Clare Daly (Dublin North, United Left) | Oireachtas source

I refer to some of the points made by Deputy Stanley. It is a disgrace that the discussion of this Bill is rammed into a half an hour the day before the summer recess. I mean no disrespect to the Minister of State but the fact that the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government is not present for a discussion on the biggest challenge facing our country and our planet is a little gobsmacking, to be honest.

This amendment is a critical addition to the Bill. It provides for national emissions reductions targets and Ireland's part in leading the way in tackling climate change. In order to be able to formulate an action plan for implementing climate change mitigation, we need a reference point from which to start so that we can measure our progress against it. Last September at the UN climate change summit in New York, the Taoiseach referred to long-term objectives for 2050 of an 80% reduction across electricity, transport and the built environment. Yet this Bill contains no reference to any targets whatsoever. The closest the Bill will come to mentioning a target is by way of the new amendment No. 17 from the Minister. This proposes to change the Bill to the effect that when the Government is drawing up its action plan in a few years' time, while making sure that all measures are cost-effective they will have regard to the policy of the Government on climate change. That is all the amendment proposes. The official Government policy published around the time of the first drafting of this Bill, is that we were in pursuit of low-carbon Ireland by 2050:

[T]he Government shall endeavour to secure an aggregate reduction in carbon dioxide emissions of at least 80 per cent (compared to 1990 levels) by 2050, across the electricity generation, the built environment and transport sectors and in parallel, an approach to carbon neutrality in the agriculture and land-use sector, including forestry, which does not compromise capacity for sustainable food production.

Some aspects require clarification. This is not an airtight commitment to a 2050 target. Even if it could be construed as such, the Government policy only references carbon dioxide and none of the highly dangerous greenhouse gases listed in our amendment. In the first two decades after its release, methane is 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Both types of emissions must be addressed if we want to effectively reduce the impact of climate change. If our amendment is not included in the Bill, this will not happen.

A plethora of amendments were tabled on Committee Stage which were ruled out of order because they made reference to emissions reduction targets. It was argued without any supporting documentation or argument that reduction targets cost the Exchequer money and that opposition Deputies are not allowed to put forward amendments which will cost the Exchequer money.

See this speech in context