Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 1: To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his attendance at the United National conference on climate change in Copenhagen; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48428/09]

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 2: To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his participation in the Copenhagen summit on climate change. [48557/09]

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 3: To ask the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his participation in and on the outcome of the Copenhagen summit on climate change. [3469/10]

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to answer Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.

I travelled to Copenhagen on 17 December to participate with more than 120 other heads of state and government in the high level segment of the United Nations climate change conference. The objective of the conference was to seek agreement to put in place a new international treaty on climate change as a successor to the Kyoto Protocol when its five-year commitment period ends in December 2012.

Ireland's position on the international climate change agenda is advanced through our membership of the European Union. We fully supported the European Union's approach to the Copenhagen conference, including being prepared to raise our target for reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, from 20% to 30% in the context of an international agreement where developed countries made comparable reduction commitments and there was adequate action by developing countries to curb their emissions growth.

The eventual outcome of the conference, the Copenhagen Accord, was considerably less ambitious than the one we had hoped for, particularly as it does not include legally binding targets. However, while the overall outcome was disappointing, the accord none the less contains positive elements on which future progress can be built. Importantly, the accord includes recognition of the need to limit the increase in global temperatures to 2° Celsius. It also provides a commitment for significant financial support for climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing countries and the establishment of a mechanism to support action against global deforestation.

We must reflect and learn from the Copenhagen meeting. The process is ongoing and the next conference of parties, COP 16, will be held in Mexico at the end of the year. Chancellor Angela Merkel has already indicated that she will try to bring parties together in Bonn in advance of the Mexico conference to move the discussions forward.

The European Union, for its part, will honour all its commitments and obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. It remains committed to emissions reductions of 20% by 2020, rising to 30% in the event of a satisfactory international agreement, and to providing substantial funding to assist developing nations. We remain a lead player in this respect.

Notwithstanding that the outcome was well short of what we hoped for, I commend the Danish Presidency and, in particular, Prime Minister Rasmussen, for their hard work in organising the conference and their considerable efforts in trying to secure a positive outcome to the proceedings. Ireland will continue to support the European Union in its efforts to persuade all other parties to sign up to an international legally binding deal in Mexico.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Given that there was no agreement in Copenhagen and that the EU had set emission reduction targets for 2020, what analysis has been carried out by the Government or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government? Will this outcome impact more severely on the targets Ireland must now achieve by 2020?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The point made is that although the European Union considers that the Copenhagen Accord is insufficient and needs to be developed in a more ambitious and robust legal agreement, it accepts that this was the best outcome that could be achieved at the time. The accord should be seen as a further step forward in the ongoing negotiations towards an effective international agreement.

With regard to the formal acceptance of the Copenhagen Accord, the EU has maintained its lead position by reiterating its declaration to a 20% reduction, increasing to 30% within an international agreement where other parties make comparable reductions. That is the point. At this point we do not have an international agreement to reach the reduction of 30%. We have been in detailed discussions with the European Commission on an ongoing basis to ensure we ameliorate the impact in certain sectors. Various discussions have taken place which would recognise Ireland's particular position, especially in regard to agriculture.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is clear that a low carbon economy can be very competitive. The national climate change strategy was, in reality, a wish list without any real ownership or management concerning how targets would be achieved. Although we were close to meeting these targets last year this was because of imploding economic circumstances which brought these targets more sharply into focus.

