Nessa Cosgrove
Labour Panel · Labour Party · Ireland
“The Minister of State recognised that there was a grassroots movement and the documentary "Groundswell" captured it. There is also the documentary "Gasland", which was made in America and came out in 2010. We know it is going to come from America. Again, this is the Trojan horse.”
“The amendment defines "fracked gas", which does not appear anywhere in the Bill. This, with amendment No. 13, would make clear that the importation of fracked gas would not be possible under the Bill. LNG particularly when sourced in the US, is usually derived from fracking.”
“I move amendment No. 3: In page 8, after line 39, to insert the following: " "hydraulically fractured gas" means liquefied natural gas, or natural gas in any other form, that has been produced, in whole or in part, by means of hydraulic fracturing within the meaning of section 5A of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960;".…”
“I am sorry but I just do not buy the argument that it is security. A floating LNG storage facility in Qatar was blown up. It is actually more of a risk to our security to have a floating LNG terminal. This whole thing is mad.”
“All of us were probably at the IFA briefing yesterday. When they gave us the briefing document I saw that it was exactly the same as the one last year and I wondered whether it had got anything it looked for. I was told not really, apart perhaps with regard to areas of natural constraint.”
“Historians, no doubt, are going to refer to this legislation in that way, because the reserve is not going to be used solely for emergencies. We are trying to define what an emergency is. There is no definition. Seven years ago, we led the way in the international community by committing to phase out oil and gas exploration.”
The complete record
Every one of 951 lines we hold for Nessa Cosgrove, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 20.
“I move amendment No. 22: In page 23, between lines 29 and 30, to insert the following: “(3) The matters referred to in subsection (2) are: (a) an assessment by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, following a public consultation, of the projected impact of the designated development on domestic utility bills, including any socialisation of costs across households and small businesses; (b) an assessment by the Minister, following a public consultation, of the potential public health impacts and security risks posed to adjacent communities, including risks arising from industrial accidents, structural failures or attacks on the facility; (c) an updated energy security review and risk assessment prepared by the Minister, following a public consultation, evaluating contemporary geopolitical scenarios and LNG supply disruptions, impacts on national climate targets, against— (i) the accelerated deployment of renewable energy, (ii) battery energy storage systems, (iii) increased interconnection, (iv) demand reduction measures for large energy users, and (v) secondary fuel obligations; (d) a cost-benefit analysis prepared by the Minister which shall— (i) be prepared in accordance with the Public Spending Code Infrastructure Guidelines, (ii) assess the full capital, operational and lifecycle costs to both the Exchequer and energy consumers, (iii) quantify the security-of-supply costs and benefits under multiple distinct energy demand and supply scenarios, (iv) include a comparative cost assessment of reasonable alternative measures, including demand reduction, system flexibility, increased storage, interconnection and renewable energy deployment, and (4) The Minister shall lay each assessment, review and analysis referred to in subsection (3) before each House of the Oireachtas as soon as practicable after its completion.”.”
“I move amendment No. 20: In page 23, line 19, after “State,” to insert the following: “the State’s obligations under the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, as amended, including in particular the obligation to pursue the transition to a climate resilient, biodiversity rich, environmentally sustainable and climate neutral economy,”.”
“I move amendment No. 16: In page 13, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following: “(l) a declaration by the applicant setting out the proposed sources of liquefied natural gas to be imported to the facility and, in particular, confirming whether any proposed source involves natural gas produced by means of hydraulic fracturing;”.”
“I move amendment No. 13: In page 11, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following: “(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) , the importation, offloading, storage or regasification of hydraulically fractured gas shall not constitute designated development for the purposes of this Act and shall not be carried out at any facility approved under section 29 .””
“We are obviously going to oppose the Bill, but this is trying to strengthen it, and we hope that the Government will consider putting it in so that if this facility is going to be built, there is some commitment that safety has to be the priority in it. That is all this proposed amendment is trying to do, and we hope that the Government will consider accepting it.”
