National Development Plan
7. Deputy Shay Brennan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for an overview of the progress made to date under national strategic outcome, NSO, 5 of the National Development Plan 2021-2030; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27477/26]
I would like an overview of the progress made to date under NSO 5 of the National Development Plan 2021-2030.
As Minister for public expenditure I am responsible for setting the overall capital allocations across Departments and for monitoring monthly expenditure at departmental level. Responsibility for the management and delivery of the wider investment and sectoral policies within the allocations agreed under the national development plan involves working with Ministers and other colleagues across Departments. Each Minister is responsible for deciding which programmes and projects will be delivered under the national development plan. The latter contains expenditure commitments for a range of strategic investment priorities which will contribute towards the achievement of national strategic outcomes, including NSO 5, which relates to a strong economy supported by enterprise, innovation and skills. This aims to maintain and enhance Ireland's status as a competitive, innovative and resilient enterprise base, providing high quality jobs and employment opportunities for people to live and prosper in all regions.
Under the plan, €3.68 billion was allocated in respect of enterprise and skills, including €400 million of additional funding to Irish start-up enterprises. Over 15,300 new jobs were created from the 323 investments in IDA Ireland-supported client companies in 2005. The numbers directly employed in the multinational sector in Ireland in 2025 were 312,400. The existing base of FDI has shown continued resilience, and more than half the investments went into regional locations. Employment in client companies of Enterprise Ireland increased to a total of over 234,000 in 2025, which is the highest number ever reported. The total number of jobs created was over 12,600. Some 69% of new jobs created in 2025 in companies supported by Enterprise Ireland were located outside the Dublin region.
In the higher education sector, €4.5 billion in capital funding was allocated to the Department of further and higher education as the number of projects and programmes continued to be advanced and deliver on the ambitions of Ireland's higher education sector. These projects will expand capacity in higher education institutions and support a pipeline of talents and skills aligned with national and regional needs.
I welcome the update on the progress made under NSO 5. The key issues for communities across the midlands is whether this is translating into real delivery on the ground. For counties like Offaly and towns such as Tullamore, Birr, Edenderry and the surrounding rural areas, balanced regional development must mean more than policy commitments. It must mean visible investment, meaningful jobs, improved infrastructure and stronger public services. People want to see tangible progress in areas such as transport connectivity, housing delivery, enterprise investment and town centre regeneration. They want to know that regional Ireland is genuinely being prioritised. Will the Minister outline the specific progress that has been delivered under NSO 5 for the midlands region to date and what future investment is planned to ensure that counties like Offaly continue to grow and will retain vibrant communities in which people can live and work?
I do not have a specific breakdown for the enterprise sector. All I say is that if we look at wider job creation, the prioritisation that has emerged on the part of both IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland and the facts that have emerged in 2025, we can see that there has been significant growth in job creation outside of Dublin. This reflects our broad strategy and shows the huge resilience in the Irish economy, notwithstanding global conflict and major geopolitical pressures. There is continued investment and positivity around Ireland's economic proposition for many companies that want to build their base in Ireland, many of them are SMEs but there are also FDI companies.
I have been with the Deputy in Offaly. He knows the huge importance of regional connectivity from a roads' perspective, which the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, has restored in the context of the national development plan. There are also objectives around other capital investment projects for the midlands region, and that is a continued focus of Government. We want not only to match the capital investment which we have set aside but also to get things done and accelerate delivery across the board.
One of the most important tests of NSO 5 is whether it helps regional towns to retain populations and attract sustainable employment. For areas in the midlands, keeping our communities vibrant depends on meaningful local jobs, strong services and infrastructure that supports family life and business growth. Will the Minister outline how progress under NSO 5 is being measured in terms of employment creation, population retention and local service provision in regional towns? How will the Government ensure that counties like Offaly receive their fair share of future national development plan investment?
The critical foundation of employment growth, house construction and industrial development is what we have sought to prioritise in the national development plan in terms of building out our energy system - where there will be opportunities for the midlands - ensuring that transport connectivity is enhanced, which is reflected in the national development plan, and that water and wastewater infrastructure is also advanced. These are the key enablers of wider social and economic development in the context of the infrastructure deficit we have in our economy. I am confident that with what has been set aside in the national development plan, we will see increased house construction in the Deputy's part of the midlands and also upside benefits in terms of job creation by SMEs and FDI companies. When that infrastructure gap starts to close, it should yield further opportunities across the Deputy's region. I am confident that will occur.
8. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for an overview of the progress made to date under National Strategic Outcome (NSO) 10 of the National Development Plan 2021-2030; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27479/26]
As the Minister knows, chapter 15 of the national development plan is titled "Access to Quality Childcare, Education and Health Services". With an increasing demand for places across those three sectors, it is absolutely essential that we have that increased investment put to use as quickly as possible. We need increased facilities in rural and urban Ireland. I sincerely hope that the money allocated can be spent as quickly as possible and that we do not have the type of interminable delays which have occurred over the years in respect of so many worthwhile projects.
In the 2021 review of the national development plan, the Government originally committed to €165 billion of investment out to 2030. Subsequently, in March 2024, it agreed to an additional €2.25 billion out to 2026. The revised development plan sets out over €275 billion of public capital investment out to 2035, the largest and most significant capital injection into the economy in the history of the State. Following the agreement in July 2025, gross capital expenditure ceilings have now been set out. While we have prioritised investment towards critical growth-enabling sectors of housing, energy, water and transport, all Departments have prepared sectoral plans for the five years out to 2030. They have set out detail around projects to be progressed.
NSO 10, as the Deputy mentioned, refers to quality childcare, education and health services. The Government has allocated over €7.55 billion to education projects over the next number of years, with €795 million to the Department of children and €9.25 billion to the Department of Health over the next five years. This will be hugely important to build the social infrastructure the Deputy mentioned, which is so important to communities across our country. We have set out the detail around that in the context of the health service, building out many of the education projects, particularly in the special education area, and also the Department of children, which the Minister, Deputy Foley, is advancing. NSO 10 is reflected in the capital investment tracker, which provides a comprehensive update of the progress of all major investments with an estimated cost of greater than €20 million. It sets out the county-specific basis, specifically for investments in schools and health facilities relating to NSO 10.
It is not only about what we allocate, but also about what we deliver and how quickly we can deliver it. That is why I am putting as much focus on reforming how we deliver infrastructure as I am on what to allocate to where.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I heard him speak at the recent meeting of the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly. He said that in far too many instances over the years process won out over delivery with regard to the capital programmes for different Departments. I refer to the childcare sector in particular. With the Minister's approval, the Minister, Deputy Foley, recently introduced the building blocks grant scheme towards the provision of new childcare places and the upgrading of existing facilities. That is a very worthwhile programme. The Minister, Deputy Foley, recently visited my constituency, where she met some of the providers who have availed of the building blocks grant scheme and others who urgently need to increase capacity or to upgrade existing capacity. That scheme needs additional investment. The Minister may recall that, between 2004 and 2008, his predecessor in Dublin West, our colleague the late Brian Lenihan and I were both were both Ministers of State with responsibility for children. At that time, we were providing grant aid in excess of €1 million for new childcare facilities. During that four- to five-year period, massive and necessary development took place in the country to build a whole new infrastructure of childcare facilities, both through the community sector and private providers. We need a repeat of that today.
I know about the significant work undertaken by that Government. Even in more difficult economic times, the then Minister of State, Barry Andrews, introduced an important initiative on the affordability of childcare, which has been built on in recent years. That was a central part of the work undertaken with the Minister, Deputy Foley, as part of the revised national development plan. The €750 million allocated to the Department of children is aimed at enabling the Minister to do more in the context of capital investment in childcare. There is a need to work with childcare and education settings. In light of the demographic shift that is happening in Ireland in the medium to long term, there is an important opportunity to use our school facilities. That is happening in many communities. We need to co-ordinate capital investment from the Department of children for separate community childcare facilities and to work with schools to utilise existing facilities. That co-ordination is ongoing. I share the Deputy's objective of doing more. That is why the Minister for children, Deputy Foley, received a significant allocation under the national development plan.
The need for additional childcare places is replicated in small areas. I am working with groups in small parishes and villages such as the Denn Toddlers Playgroup in Crosskeys, County Cavan, and Happy Days Childcare in Belturbet, County Cavan. Crosskeys is a small village and Belturbet is a small town but they have huge demand for additional places, as the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach will know. It is therefore extremely important that the building blocks scheme be expanded, if at all possible.
There is a similar situation in disability services. There are two particular needs in my constituency. There is a need to considerably expand the Drumlin House Training Centre. I am very glad that substantial capital funding has been approved in respect of that development. In addition, there is the day activation unit in Cavan town, which provides day services for young adults with complex needs. At present, it is in totally unsuitable accommodation. Again, I am very glad that the HSE, in conjunction with the Department of children, is advancing that project. However, again and again, despite the best efforts of HSE officials at local level, it takes far too long to get projects to construction. I sincerely hope the Minister can get that message through to every Department and agency. Process must not win out over delivery.
