Ciarán Ahern
Dublin South-West · Labour Party · Ireland
“What we are asking for today is simply that the Government lives up to the commitment made in the programme for Government to carry out a new, independent feasibility study for an extension of the MetroLink from where it is currently due to end in Charlemont, out to Dublin south west.”
“It examined quite a nonsensical route that finished abruptly in Knocklyon, and therefore it significantly underestimated the cost benefit of the project.”
“This all comes back to funding our schools. All too often, despite the much publicised overspend in the education budget, schools still have to fight tooth and nail to get the resources they need. I never predicted that so much of my time as a TD would be spent working with local schools on funding and resourcing issues.”
“As the capitation grant is not covering basic operating costs, many school boards feel that to avoid running deficits, which they will get into trouble for from their governing bodies, they have to find funds elsewhere.”
“As the Minister knows, parents are paying hand over fist for ancillary school costs, be it for school uniforms, laptops, school transport or the so-called voluntary contributions. We cannot say we have free education in this country if the whole architecture that enables proper participation is hugely expensive for parents.”
“Some parents are now having to pay hundreds of euro for devices if their children are to just fully participate in school. As this motion states, we are at risk of creating a digital divide and new inequalities in our education system unless we put further supports in place for low-income families. Kevin Shortall, principal of St.”
The complete record
Every one of 909 lines we hold for Ciarán Ahern, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 19.
“I cannot get my head around why mobile phone use and seat belt non-compliance would not be included, particularly when the technology is available and when we know the impact of those offences. The absence of any meaningful targets or performance indicators is a major weakness. For a strategy that references Vision Zero and reducing the number of fatalities, it is astonishing how little measurable ambition is included. It says nothing about how many cameras we need or how many we hope to have by a certain date. If, for example, we were to have a similar number to Sweden, we would need approximately 430 traffic cameras nationwide. There is nothing in the strategy about how we will measure its success or failure.”
“At a time when distracted driving has become one of the greatest dangers on our roads, the Government is still stuck at the stage of consideration. We know the reality. We see motorists every day scrolling through their phones at traffic lights, texting and watching Netflix on motorways. People are driving while visibly distracted, and we have got these TV-like displays in newer cars that add to the mix. We know the devastating consequences that driver distraction can cause. Likewise, seat-belt non-compliance continues to contribute to deaths and catastrophic injuries on our roads. I note that the strategy says its focus is primarily on cameras to detect speeding, people running red lights and committing offences relating to bus lanes, but we need a holistic approach to road safety.”
“The strategy repeatedly promises future consideration of further measures instead of immediate concrete delivery. One of the clearest examples of this is the continued absence of any meaningful progress on seat belt and mobile phone detection cameras. The Government has repeatedly stated that these technologies are being considered. When members of the Opposition have asked questions about timelines or implementation, however, we have been told to wait for this National Safety Camera Strategy. The strategy has arrived, but it provides virtually no clarity. The document merely states that mobile phone and seat belt detection cameras may be introduced in future once legislation is in place. There is no timeline. There is no implementation roadmap, no legislative schedule and no delivery target. There is nothing.”
“The strategy itself admits that speeding remains widespread on Irish roads. It cites RSA research showing that 77% of drivers speed and that a majority of motorists consider modest speeding as being socially acceptable. That is pretty alarming given the trends in road deaths here. The strategy also acknowledges the proven effectiveness of camera enforcement. It cites evidence showing that average speed cameras can reduce fatal and serious injury collisions by up to 56%. If the evidence is that strong, why is the strategy so timid? Why, after years of rising fatalities on our roads, are we dealing with a document that appears to be more concerned with governance charts than administrative structures? The former have a role to play but are not more important than measurable outcomes.”
“It involves a number of overlapping elements, including planning, investment, road infrastructure and design, public transport provision, rural connectivity, driver behaviour, the overall coherence of Government policy and, of course, enforcement of the rules of the road and the realistic prospect that dangerous driving will be caught. I have long said that traffic cameras have a pivotal role to play, particularly in terms of influencing driver behaviour. To be fair, the Minister of State has acknowledged on a number of occasions that driver behaviour has increasingly become an issue, but it is in that context that I find the whole safety camera strategy just a little underwhelming. Not only are there serious weaknesses in and omissions from the strategy, there is also a striking lack of ambition.”