There is no international agreement and despite the importance of energy security for our State we are a long way behind in wind provision. We need to increase what we have by 300% to be anywhere near the targets we set ourselves. If energy security is of such critical importance - and it is because we import €6 billions worth of fossil fuels every year - has the Taoiseach looked at the strategy that was adopted under the national climate change strategy? Has he given instructions to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, or whomsoever else it may concern such as the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources - I get the names of Departments mixed up as there are so many of them - to set out our own enhanced strategy irrespective of international agreements in order to move towards energy security which is of such importance for everybody and for every business in the country? Has the Taoiseach motivated these people to take action? The grid offers a recipe for much optimism.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Although it is a more specific question for the Minister, I will give a general answer to the Deputy. We have already reached our 15% target and we have set a further target of producing 40% of our energy from sustainable sources by 2020. As the Deputy is aware, we are proceeding with interconnection with the UK so that we can access the wider regional energy market. We have brought about an all-island electricity market and, as a result, consumers have seen improvements in the prices they pay. As we try to meet the need to develop sustainable energy resources, we are moving to a greater degree of energy security. It is on target as we speak.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I understand that there are literally hundreds of millions of euro backed up, in investment potential for alternative energy and for renewable energy. The central problem is the capacity of the grid to deal with this. Regardless of who is in government, we will continue to lag behind over the next 20 years if that central issue is not resolved. I am aware that EirGrid has laid out its programme for the next five or ten years. Overseas investors who have serious money behind them want to invest in a country that they consider to clearly have the potential for renewable energy. Although their money is ready to move, there is no capacity for them to get an offer to join the grid for five, six or ten years to come. That is not the way it should be. I recommend that the Taoiseach look at the grid, which is the central problem for the entire country. Despite EirGrid's proposals, the extent of investment waiting to come on stream, with the consequent potential for thousands of jobs, is being seriously delayed if not lost altogether. I suggest that the Government should really focus on such investment, which holds enormous potential in terms of employment. As a consequence of it, our infrastructure would improve and the country would become more attractive to internal and national investment.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy is aware, the ESB and other players in the market have considerable capital plans for the improvement of networks. It is obvious that EirGrid is involved in the regulation of all of that. I ask everyone in the House to support the provision of such networks. Unfortunately, we have seen many instances of exaggerated claims being made about health and safety issues. Such issues are and will continue to be accommodated in all circumstances. Deputy Kenny needs everyone to support the policy he is enunciating. That has not always been the consistent view of those behind him.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Everyone shares the view that the outcome at Copenhagen was deeply disappointing. I would like to pursue the Taoiseach a little further on the action being taken by the Government to tackle climate change. The revised programme for Government contained a number of commitments in this regard. First, there was a commitment that the Government would introduce a climate change Bill to give a statutory basis to the annual carbon budget. Can I ask when we will see such legislation? The Labour Party and the Oireachtas committee have produced their own Bills in this area. They could be moved if the Government is not in a position to move its own legislation. Second, the Government made a commitment to take climate change impact assessments into account when all Cabinet decisions are being made. Can the Taoiseach outline to the House how such assessments are conducted? When decisions are being made, is a separate climate change impact assessment document presented to and considered by the Cabinet? Third, a commitment was made that a national climate change adaptation strategy would be adopted. I would like to know where that is at. Finally, there was a commitment that Ireland would ratify the Aarhus Convention by March 2010. When will the convention be ratified?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If the Deputy wishes to get exact information on these specific policy development issues, it would be better for his questions to be addressed to the responsible Minister concerned. While I am keen to provide information, I do not have the details in question to hand. The questions before the House relate to the outcome of the Copenhagen Summit, rather than to specific domestic policy initiatives that may be undertaken by the Government in any particular area. It would be better to table a direct question to the Minister.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept the Taoiseach's answer in respect of two of the four matters I raised. I will pursue the ratification of the Aarhus Convention with the Minister for Foreign Affairs. If the Taoiseach can tell me which Minister is responsible for the producing the national climate change adaptation strategy, I will be happy to pursue the matter with him or her. I do not accept that the Taoiseach is not in a position to answer my questions on the other two issues.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What were the questions?

