Roderic O'Gorman
Dublin West · Green Party · Ireland
“These are men and women who served their working lives within the British civil service system but who, following unification, would be drawing their pensions in a united Ireland. The question of the funding of that will be extremely significant in any talks following a "Yes" vote on both parts of the island.”
“Some 100 extra staff have been hired to the public domain team to tackle waste and dumping and our councillors will continue to fight for a cleaner and greener Dublin.”
“These challenges are magnified by the continued failure of the current political institutions in Northern Ireland to operate for the best interests of the people rather than achieving best political advantage for the parties.”
“In the Dublin Central area, an average of 50 tonnes per month of illegally dumped waste is being removed by the council. It is a huge amount of waste, and this is more than is collected in an entire year from whole counties elsewhere in the country. Our current model of waste management is a direct contributor to this.”
“This means that in many areas, bags are the notional solution but these cause issues with seagulls or foxes or are intermingled with illegally dumped bags. The net result is our footpaths are strewn with waste. Dublin City Council recently rolled out a system of waste compactors in the core areas of the city centre.”
“The solution is to rationalise the current system, put local authorities back at the centre of waste management processes and use this to get a better handle on pricing and illegal dumping through contracts that are right for each specific area, instead of the one-size-fits-all model we have at the moment that is not actually working anyw…”
The complete record
Every one of 975 lines we hold for Roderic O'Gorman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 20.
“On the grouping, my amendment proposes that section 7(1) state: The designated strategic gas reserve, including any terminal, infrastructure, or facility developed under this Act, shall remain exclusively in public ownership and under State control and shall not be transferred or outsourced, in whole or in part, to any private commercial entity. It proposes that section 7(2) state: The facility shall be operated solely by a designated public body for emergency energy security purposes and shall not be utilized [sic] for commercial trading of gas supplies by any private enterprise.”
“It is important to put that on record. There is a large set of amendments. This is not filibustering, as these are detailed, researched amendments being put forward by the Opposition. Some them were drawn up with the advice of environmental groups. Those groups wanted to meet the Minister and engage with him on this Bill but he was not available. This is the ability for legislation to be strengthened and we are not getting that. When Committee and Report Stages are banged in together, it shows a Government not taking the issue seriously. It is important to put that on record. In particular, the idea that a brand new piece of fossil fuel infrastructure would be exempted from the application of the climate Act makes a mockery of our country's statements that we take climate action seriously.”
“Amendment No. 18 in this grouping is in my name. Before I get into the substantive issue, it is important to again raise the process that is being followed here. This is important legislation and there are fundamental disagreements over the extent to which it will contribute to our country's energy security, but it is being rushed through both Committee and Report Stages in two hours. There is no need for this Bill to be rushed in this way and I think it is unprecedented, certainly in this Dáil, to see this Bill and another one coming in in two hours' time being rushed in this way. This particular Bill is going to lock us into the use of LNG in our energy mix. It will have long-term consequences. The consequences of this Bill will be felt up to 2050. For a Bill that has a 25-year timeline, we are getting two hours of debate.”
“Two Bills are being guillotined this evening, the airport cap Bill and the liquefied natural gas, LNG, Bill, each of which will have major impacts on our climate targets. Not only are they being guillotined, but Committee Stage and Report Stage of each are being run together so the two Bills can be rushed through this House. There are 58 detailed amendments across the two Bills that will not get proper consideration because of this process. I ask the Chief Whip to please withdraw the use of the guillotine and allow these two Bills to get the consideration they deserve.”
“However, they are not getting help because the focus is on work like such as this, namely, legislation that requires a huge amount of work and is locking us into a system and energy source we need to move away from. I look forward to the opportunity to tease out in detail my objections and the objections of others to the Bill. I look forward to bringing forward meaningful solutions to some of the issues I have raised. I appeal to the Minister of State to speak to his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, about the time allocated to this Bill. It is not acceptable to have two hours for Committee, Report and Remaining stages. It does not do his or any of our arguments justice. This is an important matter, and it deserves more than two hours.”
