.

The Labour Party argued for a new Department to deal with climate change and energy. This would have had the overarching role to steer many of the requirements for administrative structures. The new Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security — I compliment Deputy Seán Barrett on his appointment to this significant and important committee — has no lead Minister attached to it, but a number of different Ministers will be involved. We have been promised a high level commission on climate change, but I am not sure how it fits into our structure. What is this commission? Is it part of the committee or is it something else? Will the Minister clarify that in his response?

The energy efficiency action programme was launched by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, although the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has responsibility for climate change. I am glad the Minister with responsibility for energy is in the House, although climate change is, strictly speaking, not his responsibility. He has, however, a central role ——

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.