Dáil debates

Wednesday, 8 March 2023

Environmental Protection Agency (Emergency Electricity Generation) (Amendment) Bill 2023: Committee and Remaining Stages

 

Sections 1 and 2 agreed to.

SECTION 3

4:12 pm

Photo of Catherine ConnollyCatherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment Nos. 1 and 7 are related and will be discussed together.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 4, to delete lines 16 to 23 and substitute the following: “82D.The Agency, in considering designated applications, shall do so in a manner consistent with the plans, strategy, framework and objectives referred to in section 15(1) of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015.”.”.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for proposing this amendment. The Climate Action Act and Low Carbon Development Act and the provisions therein are extremely important to provide for public bodies to act in a manner consistent with the latest climate action plan. This particular legislative provision was inserted on the advice of the Attorney General and reflects the language already approved by the Oireachtas under section 10 of the Development (Emergency Electricity Generation) Act 2022.

This legislation is intended to require the agency to act "in a manner consistent" with the climate action plan. It is proposed that it would do so in a practical way, having regard to the seriousness of the current situation. The provision merely provides clarity as to what will feed into the agency's decision. On a technical level, the Deputy's proposal would go further than the provisions of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 itself, which requires bodies to act "in a manner consistent" with the relevant plans and strategies, insofar as practical. By proposing to remove these words from section 3 of the Bill, the Deputy could erect a higher bar than the existing legislation and consequently increase the risk of a challenge over non-compliance with the entirety of the plans, strategies and frameworks referred to in section 13 of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. For that reason and for reasons of consistency with legislation passed by the Oireachtas, I do not propose to accept the amendment.

4:22 pm

Photo of Darren O'RourkeDarren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support this amendment in the name of Deputy Whitmore. I was here for the debate on Second Stage last evening and this proposed amendment was referred to. It is to remove the text "to the extent that it considers practicable, taking particular account of the said exceptional circumstances and urgent and compelling necessity”. There is concern in this regard. We have the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act, but we do not have it that long. That terminology, though, provides too much scope and room for the Minister or a Minister to move away from the provisions of the Act. I therefore support this amendment.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I heard the Minister's response regarding this amendment meaning there would be a strengthening of the obligations and I do not agree. This amendment states that the Act and its provisions must be considered when this is being done. Those provisions outlined in the Act state that the Minister must "have regard". All I want to see happening is these provisions being taken into account. When this work and the assessments are being done, regard should be had to this section in the climate Act. As I said yesterday in the debate, "having regard" is a very loose term. All it means is that the Minister must take these aspects into consideration. It is not, therefore, hard and fast. It just means the Minister must consider them. I do not understand why less than a year after the climate legislation was introduced and brought into law that the Minister is already trying to bring additional wiggle room into this Bill. I do not, therefore, agree with the Minister's comments. I will be interested to hear what he has to say about the specific phrase, "with regard to", and why he believes that using my amendment to specify that the Act must be considered would strengthen this aspect of "having regard to".

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This Bill is very similar to the earlier Act which provided for An Bord Pleanála in the context of being able to apply Article 2(4) of the environmental impact assessment directive with regard to consideration by An Bord Pleanála. This is a similar provision. We are replicating the provision in this Act in section 3 to give the same requirements. It is being done on the advice of the Attorney General. This is exceptional wording because these are exceptional circumstances and this is exceptional legislation. It is not in any way in the ordinary course of things to be expected to have to be putting through emergency legislation to get power generation in place. The former Attorney General, and this has been replicated by the current one, stated that we needed this text and provision to be contained in the legislation to ensure we were able to progress in a timely manner.