“I passionately believe in delivering security of supply, but I am not convinced by the argument the Government is bringing forward. Tying ourselves to a polluting fossil fuel that has seen its price spike and its availability shrink in each of these energy fuel crises is not the solution to our security of supply. Security of supply for energy in Ireland is delivered by making our own renewable energy here in Ireland. That is where the focus of this Government's action, legislation and investment needs to be. Very importantly, the Minister and his civil servants, in creating policy, need to focus on getting through the blockages in our system. The industry groups supporting the electrification of our nation's energy systems are trying to get through those blockages.”
“In years to come, there will be real questions raised about the wisdom of investing so much in a large piece of expensive infrastructure when our national policy is that we do not want to use this fuel any more. This Bill is a clear effort to undermine and weaken our climate law, in combination with the other three Bills I referred to earlier. I passionately believe in energy security for this country. I remember my parents talking to me about the late 1970s and the oil crisis in that period. Four times in my time in Dáil Éireann, our country has been struck by dramatic energy security incidents, generated by the wars in Ukraine and Iran. Those energy crises have impacted on families and caused misery and financial hardship all over the country.”
“This creates a real risk that when this terminal is created, our energy goals and climate policies will have moved on. By 2030 and 2031, we will be in a different place. Hopefully, some of that wind power will be feeding into our system, but we will have invested €900 million in this infrastructure. To take the example of Germany, in 2022, it invested €2.5 billion in LNG infrastructure. Since then, it has had to spend more than €4 billion extra in state aid to cover the losses, as these terminals' operating costs continue to rise. These rising costs can be attributed to Germany's decreased reliance on natural gas since the terminals were built. That question of having a stranded asset is not one that has been examined in sufficient detail.”
“This huge investment would pay for many of the solar panels Deputy Neville said he would love to see going up across the country. We have to remember that by the time the terminal is open, climate targets will be higher, our carbon budget will be far more constrained and our reliance on fossil fuels should be declining, not growing. However, through this Bill and the facility that will be created under it, we will lock ourselves even further into a continued fossil fuel reliance, which could last for decades. This is completely misaligned with the climate goals the country agreed to. We should not be planning further fossil fuel energy infrastructure at the same time as we are trying to move away from fossil fuels as a core national policy.”
“We need to focus on the areas where we can actually deliver and have a track record but where there are clear barriers to the rapid delivery of the electrification of our energy networks. I wish the same passion and determination were put into the changes that would allow us to create our own energy in Ireland as have been put into driving forward this Bill and other Bills that undermine our climate obligations. I will talk a little about the project itself because it is not going to deliver energy security in the short term. The best estimate we got in the committee was that it would take three and a half years - until 2030 - before this would be built, assuming there are no delays. There are few projects in this country where we can see that happening. It is going to cost €900 million in capital and running costs.”
“The Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, and I have spoken already about something small that will not change the world. In plug-in solar, even something small such as that, Ireland is behind because there is not that effort to bring those concerned, whether ESB Networks, EirGrid and the Irish standards authority, together to bring about a solution to allow more people enjoy lower cost energy from these solutions. The Celtic interconnector, something that will guarantee significant energy security and enough electricity to support 450,000 households, is delayed by two years. These are the areas where the Government needs to focus. Instead, we have a grandiose project such as this. We have Members on the backbenches touting nuclear fuel.”
“At the same time, every time wind energy industry representatives comes into this House and talk to TDs, they say An Coimisiún Pleanála does not have enough staff to get the planning applications done in detail. The Minister, Deputy Chambers, will stand up and say that he doubled the number of staff in An Coimisiún Pleanála and he is not giving any more. That is the barrier the industry experts have cited to us in getting our offshore wind energy system online. The barriers are lack of staff in An Coimisiún Pleanála to undertake this scrutiny. It is not judicial reviews. It is not the climate Act. It is not environmental NGOs. It is a failure to address the substantive barriers to the delivery of offshore wind and of the wider electrification of our energy systems.”
