Joe O'Toole (Independent)

It is easy to take a cynical view of programmes for Government. This is a very positive programme for Government and the real issue is whether it will be delivered upon. As it contains too much to address in a five-minute slot, I wish to deal with a number of issues which I ask the Minister to take back and consider closely.

Shared decision making, dealing with quangos and cloud computing are high profile issues in the programme for Government. Cloud computing is an issue we have discussed here and we are completely supportive. Rather than getting to the next stage of broadband, the reality is that many households still do not have access to broadband which we regard as the first step before taking the next one.

There is a proposal that the managers or chief executives of various bodies — they are not called quangos — report directly to the Minister of the day. The point about quangos is to bring on board people with experience, knowledge and expertise in order that they could advise the body concerned to meet its requirements, sort out policy and move forward. The problem is that if we were to get rid of the people concerned, we would then have a chief executive who would effectively be a manager and not necessarily from the background needed, reporting to a Department which would not have the required expertise either. There is another proposal to introduce further expertise, for instance, in the Department of Finance, to which no one will object. However, it creates difficulties as to how it would work. How can we have a team running through it? How can we ensure we avail of all the expertise available in the country — in whatever way we can do it — in order that people with expertise can have an input and at the same time ensure quangos are reduced to a minimum?

One aspect which would be very helpful should be highlighted. There should be clear stretch objectives for every public body. The programme for Government should propose an assessment on a number of occasions a year of each one of them. These objectives and assessments should be listed on the public websites in order that we could see whether progress was being made. These simple things could be done and would make sense.

The programme for Government places significant emphasis on renewable energy. There is a commitment to address some very important and attractive issues in the first 100 days which no doubt others will discuss. I wish to propose a few important things that could be done which are simple enough. We need geothermal legislation which this House has been promised four times in the past two years. It is required to enable us to use the energy to be found underground — hot water, in particular. We need legislation similar to mining legislation to allow developers to extract this energy and use it without fear of action being taken against them.

We need foreshore legislation to provide for offshore energy units. While various aspects of foreshore legislation have been proposed, until such legislation is put in place, we cannot make progress. There is more energy to be harnessed from the waves off the northern coast of County Mayo than there is in what is being mined under the sea. We have spent five years tearing ourselves apart to bring gas onshore, something which we had to do, but we have fallen well behind the rest of Europe in harnessing the most extraordinary, attractive and enriched wave energy in Europe. It can be brought ashore by introducing legislation. Geothermal legislation and the foreshore Bill need to be dealt with.

On people who produce energy through renewable energy and feed in to other schemes, the tariff or quantum for that needs to be increased. It is the only way in which we can draw people into the system and make it commercially attractive.

I want to ensure there is five minutes left for my colleague.