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If I asked him about the climate change Bill on the Order of Business, I would be entitled to get an answer. I am simply asking when the promised climate change Bill will be produced by the Government. I would expect him to know what stage of preparation the legislation is at. I would also expect him to know what is happening with climate change impact assessments. We were told such assessments would be taken into consideration as part of all Cabinet decision-making. I assume that is happening. Is the Taoiseach saying that no climate change impact assessments are being done in advance of Government decisions on various matters, such as infrastructural investment and economic affairs? I am not asking for the detail of particular assessments. I am simply asking how such assessments are carried out. If the Taoiseach knows nothing about it, I presume nothing is being done about it, like many other things in the programme for Government, and therefore there are no climate change impact assessments. It is all very well for the Taoiseach and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to go to Copenhagen and give a lot of rhetorical guff about climate change, when they are doing very little about it at home.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is an expert in rhetorical guff.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can the Taoiseach answer my questions? To which Minister should I direct my questions about the national climate change adaptation strategy? What is happening with the climate change Bill? Is the Government undertaking any climate change impact assessments?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has asked three questions, rather than two. I will answer the three of them for him. His initial requirement was that I should answer two questions. I will answer three anyway. The climate change Bill is due during the course of this year. Questions on legislation are usually asked on the Order of Business, when I have the information to hand. If Deputy Gilmore wants to table a specific question on the matter, I will get the answer for him. I cannot predict every question he might want to ask, particularly if it is outside the remit of the questions before the House. The purpose of Taoiseach's questions is to try to provide accurate information, rather than to speculate. I like to give it to the Deputy accurately. He likes accuracy.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Good.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Great. The Deputy can take up his second question, on climate change adaptation policy, with the Minister for Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Okay.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If he sends a letter to the Minister, he can expect to get a reply. The third matter raised was the question of climate change impact assessments. It is obvious that not every Government decision is subject to a climate change impact assessment. Some decisions do not necessitate such assessments. Climate change impact assessments will be brought forward by the relevant Departments, where relevant, in respect of Government initiatives that come forward.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Have any such assessments been brought forward to date?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would have to check all the memos that have come before me.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No, I am not asking the Taoiseach to check all the memos. I am not asking him to state how many assessments have been brought forward. I am asking him if any assessments at all have been brought forward.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy knows, climate change impact assessments, like poverty impact assessments, are set out in memos where relevant.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Have there been any climate change impact assessments to date?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have the details in front of me.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Taoiseach remember any such assessment?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I read at least 25 or 30 Government memos every week.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach cannot remember a single climate change impact assessment.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did not say that. The Deputy is well aware that he is asking questions which are beyond the remit of the questions before the House.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach should not be getting contrary.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not. It is Deputy Gilmore who is into the rhetorical guff.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it not the honest truth that the Copenhagen Summit was an absolute disaster? Does the Taoiseach agree that the participants failed to meet their responsibility to produce a binding agreement that would have tackled climate change effectively? It is clear they did not do that. Will the Taoiseach agree that the vague and badly written political declaration is a setback that will hit hardest those countries in the developing world where climate change is of greatest importance? The threat posed will spell further economic disaster for those countries in particular. Does the Taoiseach agree that what was needed were ambitious targets in regard to emissions reductions; clear sources for the substantial - and I emphasise the word "substantial" - new finance that is needed; and clear commitments, measures and procedures on a range of other issues in order to limit the global increase in temperature to less than 2° Celsius?

Having listened to the Taoiseach's initial response to this group of questions and his replies to previous speakers, I am at a loss to understand what specific initiatives and actions the Government now intends to take to ensure the next summit, scheduled for the end of the year in Mexico, will not be a replication of the disappointments of the Copenhagen summit. Will he spell out exactly what new, fresh initiatives the Government intends to take, given the experience and knowledge of the failures and fault lines within the entire approach at Copenhagen? What is the Government doing to ensure that Mexico will be a summit which people can look forward to with a realistic expectation of concrete deliverables?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Of course there is disappointment that the ambitions of many to deliver an accord at the last summit were not met. It was clear before we got to Copenhagen that there would not be a consensus on a legally binding accord, but the effort was made to get agreement on broad principles that would be converted into legal text and subsequently ratified. It became clear, unfortunately, that major global players in this debate were not prepared to come forward with the same types of proportionate steps as those taken by the European Union in the context of the leadership position it has taken on this matter. In the absence of a global agreement that would incorporate all areas and all countries that are contributing to the problem, unilateral action by the European Union is not feasible. However, the European Union has taken a leadership position on this matter and is anxious to proceed. The question of how to deal with the evolving negotiations that may take place in the course of this year in preparation for the next summit, with the hope of securing a better outcome, will be discussed at the spring European Council meeting.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach referred to the European Union as taking a lead position. In regard to the Government's role and responsibility in this matter, is it the case that we are confined in our approach in the context of our membership of the European Union, or has the Government, on behalf of the people of Ireland, engaged with countries in Africa, Asia and South America - the countries that have and are likely to suffer most by the failures to grapple with climate change? Will the Taoiseach outline whether we have taken independent initiatives and built on our work within the European Union in engaging with countries across these other continents? Does the Government intend to do so in the lead-up to Mexico and in the context of further opportunities that may subsequently present?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In terms of the conduct of aspects of our foreign policy, particularly in this area, Ireland's voice in the world is far greater amplified by adopting common positions with European Union partners. The idea that Ireland can engage in an individual initiative, outside the parameters of the European Union position of seeking to grow a consensus toward an outcome that meets the needs of the situation, is neither realistic nor achievable. Ireland is working with partners on a common position so that the European Union can speak to other regions in the world with the strength of a collective voice. That is a far more effective way of pursuing our foreign policy objective of securing a global agreement on climate change than the idea that we would progress beyond the current position of the European Union in terms of our own particular commitments. That would have adverse economic impacts for us and affect our competitiveness in a way that would not in any event achieve our objectives.