It must still very much have regard to and be "consistent with the plans, strategy, framework and objectives referred to in section 15(1) of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015". I argue, as I think I did yesterday when we had Second Stage debate, that is very much in line with the provisions of the climate action plan 2023, which in a sense is the implementing plan for that 2015 Act. In that plan, we explicitly state we will need backup, flexible, gas-fired power generation to ensure that on those exceptional days when all other power sources are unavailable, we will be able to turn to these alternative sources rather than turning off the lights. I believe, therefore, that this Bill is in line with our climate plan and our climate law. We do need to make provision for this flexible generation while we move towards a 100% renewable low-carbon system. This will take a decade and a half probably, so this is consistent in my mind. It is on the advice of the Attorney General that these provisions were put in. Having done it in the earlier legislation, I am not going to take a different approach here.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

All my amendment does is to say that the Minister and any relevant body shall in the performance of its functions have regard to the national mitigation plan, the national adaptation framework, the approved sectoral and adaptation plans, the national transition objectives and the objective of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. We all realise this is an emergency situation when it comes to our energy generation. I will also make the point, though, that we are also in an emergency situation when it comes to climate. The least we should expect from the Government now at this stage of our climate crisis is that when it is performing its functions and when any relevant body is performing functions on behalf of the Government, that regard should be had concerning the national mitigation plan, the adaptation framework, the national transition objectives etc. Having regard to is the minimum expectation.

This does not say these measures have to be applied or that they must be adhered to. It states they must be read, considered and perhaps even that notes be made and briefings given as to why these elements cannot be taken into account or why the Government is doing what it is doing. At that point, the argument can be made that the energy generation emergency is such that the Government is unable to do what I referred to. All I am asking, however, is that the Government have regard to those plans. Otherwise, there is no point in having them. What is the point in having the Act if it is just possible to override it with each subsequent item of legislation? It is disappointing that this is happening in the context of one of the first opportunities for this type of legislation. The previous Bill overrode the Planning and Development Act 2000 and now the Government wants to override the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 or discount it or say it is not important, that we are in such a crisis we are not even going to pay any heed to it. To say that the Government does not think the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, should have regard to the national mitigation plan in performing its functions is very short-sighted and undermines completely the role that the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 has and the importance we should be placing on it. I say this because we are now saying that what it says does not matter.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy's amendment states it should be "consistent with" rather than "having regard to".

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry, but I am talking about amendment No. 7.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This similarly says "in line with the provisions as set out".

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Even when we say-----

Photo of Catherine ConnollyCatherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the Minister finished?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The wording "in a manner consistent with" is in the text of the amendments to the legislation drafted before us, but it does delete the other wording.

I believe what we are doing here is consistent with the Act. I also believe it is consistent with the 2023 plan to which the Deputy referred. It specifically states that we will need such a generation capacity as the ones we are legislating for here.

4:32 pm

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first point is that the plan is not a statutory instrument. The plan is a plan. It is a policy. What I am talking about here is the Act and the legal requirements under it. I think the Minister just said that he thinks this legislation is consistent with the Act. Therefore, if he believes that it is consistent with it, I do not understand why he would argue against having a component or amendment saying that it should be consistent with the Act. I have essentially included an amendment on something the Minister believes is already happening.

The language in the climate Act is very loose. When I say that it should be consistent with the climate Act, what I am saying is that it should be consistent with the provisions, in particular section 15(1) of the climate Act, which states that any relevant body shall have regard to the plans outlined. I repeat "have regard to" is very loose. There is judicial guidance on the term based on decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Court, which essentially says that we just need to consider something, rather than to follow or slavishly adhere to that thing. All I am asking is that when the EPA is granting permission it considers the emissions that will arise from this emergency generation, and that it will consider the mitigation and adaptation.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree. The point I was making is that it is provided for in the legislation. It is caveated, one would argue, by the further text, which Deputy Whitmore's amendment would delete. It must recognise that in this particular instance it must take account of the exceptional circumstances of this legislation. The text was included in the 2022 Act on the advice of the Attorney General and repeated here. It was on the basis of that advice that I decided, unfortunately, that I could not accept the amendment. The text was recommended by the Attorney General and we accepted the advice.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 47; Níl, 78; Staon, 0.


