Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am looking forward with great hope and interest in respect of the legislation that might be brought by the Minister of State, Deputy James Browne. I will certainly engage with him on that. However, me experience in this House means I generally seek to put measures on a train that is already moving, as it were, rather than the one that may be coming down the line. In general, that is why I will always seek to have measures inserted where I think they are relevant. If that is then superseded by better future legislation or policies, so be it. That is why I am pressing the issue. On cryptocurrencies, I am concerned by the use of the phrase "crypto-assets". They are not assets. They do not constitute assets. According to the phrase used about the scheme that I mentioned previously, "they are selling thin air". It is not thin air; it is hot air, in that it is quite energy intensive. It is costing the planet. I am extremely concerned about the matter. With absolute respect, I am concerned and nervous in respect of the discussions taking place in the EU at the moment. They are being led by Commissioner McGuinness, who I believe has made a poor decision in relation to the taxonomy on gas and nuclear energy. That is one of the reasons Ireland really needs to look at the issue. I am concerned that Ireland will end up being a soft actor in terms of cryptocurrency and part of a legitimisation exercise in respect of something which is both massively socially damaging and extraordinarily environmentally damaging.

I want to mark the card right now. I believe that cryptocurrencies are bad and a problem. We should ban them. I will be seeking to ban them at every possible opportunity in every relevant item of legislation. I know that there may be a separate provision on digital currencies where they are linked to something. I am concerned about the use of the term "crypto-assets". The cryptocurrency industry is an extremely aggressive and precarious industry. Quite frankly, at a point where we are facing ecological collapse, the last thing we can afford to do is to allow a whole brand new form of speculative, made-up risk be created to layer on top of the significant real risks that we are facing environmentally, in terms of food and global conflict. Why would we add a brand new stupid problem that we do not need to add, right on top of that? It is absolutely absurd. It is exploitative. Just to be clear, in their aggressive advertisement it is not the small players who spend their €5,000 in savings on cryptocurrency who are the main supporters of the industry. They are the human shields of the industry. They will be the reason we will be told that we need to bail the industry out when it starts collapsing. I just really hate cryptocurrencies. I have to get that on the record.