Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful for the opportunity to address this. These annual transition statements, as an exercise in assessing the impact of policy, comprise a very poor instrument. I know it is a legacy from the previous legislation but it is dealing with the matter too late. In the middle of 2022, we are dealing with figures from 2019. When trying to look to the road ahead, looking so far out the back window is of little benefit. It gives no insight into how individual policy measures are impacting the targets in various sectors and imposes no serious line responsibility on Ministers regarding performance in their sectors. Therefore, the statements are very much an instrument of the past and are simply not fit for purpose. As the Minister designs the mechanism for future accountability to the House, he will have to ensure it is radically different. The legislation we have passed gives a framework for doing that, but I would like to see the Minister of State return to the House to tell us how it will be done and how we can have a genuine role in holding the Government to account.

The annual transition statements provide some benchmarks on how we are doing. Regarding the target for 2020 to 2025, we have done well on renewables and electricity, achieving minus 41% in our emissions. We failed pretty miserably in all the other sectors, including the transport, agriculture and residential sectors, where we delivered a reduction of only 7%. While I share absolutely the vision of renewables being a key and a very great opportunity for us, it is greenwashing somewhat to pretend they will save us. We have heard the Opposition accusing the Government of greenwashing but it is greenwashing to pretend we will solve the problem with a renewables sector that will not impact on the way we live and without having carbon pricing. There are those on the Opposition benches who say polluters must pay. Carbon is the big polluter. It is what is polluting our globe and making it burn up. Despite this, there are those who say in the same breath that they want the polluters to pay but not the polluters who generate carbon.

The Government has a genuine uphill struggle because, in trying to bring people with it on this challenging journey, there will be much cynicism in the political world. We have seen this in the portrayal that rural Ireland can build a prosperous future by clinging to old practices. That is the message we often hear in this House. That is not a future that will deliver for rural Ireland. We have to build a future for rural Ireland on modern practices. That means sustainable food, broadband, the remote delivery of services and remote working. I am referring to the many ways in which we can greatly transform the face of rural Ireland and create a very prosperous vision for it. That is what we need to build. My saying this is not to fault the effort going into all the planning and the sectoral allocation but I believe we do need to build a vision people can share. That is where we will face the greatest challenge.

I will repeat an appeal to the Minister of State that I know has fallen on deaf ears somewhat, that is, that we should adopt the circular economy as the central plank of our climate planning. That is the way in which we can mobilise people. At the heart of the circular economy idea is having the vision that we can produce food sustainably, meet our travel needs and deliver all the standards of living we enjoy but in a way that designs out the environmental damage. It is not about a blame-and-shame approach, which unfortunately characterises some of the focus on greenhouse emissions alone. It is about considering the whole supply chain and emphasising design change, the mobilisation of communities and consumers, and giving people information on what is happening in the various services they use. The approach emphasises that future prosperity will arise from adapting now and that the early movers will be the successful and prosperous movers of the future. The Minister of State needs to bring that back into the narrative about what we are doing because people want to know that in ten, 15 or 20 years, we will still have an agriculture sector that is prosperous and delivers income to the family farm. The rewards will be different, however. One would be rewarded for managing methane and environmental services as well as for one’s food. The reality is that we do not have the instruments in place that will give farmers the confidence that they will have a prosperous farm in ten years. That is where we need to bring the emphasis.

Yes, in the process we have to deliver these targets, but there is also the narrative around the story we are telling and why it is vital we take the environmental damage and design it out of our chain, including our buildings, where our neglect of timber versus concrete is embedding high carbon emissions into the way we build. Every sector, be it construction, food or travel, has to look at this in that context. That is the way the Minister can mobilise more support behind this, instead of the red mark on the copybook, saying, “You did not hit your target this year.” The Government needs to get everyone sharing the targets and then have a more honest evaluation of whether we have the toolbox in place to deliver them. That is where I hope the debate moves now.

See this speech in context