“With amendment No. 28, which we have submitted, we would replace the existing section 33 with a new section. We are spelling out the hard-won protections of the climate Act. This is the third time that the Government has adopted anti-climate policy. There is the Critical Infrastructure Act, the Dublin Airport (Capacity) Bill and now this legislation. The Government does not want to go down as the anti-climate Government, but there is risk of that happening if these protections are not put in. We tabled these amendments so that these protections would be put into the legislation.”
“Some €900 million is to be spent on the development of these. It is a lot of money to be investing. If it is going to be temporary why not invest it in renewable energy that is not going to be temporary? Nine hundred million euro is a lot of money.”
“Why is it okay that we are going to say it is fine for communities in places like Pennsylvania to have their lives destroyed? Communities have been destroyed by it. It is sinking into the water supply and we know there are not only health concerns but environmental concerns around areas where people are living. Has the Minister of State seen that documentary? It is really good but it is also terrifying. Why would we say that it is grand for those communities to get along with fracking and we will accept the product? More and more, I think it is the Trojan horse.”
“The Minister of State recognised that there was a grassroots movement and the documentary "Groundswell" captured it. There is also the documentary "Gasland", which was made in America and came out in 2010. We know it is going to come from America. Again, this is the Trojan horse. We know that if it is going to be LNG, it is going to be fracked gas and it is going to come from America. We know that it does have to be vented. The majority of LNG is methane and is 80 times more warming than carbon dioxide. It is 33% more damaging to the atmosphere than coal. Why are we having it at all? It is fine for us not to have it here. We know the detrimental affects it has on communities and we successfully stopped fracking from happening in our country, so why is it okay for the Government, as Senator Higgins said, to say "Drill baby, drill".”
“Unfortunately, it did not ban the importation of fracked gas. As I said earlier, it was a brave move banning fracked gas in Ireland at the time. As I said about former Deputy, Tony McLoughlin, in fairness, he did a lot of work up in our area. Deputy Scanlon did as well. They did a lot of work in the area. Subsequent Government policy introducing a de facto ban on the importation of fracked gas will be overturned to develop this LNG facility. It is definitely hypocritical for us to say that it is grand for us to import it, that we do not want to have it here ourselves but it is grand for us that other countries can have the damage of fracking and then we will import it. I hope the Minister of State will consider those amendments.”
“The amendment defines "fracked gas", which does not appear anywhere in the Bill. This, with amendment No. 13, would make clear that the importation of fracked gas would not be possible under the Bill. LNG particularly when sourced in the US, is usually derived from fracking. In Pennsylvania, we can see the devastating consequences, not only environmental consequences but health consequences as well. This is why we have included a definition of "hydraulically fractured gas" as meaning "liquefied natural gas, or natural gas in any other form, that has been produced, in whole or in part, by means of hydraulic fracturing within the meaning of section 5A of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960". That Act defines hydraulic fracturing and, after amendment in 2017, banned the practice of fracking in Ireland.”
“I move amendment No. 3: In page 8, after line 39, to insert the following: " "hydraulically fractured gas" means liquefied natural gas, or natural gas in any other form, that has been produced, in whole or in part, by means of hydraulic fracturing within the meaning of section 5A of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960;". A definition of fracked gas or hydraulically fractured gas is required to accompany a reiteration of the ban that was introduced on fracked gas and which is necessary to protect our environment. We banned the fracking of gas in this jurisdiction on health grounds and environment grounds for the good but if we allow imported fracked gas to be used, we will be hypocrites. It is wrong that it is fine for us to ban it here but it is fine for us then to import it. It is not right.”
“Why are we debating this Bill and then having to debate another one? It does not make any sense. I cannot understand it. This is a Trojan horse being railroaded through. I cannot understand why we would want to have two Bills on the very same thing. Why is the operation of the facility not included in this legislation? Why can the amendments not be accepted? That would be it sorted. I do not understand.”
