Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the staff in my office for their tremendous work on this motion, all my colleagues in the Dáil who have agreed with the substance of the motion, and indeed the Government as it has agreed with the substance of it. The kernel is in carrying out what the motion has asked the Government to do. I will hold the Government to account. There is a list of asks here with which the Minister has said he has no difficulty. I will look for a timescale for the implementation of those requests.

In regard to the motion, I would like to give some reassurance to Deputies from rural areas, particularly Deputy Michael Collins who referred to zero transport. I totally agree with him on that. It is difficult for people to embrace zero emissions when there is what he describes as "zero transport" on the ground.

As I said at the beginning, this OECD report is just one of many reports. The significant difference is that it clearly tells us that without transformative action by this Government, we cannot reach our emissions targets. It tells us in clear terms that transformative actions are still marginal. I will quote precisely from the report:

For a number of years Ireland has prioritized efforts and attention on policies that this analysis finds have a low potential to help the country transition away from car dependency and towards systems able to deliver sustainable accessibility.

As of 2022, transformative policies are still marginal and are implemented only on a small scale or as pilot projects. Transformative policies are still marginal. I say that in the context of the recent conference that concluded in Egypt, in the context of Ireland declaring a biodiversity emergency in 2019 and a climate emergency, and in the context of the Budget Statement delivered by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, last year - not this year - when he said that the climate is burning. The climate is burning and we have no choice but to take transformative action, but our policies in regard to transformative action are absolutely on the margins.

This is not a parochial motion. I am glad my colleagues have acknowledged that. It is about transformative action and focuses specifically on the OECD report. Indeed, the OECD did not choose Galway, which is significant, but chose Cork, Dublin, Sligo and Kildare. It also pointed out that transformative action was required not just in cities but in all rural and urban areas.

The Minister raised the question of what the two managers in Galway said when the decision was made to quash the order. Galway County Council, Galway City Council and Transport Infrastructure Ireland, three main bodies to which we look to do transformative change, said they were disappointed to learn from An Bord Pleanála that it would not be opposing on a "very limited ground" the judicial review proceedings taken by the Friends of the Environment challenging the board’s decision. I wish to pay tribute to the Friends of the Environment, which, along with its legal team of solicitors and barristers, succeeded in getting the order quashed. On what ground was it quashed? It was quashed because An Bord Pleanála failed to consider climate action and the urgency - the géarchéim - attached to it. The local authority management in Galway and the NTA, to which we now look to bring in transformative action, tell us it was a "very limited ground". The purpose of my motion is not to highlight the narrowness of the vision of the management, but to highlight the need for the Government to take a hands-on approach in leading out transformative action. We cannot blame motorists or people on the ground when the policies are embedded in the Government’s policy of car dependency.

There are key recommendations in the OECD report. I did not hear the Minister or the Minister of State refer to our determination to implement those key recommendations.

In regard to Galway city, there is no sense of urgency. We are talking about a feasibility study sometime in the future. The N6 project being quashed was a positive decision, in my opinion. We had a previous outer bypass that ended up in a cul-de-sac. There is no sense of urgency. We have no park and ride, and we are only now looking at that on the east side of the city.

There has been no attempt to move the school traffic off the ground, no attempt to look at joined-up thinking with a plan for the common good in regard to all of the public land we have, from the docks, which is publicly owned, to the station and the airport site of 150 acres that was mentioned, and Sandy Road. All of those are progressing with projects that are not determined by an overall master plan for the common good that links the usage of that for public housing with an integrated public transport system.

See this speech in context