Michael Finucane (Fine Gael)

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Seanad Éireann" and substitute the following:

"notes that according to the Environmental Protection Agency's latest report, Ireland is now 23.1% above its 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emission levels, 10% above our obligations under the Kyoto protocol and that average temperatures are likely to rise by 0.6% in the coming decades;

condemns the Government's Green Paper on Energy for failing to address Ireland's key energy challenges and calls for a cross-departmental approach to the issue, coordinating the activities of the Departments of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Agriculture and Food and Transport in order to reduce our reliance on imported fuels, reduce our carbon emissions and drive down the cost of energy; and

as part of that cross-Departmental agenda, calls for the immediate implementation of key policies including

investment and commitment to wind energy to be predicated on the putting in place of the necessary interconnecting infrastructure that can ensure continuity of supply in the event of a reduction in supply from wind;

creation of a market for bio-fuels by legislating that all motor fuels must include a blend of fuel from renewable sources. All petrol sold will include a 5% bioethanol mix and all diesels would contain a 2% bio-diesel mix;

removal of all excise duty on bio-fuels produced from renewable energy crops;

reform of the Vehicle Registration Tax system, through the establishment of energy efficient labelling for motor vehicles with lower and higher rates of VRT for fuel efficient and inefficient vehicles respectively;

requirement on all public transport vehicles and public service vehicles to convert, where practical and feasible, to forms of bio-fuel;

establish a Centre of Excellence for Alternative Energy charged with ensuring Ireland develops a world class alternative energy sector; and

amend the National Spatial Strategy to include major renewable energy infrastructure projects."

The energy debate is interesting. Last week the main players in the gas and electricity industries, including the regulator, appeared before the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources to discuss concerns in the marketplace about the escalating cost of gas and electricity. The backdrop to the debate is a 34% increase in gas bills with an increase of 20% in electricity prices due on 1 January next. Competition in the electricity sector has totally failed the household consumer and it has made no difference. These people are captives of their ESB bills, which, aside from electricity charges, also includes VAT, a publish service obligation levy and standing charges amounting to in excess of 20% of the cost of the bill. When the proposed increase kicks in, electricity prices will have increased by 60% between 2002 and 1 January 2007. If we are the captives of carbon fuels, how will competition be created in the marketplace?

Last night in the Lower House, the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources stated the ESB will maintain its generating capacity because to do otherwise would lead to increased costs and less competition. I am not sure about his logic and perhaps if the Government opened the marketplace, competition might be stimulated to reduce costs for the consumers and give them freedom of choice. However, that will not happen in the short or long term.

The joint committee conducted a great deal of research and launched its own energy document recently, which received a favourable reception. I asked the Minister to release the report to the committee compiled by Deloitte & Touche consultants, who were paid more than €1 million, which he received in September 2005. If the committee members had been given access to that documentation, it may have enhanced their deliberations before producing their document. However, everybody was bound to secrecy regarding its contents only for it to be published on the same day as the Green Paper on Energy.

I queried the Minister regarding the public service obligation levy in ESB bills at another meeting, which the regulator stated is anti-competitive, but he jumped down my throat and asked whether I wanted to close peat fired power stations in the midlands. That was a trivial reaction by him to a serious issue. The same Minister takes a dividend of almost €80 million from the ESB annually. I would not mind if the money was ploughed back into improving the ESB's infrastructure but it goes into the Government's coffers. It was an arrogant cheek of him to label something constructive that I put forward as anti-competitive.

However, I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Green Paper. While it is not a good enough response to the energy crisis facing the country, nobody doubts the scale of the economic and environmental difficulties that lie ahead if Ireland does not address the energy crisis. To neutralise the effect of global warming on the world's population, it is generally agreed that the level of global greenhouse gas emissions will need to be reduced by 70% by 2100. As a first step, the 1997 Kyoto agreement was drawn up with the aim of reducing global emissions of greenhouse gases by 2012 by 5.2% based on 1990 levels. Under the agreement, to which Ireland is a signatory, we undertook to limit the increase of such emissions between 2008 and 2012 to only 13% based on 1990 levels. Without any action, it is estimated our emissions will have increased by 37%, almost three times the permissible level. We are currently 25% above our 1990 level.

Fine Gael has seriously criticised the Government's Green Paper on Energy for containing little more than aspirational proposals and for a complete lack of costings. The Green Paper can be contrasted with Fine Gael's comprehensive policy document, Energy for the Future, which was launched six months ago and which contains a set of revolutionary but workable proposals involving several Departments, costed at €488 million. The Green Paper should have contained wide ranging, feasible solutions to Ireland's energy problems but the Minister has presented the public with a hotch potch of half measures, which are aspirational in character and which have not been costed.

The dearth of specifics in the Government's plan is clearly evidenced by its target to reduce electricity usage by 20% through unspecified conservation measures. Such nonsense is not good enough. It is not credible for the Minister to claim he will reduce energy usage and then refuse to specify how he will do so. The refusal to cost any proposals and the lack of emphasis on critical issues such as bio-fuels further characterise this phenomenally disappointing document. A lack of innovation and vision is at the heart of the Government and consumers are losing out.

The Government has failed to create positive competition in the industry that will benefit the consumer, particularly when there is an emphasis on driving energy prices upwards to the detriment of the consumer and the wider economy. This is clearly seen in the unjustifiable 34% hike in gas prices. It is worth considering that the Government took in €223 million last year in VAT from energy bills. At the launch of the Green Paper, the Taoiseach stated there is no other policy area that is so basic and fundamental to our success than energy, yet it has taken the Government over nine years to produce a Green Paper.