“I am sorry but I just do not buy the argument that it is security. A floating LNG storage facility in Qatar was blown up. It is actually more of a risk to our security to have a floating LNG terminal. This whole thing is mad. Paul Griffiths, CEO of Predator Oil and Gas, publicly said 12 months ago that he would not live near an LNG terminal. He said, “Accidents can happen, so keeping facilities well out of the reach of habitation is vital”. He went on to say, "There’s like a one-in-1,000 chance perhaps of an accident happening, but when an accident does happen [ - he did not even say if - ] it would be catastrophic". As for the idea that this is about some kind of energy security, it is not. It is actually the opposite. It is a real threat to our security. Why do we have two Bill?”
“If there is an insistence that it is going to be there, this amendment would provide a safeguard that it would only be used in an emergency, it would remain in public ownership and it will not open the door to commercial operators, which is a real threat. It would be great if the Minister of State could speak to that.”
“I will speak to amendment No. 15. If the stated intent of the FSRU is for it to be an emergency reserve, then the logical thing to do is to put it into public ownership. There should be no question that this will go to private providers. There is no room at all for commercial operators to make a profit out of this really dangerous gas. If we are going to end up with it as a reserve - I do not think it is a reserve - can we make sure it stays in public ownership and legislate for that? The Minister of State told us it will only be used in emergencies but that is not clear in the Bill because there is no definition of an emergency.”
“All this amendment does is reiterate that we will ensure compliance with these legally binding carbon budgets. We have tabled many amendments. According to the summary, the purpose of this Bill is to secure a supply of gas in the event of an emergency, yet it does not include a definition of an emergency. An emergency needs to be defined so the Bill will not allow and encourage the incorporation of gas that the Oireachtas has authorised for use only in an emergency into the day-to-day energy mix. The definition included in this amendment makes very clear what constitutes an emergency. That is why I wish the Minister of State would accept it. Without a definition of an emergency, there is a risk that we are going to be using filthy, horrible fracked gas in our energy mix.”
“Historians, no doubt, are going to refer to this legislation in that way, because the reserve is not going to be used solely for emergencies. We are trying to define what an emergency is. There is no definition. Seven years ago, we led the way in the international community by committing to phase out oil and gas exploration. In fairness to Fine Gael, its former member Tony McLoughlin, who lives in my area, was actually behind banning the importation of fracked gas. This has been settled Government policy ever since. This amendment, which would reassert the commitment to reduce and legally phase out the use of natural gas, should not even be controversial at this stage; it should be accepted as a given. We are obliged to comply with our legally binding carbon budget targets.”
“I have called this a Trojan Horse in the House before. This week, a new version of Homer's Odyssey is being released in cinemas nationwide. It is the tale of Odysseus's protracted journey following the end of the Trojan War. We all know the Trojan War ended when the cunning Greeks infiltrated the fortifications of Troy using a horse that was filled with Greek warriors. I know we might not have been talking about this, but this is a Trojan Horse. To say that the gas is for emergency use is an absolute Trojan Horse. It is going to be used in our energy mix. There is nothing else we can call it but a Trojan Horse. People question the strategic thinking of the Trojans in bringing a wooden horse filled with danger into their city.”
“They work part time because we do not all have land like there is in the Golden Vale down in Cork. Could we have a specific discussion or debate on farming in various areas in the country? I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for fitting me in and I wish everyone the best for the summer. The work is only starting now.”
“All of us were probably at the IFA briefing yesterday. When they gave us the briefing document I saw that it was exactly the same as the one last year and I wondered whether it had got anything it looked for. I was told not really, apart perhaps with regard to areas of natural constraint. I would like a debate on these, which affect farmers where I live. Is there any possibility we could have debate on this? As we all know, farming is different in different areas of the country. The areas of natural constraint payment was taken away in 2008 and we are wondering whether it could be restored to that level. Generational renewal is another area that was also raised. It is difficult, particularly for the farmers I met yesterday from Sligo and Leitrim, who are not full-time farmers.”