“I am sharing time with Deputy Lawlor. As we are discussing this issue today, I am thinking of Fiona Holland, who was a teacher in Scoil Maelruain's Senior National School in Old Bawn in my constituency. She tragically passed away last week following a road accident in Terenure. Fiona played a huge role in her community and was loved by her students. I know what a huge impact her loss has been and will be on her community. My thoughts today are with her family and friends and the staff and pupils in Scoil Maelruain. We are going in the wrong direction when it comes to road safety and have been for some time. We made a lot of progress in the early 2000s and 2010s, but somewhere along the line we seem to have got complacent and we are seeing a reversal of the trend. We need to take a holistic approach when it comes to road safety.”
“The only urgency that we have seen from the Government with regards to our energy system is in its attempt to import even more fossil fuels via a new liquefied natural gas, LNG, terminal. I sincerely hope that this Government takes the right lessons from this crisis, the ones that it did not take from the crisis in 2022. I will conclude by again commending Deputy Daly on his Bill. It poses an important question to the Government about what kind of energy system we want in Ireland - one in which energy is treated as a commodity subject entirely to commercial logic, or one in which it is treated as a public utility and social good. My Labour Party colleagues and I certainly favour the latter and we will be supporting this Bill.”
“Following the fuel crisis that arose as a result of Putin’s illegal war on Ukraine, they turbo-charged their solar energy capacity and have been largely protected against this current crisis. They are paying some of the lowest prices in Europe now. While Spain took that fossil fuel crisis as a wake up call, our Government hit the snooze button. We remain overly dependent on imported fossil fuels. We remain vulnerable to international price shocks. Despite our enormous potential in offshore wind generation, we still have not added a single additional turbine in more than 20 years, and the Minister has told us again tonight that we will not see anything in construction until 2030 at the earliest.”
“Perhaps that is already happening. Affordability must be central to our energy policy and our energy transition. A functioning energy system must be measured in terms of whether people can actually afford to heat and power their homes. In a country as wealthy as ours on paper, it is just unacceptable that for so many that isn’t the case. We in Labour acknowledge that our energy challenges do not exist in isolation. The volatility experienced in recent years obviously reflects broader geopolitical instability, but external factors cannot excuse the local inertia we have seen from the Government. Countries with stronger public infrastructure, greater energy independence and more developed renewable generation capacity have been able to weather this storm far more effectively. Look at Spain.”
“In order to make the energy transition a reality, we need to improve and modernise the national grid, but we cannot make this a choice between climate action and affordability. The two can and must be pursued together. One of the great failures of recent years has been the inability of successive Governments to communicate that renewable energy, energy efficiency and public investment can reduce household costs. Instead, many now associate climate action with an additional expense because the big polluters and the large energy users have not been paying their fair share and properly contributing towards a just energy transition. lf our transition towards a cleaner economy and society is perceived as something imposed on ordinary workers while wealthier actors remain insulated, public support will fracture.”
“We need to see a much greater level of ambition in our home retrofitting programmes. We need to see low and middle-income households targeted in particular. We need to rapidly scale up public investment in offshore wind, solar, plug-in solar and battery storage. We need to accelerate grid modernisation while ensuring that the large energy users, like data centres, pay their fair share. At present, the bulk of the funding for grid improvements comes from ordinary households and small business consumers through their energy bills. Meanwhile, data centres are getting a discount. Working people are being asked to bear disproportionate costs in order that large corporations can continue to make massive profits.”
“I welcome the consumer protection elements that are included in this Bill, and welcome that the interests of the consumer and protection against unfair pricing would be central considerations, but we also need to clarify what that looks like in practice. Does it mean clearer information on bills? I certainly hope so. Does it mean stronger enforcement powers? Absolutely. However, it surely must also mean preventing energy poverty before it actually occurs. Fundamentally, that means wider structural reforms in our energy system. As I have said on numerous occasions, the only way we can genuinely protect consumers from future fossil fuel crises is by reducing our dependence on those fossil fuels in the first place. I will continue to bang the drum on this for as long as I need to because the Government has been moving at a snail’s pace.”