“When my party was in government, as part of the Government, we put in place the frameworks that would enable the roll-out of offshore wind. We went from a situation where there was only a skeleton crew of staff working in the Department of energy on the issue of offshore to creating a new offshore wind unit in the Department. We brought together a task force, bringing in industry so that it could engage with the Department in terms of the barriers that existed there. As part of that Government, we worked with Ministers in other Departments to set up Marine Area Regulatory Authority, MARA, to get the marine planning legislation passed. That Government was able to advance five major renewable energy auctions in 2023. Three years on, there is still not one of those feeding into the grid.”
“What will deliver energy security for Ireland is producing our own renewable energy here at home and that should be our priority. That should be where the Government is fixing its time and where the Government is fixing the huge economic resources - €900 million - that this particular project will cost. We should not be relying on other countries to produce our energy for us, such as using Qatari LNG or US fracked gas. We need our own energy so that we can make our own choices. The solution is to rapidly build onshore and offshore wind, develop our solar farms, put in place the energy interconnection systems that will tie us into other grids and ensure the energy we create here at times of high production from renewables is stored through rolling out battery storage at scale, and I raised this issue with the Taoiseach earlier this week.”
“I believe tying ourselves into LNG will do the opposite of providing security of energy supply in our country. We know that using LNG fails to deliver affordability. We saw the first day of the Iran war, the price of LNG shot up 46% in one single day. The world's largest LNG terminal, Ras Laffan, in Qatar, was closed on day two of the Iran conflict. Twenty per cent of the world's LNG comes from there. Much of the rest of the LNG comes from the United States, with all the risks of being dependent on the whims of the Trump Administration and whoever follows him. We are tying our economy into a substance, a highly-polluting fossil fuel, that is unstable as to both its price and its availability. That is not energy security.”
“I note that this Bill does not require the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, to have a clear pathway to wind down and decommission the reserve while approving it, and that only adds to those risks. If we are to have a gas reserve, it should entail the smallest possible amount for the shortest possible period of time with a clear exit strategy, all of which is underpinned by the mechanisms of the climate Act. The Bill we are debating today does none of those things. Instead, it leaves the use of LNG in our energy system as an open-ended question at a time when we know just how unreliable supplies of fossil fuels can be globally. I will turn to that point of security of supply because that has been the central argument that the Government has put forward.”
“LNG terminals do not store LNG for long periods of time. They have to be continually topped off because of the burn off of LNG, even when there is no emergency. This creates a continual demand for the LNG gas in the energy system, sending the exact opposite message to what we should be sending right now. We know that long-term use of fossil fuels is incompatible with our 2050 targets, which should take priority. Even if the terminal is built for security today, and let us not forget it will not be built today but will be operational in 2030 at the earliest, the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, has recognised that LNG terminals will have to be phased out within ten-to-15 years. Then we will have this terminal as a stranded asset. It will become unusable and uneconomic.”
“That is what happened in the Act all of us, all parties represented here, voted for in 2021. Now we have a major fossil fuel project that has been planned to work outside of the country's climate law and that will inevitably lead to calls for other pieces of infrastructure to be excluded too. We see that with the airport cap and the Critical Infrastructure Bill. If the climate law applies to everything except the most carbon intensive projects, essentially, it applies to nothing at all. That is what we are doing in the three pieces of legislation that will be passed in this House over these two months. Without the right guardrails in place in this legislation, we are putting ourselves at risk of creating significant fossil fuel lock-in within our energy system and doubling down on a higher cost of fuel for families and for homes.”
“What is happening with this legislation, taken in conjunction with the Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026 passed by the Houses, is the Government is creating a situation where our climate targets will undergo death by a thousand exemptions. Let us remember that where we exempt sections of society or the economy from the application of the Act, other sections of society have to meet the difference in terms of emissions. Therefore, we are pushing the burden onto households, small businesses and other parts of the economy. We are exempting this liquefied natural gas, LNG, terminal but for every other public body in Ireland, the commitment to national mitigation plans and to the adaptation frameworks and the transition objectives all are legally binding. They are not only guidelines; they are legally binding.”
