Joanna Tuffy (Dublin Mid West, Labour)

Yesterday we had the carbon budget which was promised in the programme for Government. It consisted of a page and a half in total and it did not tell us anything we did not know already, or anything that could not have been highlighted in a primary school project on climate change. In his budget speech, the Minister for Finance stated that climate change targets required everybody to play a part and that the Government also had a part to play, as if the Government was a bit player in addressing climate change. That does not auger very well for his claim that by setting up the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security, the Government has put climate change at the heart of decision making.

Today's report from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government was just a speech. It was a filler, the afterthought to the so-called carbon budget, and just a sop to the Green Party Deputies to make them feel included. It was part of the spin of an allegedly green budget, but not a very successful spin. The Minister stated that he particularly welcomed the strong defining theme in the Budget Statement highlighting the Government's environmental agenda. Deputy Gormley's speech largely highlighted how badly the Government is doing in reducing our emissions and tackling climate change. It was more an admission of failure of the green agenda than a new, greener dawn.

The Minister highlighted that we must buy carbon credits to meet the difference between Ireland's net carbon emissions and our Kyoto target. More than half the reduction in emissions will not be an actual reduction, but merely a piece of paper we will buy from somewhere else. The rest is largely accounted for by what are termed carbon sinks, namely, sinks eligible for accounting under Kyoto Protocol rules. Therefore, a minuscule amount of reductions will allegedly come through measures to reduce emissions. The Minister's speech confirms what was predicted in a European Commission report two weeks ago, which stated that our carbon reductions would be largely bought as opposed to achieved. How green is that in meeting our Kyoto targets?

A genuine commitment to tackling climate change would have involved the purchase of carbon credits as a last resort, as opposed to a mainstay in achieving our Kyoto targets. The Green Party is admitting defeat in the Minister's speech today on what surely should have driven a real carbon budget, which would deliver a real reduction in our carbon emissions. The Green Party has hitched itself to an incompetent Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrats administration that has failed to invest in measures that would genuinely have achieved carbon emission reductions, such as investment in public transport and sustainable development. It is the fault of the Government that too much taxpayers' money will be spent on the purchase of carbon credits, with no improvement to the environment.

The Minister's speech largely highlighted the failures, including the fact that "last year greenhouse gas emissions from transport increased by over 5%, indicating the scale of the challenge in that sector". What an understatement. However, from the Minister's speech today and yesterday's budget it looks like business as usual. Instead of a commitment from the Minister for Finance to fast-track key public transport projects, we get regurgitated spin about projects announced many times over, for example, the Kildare line upgrade, originally supposed to have been completed in 2005. There was no commitment in the budget to the 500 extra buses needed in the short term to move more people in Dublin onto public transport as soon as possible.

There was no reference to the building of the interconnector from Heuston Station to Dublin city centre, a vital public transport project that would benefit suburban and intercity rail commuters. The Kildare route project, extra buses for Dublin Bus and the interconnector are all measures that should have been done years ago and still the Government is set to dither and delay significantly investing in our public transport. Rather than prioritising public transport, we get the very non-green approach of allocating almost two thirds of our budget for road building — €1.7 billion for roads out of €2.7 billion in total. So much for the Green Party's election promises to provide major investment in public transport.

Besides the admission by the Minister, Deputy Gormley, that our transport carbon emissions are going up, there is nothing in his speech about public transport. There is one green transport related measure in this budget, namely, the changes to the VRT regime to base VRT on the carbon dioxide emissions of cars. The motor tax changes in this budget represent regressive taxation and, as the Minister admitted yesterday, are merely a revenue raising measure. Its purpose is to make up somewhat for the shortfall in Government funding to local authorities under the budget. The Minister promises to make motor tax carbon dioxide rated at a later stage. Again, the assumption behind the motor tax and the VRT changes is that most people have no option but to use their cars, increasing carbon emissions, and we might as well tap them for some money for their trouble, namely, being stuck in traffic all day, while we are at it. The apparently green measures in this budget assume our continued dependence as a society on cars and acknowledge an abject failure to reduce our transport caused carbon emissions by giving people more public transport options.

