Ossian Smyth (Dún Laoghaire, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I will not be accepting these amendments. Amendment No. 11 relates to activities that are inherently international and require international solutions, and I do not believe it is appropriate to provide for mandatory targets in this section in the Bill.

In respect of amendment No. 12, the text in the Bill in regard to public procurement is sufficient. With regard to adding requirements for public procurement for reuse, it would be best managed through circulars, frameworks and public procurement strategies. We can consider the matter in the quality of public procurement Bill this autumn.

Regarding amendment No. 13, I believe the word “levels” refers to the numbers of repairs taking place, and in that context I believe it covers the “availability” of repair and reuse. As such, I am not accepting the amendment.

I am not accepting amendments Nos. 14 to 18, inclusive. The existing text to which these amendments relate is based on proposals originally proposed on Committee Stage in the Dáil. These discussions and proposals enjoyed broad cross-party support. That text was subject to extensive consultation with the Office of the Attorney General to ensure it would be legally sound. For that reason, the current text is appropriate and proportionate to achieve the policy objectives set out in regard to the strategy. I would be concerned as to whether the proposed amendments would be vulnerable to legal challenge if they were included in the Bill in, or near to, their current form.

I am not accepting amendment No. 19, which is consequential on amendments No. 3 and 4, which I have not accepted.

The circular economy programme is provided for in section 10. It is a long-term programme with long-term actions and objectives that will see real and meaningful change.

Amendment No. 30 seeks to shorten the term of the programme to three years. I do not believe this is appropriate. The nature of this programme requires that the actions be given sufficient time to be effective and achieve real results. Three years is not enough time in that context. It runs the risk that excessive resources would get caught up in an ongoing cycle of drafting new programmes at the expense of making progress on the objectives of the programme itself. Therefore, I do not accept amendment No. 30.

On amendment No. 28, the circular economy programme gives effect to the objectives of the circular economy strategy. The strategy includes a specific requirement on the Minister to take the national disability inclusion strategy and roadmap for social inclusion into account. As such, I do not believe amendment No. 28 is necessary and will not be accepting it.

On amendment No. 31, which I am not accepting, the Bill provides that the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, may furnish a copy of the programme to any person, body, organisation or group the Minister may prescribe for the purpose of the section. I am happy to request that the EPA furnish a copy of the programme to the committee, but given the structures of committees and even their names tend to change over time, I do not think it is appropriate to accept amendment No. 31.