Dáil debates

Thursday, 5 June 2008

Carbon Allowances: Motion (Resumed)

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Joe McHughJoe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)

I would like to pick out a few key phrases from the Government amendment. "Long-term strategy" is mentioned twice. We see references to the Energy Policy Framework 2007-2020, a strategic framework up to 2020 and the aim of achieving zero net carbon emissions by 2035, which is 27 years away. The situation is said to be subject to ongoing examination by the Departments of Finance and Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, and we are told there will be no free carbon allowances after 2012. There is not one mention of the short term or the medium term but only the long-term strategy. There is no mention of the here and now or of the people who must pay up to €1,000 for 1,000 litres of home heating fuel. There is no mention of how people in the haulage industry or the fishing sector are to deal with their short to medium-term needs. It is an absolute abdication of responsibility. It is cute-hoorism at its worst.

A gentleman named Deputy Bertie Ahern, a former leader, sat in the chair where the Minister of State is sitting now. When history is written he may be the man who is given credit for the Celtic tiger and he may smile and say he was the man who delivered the Celtic tiger, but the impending economic recession is the elephant in the room. Not one Member on that side of the House, including the noble Green Party Members, one of whom is en route to Luxembourg, is prepared to take on that elephant. They will blame the United States and the Middle East. They are prepared to abdicate their responsibility in trying to tackle this issue in the Chamber. A person once said "How do you eat an elephant?" The answer is "One bite at a time". What we are trying to do on this side of the House is offer a suggestion that we decrease the VAT rate from 13.5% to 12.5%. It will not change the economy overnight, but it is a bit-part solution to a larger problem. The irresponsibility and recklessness of the opposite side of the House in stating that our suggestion is not even worth examining is disgraceful.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.