Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)

I assume this committee does not meet for the sake of meeting, but that it has targets and objectives. The current legislative agenda and the website of the Office of the Taoiseach states that during this session the Government would publish legislation to support offshore energy development through the modernisation of the planning process, but there is no mention of that in the recently published Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009. Will the Taoiseach explain that contradiction? I have raised before the fact that the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security, chaired by Deputy Seán Barrett, published a Bill on this matter. Following analysis by the committee, will the Government commit to accepting the Bill given that it failed to produce its own? Does the Taoiseach intend to include offshore energy projects as part of the critical infrastructure Bill in view of their importance?

In a letter dated 15 May 2009, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government, Professor Cunningham, a very able man, referred in particular to the harnessing of wind power to pump seawater to storage reservoirs. He made the point that, in principle, such as system could actually supply the full power requirements of this country. He stated in the letter to the Minister that there are at least 50 sites throughout the country where the system could be implemented and that a reservoir of 2 sq. km would supply 1 GW of electricity, which is the equivalent of the output of Moneypoint. He also stated the planned upgrading of the electricity grid, costing €11 billion, could be obviated by investment in these kinds of generation systems, and that costings indicate it should be a highly profitable investment both for the country and private investors. He stated the overall cost of achieving energy independence is between €10 billion and €12 billion. Has the climate change sub-committee considered this?

Is it the case that the committee does not set out the big picture from the Taoiseach's perspective and have line Ministers follow through? The letter from the Chief Scientific Adviser is very important. In it, he sets out his position formally. It is very clear and we have advocated it on this side of the House for some time. Has the sub-committee the Taoiseach chairs actually considered the big-picture objectives and targets?

See this speech in context