Houses of the Oireachtas

All parliamentary debates are now being published on our new website. The publication of debates on this website will cease in December 2018.

Go to oireachtas.ie

 Header Item Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill 2015: Report Stage (Resumed) (Continued)
 Header Item Business of Dáil
 Header Item Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill 2015: Report Stage (Resumed)

Wednesday, 30 September 2015

Dáil Éireann Debate
Vol. 891 No. 1

First Page Previous Page Page of 91 Next Page Last Page

Debate adjourned.

Business of Dáil

Minister of State at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (Deputy Simon Harris): Information on Simon Harris Zoom on Simon Harris It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders or the Order of the Dáil of this day, that the arrangements agreed today in relation to the proceedings on No. 13a, motion re relocation opt-ins, shall apply in relation to the following motions, which shall be taken after Oral Questions tomorrow and which shall be debated together: No.13a - Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 of 14 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and of Greece; and No. 13b - Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015 establishing provisional measures in the area of international protection for the benefit of Italy and Greece.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy): Information on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Zoom on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Is that agreed? Agreed.

Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill 2015: Report Stage (Resumed)

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy): Information on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Zoom on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Amendment No. 32 is ruled out of order.

  Amendment No. 32 not moved.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Marcella Corcoran Kennedy): Information on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Zoom on Marcella Corcoran Kennedy Amendments Nos. 33 to 35, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.

Deputy Brian Stanley: Information on Brian Stanley Zoom on Brian Stanley I move amendment No. 33:

In page 6, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following:
“(c) specify the projected level of emissions once the policy measures outlined are agreed,”.

This proposal is an important change. Basically, it provides that the national mitigation plan would specify the projected levels of emissions once the policy measures outlined are agreed. The mitigation plan could be a Walter Mitty plan, in that it could be vague and aspirational but not mean a great deal. We are proposing that we should specify clearly the projected levels of emissions once the policy measures outlined have been agreed. It is the logical thing to do. It is a plan, but it is similar to saying that one has a road map but one is not sure which road one will take. One is putting in many options, yet one is setting out on the journey. Once we have agreed the policy measures we should then outline the projected levels of emissions based on our national and international obligations. It is a logical step forward and it is important that we do it.

Deputy Mick Wallace: Information on Mick Wallace Zoom on Mick Wallace I will speak on amendment No. 34 which states:

In page 6, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“(e) specify the projected total national emissions for the period of the plan on the basis of all the policy measures specified in the plan.”.

The national mitigation plan should include the projected total national emissions for the five year period covered after all of the policy measures specified in the plan have been implemented. The purpose of this amendment is to embed a little more detail in the legislation. As it stands the Bill does not require that the plan achieve anything at all. There are no targets, measurements or solid objectives, just fluff about the ill-defined low carbon economy. This amendment would mean that, in theory, the plan had some type of objective or at least those drawing up the plan would have to make an argument for the decisions that made some type of logical sense as regards the specific outcomes of individual actions specified in the plan.


Last Updated: 12/10/2016 09:09:27 First Page Previous Page Page of 91 Next Page Last Page