“It is not enough to tell people that the burden is on them to switch. We need to have real competition in the market. If a market is technically competitive but practically inaccessible, then many consumers remain unprotected. Energy should not be viewed simply as a commodity. It is an essential public good. Electricity is not a luxury. Heating is not optional. When people cannot heat their homes, we see the consequences, be it in public health, child poverty, educational outcomes or mental well-being. I have dealt with people in my constituency who have gotten sick because they have not been able to heat their homes, and people who have skipped meals in order to pay their bills. These are not exceptional cases. They are the far too common reality of so many people in this country at present.”
“The provisions in the Bill regarding anti-competitive behaviour are welcome. This goes back to my earlier point about the state of competition between actors in the Irish energy market, which is highly concentrated. Consumers do not experience this market as competitive in the everyday sense of the word. Most providers offer more or less the same high prices with minimal variation, and all too often, a price hike by one precipitates a price hike by the rest. We saw this last year, when more or less all of the energy companies raised their prices well above the rate of inflation. Barriers to switching between providers have increasingly become an issue, particularly for more vulnerable households, like older people, people with disabilities and those with limited digital literacy or access. That reality needs to be recognised.”
“However, we have seen the lack of transparency in this process create legitimate public concern. Consumers have repeatedly been told during periods of falling wholesale prices that suppliers remain tied into earlier purchasing arrangements and, therefore, cannot yet reduce bills. However, as we know from very recent examples, energy and fuel suppliers are very quick to hike their prices during periods of wholesale price increases, despite having purchased their supply weeks or months prior. Consumers cannot hedge their bills or protect themselves against sudden price spikes. Therefore, stronger oversight of hedging practices, including investigative practices and powers for the CRU, would be very welcome. We need to ensure that what people are paying reflects what it costs the supplier.”
“Crucially, we must also see statutory powers for intervention where unjustified pricing practices are identified. Transparency cannot become a substitute for action or accountability. lf that investigation eventually finds that there has been price gouging, what then? It cannot just be another report to add to the pile, and let that be the end of the matter. The Bill also addresses hedging. This is one of those technical issues that is probably quite remote from the concerns of ordinary consumers, but it is really important because different hedging strategies directly affect the prices people pay. In theory, hedging allows suppliers to protect themselves and, potentially, consumers from market volatility by purchasing in advance at agreed prices. Done responsibly, it can provide stability and predictability.”
“If a supplier claims that international gas prices necessitate major increases, then the CRU should have the capacity - indeed, the obligation - to rigorously scrutinise that claim. We know there is an active investigation being carried out at present by the CRU into price gouging and the failure of energy suppliers to pass on wholesale price reductions to consumers. The wholesale cost is down 72% from its peak in August 2022, but the prices being paid by consumers remain stubbornly high. It has been more than five months since that investigation was commissioned by the Minister, and we are still to get any update from the CRU on the progress of that investigation. That says to me there is something seriously lacking in terms of the CRU’s capacity to investigate matters such as these.”
“People know they are being ripped off. This Bill proposes enhanced monitoring of wholesale and retail prices, including average supplier margins and changes in prices paid by domestic and business consumers. That is a welcome proposal. Transparency matters. The public deserves to know not just what prices are being charged, but why they are paying them. There has virtually always been insufficient visibility with regard to supplier margins and the relationship between wholesale costs and retail prices. Consumers have basically been asked to accept on trust that price increases are unavoidable and proportionate. That is not good enough, particularly in the current context of market volatility.”
“I am on record on a number of occasions as not just calling for greater regulation in the energy markets but also for greater intervention and a crackdown on some of the profiteering we have seen on the part of the energy companies. The Irish energy system is dominated by a relatively small number of large actors. The liberalisation of our energy markets in the early 2010s was supposed to bring about lower prices through greater competition. That clearly has not happened. Instead, we have repeatedly seen cartel-like behaviour from the companies operating here. When international energy prices rise, bills fly up immediately. When wholesale prices fall, however, consumers wait months or even longer to see any meaningful reduction in the prices they pay. This fundamentally undermines public trust in the energy markets.”