Tellers: Tá, Deputies Jennifer Whitmore and Gary Gannon; Níl, Deputies Hildegarde Naughton and Cormac Devlin.

Chris Andrews, Ivana Bacik, Richard Boyd Barrett, John Brady, Martin Browne, Pat Buckley, Holly Cairns, Matt Carthy, Sorca Clarke, Rose Conway-Walsh, Réada Cronin, Seán Crowe, David Cullinane, Pa Daly, Pearse Doherty, Paul Donnelly, Dessie Ellis, Mairead Farrell, Kathleen Funchion, Gary Gannon, Thomas Gould, Johnny Guirke, Brendan Howlin, Alan Kelly, Gino Kenny, Martin Kenny, Claire Kerrane, Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, Michael McNamara, Denise Mitchell, Imelda Munster, Catherine Murphy, Cian O'Callaghan, Darren O'Rourke, Eoin Ó Broin, Ruairi Ó Murchú, Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, Aengus Ó Snodaigh, Maurice Quinlivan, Patricia Ryan, Seán Sherlock, Róisín Shortall, Duncan Smith, Brian Stanley, Pauline Tully, Mark Ward, Jennifer Whitmore.

Níl

Colm Brophy, James Browne, Richard Bruton, Colm Burke, Peter Burke, Mary Butler, Thomas Byrne, Jackie Cahill, Dara Calleary, Seán Canney, Ciarán Cannon, Jennifer Carroll MacNeill, Michael Collins, Niall Collins, Patrick Costello, Simon Coveney, Barry Cowen, Michael Creed, Cathal Crowe, Cormac Devlin, Alan Dillon, Stephen Donnelly, Francis Noel Duffy, Bernard Durkan, Damien English, Alan Farrell, Frank Feighan, Peter Fitzpatrick, Joe Flaherty, Charles Flanagan, Norma Foley, Brendan Griffin, Seán Haughey, Michael Healy-Rae, Emer Higgins, Neasa Hourigan, Heather Humphreys, Paul Kehoe, John Lahart, James Lawless, Brian Leddin, Josepha Madigan, Micheál Martin, Steven Matthews, Paul McAuliffe, Mattie McGrath, John McGuinness, Joe McHugh, Aindrias Moynihan, Michael Moynihan, Jennifer Murnane O'Connor, Verona Murphy, Hildegarde Naughton, Carol Nolan, Malcolm Noonan, Darragh O'Brien, Joe O'Brien, James O'Connor, Willie O'Dea, Kieran O'Donnell, Richard O'Donoghue, Patrick O'Donovan, Fergus O'Dowd, Roderic O'Gorman, Christopher O'Sullivan, Pádraig O'Sullivan, Marc Ó Cathasaigh, Éamon Ó Cuív, Anne Rabbitte, Neale Richmond, Michael Ring, Eamon Ryan, Matt Shanahan, Brendan Smith, Ossian Smyth, David Stanton, Peadar Tóibín, Robert Troy.

Amendment declared lost.

Section 3 agreed to.

Sections 4 to 8, inclusive, agreed to.

NEW SECTIONS

4:47 pm

Photo of Gino KennyGino Kenny (Dublin Mid West, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 8, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following:

“Report 9.(1) Within 3 months of the passing of this Act, the Minister shall report to Dáil Éireann on—
(a) the projects at Shannonbridge and Tarbert generating stations (or at any alternative appropriate sites), and

(b) the operation of the alternative assessments for these projects by the Environmental Protection Agency.
(2) The Minister shall further report on Government proposals to delete the relevant sections of this Act once these projects have been completed.”.

