Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 41:

In page 10, to delete lines 31 to 40, and in page 11, to delete lines 1 to 39 and substitute the following: “(8) In performing their respective functions under this section, the Minister and the Government—

(a) shall ensure that the national long-term climate action strategy is consistent with—

(i) climate justice, and

(ii) a just transition to a climate neutral economy which, in so far as is practicable—

(I) maximises opportunities for decent, fair and high-value work that is environmentally and socially sustainable, in a way which does not negatively affect the current workforce or the overall economy,

(II) supports low-carbon investment and infrastructure,

(III) develops and maintains social consensus through engagement with the social partners, local communities, non-governmental organisations, and other appropriate persons,

(IV) contributes to resource-efficient and sustainable economic approaches which help to address inequality and poverty, and

(V) supports persons and communities that may be negatively affected by the transition,

and

(b) shall have regard to the following matters:

(i) the need to deliver the best possible value for money consistent with the sustainable management of the public finances and to maximise, as far as practicable, the net benefits to society taking into account the impact of greenhouse gas emissions;

(ii) the need to promote sustainable development and restore, and protect, biodiversity;

(iii) relevant scientific or technical advice;

(iv) any recommendations or advice of the Advisory Council;

(v) the social and economic imperative for early and cost-effective action in relation to climate change;

(vi) in so far as practicable, the need to maximise employment, the attractiveness of the State for investment and the long-term competitiveness of the economy;

(vii) the fact that the means of achieving a climate neutral economy and other measures to enable the State to pursue the national climate objective may not yet be fully identified and may evolve over time through innovation, evolving scientific consensus and emerging technologies;

(viii) the role of behavioural change on the part of individuals and different sectors of society in supporting the Government to pursue the national climate objective and the policies and measures required to effect such change;

(ix) the risk of substantial and unreasonable carbon leakage as a consequence of measures implemented by the State to pursue the national climate objective;

(x) the protection of public health;

(xi) the National Planning Framework (or, where appropriate, the National Spatial Strategy);

(xii) the special economic and social role of agriculture, including with regard to the distinct characteristics of biogenic methane;

(xiii) where a national long-term climate action strategy has been approved under this section, the most recent approved national long-term climate action strategy;

(xiv) the 2019 Climate Action Plan or, where a climate action plan has been approved under this section, the most recent approved climate action plan;

(xv) where a national adaptation framework has been approved under section 5, the most recent approved national adaptation framework;

(xvi) where sectoral adaptation plans have been approved under section 6, the most recent approved sectoral adaptation plans.”.

I will speak to the whole set. My own amendment No. 42 covers a similar area. In the original version of the Bill, these were the various factors as to what the Minister and the Government shall or may have regard to in performing their respective functions. Senators Moynihan and Bacik may come in with more detail in terms of their amendment but speaking to my own approach to this, amendment No. 42 is what was proposed by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Environment and Climate Action. These were the factors, after long and extensive deliberation, we proposed under three categories, namely, those matters which the Minister and the Government should act in a manner consistent with; those matters which the Minister and the Government must have regard to and those matters which the Minister and the Government may have regard to.

Many of the aspects we proposed are not reflected in the final Bill. I acknowledge that some of the factors we had proposed where the language, "consistent with" should be taken in, have been taken in by the Government in another section. The Government has taken in the national climate objective and Articles 2 and 4 of the Paris Agreement. However, the Government has only taken in Articles 2 and 4.1 of the Paris Agreement. I will be pressing on Report Stage that all of Article 4 be included in terms of being "consistent with".

I can speak to these amendments as a group because I take out some of the individual points and try to address them in these subsequent amendments. A key concern for me is that the UN sustainable development goals are not mentioned anywhere in the Bill. Ireland played the key role in negotiating the sustainable development goals, SDGs. Globally, they are part of legislation and initiatives, such as at EU level. We even see them in its response to Covid-19 in which the sustainable development goals are constantly referenced and there are references to our SDG targets.

I am concerned Ireland makes no reference to the sustainable development goals anywhere in its legislation or in this crucial legislation. The 2030 agenda is widely considered to be a combination of the Paris Agreement and the sustainable development goals. Ireland basically chaired the negotiations to achieve the sustainable development goals. We see many Ministers wearing the badges. I am worried we do not seem to see a genuine engagement with the SDGs, in terms of being part of how we do things.

The sustainable development goals are not aspirational. They are not a charitable initiative. They are a blueprint for development which takes in issues of climate change and which issues of climate change should take in. I am concerned they are not referenced in the Bill.

