Timmy Dooley (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and thank the Minister for coming to the House today. I have had an input into this debate over the last five or six years. Senator Garvey spoke earlier about the work of the Citizens' Assembly in July 2018 and the establishment of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate Action. That committee was chaired by the current Minister of State at the Departments of the Environment, Climate and Communications and Transport, Deputy Hildegarde Naughton, who did an immense amount of work across both Houses of the Oireachtas to bring together the diverse views, opinions and ideas of Members. Under her stewardship, a lot of good work was done that acted as a precursor to the Bill before us today and that work continued at committee over the last number of months, as the Minister said.

We are now at a point where we have moved the debate on. Back in 2016, prior to the Citizens' Assembly, quite a few members of these Houses would have taken a more negative view and might have accepted the label of climate change denier. There is less of that around now but while people may begin their speeches in the House by saying they accept the reality of climate change, I am not so convinced they are prepared to accept the actions that are required to meet our climate change commitments. I have seen that, to some extent, at some of the committees I have served on over the years. We have tried to move the debate along so that it is no longer just the preserve of academics or environmentalists who might have been referred to affectionately a decade or two ago as tree huggers. The reality is that the debate is now accepted by all in society as being important. However, we cannot sit on our laurels in the belief that because people now accept the principle of climate change and are saying they want to embrace all that is involved, we can take it for granted that they are prepared to accept the actions required. No matter what group or sector in society one talks about, the one thing they all have in common is that they believe the burden of responsibility lies somewhere else and at somebody else's door. That is the challenge as we try to build on the framework that this legislation provides. There will be very difficult debates in the years ahead when sectoral caps are put on the amount of carbon dioxide that can be emitted through the carbon budgeting process. There will be some very difficult conversations and debates in the process of reaching agreement on them.

Of course, people respect and recognise that there is potential for real improvements in quality of life and for job creation. The Minister has grasped for quite some time the potential for job creation and for a different way of life but we are not seeing the kind of action we need to see. I agree with a lot of what Senator McDowell said with regard to caution. That should not restrain us but should spur us on to identify the weaknesses that exist. I share his real concern about the electricity grid and our capacity to provide the level of electricity that will be required to meet our energy needs over the next ten to 15 years. I have great regard for the ESB as a company. It employs some of the finest engineers in the world and that has been the case for many generations, with ESB International leading the way. However, I have some reservations about the rate at which the ESB has moved. It has been somewhat slow in embracing offshore technology, for example.In recent weeks and months it has set out a very ambitious plan for the Moneypoint plant and for the capture of wind on the Atlantic, but it is at the back end of the next ten years. It is eight to ten years away. I realise there are impediments, but both the Government and the ESB should work together to come forward with an action plan that is far more aggressive about capturing wind energy offshore.

I meet groups every weekend who are dead set against the presence of wind turbines in their communities. As somebody who believes very much in the necessity to address climate change, it is hard to not agree with their position. Up to now, many of the areas that have been developed had wind turbines a very good distance from homes, but all those sites are now developed. What we are left with are sites that are quite contentious and, as Senator McDowell and others have said, they are finding their way into the courts. Those communities are finding it hard to accept. Senator Garvey and I are aware of a particular one not far from where the Senator lives. The community in Cahermurphy is very annoyed about the next imposition, as it sees it, of Cahermurphy II Wind Farm, as the project is known, at a time when everybody is talking about putting wind turbines offshore. I wish to harness the ambition here today and ask for a far more aggressive approach to developing the offshore potential that will generate jobs in County Clare and renew much of west Clare in terms of job creation and employment, as well as the benefit that will have for schools, GAA clubs and so forth. However, it must be done much more quickly, so we need not have the other onshore developments that are now coming to fruition. We have to advance the potential offshore to a much greater degree.

Others have talked about the necessity to continue the roads programme. I support that because bottlenecks continue to exist. I recognise the efforts the Minister has made in his short time in office in terms of investment in public transport. That is very good, and we must maintain it. However, we must examine the methods to power those buses. I believe there is real potential with green hydrogen. It ties in with the potential for offshore wind development off the west coast of Ireland, so let us see movement in those areas.

Undoubtedly, there are concerns in the agriculture sector. It is no harm to have that debate on an ongoing basis to give some level of comfort to the effect that it is not about cutting the national herd. There are some, perhaps in the cities and urban areas, who believe that because agriculture is such a significant emitter of CO2 equivalent, that is where city folk will see the problems resolved. It is outside their bailiwick, as it were. They forget that the quality food produced in rural areas is produced by farmers who have a far lower carbon intensity, if one looks at carbon equivalent intensity, than those anywhere else in the world. That is where we must be strong in identifying long-term solutions, without reducing the capacity of people who live and work in rural Ireland to continue to do so.

Every sector must accept that it has to change. It is not just transport, energy generation or agriculture. I have spoken to the various farming bodies and organisations, as well as farmers I know. They understand it better than most. They see the impact of climate change on their day-to-day lives. They see the issues with flooding and the changed seasons, and the impact they are having on the collection of fodder for feeding their cattle. They understand it better, quite frankly, than some who live in a city, drive very large vehicles and who do not need a 3 l or 4 l engine to potter around from school to school.

Collectively, we should not be trying to divide society. We must stand by each other. All of us must do our bit within our own area of responsibility. If we achieve anything as politicians, it should not be blaming one side more than another. There has been quite robust debate both in the committee and in the Dáil. I do not believe that helps at all.We must all accept, from our vantage point or the point of view of the panel from which we are elected, that this is a shared responsibility and challenge that we face, and that if we do it collectively that this generation and future generations will benefit. This does not have to be at a loss to the economy immediately. Over the past ten years I have worked on these committees and seen real potential. For some time the Minister, when he was both a Deputy and an unelected advocate, has always talked about the potential for the green economy. It is now within his grasp to drive that really hard and he needs to start with the ESB. He must demand more from the company in regard to what can be done with the capture of offshore wind more quickly and effectively.