It is self-explanatory and calls for, within three months of the passing of the Act, the Minister to report to the Dáil on substantial issues. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The holder of an industrial emissions licence is required to submit an annual environmental report, AER, each year to the agency. The AER is designed to facilitate the provision to the public of a concise summary of environmental performance and ongoing developments on a licensed site over the previous year. AERs, depending on the nature of the site, typically include details of environmental objectives and targets achieved to date and go to maintain compliance and-or improve the environmental performance of the facility or operations. They contain information on power, water and resource efficiency, information regarding the facility’s activities, a summary of environmental complaints and incidents, if any, and summary results from emissions monitoring, including air and noise. Given the comprehensive data that will be made available for the consultation on the licence applications and contained in the subsequent AERs, I am afraid I have to reject the amendment.

Photo of Gino KennyGino Kenny (Dublin Mid West, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is disappointing. It is a rudimentary amendment. It is disappointing that there would not be a report on the passing of the legislation. The substantial issue was not dealt with in the Minister’s response. It is disappointing he has not accepted this amendment on the report on the issue of the committee.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 8, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following:

“Report on Implementation 9.The Minister shall, within 6 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas on the application of the provisions of this Act. This report shall include, but not be limited to—
(a) the current and future status of energy security in the State, and

(b) an analysis of the levels of CO2emissions resulting from the application of this Act.”

This is similar to the previous amendment. It relates to the provision of information and keeping the Dáil informed of the status, operation and implementation of the Bill. It is a simple amendment. Considering the Minister in his contribution to yesterday’s debate said he looked forward to working with Members in a collaborative manner on the Bill, I hope he takes the amendment on board. Essentially, we are asking for information that will be provided or can be collated on the current and future energy security of the state. The McCarthy review would probably contain a considerable volume of that information, as would the information collated by EirGrid, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, and other entities. That could be easily provided to the Oireachtas.

The amendment refers to analysis of the levels of CO2emissions resulting from the application of this Act. We talk all the time about how we will reduce emissions; we have less discussion about how to stop them growing. Whether because of emergency situations or a lack of monitoring, we are not collating that information or making it easily accessible.

I agree that emergency legislation is needed to deal with energy security and we discussed yesterday the reason for that, namely, bad planning by successive Governments. That is why we are in the situation we are in. We need to address it and unpalatable things need to happen to do that. I want a transparent acknowledgement of what that means and of the impact it will have on us meeting our targets. That transparency has not been present to date. We talk about 450 MW. What does that mean in emissions? What is the equivalent number of cars or household emissions? We need that kind of discussion. If something is not monitored, it cannot be controlled. The Minister in his previous response said the data will be collected by the EPA. All I ask is that he bring it back to the Oireachtas so we can have a discussion on it. That should not be too great an impost on the Government, considering the emergency nature of this and the energy security and climate crises we are in. I hope the Minister looks favourably on the amendment.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The legislation relates to the licensing process under the EPA Act. It would not be appropriate to insert provisions dealing with matters outside the scope of the functions of the agency, such as reporting on electricity and security of supply. There is, as I said on the previous amendment, not just the collection of data but the public reporting of that. That is publicly available, in terms of the performance of the plant meeting its licence requirements.

I would be happy, if the Deputy wants to bring to the Dáil or committee a debate on that, to engage in that process. We have done so already. EirGrid, the CRU and I have appeared before the Oireachtas joint committee on as many occasions as needed and never constrained ourselves time-wise in that regard. The provisions of the EirGrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Act 2022 require EirGrid to report to the CRU on a quarterly basis on the measures pursuant to the Act. The CRU is answerable in a similar way to the Oireachtas joint committee. There is nothing preventing such transparency. The EPA licensing system makes that available. Our business in the committee or the Chamber is debating, reviewing, assessing and monitoring the energy security situation. I commit to that but do not believe it is best done through the proposed amendment.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not asking the EPA to come in; I am asking the Minister to come in, present that documentation and have a debate on it. I listened to what he said and hope and assume that the McCarthy report will be laid and there will be debate in the Chamber. I am happy to withdraw the amendment if the Minister makes a commitment to have a discussion in the Chamber on the McCarthy report and energy security and, as part of that, provide the specific emissions resulting from the implementation of this Bill.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would be happy to do that at any stage. There are probably two different time periods. This equipment will not be in until the end of the year, whereas I presume the debate on the energy security issue would happen before that. I am happy to commit to further debate along those lines at an appropriate time.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I withdraw the amendment on the basis we will have statements in the Chamber on the McCarthy report.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Photo of Seán Ó FearghaílSeán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No.4 is out of order.