“Again, that is why I cannot understand why this motion is not fully supported. I too was at the IFA submission event. It was said twice to me that trust is being lost between politicians and farmers, which we all need to take on board as political representatives. I am delighted to support the motion. In this House, we spend a lot of time talking about rural Ireland. It is wonderful to have it all in one specific document.”
“It is very easy for a planner in Dublin to look at where wind farms should be if there are not a lot of dwellings nearby but that often overlooks the impact these giant wind farms have. No one is against renewable energy. We all need to transition to that but it is it about being careful about not developing them in areas where they will really affect not only quality of life but also the environment with disasters like landslides, which are a big concern in Leitrim. So many grassroots groups have come together. Rural Ireland is at its best when groups come together. There are Love Leitrim, Save Leitrim and Treasure Leitrim. They are all concerned people living in the local areas who work closely with Government representatives and with the Opposition, with all groups, and want to bring people with them.”
“Independents who represent rural areas are supporting the Government. In an area like mine, there is a real threat from LNG development. I am surprised, in light of the national planning framework and the critical infrastructure Bill, that environmental measures will be overlooked. That is my main worry about rural Ireland. Places like Leitrim can be seen as a sacrificial zone because we have really good natural resources. Already 20% of its land is covered with forestry compared with the national average or 11.6%, mainly non-native Sitka spruce. There is exploitation of gold mining, fracking and giant windmills. We have spoken about wind energy. They are unsuitable. There is a proposed development in Leitrim again on Dough Mountain. It will be built on peatland so there is huge objection. The countermotion refers to local involvement.”
“Under the national planning framework, all towns with a population of fewer than 10,000 people are classed as rural settlements meaning that every town, village and settlement in Sligo, Leitrim and south Donegal with the exception of Sligo town is a rural settlement. That is indicative of most of our constituencies. As a nation that is what we are made up of. It takes me ten minutes to walk into town one way and if I walk the other, I can walk to agricultural land in ten minutes. Urban settings rely on rural settings and vice versa. There is nothing in this motion I would not support. I know it is not the Minister's brief but I am concerned about the approach the Government has taken to the environment in general. We are not transitioning to renewable energies as quickly as we should.”
“I too know how interested the Minister is in rural Ireland and in his brief. I cannot understand why the Government would not support the motion, either. It is a fantastic motion. A lot of us are representatives of rural areas. It is great to have everything in together. I do not think there is anything negative about it. I fail to understand why the Government has an amendment at all. The motion could easily have been supported. The motion could not state the reality of life more clearly, "Rural communities are central to the social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being of the State". My constituency is very representative of that, made up of small towns in Sligo, Leitrim and south Donegal.”
“This approach would match the ICJ jurisprudence. We have discussed at length how disappointed we are that services are not included. This amendment puts forward an easily enforceable and actionable way to bring services within the scope of the Bill. I hope the Minister will consider the amendment.”
“(3) In this section — (a) “service” and “supplier” have the meanings assigned to them by the Value-Added Tax Consolidation Act 2010, and (b) the question whether the place of supply of the service is the State shall be determined in accordance with section 34 (a) of that Act.”. This amendment aims to effectively ban - we have gone through all of that and I am not going to go over it again - the import into the State of services from a postcode related to an illegal settlement. It would do so by making the relevant contracts completely void and unenforceable in Irish law. The courts would not recognise commercial agreements or any rights or obligations they created. Through its courts, the State would be demonstrably shunning economic and trade dealings that support or entrench Israel's unlawful presence in the occupied territories.”
