The incredible weather we are seeing across Europe and its significance are not going to be lost on anybody. France has recorded its hottest day, at 44.3°C. Tragically, at least 18 heat-related deaths have been seen in France and dozens of people have drowned as they tried to cool off. The UK had its hottest June day on record this month, at 36.1°C. We have seen red heat warnings issued across Europe. Indeed, here in Ireland it would appear we are seeing our hottest day on record. It is clear that climate change is not something that is coming. It is not something that is going to be presented to us in the future. Climate change is here. Days like today really need to be warning signs for the Government because it has a very big job to do. That is not just to ensure that, as a country, we can adapt to the climate change that we are experiencing but also to do everything it can to stop it from getting worse and to work internationally in that regard. Unfortunately, what we have seen from this Government is a rowing back when it comes to climate action and climate-action ambition. We have seen a repeated failure to meet targets, and even a failure to lay out the list of policies that would meet our 51% legal reduction target. Not once has the climate action plan specified enough policies to meet our targets. This is not even about implementing them. I am referring to the Government setting out what policies we need. Never once has the current or previous Government spelt out enough policies. That in itself is a very stark illustration that the Government is not taking this seriously enough. The LNG facility has not just come upon us in the last week or two, the last month or two or, indeed, the last year. This discussion is happening because the current and previous Governments have failed to come to grips with our energy security and to put in place measures that will assist us to become energy independent. This LNG facility is a sort of emergency solution because all the hard work has not been done. We have seen delay after delay regarding much of the major infrastructure we would need in order to deal with our emissions, but also to have a very strong renewable energy system. We have less offshore wind energy now than 20 years ago. Twenty years ago, we were a world leader in offshore wind. We had the Arklow Bank but that has been decommissioned. We have had delays in respect of our interconnectors. As I have raised repeatedly, I do not believe the Government has done enough when it comes to solar energy to make households resilient and to support people in this regard. I do not believe the Government has focused enough on battery storage and its potential. Over the past number of weeks, we have heard from some experts at meetings of the climate committee on the huge potential of, and the technological advances that have been made when it comes to, battery storage. Yet we have not had a Government that has focused on all those issues. Indeed, we have had a Government that has closed its eyes to the issue of demand management. At some stage, a tough decision is going to have to be made where we say we cannot afford to allow the continued incredible growth of large energy users like data centres, because that will ultimately make us more vulnerable when it comes to energy security. They are reliant on gas and they are pushing up our energy prices. They are the reason that we now apparently need the €1 billion LNG facility. It is not to meet the needs of individual households or businesses, or people in hospitals or schools. It is not to meet those needs. The LNG facility is to ensure that if there is a problem with the interconnector or the gas line from Scotland, energy for the approximately 250 large corporates will be available. At some stage, we do have to start considering bringing our enterprise, climate and energy policies all together, because at the moment we are seeing far too much siloing of the issues. The Government is in a position now where it is acknowledging there is a big problem, that we are at risk and that we need to come up with a solution. There are alternatives to what is being proposed. I really do not believe there has been enough examination of the alternatives. In the event that we lose connection with Scotland for a gas pipeline, which is highly unlikely but would be very problematic, what are the alternatives to the LNG facility? I really do not believe that has been given enough consideration. I have spoken about demand management, battery storage, fast-tracking our interconnectors, district heating to provide heating to people, alternative fuels and requiring large corporates to have more alternative fuels on site. These have not been examined robustly enough. When I read through the energy security reports, it appears that the Government essentially got the answers it wanted from the questions put in the reviews. It is really important that the Government stall now. This is a major piece of infrastructure and it is costly. It will cost us €1 billion at least and it will be in place for many years. It will also be costly from an environmental perspective. The Minister of State needs to re-examine that. The Social Democrats have tabled amendments reflecting these views. We will be debating them when appropriate, but I ask that the Minister of State give serious consideration to looking at all the different pieces of the jigsaw and seeing whether there is a way that the various elements can be brought together to ensure we are energy