“This Bill seeks to amend the 1999 Act in several important ways, which have already been outlined by Deputy Daly and others. The governance and mechanisms of the energy markets are convoluted and complex, to say the least. We cannot expect the average consumer to know the ins and outs. That is hard enough for those of us in here, whose job it is to understand it. In that respect, greater transparency in energy pricing is necessary and good. Stronger consumer protection is necessary. Better scrutiny of suppliers is necessary. Affordability must be recognised as a core public policy objective, not just an afterthought. The provisions in this Bill would set us in the right direction. I suggest that we could perhaps go even further.”
“However, the sense of dread with which people open their energy bills long proceeds Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal war in Iran. Low-income households, small businesses and pensioners are the cohorts that have been put to the pin of their collar for years now. Virtually everyone is being touched in some way by this fossil fuel crisis. While the Government has produced a €750 million package, however necessary it was, it was designed to placate sectoral interests. It has done next to nothing for ordinary PAYE workers, certainly not those who take public transport, cycle or walk every day. The Government has resisted every effort from the Labour Party, including the costed mini-budget that we proposed last week, to give workers a dig-out during this perpetual cost-of-living crisis.”
“I thank Deputy Daly and Sinn Féin for bringing forward this legislation. I am disappointed that the Government will not be supporting it. The Labour Party and I have long called for enhanced powers for the CRU. Indeed, I have my own electricity regulation Bill, which seeks to give the CRU the ability to issue specific emissions reduction or offsetting obligations on large energy users, like data centres. I hope we get the opportunity to debate that Bill on Second Stage in the House in the not-too-distant future. I am broadly supportive of Deputy Daly’s Bill. There are elements that I think could use some strengthening, which I will come to, but on the whole, it is a noble endeavour. We are discussing this in the midst of what the head of the International Energy Agency has described as the worst ever energy crisis.”
“The theoretical musings we have heard about nuclear power this week from Fianna Fáil are simply a distraction. They are fundamentally unserious at a time when we need to just do the simple things right. We know where our renewable potential is, and it is primarily in wind. Now more than ever, we need urgency and focus from the Government in getting offshore wind built. We are told it will be another four years before we even start construction on any offshore wind farms. Just get it done. People are hurting. The Government must heed the calls in our motion to give people support in the short term and focus its attention on the resources we actually have, not fantasise about new energy sources when we have not built an offshore turbine for 20 years.”
“Along with introducing a real right to remote work, this is the best way to protect people from the high costs of petrol and diesel by cutting out the cost of commuting altogether. We must offer supports to people in the here and now but the longer-term ambition has to be reducing our dependence on the fossil fuels that have caused this crisis. That means putting the supports in place to help people switch to EVs, particularly in more rural areas with a less developed public transport system. I raised the abysmal uptake of zero emissions HGV grants with the Minister last week. That scheme and the incentives must be reviewed so that they are actually availed of and used. We also need to seriously scale up and deploy our renewable generation capacity.”
“Time and again, we have seen them hike their prices despite very healthy profits. Just last week, when another price rise was announced, I called on the Minister to ensure that the State-owned energy company, Electric Ireland, did not follow the private operators and increase its prices. I repeat that call today. To its credit, Electric Ireland has held off recently on price rises, as is only right and proper for a State-owned company. That must continue. Trump and Netanyahu's illegal war in the Middle East shows very little sign of ending soon. Part of the solution has to be reducing our fossil fuel use. That is why we are proposing a pilot programme of free public transport.”
“Before the Government gives out that we only ever want to spend, spend, spend, the credits would be funded by the windfall tax on energy company profits and the other measures that my colleagues have outlined. The Government cannot dither on this again. I hope the Minister for energy will lend his support to us on this. If he does not want to listen to us, he might listen to his party colleague, Barry Andrews, MEP, who has made a similar call. Our costings put the revenue raised from this windfall tax at €476 million, €270 million of which would be used for energy credits, with the remainder put towards social welfare supports, such as a bonus double payment. On many occasions in this House, I have called for a crackdown on profiteering by energy companies in the midst of this cost-of-living crisis.”
“Energy prices have never returned to what they were prior to the war on Ukraine. Fossil fuel companies continue to make record profits. The time has clearly come for this windfall tax to be reintroduced, and that is what we in the Labour Party are calling for today. This fossil fuel crisis has touched more or less every household and small business in the country. We know that 500,000 households are already in arrears on their energy bills. I know people with good jobs and steady careers who are simply not able to pay their bills currently. However, it is low-income households, in particular, who need a lifeline. That is why we are calling for the introduction of targeted energy credits for those with an income of less than €80,000.”