“That is what would at least provide some element of reassurance that this is only emergency legislation. That could be done. I will be bringing forward amendments to allow that - other members of the Opposition will be doing the same - although they will not be accepted. That is why it is hard to hear this tale being spun that we are all in it together. There are two distinct views here about what this Bill could achieve and we will not even get the opportunity to tease that out over the next week. Exempting fossil fuel infrastructure from the application of the climate Act sets a worrying precedent. It also makes a mockery of the efforts taking place all over the country, in households and in businesses in wide-ranging sectors of the economy, to reduce our emissions.”
“It will be contingent on how soon and how readily we can electrify our energy systems and support it with interconnection and support it with storage. Then it is critically important that a Bill that enables such a piece of infrastructure would take place within the framework of decarbonising our society. To do otherwise would create a situation where we develop a reserve which locks us in to further fossil fuel dependency well past its sale-by date. That, in my view, is what this proposal will do. Every member of the Government who spoke on this said this is only for an emergency. If the Government is serious about that, let it help us achieve that by putting the relevant measures into this Bill, make sure it is time-bound and make sure it is compliant with our larger climate obligations in the Act and in the annual climate action plans.”
“It is deeply disrespectful, but also indicative of the lack of seriousness with which the Government treats these issues, that it is simply ramming this through the Dáil without the requisite opportunity to debate, amend or improve. I will now turn to the legislation before us. My central issue with this Bill, the airport cap Bill and the Critical Infrastructure Bill is that all three seek a carve-out from the application of the climate action Act. With regard to this Bill, to be clear, no proposal to introduce new fossil fuel infrastructure into our country's energy mix should go ahead without a climate impact assessment. That is exactly what section 33 of this Bill proposes to do. If an emergency reserve is needed, and it is a big "if", that "if" will be contingent on several factors.”
“This Bill and the Dublin Airport cap Bill will be discussed on Committee, Report and Remaining Stages for two hours each next week. I cannot recall seeing such important legislation rammed through this House with such little respect. I have put a set of amendments down on each of these Bills and other members of the Opposition have done likewise. There is a difference in approach between the Government and the Opposition. Let that be tested on Committee Stage. It could be done on Committee Stage next week. We all know what the end result will be, but this could be tested on Committee Stage next week and the Bill could then proceed to Report Stage the following week. It would still be done by the end of this year.”
“This is the second Bill I will discuss this week which will act to tear holes in our country's climate ambition. It is doing that on a week when we are seeing the realities of the scale of climate change across Europe, with heat impacting on so many countries and making life intolerable for millions of people. The irony of this is lost on the Government, which is rushing through this legislation and the airport cap legislation with the minimum of debate. I will focus on that before I get into the substantive discussion. I have heard other Deputies eloquently advocate for this legislation. There are clear, different approaches and views in this regard, and that is fine. However, if that is the case, let us test it.”
“The national immunisation advisory committee, NIAC, recommends the vaccine for those up to the age of 24 years. When will the Government bring forward a new HPV catch-up campaign for young adults, so they can benefit from this protection as well?”
“Last week a UK report showed that girls who receive the HPV vaccine in their early teens have an almost zero risk of dying from cervical cancer but at a time when the research shows there is a chance of actually eliminating cervical cancer, uptake rates of the vaccine in schools is actually falling all over the country. It is down to 63% of girls taking it up in the Dublin North West region. In January, the Minister for Health announced a HPV vaccine catch-up programme for fifth and sixth year students. This was a really positive step, which I warmly welcomed as chair of the cross-party group on cancer. However, there is still a gap. There is no new catch-up scheme for young adults who missed the vaccine in schools. It costs €200 a dose for them.”