Amendment No. 4 not moved.

SECTION 9

Photo of Seán Ó FearghaílSeán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 are related. Amendment No. 6 is a logical alternative to No. 5. Amendments Nos. 5 and 6 may be discussed together by agreement.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 8, line 8, after “provisions” to insert “and will continue in operation until 2 March 2024”.

This is a simple, self-explanatory amendment. It provides for a sunset clause in the legislation, stipulating that it can only remain in operation until 12 months after its publication. The Government has waived pre-legislative scrutiny.

6 o’clock

Unfortunately, it was waived through a vote at committee, which is not good practice. We are waiving the existing provisions with regard to licensing, which is a bit hypocritical, for diesel-powered electricity generation on sites where we wanted to have a biomass plant generating electricity. I know the communities in the midlands feel quite aggrieved about the approach that is being taken on this. However, last night we were talking about how two power plants had a ten-year lifespan remaining and could burn, without adaptation, 100% biomass and replace one of those plants with diesel generation.

While the Minister will come back to argue the two sites have now been designated for this, there is wriggle room within the drafting, whereby an alternative site could be looked into at a future date in the coming period, or the Minister would come back with an amendment to extend the remit of this particular provision. We have seen this with regard to Covid legislation and regulations. I tabled a sunset clause to that legislation. Thankfully, the Government agreed to it, because it would have usurped the democratic process had that not happened and it forced the Government to come back in here and justify, on numerous occasions, why it was extending the legislation. If it is the case that this has to be extended beyond the sites in Tarbert and Shannonbridge, the Minister must come back to the House to justify such an extension. It is a sensible approach to have this sunset clause. I hope the Minister can accept this amendment.

4:57 pm

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am afraid I cannot accept it, for the primary reason that we already have a sunset clause. The Eirgrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Act 2022, which was published last year, has such a clause, saying the project will cease operation in 2027, with an option of a further year, if required, but only if a resolution is passed by both Houses. The purpose of that legislation was to provide this capacity and will remain available until the necessary replacement capacity has been secured. It is absolutely cast iron, in that this is time-limited. There is no question about it.

With regard to alternative locations, this does not apply in any other location. There are only two projects, in Shannonbridge and Tarbert, which were put forward for planning assessment by An Bord Pleanála. If either of those projects fail for any reason - I hope it is unlikely - an alternative site would not be found in time and brought to a similar level of planning compliance for winter 2023-24, given the tight timeframes.

I will speak to the Deputy's point about process. I accept and agree it is very unfortunate. It was not my intention to disrespect the committee or others in having a third set of legislation. I would prefer if we did not have to do this legislative measure. It was only after final legal advice, when all other avenues and options we looked at were not available, that we realised we would have to do it this way. There are clear sunset provisions in the 2022 Act which mean it will not continue beyond the dates set out.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad to hear the Minister believes the sunset clause is already in place and that the Eirgrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Act 2022 will cease operation in 2027 and that is-----