“I pay tribute to Deputy Nash for his immense work in preparing this mini-budget, which I commend to the House. After Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the energy crisis that followed, the Labour Party was the first party to call for a windfall tax on the gross and excessive profits that were being made by energy companies. It took the Government a year and a half to do it but a temporary solidarity contribution, as it became known, was enacted in 2023 and covered the excess profits of fossil fuel energy companies for the years 2022 and 2023. Some €267 million was raised; it was ring-fenced and helped to reduce the burden of high energy costs on vulnerable households. Then, this really progressive and useful tax was just stopped but the cost-of-living crisis has never stopped.”
“No country is doing particularly well in this area but even across Europe 4.5% of HGVs are zero emission and we are only at just over 1%. In China, it is up to 25%. It is leading the world in this regard. The charging infrastructure grant is important because hauliers say to us they cannot avail of this not only because of the cost of the vehicles but also the lack of infrastructure. My understanding of that grant is that €1 million was allocated last year, less than €200,000 was spent and €188,000 of that was on administrative costs. I think only one grant was availed of in that whole infrastructure scheme. Improving that has to be looked at. I ask the Minister to increase the price differential in the purchase grant scheme to 100% to incentivise, so there is no cost differential between a diesel or electric vehicle purchase.”
“I ask this question in the context of the €500 million package with no strings attached announced for the haulage and farming sectors. While we recognise the need for these packages, we also have to recognise this exists because of fossil fuel dependence in those sectors and it is in many ways a subsidy to the fossil fuel industry. As part of a just transition, we must make this choice easy for hauliers in particular to decide to purchase zero-emission vehicles. The figures are not great. In 2025, of 2,564 HGVs purchased in Ireland just 1.09% were zero emission. The grants available are not availed of to the full extent either - about 50% are not being availed of. What will the Minister do to encourage the use of them?”
“I would like to ask the Minister about the electrification of our heavy goods vehicles fleet and for a report on the zero-emissions heavy duty vehicle purchase grant and zero-emissions heavy duty vehicle infrastructure grant schemes, including the number of applications received and funding drawn down since their inception; the steps he will take to encourage and increase uptake among those in the haulage and farming sectors.”
“I welcome the child maintenance guidelines that were issued earlier this year. These will help parents to decide and come to an agreement on the appropriate level of maintenance outside of the courts. However, as the Law Society has recommended, we still need an agency to assist in bringing court applications to determine maintenance where disputes arise and an agency to act as a collecting agent for maintenance payments and to engage in the enforcement of maintenance and the collection of arrears. I reiterate my support for the motion.”
“I welcome the Department's announcement of plans to retitle the rule into plain English to ensure that it is understood by all family court users, not just those with a legal or Latin degree. That is really simple but very important. Let us just call it "the privacy and transparency rule". It is vital that this rule, as long as it still exists at all, be clearly and consistently defined and understood and that its operation does not impede parties accessing support services outside the court. Of course, we should always be encouraging, in every way possible, the resolution of family disputes outside the confines of our courts. There are many other pressing issues in our family courts at the moment. These include the need for a statutory agency to pursue child maintenance.”
“I welcome this motion and thank Deputy Gogarty for proposing it. It is a worthy objective to seek more transparency and clarity in our courts system for the benefit of all court users. The notable thing about this campaign for reform of the in camera rule is that it has been led by survivors. It is grounded in the lived experiences of women and children who have experienced intimate partner violence, abuse and coercive control and who are trying to navigate a decrepit family law system that is failing them. Our system does not always manage to achieve the best outcomes for children, who are at the heart of many of these disputes. Attempts at reform in this area are welcome. Accessibility is vital in our justice system. Even the name of this rule, the in camera rule, is archaic and outdated.”