“There are bad actors out there who would like nothing more than to stigmatise us and drive us back into the closet. We will not allow that to happen. As Dublin celebrates Pride this weekend we mark how far we have come. Let us also be clear that we will not accept any push-back on our LGBTQ+ rights; not internationally and not here in our own country.”
“It is not right that harmful and hateful content can be posted and shared so widely. It is not right that an innumerable amount of bot accounts can spread this type of hate. It is not right that a person struggling to come to terms with their own sexuality or their own gender identity is bombarded with that content. In the past, at least you could be safe from verbal homophobic abuse in your own home space, but now through the ubiquity of platforms that abuse feel inescapable. It is not because there is suddenly more hateful people in our society but because social media platforms have built systems that reward outrage, division and fear. This is not a question about simply offensive comments online; this is a question about who feels safe participating in our public life.”
“In particular, the level of abuse that gay, lesbian and particularly trans people receive online, and now regularly in person as well, has spiked in recent years. Most gay people have had to deal with homophobia at some point in their lives. We learn how to deal with it, we learn how to overcome it and sometimes we learn how to ignore it. That can be a very deeply personal journey for each person involved. For a time in the afterglow of the marriage referendum, it was felt that we had turned a corner and that Ireland had settled a fundamental question about dignity and equality. I believe, as I know many in the community do, that there has been a change, and a change for the worse, in recent years. The biggest driver of that change is the poisoning of our online spaces.”
“I acknowledge the presence in the Gallery of representatives of many of the LGBTQ+ groups around the country. I thank them for their work and I recognise that I, and queer people all over our country, enjoy rights as a result of their efforts. Pride remains an empowering expression of community, visibility and celebration. It is a chance for LGBTQ+ people to gather openly and proudly. However, as many of the speakers have noted, while it is an opportunity for us to reflect on how far Ireland has come in recent years, it also has to be a truthful recognition of the challenges our communities still experience. I have made the point in this Chamber and elsewhere that the trajectory of progress in Ireland has not all been one-way.”
“If we do not measure a problem, we cannot bring forward a real solution to it. Will the Taoiseach commit that the Government will bring forward clear measurements about how heatwaves are impacting vulnerable communities, particularly in the area of mortality?”
“This week, people around the country will be enjoying the good weather that is currently forecast. However, hot temperatures can be a real challenge for some in our communities, such as the elderly, the very young and people with underlying conditions. Once again, we are seeing record-breaking temperatures around Europe, with red alerts being issued in many countries and temperatures of over 40°C expected. Sustained heat in summer is here to stay. Over the last year, I have been seeking information from the Department of Health and the HSE on how Ireland records the impact of heatwaves on vulnerable populations. The HSE has admitted that heat-related deaths are simply not recorded and the Minister has acknowledged that more needs to be done to improve recording in this area.”
“To achieve this, it undermines the climate action Act and ignores those key concerns of local communities that have been voiced to us all on many occasions. This is a reflection of the way that the legislation was prepared in close consultation with the aviation industry but with the concerns of those key environmental groups entirely excluded. Ultimately, it will be ordinary people who bear the consequences of this approach in the costs of complying with missed climate targets and in the impacts from increased noise for those living in the vicinity of the airport. Again, and it is unfortunate to say, the approach being adopted to this legislation is more and more replicated across the Government's approach to all issues to do with climate and the environment.”
“The Bill does not in any way anticipate an assessment-of-noise impact and it again pushes responsibility for noise mitigation back onto the planning authority. The need for air connectivity in an island nation like Ireland is unavoidable. Again, nobody disputes that. What is of concern here is the ill-considered way in which this legislation has been brought forward, without any recognition of a balancing or any recognition that other considerations need to be taken account of in bringing a change like this forward. The hallmark of good legislation is a balanced approach between competing needs within our society. This legislation makes no efforts to do that. It is single-minded in its approach and offers no idea as to what a proportional approach to passenger numbers at Dublin Airport might look like.”
