Feargal Quinn (Independent)

I thank Senator O'Toole for allowing me time to contribute and I welcome the Minister of State. The Minister of State has been in here before and I do not want to repeat myself. I have a concern about more quangos and more organisations being set up, the objective of which is very worthy. However, my real concern is the belief that we can create jobs; jobs will be created by entrepreneurs and not by us nor by setting up a new organisation. I have a great concern that some of the proposals made in the past will not create wealth.

When I studied economics in university I was reminded that the country could be likened to a family. If father and mother are doing the knitting or doing the washing for one another and if the son is selling to the daughter, unless some wealth is brought in from outside, they will not survive. Many of the proposals made in the past do not give us extra wealth. We have to find a way of either producing something or exporting something, whether that is intellectual property or whatever. Some of Fine Gael's proposals are very worthy but I have a fear that we believe we can create jobs. It is not the job of Government or of the Oireachtas to create jobs. They will be created if we can create the right atmosphere.

I met the American minister for employment who said that her job was to create the environment to enable entrepreneurs to create the jobs and that should be the objective. When Senator O'Toole talked about the different kinds of energy such as wave, tidal and wind, I agree we should be finding a way but it is not happening nearly fast enough. We must properly discuss and debate our energy future. The proposal discusses how we will become self-sufficient in energy but this does not seem possible unless we look at more proven sources of energy. It is easy to pander to the populist view that nuclear energy is simply bad and almost taboo when green energy has such positive connotations. It is much deeper than that. Let us look at what is happening in other European countries. Senator Boyle will be interested that last month, four of the leading Greens who were opposed to nuclear energy changed their attitude. The head of Greenpeace and others said they have taken the viewpoint that nuclear energy is worthy of discussion. We have not taken that first step here.

Nuclear reactors are to be built in Sweden for the first time in nearly 30 years after the Government there decided to abandon the commitment it made in 1980 to phase out nuclear power. In this country we still cling to that outdated condemnation of nuclear power through our Electricity Regulation Act 1999. Sweden is just one of a number of EU countries that have chosen nuclear energy under pressure to diversify from fossil fuels and meet tough climate change targets for cutting emissions. Some two thirds of the world's population live in countries that have nuclear energy. We may have been doing the right thing back in 1999, but we are not doing the right thing now by excluding nuclear power from our discussion. Sweden is just one of a number of countries that have done that. Sweden recognises that renewable sources are not being developed quickly enough to decommission nuclear power sources. Nuclear energy is seen there as part of an energy solution strategy. We must find a way to do that. I am not sure I am right, but I am sure we are right to at least discuss it and I would love to see nuclear power discussed as part of our objective.