Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Like previous speakers, I acknowledge and appreciate that this amendment provides for funding to be allocated from within the climate action fund to meet the demands associated with the rewetting and reinstatement of peatlands associated with Bord na Móna and the extraction of peat for various uses. However, in welcoming this provision, I ask the Minister to tell the House whether the commitments made by the previous Government on the repatriation of part of the public service obligation, PSO, funding, amounting to €20 million per annum for the next four years, towards this project is not now the case, despite the commitments made and despite the understanding in Bord na Móna and among its workers, the regions and the constituency represented by myself and others. If that is not now the case, does this amendment provide for €20 million per annum over the next four years, as we were told at the time of the announcement when a commitment was given? It would appear from my information that the EU Commission no longer supports that contention, that belief, that understanding, and that commitment that was given in this House and outside. Will the Minister clarify that?

Based on that answer, it is incumbent on me to ask two further questions so that I can get an answer for this House and my constituents. I refer to the funding approved by the European Council this week. Much has been alluded to in regard to the funding made available under various headings, whether it is the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, or the just transition and the reduction in funding associated with them compared with previous figures. I acknowledge and appreciate that it would have looked far graver months ago were it not for the introduction of the emergency funding that compensates us in relation to the CAP and other areas. I welcome that and appreciate the job faced by those with responsibilities to ensure that any such conditionality helps and assists those who partake in the schemes to improve their incomes and so on.

Will the Minister confirm the inclusion in the transition fund of peatlands in the coal regions? Will he confirm that measures used and targeted towards the regions will target where there are and have been job losses to assist finding alternative jobs in those areas? A commitment was given in the just transition report, which all stakeholders welcomed and approved, that the regions most affected would be targeted for such funding.

On the first round of funding, which was only 50% of what was provided by Government and 50% of what was apparently provided by ESB, this was to be geared towards those areas most affected and that is not necessarily the case. That is no disrespect to those applications in hand, that are being adjudicated upon and will be afforded. In the context of the larger pot of funding that will be available under the Coal Regions in Transition programme, the criteria associated with that must accommodate those areas that are most affected. Nowhere has been more affected in the context of these job losses than the county and constituency I represent. I would appreciate a commitment that that will be the case.

On that same report that was welcomed by all stakeholders and by Government and acknowledged by everybody who participated in its deliberations and ultimate publication by Mr. Kieran Mulvey, there was a commitment in that, which we all respected, to look at alternative use associated with the powerplants in Shannonbridge and Lanesborough. As we speak, I have been made aware of the fact that ESB is seeking tenders and contracts for the decommissioning and demolition of these facilities. That is a far cry from the commitment made by the Just Transition Commissioner and from the response from all parties and none to what was contained in this report's recommendations. I hope the Minister will hold those bodies to account and engage with them to ensure that every opportunity is afforded to the localities and the regions and that the commitments that have been made by representatives, authorities and stakeholders to investigate, explore and ensure that other alternatives are found are fulfilled. I call on the Government to support those alternatives which will have a role in ensuring that these regions have prospects from the facilities proposed to be demolished.

I welcome the commitment contained within the amendment. It is it is incumbent on the Minister to inform the House that this is now a replacement for a commitment that was made previously which was not honoured. The reasons it was not honoured are not yet clear to me and need to be clarified and put on the record of the House.

The Minister needs to go beyond that and to commit to what was originally envisaged, which was a four-year programme. If he cannot do that, I ask them to say that now so that we know exactly where we stand. These people, these areas and these regions have been let down a lot in the past two to three years since the first commitment was made. We cannot afford that to continue or for it to be the case in the future. I am now a member of a Government party and I am supporting this Government on the basis of the ambitions contained in the programme for Government, one of which was to address just transition fairly and appropriately and I hope the Minister can guarantee that is the case and confirm the reasons commitments made previously cannot be stood over and what he is doing to ensure similar commitments can be made by this Government, as are contained within the programme for Government.

See this speech in context