“I think they provided the Minister with an economic analysis they have done of the costs to health, particularly from noise generated from the airport. Local residents are already being severely impacted by the current levels of activity at Dublin Airport but, again, instead of engaging meaningfully with those concerns, this proposal is to introduce potentially limitless increases in the number of flights on top of the existing problematic patterns. I know from FOI requests that there has been more correspondence between the Minister and Airlines for America than with local groups. In advertising this Bill on social media over the last week, the Minister said that people's concerns would be addressed in a substantive way that is respectful of local communities. I do not believe this adds up when I look at this draft right now.”
“Since the north runway entered operation, local residents living close to Dublin Airport have already highlighted significant concerns around a range of issues, particularly the issue of noise. I know the Minister has constituents in his constituency who have undoubtedly brought this issue to his attention. Deputy Coppinger and I have heard from people in places like Hollystown, Hollywoodrath and Tyrrelstown, where the impact of noise is a regular issue and particularly the change in flight paths from what people were told to what actually was eventually permitted. Of course, all of this is taking place with the current restriction and current cap in place. I understand the Minister met residents of St. Margaret's and The Ward last month.”
“This is not a balanced approach. It appears that in the drafting of this legislation that perspective about the environment was entirely absent from considerations. Deputy O'Brien is the Minister for Transport but he is also the Minister with responsibility for the environment and climate. Yet, he seems allergic to meeting organisations representing those particular interests. This lack of consultation feeds into the way in which this legislation is likely to impact on local communities. It does not appear the key concerns that local communities have voiced throughout this process and in detail at the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Transport, when we heard on this issue, have been taken into account in a meaningful way in this Bill.”
“Compounding the Government's unbalanced approach to the legislation is the attitude that has been taken to stakeholder engagement. In preparation for this debate, I asked the Minister via a parliamentary question to provide information about the companies and the lobbyists he had met to discuss this Bill. The result is quite stark. The Minister and the Taoiseach were very willing to engage with the airlines and their representatives and that is absolutely fine; they are lobbyists. However, no efforts were made to engage with the environmental organisations to get alternative perspectives on this particular area. I note in particular that a number of environmental organisations actively sought engagement with the Minister, including Children's Rights Over Flights and Friends of the Earth, and these meetings were not granted on this issue.”
“The justification for all this that we have heard from the Minister this evening is that this Bill is critical for economic growth for our country, when no cost-benefit analysis has been carried out and we know current activity levels at the airport are incurring health-related costs, as outlined by other Deputies. A recent report by the UK Department for Transport on the economic implications from the expansion of Heathrow Airport found that the positive gains were outweighed by the social and environmental impact, which for that airport was estimated at between £58 billion and £82 billion. An independent cost-benefit analysis of the impact of this expansion is necessary, and that should have been conducted in advance of legislation being moved forward.”
“directly impacts Ireland's climate targets, as the significant emissions associated with the Cap Repeal will significantly constrain the margin of discretion of public authorities to make strategic decisions about future infrastructure." In short, this Bill is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Any disapplication will push climate costs away from aviation onto other sections of the economy and other sections of our society. Future infrastructure projects will be increasingly jeopardised and constrained to mitigate the consequences of what I would say is the reckless deregulation proposed in this legislation.”
“The same opinion also found the State had a procedural obligation to conduct an environmental impact assessment, EIA, including of all CO2 and non-CO2 emissions from arriving and departing flights, or face significant risk of being challenged in the courts. The Bill will not make our climate commitments go away but it does leave significantly less room for manoeuvre for all sectors of our economy that are not insulated from scrutiny in the way the Bill insulates the aviation sector. In effect, one sector will have no upward cap on its emissions, while others will have to constrain themselves even further to allow that to happen. The legal opinion I mentioned makes that point quite starkly: "The disapplication of section 15 of the 2015 Act ...”
