Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish we could channel some of that anger and passion into facing the existential threat that climate change poses. That is a challenge for all of us. I welcome the opportunity provided by Sinn Féin to take part in this debate and I support the motion. I take great exception to a Deputy from the Labour Party telling us that anyone who is opposed to a carbon tax is not serious about climate change. That type of divisive comment is unacceptable. Since my election in February 2016, I would say that, outside of health and housing, it is the topic I have spoken on the most. I have stood up repeatedly with a small number of colleagues and appealed to the Government to recognise the crisis posed by climate change and to declare an emergency. That was finally declared on 9 May 2019. I would like to say that it was as a result of pressure from us, but it was ultimately as a result of children standing outside the Dáil and appealing to all of us to do something, as well as all of the reports from various organisations that there was no turning back. The Minister for Finance or the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform told us that our planet was burning and I fully agree. I do not agree with a divisive carbon tax.

We like to quote the ESRI on different topics. I will quote it later tonight during questions to the Minister for Finance. A working paper in 2008 told us:

A carbon tax in Ireland will not stop climate change – indeed, it is unlikely to have a measurable direct impact on global warming. A carbon tax is important because it signals Ireland’s commitment to international climate policy.

It is about signalling as opposed to having an impact. I disagree with what the ESRI said about signalling. I think there are far more effective ways to signal to companions in other countries that we are taking climate change seriously.

I quote Professor John Sweeney, who is on the side of carbon taxes. He said, "politicians feel comfortable talking about taxes rather than more fundamental social and economic changes". That is exactly what is happening here. We are being diverted, not by Sinn Féin's motion, but by the Government policy generally talking about carbon tax, as opposed to a proper analysis of how we bring people together like we did at the beginning of Covid. We rapidly lost that solidarity. How do we do that? As a small country, we are well placed to put ourselves forward to aspire and work towards being a green country. Galway city should be picked as a pilot project to roll out a green, thriving city. A feasibility study on light rail should be done and there should be a roll-out of public transport and park-and-ride to get the traffic off the road.

What we are currently doing is the complete opposite of that. We have looked for a policy for sustainable industries with seaweed and wool from sheep. Let us look at the period since 2015, when we brought in the climate action plan. What happened after that? Each year, our emissions have gone up. That says a lot about our sincerity. We zone in on a divisive carbon tax while the emissions go up. We then brought in a national mitigation plan. Friends of the Irish Environment had to go to the Supreme Court and get it quashed because the mitigation plan was unlawful and against our obligations under the 2015 plan. All of the energy went into that as opposed to joining forces to deal, in a sustainable way, with climate action.

Let us go local again. Let us look at the good idea of decarbonisation plans. Galway City Council, among other local authorities, put forward its plan in April last year. It now sits at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. It told us in replies to questions that it cannot do anything about it because it will need guidelines from the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. So much for joined-up thinking. The decarbonisation plan was submitted in April last year and there has been no progress. There is a circular that tells us that only towns of more than 5,000 will be looked at. They are exclusive guidelines that prevent the community from be involved. I will stop on time but I would dearly love to engage on this matter.

See this speech in context