“I move amendment No. 5: In page 4, after line 35, to insert the following: “Agreements for importation of certain services 5. (1) An agreement for the reception by a person in the State of a service from a supplier established in a postal code to which this Act applies, where the place of supply of the service is the State, is void and unenforceable. (2) A court shall not recognise — (a) a judgment or order of the court of another state, or (b) an award made by an arbitral tribunal under an arbitration agreement, for the enforcement of an agreement to which subsection (1) applies, on the ground that enforcement of such an agreement is contrary to public policy.”
“I want to give a big welcome to the guests who came on the Culture Bus from Dunlavin. They are here as guests of Deputy Edward Timmins. I also welcome Jordan and Cian Adams, the FTD Brothers, who are guests of Deputy Carrigy. I do not know whether they have gone but they are very welcome. They are with Helen Jolly, and I am sure their mother, Geraldine, was very proud of them.”
“The consequences of these utterly untrue allegations have caused Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Independents in government to prevaricate and it has deterred us from concrete economic actions that would underline our diplomatic criticism of the behaviour of the State of Israel and of its proxy militias among the settler movement. Settler militias and settler-only units of the Israel Defense Forces, IDF, continue to extend the occupation to fresh areas of Palestinian land. They continue to expel the inhabitants and ethnically cleanse ever greater areas of Palestine. I, too, have been to Palestine. Our State is not the state that is guilty of systematic, genocidal racism. We should not be afraid to follow up our words with economic actions. The occupied territories Bill should include imports, exports, goods and services.”
“We showed that the practical identification and outlawing of trade in services in specific geographical areas of a wider range was possible. Why do we not have the political will to do this to Israel? Senior Israelis have frequently slandered Ireland and our leaders, including the Taoiseach, Deputy Micheál Martin, the Tánaiste, Deputy Simon Harris, and former President Michael D. Higgins, as being antisemitic. It goes without saying that we, as a State, and those three individuals are not antisemitic. I trust and hope that we will always continue to challenge the scourge antisemitism, just as with any other form of racism. These slurs are used as a form of bullying as a means to enrage US politicians and to direct our foreign policy.”
“Both are modern, open economies with a much higher value on services than goods. This Bill only applies to the trade and importation of goods from the occupied territories. It does not apply to the importation or exportation of services. Ironically, there would be less of a breach of the ICJ ruling if we allowed the importation of goods and outlawed the export of services. While the Government argued that EU law prevents us from acting, Spain has proven that if the will is there to outlaw the advertisement of services, such as Airbnb, it can be done under existing EU legislation. We, along with the rest of the EU, outlawed the trade of both goods and services in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine within months of the invasion.”
“The same court, in paragraph 278 of its ruling, demanded that states should no more trade with these settlements and services than we should in goods. We should no more export services than we should import figs or dates. This is explicitly stated. All states are under an obligation "to abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings" and they are "to prevent trade or investment relations" with the settlements. It is not only our legal obligation not to engage in trade with the occupied territories in our own name, but it is also our legal obligation under international law to prevent others from doing so. If we do not comply with this paragraph of the ruling, we are in breach of international law. In many ways, Ireland and Israel have similar economies.”
“The Aire is welcome. I commend Senator Black on all the work she has done. I welcome Brian and Conor O'Neill to the Gallery. I do not wish to spend my time this evening stating the obvious, but in these circumstances, it is hard not to do so. Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory are illegal. They have been ruled to be illegal not by me, Opposition parties, the Government or Senator Black, who, as everyone has acknowledged, brought forward a more perfect version of this Bill. Those settlements have been ruled illegal by the ICJ. This Bill only applies to the trade and importation of goods from the occupied territories. It does not apply to services or exports, yet the highest court available to the United Nations is unequivocal in stating that Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are illegal.”
