Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Prior to discussing COP27, I echo the points made by Senator Chambers on the western rail corridor. The climate committee in our transport report was very clear that the form of cost-benefit analysis used to justify removing it did not reflect climate, the environment or all of the benefits that accrue.Especially given the world's limited supplies of lithium, we cannot think that we will have electric vehicles everywhere. Public transport has a significant role to play. I would echo that call in relation to inclusion. It should never have been removed and it should be put back as an EU transport priority from the Irish side.

I thank the Minister for coming in today to discuss COP27. The Minister will be aware I have been at some of the Conferences of the Parties, COPs. I am conscious that loss and damage is an issue that developing countries have been raising for 30 years. We got the back and forth of frustrations but the frustration that had been felt by developing countries across the world over decades cannot be underestimated. If we had not come out of COP27 with a loss and damage fund, the damage to trust would have been irreparable. It is vital that a fund has been agreed.

I commend Ireland on its role in it. First, as I said, I commend the developing countries that have championed and pushed this and which have talked about climate justice and made sure climate - because this is a climate justice issue in terms of loss and damage - has been on the focus. I also pay special tribute to Denmark, which showed real leadership by being the first country to, crucially - this is what ultimately loss and damage has to be - acknowledge historic and moral responsibility in respect of climate change and then followed that through with the first loss and damage fund from an EU country. That showed proper acknowledgement and leadership. I commend parliamentarians I myself know, such as Rasmus Nordqvist, and the Danish Minister, Mr. Møller Mortensen, and others who led on that. That moral leadership, combined with the absolutely righteous demand from developing countries, is what forced loss and damage to be such a strong item on the agenda at this COP coming after the disappointments of Glasgow.

In regards to the EU position, to be honest the EU has avoided this for a long time. I understand that there are other countries in the past ten, 15 or 20 years which have also looked at great wealth in emissions. I understand those points in respect of that, especially those oil-producing countries. When we look atper capitaemissions as well, Europe has a long history of responsibility in this area. It is appropriate that Ireland was an EU lead negotiator, not only because of the Minister's commitment and the commitment of the staff and diplomatic corps, which I acknowledge in that regard, but also because Ireland is a country that has a different colonial history to much of the rest of the EU. The relationship that many other EU countries have had with other countries around the world has been both one of taking the emissions space and one of taking the natural resources and, indeed, direct colonial extraction. It was highly appropriate. It is an example of how a country such as Ireland, with a different history but still a committed EU country, can be an important bridge between the EU and the world when we take that unique role. It is something we have also done in the area of peace-building and, indeed, through our neutrality.

There is an important piece there around the climate justice. As the Minister said, the next stage is the detail. In the detail, I urge that Ireland continue to play a leading role in ensuring that the detail is informed by climate justice principles. I welcome the fact that the most vulnerable are recognised but we are speaking neither in terms of a charitable frame nor a frame of those simply protecting the most vulnerable. It is around a language of effectively restorative justice or reparations. This is the frame. It is a justice issue and I hope we keep that. For example, the Minister mentioned innovative financing. I was relieved that the Minister stated that part of his innovative financing is looking to the corporate sector and those companies and sectors which have profited over a number of years. That is fair but let us make sure that we have nothing that constitutes further debt for the developing world anywhere near this fund and that this fund is a fund coming from those who have profited from and contributed most to the crisis in climate to those who have contributed least and there is not any sense of innovative financing being a cover for further debt or for further measures in that regard.

Of course, it is also crucial that the loss and damage fund would be separate. We still have our debt promised and pledged many years ago. It is $100 billion per year that the developed world was meant to be paying. We are not reaching Ireland's share currently. The projection now is €225 million a year by 2025 but the fair share for Ireland would be €545 million per year. Ireland still is neither contributing its fair share on emissions reduction nor contributing its fair share in respect of the payment of the $100 billion already owed. Maybe we can step up on that and build on the leadership in loss and damage in respect of that.

I would be grateful if the Minister could update us on the declaration on children, youth and climate action which was being discussed at the COP. I asked officials from the Department whether Ireland would be signing and, indeed, advocating for that declaration.

Building on the point made by the Prime Minister of Barbados, Ms Mia Mottley, as the Minister mentioned, in terms of financing, there are innovative pieces around now looking at the new tax laws that are being discussed at UN level and, indeed, leaving the Energy Charter Treaty in order that we do not create a noose around the neck of developing countries which want to change their energy policies by allowing them to be pushed into this cul de sacand pushed into investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS. Surely it is time for Ireland to step away from that. That is part of changing the finance piece.

I welcome the proposal on private jets that the Minister mentioned. That is interesting, but maybe let us also look at the €600 million in jet kerosene subsidies that we have at present. Surely we should reduce that.