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The project will cease.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The project will cease. Its cessation being cast iron does not negate the need to have a sunset clause in this Bill, because the operation of this Bill only applies to the application. It is safe to say that once the EPA has granted that application, there is absolutely no reason it would need to retain these functions and powers for another two, three, four or however many years. I was a little bit more generous than Deputy Naughten. I gave an extra year in my sunset clause, but what has been said to us during the entirety of the briefings and discussions, which have been very short - that is a different argument altogether - is that the legislation is only for the energy security for 2023-24. It is bad practice to give an entity extraordinary powers for longer than is absolutely necessary. As these extraordinary powers with regard to the Environmental Protection Agency Act should only apply to the application and the granting of that application, once the EPA has done that job, it no longer needs the powers. I ask that the Minister consider putting a sunset clause in. I am agnostic as to the exact date, but the sunset clause should go in to show the intent that this is an emergency measure. It is a temporary measure and no one expects us to go beyond the necessary functioning of the Bill. I ask that the Minister considers that.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will pick up from where my colleague, Deputy Whitmore, left off. We have been told this is an emergency measure. If it is an emergency measure, there should be a sunset clause. We are waiving the environmental laws in this country to facilitate this. It should be a once-off and the only way we can ensure this is a once-off, is if a sunset clause is put into it. I wish to know what winter 2023-24 is. Does it go by the calendar, with regard to 1 February being spring? Is it the meteorological spring of 1 March? Is it the one in statute for the fuel allowance, that is, April 2024? The reality is that despite what the Minister is telling us, if either Tarbert or Shannonbridge was knocked back, the Minister has time, until April of next year, to put forward another site. The Minister should not tell us that is not the case. When I put that point to officials I engaged with, whom I respect, they did not deny that is the case. The Minister is telling the House one story, but we are being told a different story when we put these questions. What is the definition of winter 2023-24, if the Minister is so sure? I do not know what it is.

If the legislation is only to deal with the pressure next winter, the Minister should put in his sunset clause. This is putting a coach and four through the existing environmental laws in this country. The Minister has made a strong justification as to why that should happen. If it is an emergency law, there should be a sunset clause. We have all seen in the past where legislation remains on the Statute Book and, all of a sudden, this rabbit is pulled out of a hat in ten years' time, whereby we actually have legislation we can deal with this and just need to make a small typographical change. The Minister of the day will come to the House and say this is already on the statute and was agreed after long debate in the House, ten years ago, back in 2023 and that it was put on the Statute Book, without a sunset clause. He or she will say all we need to do is to make a typographical change to the other legislation to which we are referring. The Minister of the day will bring forward a single-sentence amendment to the legislation and we will be back to square 1. A sunset clause should be put in, if it is an emergency. If it is not an emergency, the Minister should go through the proper statutory process in enacting this legislation.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no prospect of any other sites being used. The 2022 Act is precise and clear as to what designated development is. The intention is for it to be located at two separate sites, that is, Shannonbridge and Tarbert generation stations. It is not possible to use alternative sites.

Legally, courts have to interpret a particular provision, but any assessment by a court of the definition of "winter", including one based on the various definitions put forward by the Deputies, will be seen as appropriate. We cannot stop with 2024 because it goes on for several more winters. We will have a shortfall in the coming period, not just next winter but in the two to three winters after that, which is why we are providing for it. We have a sunset clause, however, which is set out clearly in the legislation.

My officials have rightly pointed out that the legislation allows for the potential for alternative sites but we have 450 MW already on those two sites. That is also set out as a designated development so it will not extend beyond the initial two sites. We need them quickly.

5:07 pm

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has come into the Chamber and is twisting and turning, in fairness. He said this provision only relates to two designated sites and no others, but then something else was brought to his attention. This matter was brought to our attention when we asked these very questions during the week. We have not had a lot of time to deal with this. We are asking simple, basic questions and when putting these same questions to the Minister, we are getting a different answer in the Chamber.

I have asked the Minister what the definition of "winter" is and he has not given me an answer. We do not know what "winter" is. It will come down to an interpretation. The Minister said that if one of these two sites is shot down, for whatever reason, this legislation cannot be invoked. It can be invoked and we have been told it can be invoked. The reality is that winter finishes in April. It is about energy demand. In any interpretation taken by the courts, if the fuel allowance is paid into April, one could legitimately make the argument that winter, from an energy demand point of view, continues into April. We are talking about a 14-month window in that regard and the Minister is telling me, here and now, that if one of these sites gets shot down, another site cannot be put forward within the next 14 months. That is not the case and that is why we need the sunset clause.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister is saying we cannot include the sunset clause because it is needed until 2027. This Bill relates to the EPA assessment. The EPA will do that assessment once. We were told very clearly that the assessment would have to be conducted within a couple of months. The EPA will have done its job. It will have used the provisions of the Act and done the assessment in an expedited manner. That will be completed by the end of the year. I do not know why the Minister thinks he needs this legislation going forward. The EPA will have done its job.

