Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have two remaining amendments that deal with the issue of liability from a particular perspective. I have removed around ten to 15 amendments that I would have tabled individually because of this very elegant amendment that has been put by Senators Bacik and Moynihan. It deals with the same issue. The Minister will be aware that his Department was involved in a case in the High Court this year. It was not a past iteration of his Department or the Government. This Government and the Minister's Department successfully argued in the High Court this year, in respect of the provisions of the 2015 Act, which is still the relevant Act because this Bill amends the 2015 Act, that because the Government was not specifically named, it was not required or obliged to basically account for and deliver on provisions. Due to the fact that a Minister was named but the Government was not named, it was argued that the Government could not be held to account in relation to provisions of the 2015 Act. That is a huge concern. We know that one of the key recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly was justiciability. The committee also recommended that there should be greater justiciability and accountability. Of course, there is some justiciability here. We want there to be justiciability that is successful and justiciability for the Government.

The Government is referred to in some of the sections of the Bill. However, it is important to note that in many of the places where it is referenced, reference is made to the Minister and the Government's respective functions. For example the new section 3(3) states: "The Minister and the Government shall carry out their respective functions" in ways that are consistent with the UNFCCC and the European Union. However, and this is where I come to my amendments Nos. 35 and 36, in respect of one of the key sections of the Bill cited by the Government, when claiming that it did not have to deliver on, or be bound by, the commitments contained in the 2015 Act, the argument was that the Government was not listed as a relevant body. The solution that I have put forward is a simple one. I do not list the Government as a relevant body, but I list it alongside the relevant bodies. My amendment states that a relevant body "and the Government of Ireland" will be required to act in a way consistent with the UNFCCC and the EU. That is important in respect of section 15.

Section 15, and specifically the new section 15, as inserted, is where the climate plan, sectoral targets and all of the building blocks of achieving our national objective are listed. All of those building blocks - the plans, the mitigation, the strategies, the budgets and all of that - are listed in section 15. Relevant bodies have to consider them, but the Government is not bound by that. The Government is referred to in section 3(3), which specifies "The Minister and the Government shall carry out their respective functions" in a manner consistent with the higher ultimate goal. However, the Government is not referenced in section 15, which states that a relevant body must perform its functions in a manner consistent with all of those tools that we are effectively going to create. There may be room for interpretation, but it is not specified as clearly as it should be in that section. I understand that there are a few sections in the Bill where reference is made to the Government. However, my concern is that through section 15, we could be allowing a loophole to continue. It is not a theoretical loophole. It is a loophole which has been used, and used very recently.

I ask the Minister to consider supporting Senators Moynihan and Bacik's amendment to ensure that reference is made to the Government when reference is made to the Minister throughout the Bill. I also ask the Minister to consider supporting amendment No. 35, specifically to ensure that the Government of Ireland is required to have regard to and consider the same things and meet the same levels of accountability as must a local authority or any other relevant body under this Bill.Will the Minister address that issue? I hope he will consider accepting one or other of these amendments.