Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

The issue of the language has not been addressed. The issue that was identified by Professor Sweeney, Dr. Jackson and many others has not been addressed. The Bill states: "The first two carbon budgets proposed by the Advisory Council shall provide for a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions such that the total amount of annual greenhouse gas emissions in the year ending on 31 December 2030 is 51 per cent less than the annual greenhouse gas emissions reported for the year ending on 31 December 2018, as set out in the national greenhouse gas emissions inventory." The change made in the Dáil made clear that it is not a matter of whether it would be 7% by 7% and that the only commitment is to the year ending in December 2030. That is all that is there in writing.

There are many ways to arrive at that. It can be arrived at in the way that was recommended. I note that the amendment relating to an average reduction of 7% yearly, which might scale down, was ruled out of order and we will not get to vote on it. It can be done as an arrow, a line, or a diagonal that moves slowly downwards. It can also be done by continuing with high emissions for quite a while and then trying to take a dive in the last two or three years. This allows for something closer to a parallelogram than a triangle of emissions. It allows us to continue with high levels of emissions.

Crucially, the wording means that if by some miracle we manage to really improve and hit 46% or 47% in the first five-year period, the Bill requires us to be at 51% and that the advisory council should provide recommendations that aim for 51% less. The Bill does not state a minimum of 51% but that the council has to aim for exactly 51%. The Minister is tying its hands to what he believes is the most ambitious target that can be achieved now. It is a political commitment. The thing to do with a political commitment is to follow through and put it in law for politicians to deliver on. That means putting that political commitment in this Bill as a legal minimum interim target, which the Government and the Minister must deliver on. Instead, the Minister has devolved the responsibility for his political commitment to an advisory council, which is meant to be independent and is meant to be able to be more ambitious if it wants to be. In section 7, it gives its reasons for its proposed carbon budget programme under subsection (4). One reason will be from subsection (5), which has already told it the outcome that it needs to have. The Minister is using the wrong instrument.

I will address accountability later. It would certainly help if the Minister accepted some of the later amendments, which make it clear that the Minister and Government, not just the advisory council, have to be accountable about the 51%. The Minister did not deal with the concern raised by experts who have followed this issue for many years. If anything, the amendment in the Dáil has solidified our concern. We will come to a vote on that section later. I am disappointed that the Minister will not accept the word "minimum."

We talk about ambitious targets. It will be hard to get to 51%. Can we stop giving ourselves prizes, rosettes and awards for starting late? There should not be a prize for starting to do the right thing 20 years later than every other country. There might be a prize upon achieving the 51%. That is maybe the point when we can start congratulating ourselves. Congratulating ourselves for starting late, having dragged our heels when others have moved forward, is a little much. We need to temper that and have some humility about where we are in Ireland and our record to date.