Lynn Boylan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Only this morning, the International Energy Agency, IEA, released a report calling for radical change if we are to reach net zero emissions and stay within the 1.5°C target of the Paris Agreement. The IEA stated, "If we want to reach net zero by 2050 we do not need any more investments in new oil, gas and coal projects". If ever there was a clear signal that Ireland and the EU need to unshackle themselves from the Energy Charter Treaty, ECT, this is it.

The ECT, which was sneaked into Ireland without an Oireachtas debate, is an international treaty that gives investor protections to the energy sector, providing access to closed-door arbitration mechanisms for investors to sue states when they decide they do not like the policy changes those states are making because they might interfere with their profits or future profits. Investors are allowed to bypass domestic courts and sue EU member states for, in some cases, billions of euro in compensation. Compensation claims have been made against states for environmental rules and measures, including alleviating fuel poverty or cutting fossil fuel subsidies. These claims have had a chilling effect on governments.

I will outline a couple of examples of investor cases. In 2017, the French environment minister drafted a law intended to phase out fossil fuels by 2040. The Canadian company Vermilion threatened to sue the French Government. This worked, and the government revised its proposals and watered down its climate ambition, allowing for a renewal of oil permits beyond 2040. Rockhopper, a British oil and gas company, brought a claim against the Italian Government following its decision to ban an oil and gas exploration along the Italian coastline, while Uniper in 2019 started a challenge against the Dutch Government because it tried to phase out coal-powered electricity by 2030. It is seeking €1 billion in compensation. Much like the HSE hackers, Vermilion, Rockhopper and Uniper show there is no length to which these companies will not go to protect their interests, no matter the damage that does to the public good.

We know what needs to be done to avert climate change. Companies will have to leave fossil fuels unburned, and the public should not be left carrying the cost of their stranded assets.After all, the public is already paying the cost of the fossil fuel companies' lies about climate change over decades. The ECT prevents states from taking the necessary action to tackle climate change.

With Italy already having unilaterally pulled out of the ECT due to its nefarious influence, the French and Dutch are also considering pulling out of it and are calling for the EU as a bloc to consider leaving it. Ahead of the next round of negotiations on 1 to 4 June, where does Ireland stand? Does Ireland support the removal of investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, chapters from the ECT? Does the State support the expansion of the ECT into the global south? Does the State support the French and Dutch positions that the ECT is likely irreformable and that the EU needs to leave it as a bloc?

The Irish public deserve to know, ahead of 1 June, where Ireland stands on the ECT. We sneaked it in without the Irish people knowing we were signing up to it. They now have a right to know where we stand in terms of its future.