I have two amendments which try to address that, in that where sustainable development is referenced - which could mean anything - I specify the definition of sustainable development should include the UN sustainable development goals. I also have a stand-alone amendment to directly insert the sustainable development goals as a matter for consideration.

I urge the Minister to reflect on the fact of Ireland's relationship with the SDGs and how we worked hard in Ireland to get the world to come up with a blueprint on sustainable development. Saying the word sustainable development means nothing unless we are clear about what it means. The period of time will be longer until 2030 but that does not mean one cannot incorporate the SDGs until 2030 into this.

I have two suggestions of how it could be addressed. There are other ways it could be addressed. It could be addressed through a definition of sustainable development in the definitions section at the beginning of the Bill and I may introduce that on Report Stage. I urge the Minister to reflect on how we can ensure the sustainable development goals are appropriately referenced in the Bill.

Amendment No. 44 references scientific advice. I specify that should be advice which is consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, in terms of relevant scientific advice. There is considerable scientific advice out there, of varying quality. It is important any advice Ireland relies on in these decision-making processes should be consistent with the IPCC's scientific advice.

I will remove the amendment in respect of "behavioural change" and will replace it. I have two separate amendments - one to replace the amendment I will remove and another with an addition included.

Some of the behavioural change focus rings hollow to people throughout Ireland. There is a significant focus on what a person should do and what his or her "little piece" should be, yet there is a remarkable reluctance to change business as usual in terms of manufacturing, businesses, corporations, and in terms of being willing to say "No" to established corporate lobby groups. This is a crucial point which we will come back to at a later section of the Bill. Being willing to say "No" to the renewal of licences for prospecting or oil and gas extraction and exploration is crucial. There should be behavioural change from the top, from Government, and it should show that it is willing to let go of some of the trickle-down economics and the idea that there are investors which are too big to argue with. It should be willing to challenge that. I will bring specific amendments forward that will tease out the area of oil and gas exploration, and licences.

Behavioural change begins from the top. We know that the political signal sends the message downwards. Rather than focusing on behavioural change, it would be more useful to use that space to focus on a joined-up analysis of consumption emissions within the State. We should make sure that we are tracking emissions. The idea of life cycle costing is within the Minister of State's area. It is a matter of tracking emissions from their point of origin to their point of consumption and making sure that they do not disappear from either end of the balance sheet. I suggest behavioural change is replaced with "the emissions of greenhouse gases into the Earth’s atmosphere attributable to the consumption of products or utilisation of services in the State", which ensures that the end of the process is captured, reflected upon and thought about. This amendment could be added without deleting the other one. I offer it in a number of different forms.

I refer to the group of amendments Nos. 50, 51 and 53, including a few others. In amendment No. 50, I seek to delete "in so far as is practicable" as a caveat to the Minister's performance of his functions with regard to just transition. The reference to just transition in the Bill simply refers to employment but, in amendment No. 52, I seek to insert the phrase "environmentally and socially sustainable". In amendment No. 51, I seek to insert "environmentally and socially sustainable, quality" employment because the nature and kind of employment that will be available will be key to whether this will be a just transition.

Amendment No. 53 seeks to add "engage with". This comes back to the question of support. The Bill at the moment refers to supporting persons and communities that may be negatively impacted by climate action. I refer to supporting and engaging with people. This comes back to a contribution I made during the earlier debate which we discussed at great length, so I will not rehash it. Social dialogue and community engagement in how we approach a just transition is important so that it is not a charitable after effect whereby one looks to provide some support. It is about listening to communities and helping them shape and reimagine their futures.

Amendment No. 55 takes that to a more explicit level. I use language, as we discussed, that is from the Scottish climate law. In this amendment, I recognise the need to "develop and maintain social consensus through engagement with workers, trade unions, communities, non-governmental organisations" and business and industry representatives. This directly mirrors the language in the Scottish climate law. Scotland has been recognised as one of the places that - while it is not easy - has grappled most successfully with just transition. It constantly tightens and improves its response in this area, including through extensive engagement with unions.

Lastly in this section, amendment No. 56 inserts "environmental" in terms of the special role of agriculture. This is contained in section 4(8)(n) of the Bill which refers to "the special economic and social role of agriculture". I am suggesting that it should state "the special economic, environment, and social role of agriculture". This builds on some of the points made by others. However, I am cautious in relation to how we approach removals and will come back to that on Report Stage. While we must reward, support and recognise the environmental role of agriculture, we must also ensure that we meet the hard targets of genuine emissions reduction which makes sure we are not feeding the furnace of climate change.