We must work with others to achieve those objectives. The reality is that failure to secure agreement does not rest with Europe; there are other countries elsewhere in the world that are major contributors to carbon emissions and which are not facing up to their responsibilities. Everybody must do their bit and Europe is prepared to do more - as we have indicated and are prepared to indicate publicly - to bring momentum to these negotiations. What happened at Copenhagen was that the prospect of agreement, unfortunately, fell away in terms of the initial ambition we adopted. We must build on where we were at in Copenhagen and seek to make a success of Mexico. In the context of the next series of negotiations, the European Union will adopt its position after the spring Council.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Taoiseach agree that if the European Union is to lead on this matter, it should first ensure that its own member states are developing their natural resources to the extent that they can play a major part in reducing CO2 emissions? We do not have to look far to see the failures in this regard. The Government established an all-party Oireachtas committee but proceed to ignore its recommendations entirely. As my colleague, Deputy Gilmore, has stated, that committee has already produced two legislative proposals, one on climate change and the other on offshore renewable energy. Neither report has seen the light of day, yet we hear much from Government about the importance of the committees structure.

Second, we have neither the legislative provisions nor the grid capacity to develop our natural resources, let alone to meet European targets. It is a disgrace. We are years behind and will continue to be years behind in the development of ocean energy.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Deputy have a question for the Taoiseach?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As Chairman of the Cabinet sub-committee on climate change and energy security, will the Taoiseach take an active role on this issue? Will he talk to the Minister seated beside him, who is responsible for the greatest disaster of all time in terms of CO2 emissions from transport, which are 146% above target? Will we lead by example or will we simply go on with all this mere talk of our concern about CO2 emissions and climate change? We have two Green Party Ministers who are supposed to be responsible in this area-----

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

And two Green Party Ministers of State.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----who have done nothing in terms of bringing forward legislation. They do not even have the common courtesy to follow up on legislation produced by the all-party committee.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Deputy put a question to the Taoiseach?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They do not the courtesy to engage with the committee and encourage it to proceed further in this area. Let us cut out all this nonsense that Europe is leading the fight against climate change. Leadership starts with one's own country. We must show that we are developing our natural resources-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is imparting information rather than seeking it.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----and creating the employment opportunities that are needed.

The Taoiseach mentioned that we are very competitive. Does he not realise that electricity prices in the State are among the highest in Europe, which seriously damages our competitiveness? Yet we have natural resources which, if they were developed, would allow us to become net exporters of electricity.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not correct that electricity prices here are among the highest in Europe. As a result of reductions in the course of the last year, electricity prices are now below the European average. Work is ongoing in this regard in order to improve the competitiveness of Irish industry. We have made certain changes that sought to ameliorate the problem, particularly for business users, in order to ensure that we keep energy costs down. We are a small island market. Despite the emergence of an all-Ireland electricity market, which has brought its own benefits, we intend to pursue interconnection in order to become part of a wider regional market and to secure access to other sources of energy for purchase, which will ensure we have a proper competitive system. There has been much change and more players entering the marketplace to assist in that. However, it is not just a question of more players in the smaller market on this island but also securing interconnection to the wider regional market and ensuring that this, in turn, will bring competitive pressures in terms of price and choice to consumers.

We are making huge investments in public transport in this city. We have only seen substantial investment in public transport in Ireland in the last ten or 12 years. There are major transport projects in various stages of preparation, while some of them are already coming on stream.