“It is reassuring to hear that there is a commitment to continue it. I am delighted that it has been made permanent. It is hard enough, though, as not everyone is eligible. Praxis, the artists' union, would urge that anyone eligible should receive it. We need more art, not less. All jobs and workers are under threat from AI but creative workers are particularly vulnerable. We see how much we as a society lean on it. I believe there is research that shows that, for every euro spent on the basic income for the arts scheme, €1.39 is returned to the economy. That is an incredible figure. Artists are spending their money locally, bringing communities together through it. I hope the commitment will continue and we will look at extending it to anyone eligible.”
“She deserves great respect for bringing in the scheme. The fact that the pilot has been extended to a full and permanent scheme, which will run on a three-year cycle from 2026 to 2029, demonstrates the commitment of the current Minister. I am asking whether there is any intention to build on it. We know it works. We know how much as a country we lean on artistic ability. We lean on creativity. People definitely do not come here for the weather. They come here for the richness of our culture and heritage. We saw the number of people who applied and were approved for the scheme. Could it be extended? Could the basic income for artists be extended so we give the artists the commitment and recognition in monetary value that they deserve?”
“They are not the ones to blame for this. To attribute a financial value to something that may be conceptual or dependent on taste is a challenge. I understand it is a challenge. This is why the basic income for artists works. It is about ensuring that artists have a basic income on which they can rely, allowing them to concentrate purely on the value of their product rather than spending so long either in part-time work or filling out unnecessary forms and grant applications. During the downturn, which started in 2008, the consequences of which we are still living with, an estimated 48% of artists left their practice. Imagine that this scheme had been in operation since then. Who did we lose from the art world before they ever got the chance to shine? In fairness, I will give deserved respect to the former Minister, Catherine Martin.”
“Last Wednesday, at the launch of our EU Presidency, it was wonderful for us to show the world the creative richness we have here. In 2025, the Arts Council produced a toolkit, Fair Pay, Fair Practice. Its purpose is admirable and it is consistent with values that I believe in. In my previous job, I worked to support artists. The fact that the Arts Council had to produce this policy toolkit clearly demonstrates that everybody who works in the arts knows the work that artists do and that they are not paid fairly for their work. There are unseen hours of preparation, research and gathering materials. In other professions, you would get paid for that, but for some reason, that work when done by creatives goes without pay. Organisations employ artists at rates that never reflect that value of what they produce.”
“There is no accurate way to count how many people are actively involved in the arts as creators at a professional level but we know it is a massive amount of people. We can say with certainty, however, that over 10,000 artists and creative workers applied for the initial pilot of the basic income for artists in 2022, and that 2,000 of those artists and creative workers were selected for inclusion in the pilot. Those lucky enough to be selected between 2022 and 2026 received a payment of €325 per week. It was used by them to support them in a professional practice. We are all familiar with the historic link between artists and poverty, and the reality is that it is ongoing. Many artists live in poverty. We rely on them so much.”
“Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. Nach éagóir é go bhfuil ealaíontóirí na tíre á gcur ar stáitse againn chun saibhreas cultúrtha na tíre a léiriú, ach iad beo bocht? Níl sé sin ceart ar chor ar bith. Since ancient times, we Irish have been famous for literature, storytelling, music and whatever we generally call "the arts". It is a term that is used to describe a wide variety of creative work from which we, as individuals and a society, benefit. We lean on the arts in this country, from visual art, painting, sculpture, film, performing arts, theatre, circus and spectacle to the composition of literature and music. Especially in my part of the world, we all know how much we rely on that arts. They have such an impact on people's lives. Nearly everyone engages with some level of art in their daily lives.”
“What does make strategic sense is investing rapidly in indigenous renewables and a combination of offshore and onshore wind, along with solar and tidal energy, and when the wind blows or the sun shines, save that surplus as a reserve. Gas, particularly LNG acquired by fracking, does not make sense as a strategic reserve. We need to see quick action, not on a strategic gas reserve but on a strategic renewable reserve. I really hope the Minister will listen to what I am saying. I am like a broken record in here talking about this, because it affects me so much where I live in the north west.”