The good news in the Minister's speech consists of rehashing previous announcements, including the draft building regulations on more energy efficient buildings and the continuation of the greener home scheme. These apparently environmentally friendly measures also signify the failure of the Green Party to achieve anything substantial in Government in its first budget. One of the first decisions by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources was to slash the amounts available under the greener homes scheme for individuals installing more environmentally friendly heating systems in their homes. Before the Green Party was in Government, a home owner could apply for €4,200 for a biomass boiler. Instead of increasing that, the Green Party in Government reduced the amount to €3,000. That is a failure by the Green Party in Government. The people who would apply for this grant want to change to a more environmentally friendly heating system. How could a Green Party Minister stand over a reduction in the grants to those who want to play their part in reducing the emissions?

The draft building regulations will not be worth the paper they are written on if we continue with the laissez-faire approach of the Government to compliance with building regulations. Deputy Sargent said to the Taoiseach in the Dáil this February:

I refer to two articles, one from The Sunday Tribune and the other from a construction magazine, Construct Ireland, stating that less then 2% of all houses comply with Part L of the Building Regulations 1997. This follows a survey conducted by Sustainable Energy Ireland, which has not been published even though it was carried out in 2005.

That is some context for the Minister, Deputy Gormley's self praise about his introduction of the draft building regulations. The problem is these regulations operate under a system of self-certified compliance by architects employed by the builders who only get to inspect in a very superficial way whether the building regulations are being complied with. Like the existing building regulations, the proposed new building regulations will be no guarantee that our buildings will have the theoretical level of energy efficiency in practice. Will there be any significant compliance with the regulations unless they are backed up by significant levels of inspection by local authorities and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government?

A very basic level of alternative heating system is required under the proposed regulations, for example, a wood pellet stove. With the high cost and difficulty in getting wood pellets, what hope is there that hard pressed home buyers will use these heating systems and will not instead opt to use the gas heating systems that will almost certainly also be installed in most of the homes built under these new regulations? This brings me back to the minuscule carbon emission reductions that are predicted in the Minister's emissions table. Is it at all probable that in practice the draft building regulations and the VRT changes will lead to the reductions in emissions predicted by the Minister? Is it more likely that this prediction will have to be adjusted downwards and the amount to be spent on carbon credit purchase revised upwards?

There was no reference in the Minister, Deputy Gormley's speech to the role of waste management in reducing emissions. Was that because the budget provided no increase in money available under the environment subheading for recycling services? How can we, as the Minister suggests, "achieve the annual reduction on average between now and 2012" and "need to purchase only a million carbon credits on average each year" with the approach taken in this first so called "carbon budget"? It is obvious from the Minister's speech that this is only aspirational and he has no intention of making such targets legally binding. He said that "this year's budget is a significant first step". Obviously it is not. Where are the specifics about how we are going to actually reduce our emissions and by how much? Where is the programme for reducing emissions Department by Department? Where are the requirements of local authorities to reduce emissions at local and regional level? Where is the legislation needed to make these targets more than just aspirational? The extra funding for the EPA is welcome but what about the need to properly fund and resource local authorities in their role in environmental protection and mitigating and adapting to climate change?

One does not need a Cabinet committee on climate change and energy security to tell one that public transport projects should be fast-tracked to reduce our transport emissions. It is obvious that we cannot continue with urban sprawl and unsustainable rezonings if we want to reduce our carbon footprint, yet the Government is blindly ignoring this fact, conveniently for Fianna Fáil's developer friends. So called carbon reports and carbon budgets are merely cosmetic unless we make real changes in Ireland, such as vastly improving our public transport sector and more responsible planning of residential communities that will be more energy efficient.

On paper, the Green Party seems to have got very little in the programme for Government, and so far in practice with the so called "carbon budget" it seems even less. It has adopted the Fianna Fáil pose of being seen to do things by opening conferences and launching reviews, reports and awareness campaigns, although I should say advertising campaigns. Meanwhile, Ireland continues unabated as one of the worst offenders in terms of non-compliance with EU environmental legislation. With today's speech from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, it seems the Green Party has given up on reducing our carbon emissions, instead having to buy our way to our Kyoto targets.

In February Senator Dan Boyle, as a then Deputy, said the Carbon Fund Bill:

. . . was an illustration of the hollowness of the Government's policies towards the environment. It underlines the empty rhetoric in which the Government engages, in terms of indulging in "green speak" and not undertaking one inch of green action.

The shoe is on the other foot now. The Government still indulges in "green speak" but has the Greens to do so for it.

See this speech in context