The Deputy asked about the Government's position on legislative change. The Minister is dealing with that matter. I am aware that the committee has done work in this area. The preparation of legislation is a matter for the relevant Department and must take account of what has been said. I am not aware of what happened at the most recent meetings between the Minister and the committee, but it is best to work together to get an effective operation. If an adversarial approach is taken, then it is hard to make progress but I am sure there is much good work being done.

The Deputy also spoke about climate change and wave energy. I met the representatives of an American company prominent in that area who told me they were proceeding with further capital investment here. We hope that much of the work they are doing will result in a successful commercial outcome. I replied to Deputy Kenny previously on wind energy and the other sustainable energy sources.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no point in having interconnection if there is no grid to carry the power. We are years behind on this aspect. Why are we talking about interconnection if we have not got the grid to export energy? We have no thought of developing harbours to deal with offshore development. We do not have the basics put in place. We do not even talk about a road network. Do people understand that ocean energy cannot be developed without having harbours?

We have a transport company which has no targets-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can we have a question please?

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----for renewable energy in public transport. The ESB has set targets, but CIE has set no targets. Not a single bus on the island of Ireland is run on renewable energy. We have trains that do not even carry bicycles so that people can use them for holidays.

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is Question Time, not a Second Stage speech on energy matters.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We have no policy on public transport to enable us to bring forward a positive plan to show that we are really serious in this area. We have natural resources that are waiting to be developed. People are investing their money-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Barrett, you are abusing Question Time. We need a question and not a Second Stage speech.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am entitled to ask the-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not mind a short preamble, but not a long dissertation.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----Taoiseach if he agrees with the fact that opportunities cannot be developed because of the lack of infrastructure and planning. No team has been put together for such development.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Developing a network and investment for such developments are huge strategic issues for Ireland. At local level there have been very visible instances of people from the Deputy's own party backing those who suggest that we should defer it, or go underground for miles at huge cost. If the Deputy is for the network, then he should be consistent about it. I am for a network and for doing it within international requirements, but I am not prepared to listen to the Deputy saying he is committed to the issue when his colleagues say the exact opposite in town halls all over the country.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach is head of the Government. He should show leadership.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

These are the facts and I am showing leadership. I have clearly stated my position.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Fine Gael is in favour-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Barrett, please.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

If that is the case, then why is it being deferred? Why are we not making as much progress as we would like to make? The Deputy claims we are years behind. Objections have been raised in the north west, in the mid-east, and in the Border areas. There have been calls for development, jobs, this and that, but when it comes to putting in the infrastructure, politicians have another tale to tell because people are saying other things to them and they want to play to that gallery as well.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Where is the money in the budget? It is not there.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did not interrupt the Deputy when he asked questions and made many comments. He suggested that nothing is being done, but I am explaining to him how the Government is trying to promote this investment. Things are being said and done on the ground that are at variance with the Deputy's strong commitment to get this done as quickly as possible. Some of these things are being said by people in the Deputy's own party. I am entitled to make that point, and if people in my party did that, I would ask them their proposals. They are either for this or against it. We cannot demand better infrastructure all over the country, and then go to town halls around the country and agree with those who say they have a problem with such developments. We cannot have it every way.

There has been an improvement in the stock of trains and engines at CIE. There was no rail transport investment in this country up until 1996. In the last 13 or 14 years, hundreds of millions of euro have been invested in public transport. More is to be invested, but significant infrastructure projects are being completed on time and within budget across this city. There are other cities in Ireland that would love to get such projects. To hear a Deputy from Dublin saying nothing is happening with public transport-----

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I said that there is not one vehicle run on renewable energy.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would like to ask about the question on the order paper on the negotiations that are following the Copenhagen summit. Is the Government opening a dialogue with the developing bloc of countries that went to the summit with specific demands on the additionality of resources over and above that which is committed to development?

Very little meaningful progress was made on technology transfer. It is not good enough to say that the European Council will discuss some of the broader issues, as individual member states of the EU are in negotiation with particular parts of the developing and the undeveloped blocs.

Is it still the position of the Government and the European Council to stay in pursuit of a legally binding agreement? Will that agreement have mechanisms of implementation that will be the project of the UN? Alternatively, is there a slide towards a set of bilateral accommodations between blocs and countries that will fall well short of a legally bind agreement? This would mean that the Mexico conference in December would be as big a failure as the Copenhagen summit.