“As the Minister knows, family law remains one of the most overlooked and under-resourced areas of our justice system. The attitude to family law is epitomised by the huge site earmarked for the headquarters of the new family law courts back in 2014 that has been lying vacant and waterlogged on Hammond Lane in Smithfield for years. Planning permission was granted in 2024 and it might be completed by 2029, if we are lucky. None of these delays have anything to do with environmental law or judicial reviews, by the way. This is just a failure by Government to prioritise family law. In the meantime, our existing family law courts, which are spread over multiple different venues, are overcrowded, dilapidated and lacking in privacy and spaces suitable for dealing with the tragic and sensitive disputes at play.”
“Accessibility has to be one of its guiding principles, and this proposal is contrary to that. I ask that the Taoiseach ensure that An Post invests in the services locally in the Rathfarnham-Edmondstown area rather than forcing people to travel across Dublin South-West to get their parcels.”
“I have serious concerns about a proposal by An Post to relocate a sorting office from Edmondstown in Rathfarnham to Lucan later this year. This facility has served people in Knocklyon, Whitechurch, Firhouse and Rathfarnham for decades. Closing it would be a particularly bad blow, given the recent closure of the much-valued and much-used post office in Rathfarnham village. It will impact postal services in our area. It will have knock-on impacts with regard to delivery times and general service levels. Instead of having a relatively short and convenient journey, people in Rathfarnham will have to travel across the congested M50 all the way over to Lucan to pick up their parcels, and that is if they have a car. If there were to use by public transport, it would be a two-hour journey each way. An Post is a public service.”
“I could go on but I will finish by again stating that the story of this Government when it comes to climate is one of backsliding, a lack of seriousness and great rhetoric that is then undermined in practical actions. It is a story of a government without ambition on climate.”
“If it is to be the case that a designation by the Minister or the Government means that a core statutory duty, such as that contained in section 15 of the climate Act, can be disapplied, there would essentially be unfettered discretion, enabling selective exemption from legislation. Such a power has already been tested in the Supreme Court, where the case for it failed. Essentially, if the Bill allows the Executive to decide which projects are critical and therefore freed from climate constraints, the Government is effectively deciding when and to whom the law applies. That is not acceptable. This Government has unfortunately shown a total disregard for our existing laws, particularly environmental provisions. I will reiterate my strong support for this motion.”
“There are any number of reasons that it takes time to deliver large projects here but dumping on environmentalists and environmental law is just dishonest. The Government is looking for someone or something to blame for its failure to properly resource our planning authorities, regulatory bodies and courts over the last ten years. None of the delays to the national children's hospital will be because of environmental objections. Section 15 of the climate Act is there to ensure that our public bodies account for the fact that we are living through a climate and biodiversity crisis and that the decisions we take now will determine whether things get better or worse. There are also serious constitutional questions about this move.”
“The Minister is now framing that target to deliver 5 GW as being to have them under construction by 2030. That seems to be the best we can hope for. There has been no urgency to build up our renewable capacity. No great effort has been made to wean us off the fossil fuels that are not just harming our environment but causing real financial pain for workers and families up and down the country. The latest exercise in climate backsliding we have seen from this Government is an attack on our climate laws. It does not want to bother with the climate Act any more. It is just an inconvenience. Instead of addressing our infrastructure deficits, the Government is scapegoating environmental concerns and judicial reviews.”
“Ordinary workers, households and small businesses are now paying the price for our overreliance on dirty fossil fuels. I was really glad to hear an acknowledgement from the Tánaiste yesterday morning that our dependence on fossil fuels is not sustainable, but the inertia we have seen in this area so far can no longer be tolerated. The events of the last few weeks have exposed just how scandalous it is that we have not added a single watt of energy from offshore wind to our grid in 20 years. Our most abundant renewable resource remains largely untapped offshore. We are certainly not going to reach our 2030 target, which was set in the previous programme for Government and the 2021 climate action plan of achieving 5 GW of offshore renewable capacity by 2030.”
“We saw the plan for the Cork Luas published last week, which is great but we need to see urgency from the Government to get it delivered. Energy is, of course, on everyone's mind at the moment. In the Labour Party we have been clear that this needs to be a moment of revolution in our energy system. What we are experiencing at present is not an energy crisis; it is a fossil fuel crisis. Many of us have been sounding the alarm about our dependence on oil and gas for years from a climate perspective, but the last number of weeks have illustrated in no uncertain terms that there are also financial costs associated with our continued dependence on oil and gas. That is aside from any fines we might get from the EU for not reaching our climate targets.”
