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

We are all struggling today with the schedule going too far. We have discussed these issues at length over the course of the past week and there is grave concern on our side of the House that excluding targets and failing to put any meat on its bones makes the legislation probably worse than having nothing. I do not say that lightly. It is said very much in the context of the fact that climate change is undoubtedly one of the most significant challenges facing humanity at the moment. It is a challenge which has not been given sufficient attention by the Government or the establishment internationally. Too often, we continue to put the interests of big business and profit ahead of the needs of society. It is interesting that even elements at the top of the business world are beginning to take that point on board and acknowledging that we must do something. Putting forward a Bill which does not put meat on the bones is not adequate. We must divide out where we are setting the targets and how we are going to achieve them.

When the issue arose originally, there was a great deal of dialogue about the individual's actions and the view was that the person was responsible. In my view, society is responsible and we need to take collective measures. Transport is one of the key areas that needs to be broken down. The Government made a big fanfare about the capital programme, which we discussed yesterday, elevating rail. Rail is not being sufficiently elevated in Ireland. In fact, to grapple properly with climate change, one should have a system of free public transport to get people out of private cars. At the moment, if one lives in parts of the north side of our capital city which are not on the coastal DART line and are not connected, one is condemned to use a private car. That is not viable in the city and it is a huge cause of pollutants. We must have targets which are linked to economic policy. That is what our amendments are about. We can put forward general guidelines and blurbs about this type of thing, but if there is no meat on it, it will not be good enough. The same is true of energy where we have a backdrop of a lack of any serious programme to retrofit houses to achieve proper energy efficiency.

Climate change is particularly relevant when we consider the issue of migration. Along with our European peers, we have been grappling in the House every week since we came back with the issue of refugees from war-torn countries. Clearly, it will not just be people affected by war or economic refugees in future; the biggest group of new refugees the world will face will consist of victims of climate change. Dealing with that will be a huge consequence of climate change.

It is important that there be chapters in the legislation to deal with public bodies' duties of climate change mitigation, adaptation programmes, land use, forestry, energy efficiency, waste reduction and recycling. Scotland put the detail in its plan whereas what we have are vague aspirations and no substance. That is not good enough and will not lead to us achieving our targets.

I am conscious that many environmental groups contacted everyone and told us to get the Bill through, but something is not always better than nothing. In the absence of these amendments, the Bill is not sufficient to address key concerns and achieve what is necessary. For this reason, we will seek votes on these amendments.

See this speech in context