Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to participate in today's debate. I will focus primarily on the climate and nature fund component of the Bill. It is getting more and more difficult to read news reports on our climate crisis and keep an eye on what is happening in the media. It is getting progressively hellish when it comes to what we see globally and across this country. The state of the climate report from the World Meteorological Organization confirmed that 2023 is the hottest year on record by a clear margin. We have seen records broken for ocean heat, sea-level rises, Antarctic sea ice loss and glacial retreat.

We are approaching a lot of tipping points globally. Those tipping points are a point of no return. They are ecological changes that will occur as a result of climate change and have their own catastrophic domino effects globally. Unfortunately, we are reaching those, such as the collapse of the big ice sheets in Greenland and the west Antarctic, the widespread thawing of permafrost, the death of coral reefs in warm waters and the collapse of an oceanic current in the north Atlantic.

These are incredibly worrying things and we are on a worrying trajectory and path. It demonstrates the urgency and speed with which we need to deal with the climate crisis. When Greta Thunberg gave a speech at Davos in 2019 she said, "Our house is on fire". I agree with that sentiment.

I cannot understand why, when we are in such a catastrophic situation where the climate crisis is accelerating to the point where we may not be able to address it, the Minister is introducing a climate and nature fund that will start in 2026. It just does not make sense. If your house is on fire, you throw everything at it. You do not sit down and say you are going to stick some money in the bank and that in a few years' time, you will use it to deal with the fire. That this fund is being set up from 2026 illustrates that the Government just does not get the seriousness of the crisis we face.

I have spoken only in respect of the climate aspects of the fund but it is also a nature fund. Sometimes, as a Government and as a State, we tend to forgot the nature aspects of the work we do and it is very much a poor cousin, so I welcome the fact nature is being incorporated into this fund. The impact on our biodiversity are as catastrophic as those on the climate. The one difference, however, between climate action and biodiversity action is that in many instances climate action is a global responsibility. In the case of the biodiversity crisis, we can deal with it here ourselves. It is a national issue primarily and any effort put in by the State will accrue benefits and the restoration of nature, so it is absolutely within our remit to deal with this and do something about it. Again, I really question why that money is not being made available now, even for the most basic needs such as our national parks. National parks, which people would imagine to be areas that are of national importance where nature is allowed to thrive, are dying on foot of the impact of invasive species, a lack of management and a lack of prioritisation of nature in the parks. We are not getting right even those most basic things. I ask the Minister to reconsider this and to make sure that fund will be made available on a more urgent basis.

When I was doing some research for this contribution, I saw that the Minister had been asked a parliamentary question about the finances available to deal with climate and nature, and when he spoke about the climate and nature fund, he spoke about it only in the context of emissions. He did not mention nature restoration or anything in that vein. I ask him to be cognisant of that. There is a fear that that sort of lack of attention and forgetfulness regarding nature will flow through this process. While we need to deal with this urgently and to see the fund brought in such that the money will be made available immediately, we also need to ring-fence some of that money for nature. There is a real risk that money will be directed towards corporate emissions, such as those from engineering projects, and nature will again be forgotten, as it tends to be in these debates.

An awful lot of hay was made about this fund being developed, particularly by the Green Party, in advance of the most recent budget. Any time anyone spoke about their commitment to biodiversity, they spoke about this €3.15 billion fund. Within the Bill, however, that is the maximum that will be set aside. It will be no more than €3.15 billion but it does not say what the minimum will be. Theoretically, under the Bill, no money could be spent. No minimum is specified within it and that is a big flaw. I hope the Minister will take that on board and ensure a minimum will be incorporated in it and, as I said, that a certain figure will be ring-fenced to deal with biodiversity and nature. Particularly given what is happening in Europe with the apparent collapse of the nature restoration programme, it is important that Ireland take up that mantle and that we do absolutely everything necessary to deal with it. To that end, we will need our own source of funding.

Turning to the overall operation of the investment vehicles and the funds themselves, Deputy Pringle recently tabled a motion before the Dáil in regard to the Fossil Fuel Divestment Act. When that legislation was enacted a number of years ago, there was great fanfare about it globally because it was very important. It has been in operation for a number of years, however, and there have been clear gaps and failures and issues have arisen, which Deputy Pringle tried to address or raise before Christmas. One of the major issues relates to where the money can be spent. It can be spent indirectly on businesses whose primary objective is fossil fuel undertakings if it is done through hedge funding or other such financial tools, and that needs to be taken out of any proposal in the case of this fund. It is really important that the money the State spends, whether it comes through the infrastructure, climate and nature fund or the future Ireland fund in general, will not be used for any fossil fuel undertaking, directly or indirectly.

In respect of the direct spending aspect, it appears from the Bill that it will be possible to invest moneys in the programmes or projects of corporations that have a primary fossil fuel objective as long as our national emissions targets and policies are not impacted. From my reading of that, we could theoretically invest in a coalmine in China under this fund because that would not impact on our national emissions. Again, that is not something we should countenance, and I ask the Minister to look at that and make sure any possibility of that will be excluded from the Bill. Whether we spend this money in Ireland or overseas, we should not undermine global or national climate or biodiversity actions, and it is important that be taken into account.

In any event, we will have greater opportunities to debate the Bill over the course of the process.

See this speech in context