Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am glad that we are here discussing the contents of the Climate Action Plan 2023, notwithstanding the delays in publishing the report and in holding this debate. I have stated previously, but it bears repeating, that the delay and missed targets are regrettably characteristic of the Government’s approach to the climate and biodiversity crises.

The matter of climate action is so serious, we should have been scheduled for the Dáil and Seanad to debate this updated plan before Christmas and it is somewhat late coming to the House today, in January. Nevertheless, I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute on behalf of the Labour Party to the debate, and I do so in the spirit of working constructively to overcome the immense challenges we face in meeting our necessary climate emission reductions targets.

This answer to our collective problem is inherently political, but it should not be partisan. Ireland must lose its reputation as a climate laggard and we must all work together to achieve a better status for us.

We are well into the key decade in which we must see our emissions reduced by half. We are already on the precipice of reaching that worrying milestone of 1.5°C global warming. We are mid-way through the first carbon budget, which requires emissions to fall by an average of 4.8% per year, and yet the Environmental Protection Agency has reported that Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions rose by almost 5% in 2021, during a pandemic year. At this rate, we are seriously diminishing the chance of meeting our climate targets. I have to ask if the Minister believes that there will be further slippage in the achievement of these targets.

I listened carefully to the Minister's speech. Indeed, there were some welcome announcements today on the roll-out of rapid electric vehicle, EV, charging points. The Minister's points about circular economy are vitally important and I support those. There is much in the climate action plan that is important and significant and yet it is heavy on aspiration but light on delivery. In the section on district heating, for example, all are agreed on the considerable potential of district heating schemes to curb emissions but there has been such a severe lack of delivery and such a severe delay in rolling out schemes, such as in Poolbeg. I visited the Covanta plant some time ago and saw the mechanisms there for achieving district heating systems, and yet no resourcing is put in place to ensure that they would, in fact, be delivered. That is the real problem.

To echo the sentiments of Friends of the Earth and other environmentalists, the real test for the Minister and indeed for the Government is to deliver not only ambitions but also outcomes. We need to see serious priority placed on outcomes on climate action, not just by Ministers and Departments, but also by State agencies they oversee. I have raised in this Chamber previously reports in the media, in particular in the Business Post, that elements of Government appear not even to be aiming to achieve their own targets. We have documents released under freedom of information confirming that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is conceding it will not meet its methane emission reduction targets. That is clearly serious, but it is not only the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. I read recent reports about pensions in Ireland in The Journal’s Noteworthyoutlet, which has reported that an ambition in the 2019 Climate Action Plan to tighten scrutiny regarding the investment of pension funds in fossil fuels appears to have been quietly rolled back by the Department of Social Protection almost as soon as it was published, and no delivery. I note the absence of any such objective in more recent iterations of the climate action plan. Why are policies such as this falling between the gaps or, indeed, being reversed?

We in Labour have repeatedly called for the Department of the Taoiseach and the Taoiseach to take a stronger role in keeping climate action plans on track across Departments and across State agencies. In housing, for example, the Minister has said that Government has met its targets on retrofitting of housing. Let us face it. There is a significant building and deep retrofitting programme in place, with 120,000 dwellings to be retrofitted to BER B2 by 2025 and a goal of 500,000 by 2030. According to the Department’s own reports, construction of public housing slowed between the third quarter of 2021 and the same period last year. Anyone attempting to renovate a home now will know of the effect of inflation on the cost of building supplies. They will know of the difficulties in securing labour. It does not seem that it will be feasible to meet those ambitious retrofitting targets. Does the Minister believe that his Department is sufficiently resourced to ensure retrofitting targets are met and a greater co-ordination between Departments would be vital to see these targets achieved?

I will speak finally on the topic of forestry. Too often, the issue of biodiversity and the biodiversity crisis is overlooked in conversations about climate change. In that context and in the context in which we know that forests serve such a vital function as a carbon sink, I want to raise with the Minister the worrying proposal to sell-off land by Coillte. This is a proposal that has raised immense concerns. I have heard numerous people - constituents of mine and people across the country - who are really concerned about this. We in Labour are unequivocal about this. Coillte must adopt a new approach. They must plant more publicly-owned forests and partner with farmers to support farmers in developing new forestry on their own lands to provide a long term sustainable income, as the Minister suggested in his speech, and to help Ireland meet our climate targets. The proposed fund appears not to make any sense in the context of our overall objectives. Indeed, it has united environmentalists and farmers, and all sectors of society, against it. It seems that, under the reported proposal, Coillte will source the land for forestry, carry out the planting and management, but private investment will benefit from State grants and premia. We will see more monoculture forests, driven by a profit motivation. We cannot see how this will either boost biodiversity or support our agriculture sector to meet ambitious targets. Indeed, we think it is wrong for private investors to reap all of the financial benefits. Why is Coillte itself not simply managing these proposed forests and why is the Government not supporting Coillte to do this so that it is done in public ownership? I would like to hear some clarity from the Minister on that. I am aware this was raised earlier and the Taoiseach stated that this was not directly a matter for the Government. I simply do not accept that. The Government must intervene here to ensure that Coillte can be supported in this way. We want to see farmers provided with a new long-term source of income so that we can commit to a sustainable and biodiverse farming sector and a sustainable and biodiverse forestry sector. This is something that requires a urgent response from the Government.

See this speech in context