Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I am also speaking to amendment No. 19. If we do not have a just transition, it is very possible there will not be any transition that is effective in dealing with climate change. This is something I do not think the Government, or the Green Party, which should know this, fully comprehends. If we alienate ordinary working people from the climate change agenda which is so urgent, if we turn them against it because we do it unfairly then it will not happen, or there is a serious danger it will not happen.

When one looks at the alarming growth of the far right, which has many elements to its sick and rather twisted ideology, be it racism, anti vaccination or conspiracy theories of one sort or another, one very serious component of the far right's rise is climate scepticism. While many of the ideologues of the far right are just dangerous nutjobs, it gains traction with ordinary people if they feel the measures being taken in the name of climate action are ones coming at their expense. It is hardly surprising that would be the case. To date, this Government, or the last one, or the Green Party based on its historical experience in Government, have not seemed to grasp that. It is simply not climate justice, or a just transition, to increase the cost of heating houses for working people who have no choice whatsoever over whether their houses are properly insulated or what type of heating system is in their houses. That is one example, and it applies to tens of thousands of renters in the private and public sector. They have absolutely no choice about the heating systems in their houses. They have no choice about whether their houses will be retrofitted. Yet year after year, they are going to be hit with an increased cost just to keep their houses warm. On the current trajectory the inequality will grow because not only will the poor be hit hardest by climate measures, but the rich will benefit. This is because if a person is cash-rich, he or she can retrofit he is or her house tomorrow. That will drive down the energy bill and the person will pay less carbon tax. Thus the rich will benefit and working people will suffer. What is that going to do for popular enthusiasm for climate change? Not a lot.

The taxi industry is on its knees at the moment, as I have pointed out to the Minister repeatedly. We get vague promises about a package of support which is frankly paltry and almost insulting, in that it is not real support. All the taxi drivers believe the Minister's failure to support them is driven by a Green dislike of the taxi industry, a determination to destroy the taxi industry and the fact that insofar as he is interested in electrifying what might be left of the taxi fleet, it will be only for the big companies which can afford the cost of electric vehicles. This is because the grant of €20,000 the Minister is offering is simply not enough for the majority of taxi drivers, who are sole traders. Maybe the big companies can do it but the individual taxi driver cannot make up the €30,000 gap. Thus, if the Minister puts them in a position where they must replace their cars, which they will have to do now at the end of this year, it will be a major investment. How are those drivers going to make up the €30,000 gap when they have already lost two years of income? It would be a huge gap in any event, even if they had not lost income due to the pandemic. That is fuelling scepticism against the environmental agenda and against the Minister specifically. Whether it is justified or not, that is the feeling out there. It is alienating people from the climate agenda and the Minister needs to address it as a matter of urgency.

It is a similar situation with public transport. If the Government wants to address the climate crisis it must improve the public transport that is available for people. The change in the use of public transport in my area because of the investment put into the DART was transformative. Previously we had a bockety old diesel suburban railway train which frankly, was unpleasant for people to get on. Consequently, many people did not use it and got in their cars. Then there was investment in the DART and it really changed things. One could say the same about people on the Luas. However, what if someone is not lucky enough to live beside the DART or beside the Luas? What of the people living in a rural area where investment in public transport is being cut back? What if, due to the privatisation agenda the Government is facilitating inside Dublin Bus, many of the public service routes that are off the central routes but which serve the older population trying to get to the hospital or whatever are lost? What will the people affected think then of the climate agenda? They will see it as something that is adversely affecting them. I could go on through the examples but I have not got time. There are also the fishermen in Dublin Bay affected by the determination to put offshore wind on the sensitive fishing areas. The turbines are to go on the banks rather than further out, as is common practice in most of the European Union, because it is too expensive for the corporations which want to make money but it would be the right thing to do for the local communities, fisherman and ultimately for biodiversity and the environment.

The Minister must hardwire the just transition into the brains of the Government and into this legislation. He has not done that. We are trying to do that with this amendment and the Minister should accept it for that reason.

See this speech in context