“Germany has to keep committing an amount of €4 billion to keep these units operational, with no benefit to the German consumer in terms of electricity prices. There has never been a clearer case of supply and demand affecting price than the impact which conflict in oil producing regions has upon the price of energy. If the economic case made strategic sense in April 2024, it does not make sense in Trump's 2026. It has never made sense, from the point of view of military security, to have floating gas terminals. Attacks on Russian and Qatari LNG infrastructure clearly demonstrates the truth of this assertion. It does not make sense to depend on LNG from the Middle East, and it does not make strategic sense to make ourselves even more dependent on America than we already are.”
“The influence of the Green Party is severely missed. The deal that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael did with the rural Independent Deputies really is as bad for the environment as many of us feared, particularly where I live in the north west. There is no coherent strategic thinking regarding the environmental emergency in which we find ourselves. Does the economic strategy make sense? The economic case for an LNG terminal was made in April 2024 at a time when the price of LNG delivered to the EU was on a downward trajectory. The price for a megawatt hour was just under €23 in February 2024. In March 2026, just two years later, it climbed to €55.20, an increase of more than double. The experience of Germany, which spent an initial €2.5 billion on four floating storage regasification units shows how the costs spiralled.”
“Obviously, it does not make sense to vent gas which is acquired at such a cost to the economy and the earth into the atmosphere. Therefore, we will vent it into the system. We are going to use the gas. That is the logical thing to do once we have the gas and it needs to be used. The problem is that when we vent the gas, we will need to refill the tank. In order to maintain a seven-day supply of LNG, we will need to replenish the floating storage unit at least six times each year. It is not a reserve; it is intended to be part of the general energy mix. Even if it is used only at an absolute minimum level to keep it safe, we will discharge the daily equivalent of 10 GW to 30 GW of hours of energy into the national network. It is clear that the environmental arguments are failing to have any influence whatsoever on the Government.”
“I will share my time with Senator Stephenson. Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. It is an old joke that the Holy Roman Empire was not holy, Roman or an empire. The strategic gas reserve suffers from a similar misnomer. Our continuing dependence on fossil fuels for energy security is not strategic, and the gas that will be stored at the envisioned facility will be far from a reserve. From the very outset, it will become part of our everyday energy mix. I have highlighted this many times in the Chamber, as has my Labour Party colleague Ciarán Ahern in the Dáil. It will be used in our energy mix because LNG requires venting in order to remain usable and safe. It will need to be vented, either into the atmosphere or into the system.”
“We joined because it would be better for all the people living on the island and that has to be taken into account when we look at areas such as the north west that have been downgraded in their EU status to a lagging region. That is the case we need to be arguing during our EU Presidency.”
“I thank the Minister of State. We know the work that is done on the ground. However, there is a danger. That is why I think we should use our EU Presidency. I am talking in particular about the north west. It has been downgraded to a lagging region within the EU. It is in areas like that we know there are challenges in respect of employment opportunities, building sustainable communities and promoting green ethical farming. All of those matters come under the CAP budget. It must be ensured that we have this commitment. I know that the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Calleary, are committed to LEADER companies and SICAP. It is about trying to use our voice. We joined the EU in 1973. It was not a military operation that we joined.”
“The Sligo and Leitrim LEADER programmes provide amazing opportunities, as do the programmes across the country. However, there is a worry that the CAP budget is going to decrease and will go towards more militarisation.”
“Even if it is not within the CAP budget, is money going to be ring-fenced? There is also the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, budget. Is the new community and new arrivals portion of that budget going to remain in place? Whether we like it or not, is it going to stay in place? The SICAP budget usually comes quite late. For local development companies, the SICAP budget arrives quite late, but because there is this additional new arrivals fund, they were able to manage the fund themselves. However, if that new arrivals money is not going to be there, when is the money going to be given to SICAP? Can we be sure of a date? There are real concerns that there is a move towards military spending. It is not just LEADER companies. The Minister of State knows this.”