Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

It has become common for the Labour Party, almost in an act of self-pity, to say it is being treated as the mudguard for Fine Gael policy, but a Labour Party Minister has tabled the Bill. Apparently, in the Cabinet reshuffle, getting the environment portfolio was a priority for the Labour Party. I wonder why, having seen this Bill. First it introduced water charges, then there was a housing crisis, and now we have a Bill on climate change. Rather than being mudguards, it appears that Fine Gael's policy is Labour's policy.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report last year painted a picture of impending environmental and humanitarian disaster. We have now gone beyond a global tipping point for the environment, but this is not news that only emerged this year. It has been known for 20 years. The impending crisis is not something that will only affect future generations. It is actively affecting large numbers of people around the globe right now. There are rising sea levels, shrinking ice caps and extreme weather events. Many of these events have the most impact on poor and developing countries.

It would seem that capitalist governments across the globe have paid lip service to the environment, just as this Government is today. There have been 19 climate change summits since 1992, and all have resulted in a lot of aspirations which turned out to be nothing but hot air. Kyoto was a failure, as were Copenhagen in 2009 and Doha in 2012. All that has emerged are solutions like carbon trading, which have been licences for more developed countries to pollute. In 2015, we have the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill.

It is a masterclass in Orwellian doublespeak because it does not propose any action. There are no binding targets or definition of what is a low-carbon economy. It is more aspiration and lip service while the Government keeps its head in the sand and protects the vested interests of big business and the agricultural sector in particular. Ireland is now on course to miss its EU 2020 target for the reduction in greenhouse gases. This might shock many people who have been labouring under the impression that EU targets had to be met; apparently it is only with austerity measures that we have to be the best pupil in the class, and when it comes to protecting the environment, it is fine for us not to meet those targets.

Even the EU targets do not go far enough. Big business in Europe and throughout the globe has invested millions of euro in paying lobbyists to influence the decision-making policy of the Commission. The EU target of a 40% reduction in greenhouse gasses by 2030 will not be enough and we must consider taking immediate and decisive action which can halt climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report suggests we must eliminate greenhouse gases completely in the next 80 years. That is a massive task and the piecemeal, incremental change being proposed will not go anywhere near achieving that target. The national expert advisory council on climate change will be another platform where we will see vested interests taking positions to defend sectional interests. The council will not be independent and it will have representatives from State bodies like Teagasc who will attempt to protect the interests of the agricultural sector. I do not use this term to refer to small farmers and individual farms but rather the multi-million euro agricultural food industry, which is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases. The Bill will put those interests at the heart of any advice given to the Government and continue to put the interests of the drive for profit and economic growth at the heart of environmental policy rather than the environment itself. It will be a continuation of business as usual.

This Bill must be changed massively so the environment can be put at its heart rather than leaving it as a secondary factor. It should not be left for consideration after the interests of business to make profits. We cannot just state that targets are unreachable for the sake of the economy and GDP figures.

See this speech in context