resilient. The other issue I want to raise with the Minister of State is one that very much surprised me. There is a general lack of trust in the Department and Government in this regard. I certainly was very sceptical and I was concerned that this legislation was a way of allowing for commercial LNG facilities to begin operating. When there was a pulling back on the fracked gas policy and when the Minister did not really engage on the planning issues in Shannon, my sense was that this was really a Trojan Horse to allow a commercial facility to operate. I do not know whether that is the case or not. The one thing I have repeatedly raised with the Minister, and on which I have repeatedly received assurances from him, is that the LNG facility will be State-owned, State-led and not commercial, and that there will be sufficient guardrails in place to make sure that is the case. I have had this back and forth with the Minister many times, as I did at committee. It has always been promised that it would be the case. I am worried as to why it was not mentioned in the Bill. The primary purpose of this LNG facility is to act as a risk-mitigation measure in a very limited fashion that can only be done by the State, run and managed by the State, and is not to increase our gas usage. That usage is to be very controlled. If that is the purpose of the facility, this why is that not stated in the Bill? It is not mentioned at all. I am sure the Minister of State will understand that it sets off alarms. It says to me that this process cannot be trusted. Now, when the Department or anyone makes any statements or comes forward with any advice, solutions or evidence, I and others are going to be questioning it because there is a fear that it is not being transparent. That is why the energy security, as the Department is looking at all the other measures, is also important. We want a transparent process. We want to ensure that the people who will be footing the bill for this €1 billion know why this has gone in and know that the Government looked at all these other measures and decided they were not going to work. It must be transparent. It is important that the Government gets that done. I would like to make a similar point. I am hugely worried about the disapplication of the birds and habitat directive. As I said, there has been a rowing back on a lot of climate legislation. There has been fear that there would be a similar rowing back on legislation to protect biodiversity. There has certainly been a movement in Europe to do that so I was disappointed to see that also being applied in this Bill. I was also very surprised to see it because during pre-legislative scrutiny, we were told at that stage that we will not be exempting this facility from the habitats directive. That is what we were told in committee. Yet, this Bill disapplies the birds and habitats directive. That again comes back to the lack of trust about what the motives are here. That is another important consideration. We have been far too slow in ensuring that Ireland can exist as an independent energy State. We have relied far too heavily on other countries to do the heavy lifting for us. We have not been innovative enough. We have really been quite lazy when it comes to our energy security and independence, and ensuring that we have an energy system that people in this country can afford. The lived experience of the people at the moment is that that is not the case. Ireland has the highest electricity prices. An official from the Department was in talking about the issue recently. The official was stressing that we have done so well when it comes to our renewable energies. We have but what are we doing with them? We are funnelling them back into these large corporates. The benefits from the renewables are not being felt by individuals and that is a problem. We want our citizens, domestic users and small businesses to have faith that when we move to a fossil fuel-free future, they will not be left behind. That is not happening because they are actually being left behind. Not only are they being left behind, they are having to foot the bill. They are footing the bill for data centres. They are going to be footing the €1 billion bill for this LNG facility that is only there to ensure that 250 large energy users can continue to operate if there is problem with the pipeline. Domestic users will be footing that bill. That not only has problems from an equity perspective. It is also a problem from a social and community perspective. We cannot allow people to feel that they are being left behind by this transition and that the people who are gaining the benefit and are being prioritised by this Government are the big boys and the big players. We want everybody to be able to benefit and to enjoy lower electricity prices and warmer homes. We want them to be energy independent. We want them to be able to drive electric vehicles and have solar panels on their homes. When they do need to access electricity or energy from the grid, we must ensure it is there at an affordable price. Unfortunately, the Government is far away from that at the moment. However, it is not too late. There is now an opportunity to pause things and bring in that review. If the Government is so convinced that this LNG facility is the only answer to this energy security risk, it needs to spell it out for people. It should do the analysis and let everybody see it because it is costly and, as I said, not just financially but environmentally.

Sentiment score: 0.07