Joe O'Toole (Independent)

I welcome the Minister and congratulate him and his staff on producing this very important legislation which I am delighted to see before the House. It confirms my view that, if the Green Party continues to push its own agenda, there will be recognition for and an acknowledgement of it at some stage, although I accept the electorate are not quick to do so.

Previous speakers asked if this legislation was any longer part of the green agenda. It is. The better that agenda, the more it will be grabbed by other parties. The Green Party has done a great deal in advancing this kind of legislation. While this is important legislation, as previous speakers said, we must examine the complete picture. In fairness, there is a trilemma involving the tension surrounding food production, energy security and the environment. Getting it right globally will be very difficult. I do not know all the answers.

I support this legislation, although I do not believe it is the most pressing of the environment issues with which we must deal but it is nonetheless important. With building regulations and other issues, there should be a requirement for every home in the country to have some form of renewable resource. There is a very vague requirement in current building regulations which allows people to get in under the net.

We are dealing with the replacement of fossil fuel energy with renewable energy, which as a starting position must be welcomed. Nobody can speak against that. How does that relate to other issues? Such action should also be welcomed with regard to dealing with emissions. The various plants or vegetation used to create bio-fuels are completely carbon neutral. This means the amount of carbon dioxide they release to the air is equal to the amount collected during their period of growth. Therefore, the process does not worsen in any way the balance in the atmosphere.

I would like to hear the answer to the following issue, which is a technical one. Recently, questions have been raised about nitrous oxide and the concern that nitrous oxide is being created by the use of bio-fuels. We need to know about that. I am slow to raise the matter because when we do not know the background of the people raising these issues, we could wonder if they are the same as climate change doubters. We need to deal with the issue effectively. These issues can gain legs if they are not dealt with early.

The Minister mentioned in his speech the mineral oil tax relief schemes and referred to them as interim measures. That is a significant problem. I have spoken to farmers and people in the fuel industry who have been dealing with the issue. They need certainty over a period of time. They must be sure that the tax or excise reliefs will be available for a certain number of years in order that a farmer can plan growth of the vegetation over that time in various parts of his or her farm. Similarly, suppliers can be set up to do exactly the same for extraction, mixing, selling, etc. That is an important financial matter that must be done right.

I heard Members speak earlier about electric cars, etc. I know the Minister's views, which are very solid. In the same way as this legislation is welcome, if the Minister came to the House next week with balanced requirements on a proportion of the nation's car fleet being electrically powered by a certain time, it would immediately provide incentive to an industry. There would be full support in the House and we could weed out those who did not give such support. We must explain to people how well this can work on an island. There is no better place in the globe than Ireland to test and prove the effectiveness of electric cars. Considering the distance north, south, east and west, the refuelling or recharging opportunities could make the process very easy.

There are always issues going in the other way. I have an example of a small matter which is counter-intuitive to the Minister's actions. Beside where I live there has been a bus service since 1920 and it existed before CIE was established. It was a small bus service that came from Cavan via a back road in north Dublin. It came from Kingscourt through the back roads of north Dublin and places like Ardcath, Clonalvy, Garristown and Ballyboughal. The Minister has perhaps never heard of these places but there was a bus service going through them, which has now been culled. This is for reasons we can well understand as only 20 or 25 people were using it every day. Nevertheless, this puts 25 more people back into cars or off the road. Hand-in-hand with what we are doing tonight, we should be insisting that the Green Party policy on public transport be delivered. The question of public transport is not only economic and financial, it relates to social infrastructure and how we see ourselves in our community and environment. The Minister should take a personal interest in these small bus routes which are being lost for reasons we all understand. I do not want to blame CIE or make a simple or cheap political point. I know the reasons but I ask the Minister to take a sincere and serious interest in some of the issues.

Many of these issues should be green proofed, as it were, by the Minister as they go through. There is equality proofing of issues and this should apply to issues in the context of the green agenda as well. If we are losing routes, we should initiate such a process. There are parts of public transport which are working really well and there is the exciting prospect of the western rail link finally coming into play shortly. I would like to hear the Government say that it wants to bring it to Sligo. We can hear from IBEC and those who would say what a bad idea that would be. This would create and force the debate. It is the only way to do it.

Part of this should be tied to the issue of carbon tax. There can be no argument against such a tax, which is a fair and progressive way forward. People may speak about the quantum and we can argue about that. Related to this is the issue of water charges. We should kill one idea stone dead. Nobody is proposing water charges because water is free. Anybody can get as much as they want with a bucket. Every time the Minister is on the radio and somebody mentions water charges, he should tell that person that nobody is proposing a charge for water. There is a proposal that considers the cost of water treatment and delivery as something that should be paid for by those who can afford it. A person with a swimming pool should not get the same amount of water for free as the person who does not. The same applies to people with four cars against those with one car.

We must keep the issues simple because they do not relate to principle. I had a mentor many years ago who told me that when he heard a person talking about principles, he felt for his wallet. When I hear people talking about the principles of issues such as water charges, I feel for my wallet. If the matter can be reduced to a quantum of money, it is not an issue of principle. That is a good rule of thumb.

I ask the Minister to consider wider legislation and think about the farmer who may be planning for the next ten years. Can he be sure that the mineral oil tax relief or excise measures will be maintained? People doing the extraction, mixing, selling and delivering can ask the same question. We discussed the most crucial aspect of the green economy in the Minister's absence last week. His colleague was not aware of some proposals on issues such as a national water authority, etc. As these ideas are good, they must be sold and argued. They should not be advocated apologetically.

The Green Party has a fine agenda which it should stand behind. We will sort out the irrelevant issues like hunting but we must keep with the core issues of the green economy. We must do everything we can to push it forward and have a cleaner environment. We should resolve the trilemma between food, energy and the environment. It can be done and I look forward to supporting the Minister as he does this.