Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I know that, but the Minister of State's tones are measured. Does it not want to make you scream? This is a bizarre, crazy and irrational situation. We need to hear the Minister of State say that. The old phrases about selling ice to Eskimos, sand to Arabs or bringing coal to Newcastle spring to mind. Importing peat to store it next to a bog would be laughable were it not so serious an issue. One might say it is "No Latvian matter". As we know, harvesting in Rathowen and elsewhere all but ceased as a result of the High Court judgment which has led to onerous licensing and planning applications for bogs which were larger than 30 ha. Peat is, of course, important to the horticultural sector, particularly in mushroom farming. Apparently, we will need one shipment like this every two weeks for the foreseeable future to cope with demand.

We hear a lot in this House about the carbon footprint. How can you even begin to quantify the carbon footprint of shipping that much peat from abroad? Apparently, peat extraction contributed just 0.15% of our total CO₂ missions in years past. The carbon cost of importation surely exceeds that by a considerable margin. This is a good illustration of some of the farcical and, frankly, self-defeating outcomes that can flow from climate change and planning policies if not well organised. I have said here time and again that we all support balanced changes to Irish life, habits, industry and agriculture as long as those changes are sensible and they do not attack traditional ways of life or punish people for living their lives in ordinary and responsible ways. Sadly, our policies are increasingly tending towards punishing ordinary people, damaging agriculture, crippling small businesses in certain sectors and destroying jobs, while doing little or nothing to reduce our carbon footprint overall. We end peat extraction in Ireland and start shipping in peat from the other side of Europe. What gives? We shut down two power generation stations, pat ourselves on the back for being good environmentalists and then import energy from abroad which was generated by burning fossil fuels or by nuclear power. We also need a debate on nuclear power. Ecological virtue-signalling often seems to be the aim here. That might be another example of the so-called "Irish solution to an Irish problem".

An opinion poll in last week's The Irish Timesshowed a deep level of opposition to the Government’s climate change policy among the general public. It found that 82% oppose new carbon taxes, 60% oppose reducing the national herd and 72% oppose higher prices for petrol and diesel. You will never get any argument from me if you say that the majority can sometimes be wrong; they frequently are in this House. The solitary measure that has widespread public support is the increased use of land for harnessing wind energy. My point is that if these are the numbers nationwide, can you imagine what they are when Dublin voters are excluded? Can you imagine what the figures would be specifically among voters in the midlands and west, the places most affected by these measures? All this suggests that successive Governments have failed to bring the public with them in relation to the measures necessary to tackle the impact of climate change. Yet, according to some of our leaders, we are only getting warmed up about it.

What do we think the farcical stories, such as that which I cited was on the front of the Westmeath Examinerlast week, are doing for public support for climate policy? Surely, they can only generate additional hostility and resentment.It can be argued that the Government is adding to this by the day. In yesterday's budget, the carbon tax was hiked up by 22% or €7.50 per tonne, to €41 per tonne. To ordinary people, that means €1.28 on a fill of petrol, €1.48 on a fill of diesel and €20 on a tank of home heating and all of this will bring in €412 million in taxes per annum. My point is that what the Government is giving on one hand, through modest increases in social welfare and reductions in the income tax bands, it is taking away on the other through these taxes. We hear many lectures about progressive taxation and yet it is indisputable that carbon taxes are regressive measures because they are levelled on everyone equally and therefore, hit the poorest in society the most. This can only cause a reduction of support from the public for climate change policy in the years to come.

I will conclude with the issue of peat harvesting. Domestic supplies of peat inevitably will be exhausted and the horticultural sector will have to rely, increasingly, on imports, which is a farcical situation. To prevent this, we should allow some kind of simplified licensing system whereby peat harvesting can be resumed, if only for a number of years, until a proper phased solution can be found. By doing so, we would likely be reducing, rather than increasing, our carbon output. The Irish Farmers Association, IFA, and the horticultural sector have called for legislation in this area. On the basis of the facts, as I am aware of them, I would support any legislation which deals with this problem in a sensible way. I brought four bags of turf to a friend in Dublin last night. I wondered, as I was delivering them, how much longer I would be able to do so.