“The removal of the obligation to adhere to section 15 of the climate action Act in relation to the passenger cap does not remove the Government's wider obligations under national law, international law or, indeed, under the European Convention on Human Rights. A legal opinion that was sought on the Bill found the lifting of the cap without introducing any other protections will expose the Government to a credible claim that it is in breach of Article 8 of the convention, which concerns the right to protection of private and family life, by failing to shield its citizens from the health impacts of the climate crisis.”
“The exemptions are an admission that it knows these legislative measures will not stand up to scrutiny from a climate perspective. It is seeking to forestall any opposition before it even starts. In essence, the Government is seeking to remove even any monitoring of some of the most carbon-intensive industries in our country at a time when we are significantly failing in our climate commitments. This is not an abstract issue. It exposes us to serious environmental, social and financial risks. We know there is a cost to non-compliance that is in a range somewhere between €8 billion and €26 billion.”
“The question is whether it makes sense to have absolutely no upper limit on flight numbers going through Dublin Airport, with all the connected climate, environmental and community impacts of that approach. Just as significant is the message the Bill is sending on national climate commitments. In recent years, the Government has tried to undermine the climate Acts in numerous ways, particularly by way of legislative mechanisms. The Critical Infrastructure Bill, the Development (Strategic Gas Reserve) Bill and this Bill each contain specific carve-outs to exempt the particular issue they deal with from scrutiny under section 15 of the 2015 Act. There is a sense almost of pre-emptive guilt on the part of the Government.”
“The first and probably most glaring issue with the Bill is its direct effort to undermine the signature climate action legislation that is intended to keep Ireland on track to meet its climate obligations. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that Ireland is on track to significantly exceed its 2030 climate limits. With less than four years until we are supposed to reduce our 2018 emissions level by 50%, the Minister has already announced that we are far off track. Raising the passenger cap by just 8 million is likely to increase flight emissions by about 24%. Yet, the Minister has indicated in remarks he has made over the past year that he wants to double the numbers currently going through Dublin Airport. This is not about saying people should not fly. It is inevitable that people will fly out of and into Ireland.”
“Ireland is an island nation and we all recognise the necessity of airport connectivity for our people and our economy. We already have good air links and they will continue. The question before us today is whether this legislation is a proportionate and appropriate way to balance our commitment to a connected island with our obligations to meet climate targets, protect local communities and care for our environment. My concern is that the Bill does not even make an attempt at balancing those competing needs. Instead, we have legislation that is one-sided in its focus, was constructed entirely with the desires of one set of stakeholders in mind, ignoring all others, and creates a set of real risks.”
“They can support it in Germany or other European countries - the countries that actually have put in the work to put in those support frameworks to make it financially viable. What is needed is here is focus on getting through the policy blockages that exist and that can actually ensure that this technology that is available can deliver lower price energy for Irish consumers.”
“With respect, while the Taoiseach is right that it is an issue of technology, the solution is there. The solution is there in terms of battery storage and we do not have enough of it. What representatives of the industry told all Members of the Oireachtas from the Opposition to the Government when they were in with us is that the two key barriers to them are the lack of a national target for how much the Government thinks in terms of energy support that is needed and that support system to help them to deliver it. The Taoiseach is right that planning permission has been granted for plenty of battery storage units around the country but they will not get the financing if they do not see that there is a clear route to market access. The companies that are looking to set up here are mobile.”
“Will the Taoiseach commit to his Government setting a clear target for long-term energy storage needs in Ireland by the end of this year? Will he also commit to putting in place a renewable energy support scheme for battery storage by the middle of 2027 so that this waste of renewable electricity will come to an end?”
“Action 9 requires the creation of a market framework to incentivise energy storage technologies. Wind and solar electricity have the renewable energy support scheme. Energy storage needs similar financial certainty to incentivise development. Two years after the publication of that framework, these two actions have not been achieved. As a result, millions of euro worth of renewable energy, renewable electricity, is being squandered. The problem here is not judicial reviews, gold-plated environmental regulations or the climate action Act. The problem is the failure of the Government to prioritise the detailed policy work that is needed to ensure that this technology can work for Irish consumers and for the Irish economy.”