“Reliable, efficient and affordable public transport is a quality-of-life issue too, and our cities are completely gridlocked. Dublin is the third most congested city in the world and people are wasting hours of their lives sitting in traffic every day, every week. At the end of last year,Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, threw up the white flag on the M50, effectively saying there is nothing more it can do to address traffic congestion. A Galway bypass has recently been approved. This will be welcome in the short term but what happens when that road inevitably gets clogged with more traffic just like the M50 and every road we build? Where is the plan for the Galway Luas? Where is the plan for better buses, like the express service from Oranmore to the city centre that Councillor Helen Ogbu is pushing for?”
“Public transport projects like DART+ Southwest, projects that would have a real positive impact on people's lives, are unfortunately just getting pushed back. Even on a more local level for me and for the Minister of State, Deputy Brophy, we have heard absolutely nothing about the programme for Government commitment to carry out a new independent feasibility study for an extension of a metro out to Dublin South West. It is looking like we will finally be able to say with some degree of confidence that construction on the MetroLink will begin soon and that is very welcome, but we now need to start looking ahead and we should be looking in the direction of Dublin South West. My frustration with these delays and the Government's apparent lack of urgency in delivering these public transport projects is not purely from a climate perspective.”
“Clearly, this is a very regressive move, particularly given the positive steps that had been taken by the previous Government in the investment and roll-out of more public transport services in rural areas, the reduction in fares, etc. Transport remains the second highest emitting sector in our economy. Decarbonising it to the greatest extent possible would go a long way to helping us reach our climate goals, not to mention the associated public health and quality-of-life benefits and the improvements it could have on congestion on our roads. However, at a time when we are trying to see a modal shift away from private car use towards greener, more sustainable modes of transport like buses, rail, cycling, walking and so on, the Government's major change in policy was to pour more concrete and tar, which is just a bit depressing.”
“What we have seen from this Government over the past year and a half is climate backsliding, both in terms of our level of ambition and in terms of the actual numbers. Of course, rhetorically this Government remains committed to our climate ambitions and it recognises the importance of decarbonising our economy and our energy sector and so on, but it undermines it every day of the week. It is laid out plainly in this motion and I commend Deputy O'Gorman on putting together a compilation of this Government's willful failures, its greatest hits when it comes to climate, energy and the environment. Alarm bells have been going off more or less since day one of this Government. Let us take the removal of the 2:1 spending ratio on public transport to new roads in the programme for Government, for example.”
“I have not seen the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, at any of our climate committee hearings on biodiversity. As the Chief Whip said to another Deputy yesterday, you do not need to be a member of committee to attend it. We would welcome the Minister of State's input. I know he has a genuine passion for and dedication to biodiversity and nature. I would like to support him in his role but I would suggest that rather than criticising the Opposition, his efforts would be better placed in trying to ensure that our Government focuses on biodiversity issues being raised by the Opposition and regularly at the climate committee on a cross-party basis. He should ensure that the EPA, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, county councils and other institutions are resourced to effectively enforce our climate and nature laws.”
“At the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy, which I am privileged to be a part of, we have tried to shine a light on the huge destruction of biodiversity and nature going on in various locations like Lady's Island Lake in Wexford and the Blackwater river in Cork. We have investigated the large-scale, illegal commercial extraction of peat for export and profit, destroying our bogs and peatland habitats, as well as undermining our vital carbon sinks. The committee has investigated the EU's proposal to eliminate the LIFE programme, the only dedicated fund in Europe for nature restoration and a scheme that has major positive impacts on biodiversity and nature restoration projects across Ireland. Later today, we will be looking into salmon conservation.”
“This Government, which the Minister of State is a part of, is determined to systematically destroy biodiversity in this country by ignoring and actively disapplying environmental laws and environmental considerations when it comes to critical infrastructure. The Government is scapegoating environmental law for its own failures to deliver and undermining laws that were designed to protect our biodiversity and our natural environment. This Government wants to import hugely polluting fracked gas via a new LNG terminal. These two issues alone have huge impacts on our biodiversity and we are fighting against this in opposition all the time. This Government has also extended the nitrates directive, despite the fact that the quality of water in our waterways and lakes continues to decline.”