On the Minister's point about the two sites, whether there are two sites or expanded sites, the question for me is more about capacity. We are talking about 450 MW. Is there potential for an additional 450 MW being provided on those sites? I am interested in the Minister's response to this. Using the Shannonbridge or Tarbert sites, can additional generating capacity be added using the provisions of the Eirgrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Act 2022 and this Bill? Could the EPA do another assessment on the additional capacity?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The reason for this emergency Bill is to make sure we have power available for next winter. If we do not get the Bill passed and get the EPA started in the licensing process, that will not be possible for the two stations and plants that are planned, whatever about other plants. Starting another process would mean adding another 12 months at least. We have seen from experience, even using emergency legislation, how much time it takes to follow due process and make sure everything is correct. We will not be able to switch easily. We have two sites that we believe are appropriate. We have the power equipment, the distillate connection and the transformer and other equipment. It took between eight and nine months to do that. If we were to start again, we would be starting another process and this legislation would not help us or would not apply. We would be entering a completely different situation. This legislation applies to these two plants in these two locations. We believe we can do it on time, but the time is so tight that if we were to start again, another application would not come in within time.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If this process goes through and the 450 MW is in place for this winter but another deficit arises next year and the Minister realises we need additional capacity, will this legislation enable the EPA to undertake a further assessment on additional capacity for winter 2024-25?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, because the limit of the designated development is 450 MW, which will be fully delivered by the plants we have proposed.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Where is that specified? I have done a quick search of Eirgrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Act 2022 and 450 MW is not specified in that legislation.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will try to get that answer for the Deputy now. The Development (Emergency Electricity Generation) Act 2022, under the heading "Designation of development", states:

Development comprising of the installation of up to 450 megawatts of temporary emergency electricity generation plant, site development and works ancillary to that installation, and the operation of the plant, intended to be located at two separate sites at Shannonbridge ...

In regard to this Bill, the amendment states that the designated development refers to the legislative provision I just outlined.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister has just read into the record that the 450 MW is on the Shannonbridge site.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Shannonbridge and Tarbert.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is on Shannonbridge and Tarbert.

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not have that legislation to hand but I will take the Minster at his word. It still does not negate the fact that once the EPA has conducted its functions, this Bill is no longer necessary. Therefore, there should be a sunset clause included to ensure the emergency provisions, once dealt with, are negated and no longer possible to be used in any other process.

Photo of Seán Ó FearghaílSeán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are beginning to go around in circles now. Does anyone else want to make a contribution? Does the Minister want to make a concluding response?

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The arguments have been made.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 8, after line 8, to insert the following: “(3) This Act shall continue in operation until 8 March 2025, unless a resolution approving the continuation of this Act has been passed by Dáil Éireann before that date and, in that event, this Act shall continue in operation until such date as is specified in the resolution.”.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 9 agreed to.

Photo of Jennifer WhitmoreJennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 3, line 19, after “flora” to insert the following: “, in line with the provisions as set out in the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development (Amendment) Act 2021”.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment and received for final consideration.

Question proposed: “That the Bill do now pass.”

5:17 pm

Photo of Eamon RyanEamon Ryan (Dublin Bay South, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the members of the Opposition. I know this was difficult because it came at them late and at short notice. I appreciate that. I also thank my officials. It has not been short notice for them. They have been working extensively for a long time to try to ensure this plant is built. I commend their work and thank them for it.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not a bad team, in fairness.

Question put and agreed to.