I accept the view that a strong positive position by the EU will be of great value at the conference in Mexico. What precise dialogue is being opened with some of the major players who were obstructionist in the Copenhagen process? China has described itself as part of the developing bloc, and this differs from the undeveloped bloc. The undeveloped bloc will go to the Mexico conference claiming that they are paying the highest price in terms of loss of life and environmental costs, yet they are getting the least. They want a clear answer on additionality and technology transfer.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree with the Deputy that there is a requirement to assist those undeveloped countries to the greatest possible extent, both in terms of additionality and technological transfer. There has to be a just outcome to this matter. As the Deputy said, there are small communities, islands and countries in the undeveloped bloc whose very existence is under threat, given all the available scientific evidence. They have the greatest stake in this but, unfortunately, they also have the weakest voice. As regards the values we should espouse and articulate, the EU has been and will be to the forefront in ensuring that we get an outcome that will do justice to those who are under the most severe pressure. I do not think there is any argument about that.

It is true to say that the stage the negotiations reached did not indicate what the final figure or outward boundary would be in terms of additionality and technological transfer for those countries. That was because no overall deal emerged. However, it is a part of the negotiations which I agree is important and needs to be adequately addressed. In so far as one can, I hope it can also be addressed to the satisfaction of those undeveloped countries whose very existence is under threat, let alone for other more developed countries which have resources and are in a better position to deal with this problem and find ameliorating measures to compensate for any loss of capacity arising from the commitments they undertake.

As regards the United Nations, we obviously do not want to see bilateral or trilateral arrangements being made by individual blocs. We want to see an overall global agreement under the aegis of the UN, which best provides guarantees for that. I was personally disappointed with the arrangements in Copenhagen, which were under the UN aegis. It undermined the arguments about the centrality of the UN's ambition and involvement if basic logistical issues regarding the organisation of conferences cannot be dealt with competently. To that extent, one was dealing with a disorganised situation. I found it hard to believe, given the importance of the issues that were being dealt with, but that is not germane to the debate's issues. While we have always advocated that the UN must be centrally involved in these issues, it must show the capacity and competence to be the player it needs to be in order to provide a just outcome for those whose voices, thus far, have not been adequately heard in this debate.

I believe in working towards the UN's common position, which does not mean that this country will abdicate its responsibility for advocacy on these matters. In addition, it ensures that in our bilateral relations with those affected, we have a good relationship in terms of our UN participation in New York and elsewhere. Nobody is suggesting that Ireland is less than committed to the issues regarding the group of countries to which the Deputy has referred.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach has said that the United Nations' role and responsibility are clear following any future agreement. Is it not the case that individual EU countries are effectively trading off different levels of crisis against each other? These include the food, energy, environmental and climate change crises. My question is positive towards the outcomes that will happen in Mexico. If, for example, technology transfer is to be left to individual countries' arrangements with countries receiving development aid, one will not be able to monitor the issue of additionality. In addition, the technology transfer will not be of sufficient volume to enable individual developing countries to participate in the agreement in Mexico. Does the question mark over some scientific activities - not the work, but the publications - mean that the United Nations has moved back from taking the lead role? I refer to the UN taking responsibility for technology transfer as a global achievement, and for changing the role of its institutions such as the UN Development Programme. Will this be done in such a way that, effectively, the issues of additionality, accepting differences, survival and the balance between the different crises-----

Séamus Kirk (Louth, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Deputy have a question?

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is my question: is the UN being urged by the Irish Government to resume a more active role in being the lead agency for resolving the issues that will go into the Mexico conference? Is there any evidence available to the Taoiseach that the UN is resuming such a role?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy has raised a fair point. I will take the matter up with the Department of Foreign Affairs to ensure that we are letting the UN know that we want it to be involved in this area. It is not a question of coming up with a deal that does not have the necessary transparency we would like to see, so that in signing up to something these developing countries would know exactly what they will get, and that it was additional rather than a replacement or less than what is being suggested. There are detailed aspects to these negotiations, which are dealt with at a technical level and need to be cleared. I do not have the details with me but I note what the Deputy has said. I will take the matter up with the Minister and ask him to revert to the Deputy.