I absolutely agree. That is central to what we are doing in reforming infrastructure delivery. We are aiming to cut out as much process as possible and to put delivery at the centre. That is why 34 of the 35 actions set out for implementation in the first quarter as part of our infrastructure reforms have been delivered. The other is to be delivered imminently. It is the same in the second quarter. We are working every day to drive improved delivery, to reduce process, to rebalance regulation and to ensure that delivery is at the centre of everything we do in every area of social and economic infrastructure. That will yield improved delivery in childcare and in wider areas across the economy. I will work with the Minister, Deputy Foley, to ensure her sectoral investment plan in the Department of children is advanced quickly. I know she has worked extensively to ensure the €795 million allocated across the next five years yields that improved delivery of childcare across communities and across the country.
Question No. 9 taken with Written Answers.
An Garda Síochána
10. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for an update on the proposed new Garda station at Northern Cross in Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27621/26]
Is there an update on the provision of a much-needed new Garda station at Northern Cross in Dublin?
The Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration published its sectoral investment plan on 4 December 2025. The second half of the sectoral investment plan will focus on bringing the projects for Dublin metropolitan region north to construction in 2028.
Given the commitment in the Department of justice's NDP sectoral plan, the Office of Public Works is now working with An Garda Síochána to confirm and refine specific requirements in north Dublin. An Garda Síochána is continuing to develop a detailed brief of requirements for Dublin metropolitan region north in collaboration with the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration. Once this process is complete, the Office of Public Works will engage with An Garda Síochána and the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration to support them in identifying and appraising the most suitable site to support their objectives.
I sincerely acknowledge the persistent and constructive engagement of Deputy O'Callaghan and other Deputies. I assure them that the matter remains a priority for my Department and the wider Government. I recognise the frustration caused by the lack of visible progress, and I share the Deputy's concerns about the timeline.
The Office of Public Works is actively collaborating with An Garda Síochána and the Department to finalise requirements and conduct a thorough site identification and appraisal process in line with infrastructure guidelines. While an initial market trawl has been completed, the next steps involve refining requirements and selecting the most suitable site for all those requirements, with construction targeted for 2028.
I assure the Deputy that the funding is ring-fenced and the commitment is clear. The OPW, the Garda and the Department are working together to ensure momentum is maintained. The Deputy should have no doubt that I will keep him and all public representatives involved informed as the project advances. I welcome ongoing engagement to ensure the community's needs are fully met.
It is welcome that we are making some progress in that there is a commitment that construction will start in 2028. Is the Minister of State confident that timeline will be adhered to? If construction begins in 2028, what is the timeline for finishing? I am concerned that we are still talking about identifying a suitable site for this new Garda station when it was announced not by the last Government, but by the Government before it in 2019, and when a site had been identified for it at that time. I do not really understand that part of it because a site was identified and even announced seven years ago. Why are we still talking about identifying a suitable site when one was identified seven years ago? Is the Minister of State confident that construction will start in 2028?
I am not being critical when I note that the Deputy puts down this question every month. I wish the project would move at the same pace. I recently met with the Minister for justice and asked him for a meeting with him and his officials with a view to speeding up this process. Like the Deputy, I would like to see this delivered. It has been announced and has been going on for quite some time. As I have said in the past, politicians announce things but it takes time to deliver them. Just as a flood scheme takes 11 years, a Garda station normally takes ten, believe it or not. Since this was announced, things have changed in respect of An Garda Síochána. We have to get the development of this site right. It is a highly populated area. The Deputy knows that better than I do. He is there. I have been inundated with contact from Deputy Brabazon, from my colleague, Deputy Heneghan and from Deputy O'Callaghan himself. I assure the Deputy today that I will work with him and those other colleagues to try to deliver this on time.
I welcome his work on this, his commitment to it and his interest in it. That is very welcome. It is also welcome that genuine attempts to move this on are now being made. The Minister of State is right that this is a growing community with a huge population. That community was bitterly disappointed that this was announced in 2019 and that nothing then happened for seven years. The fact that we have the date of 2028 is positive, as is the fact that the Minister of State is engaging with the Department of justice on it. I welcome that. However, I urge that we all collectively keep at this and get this much-needed new Garda station delivered.
The area needs other facilities and community infrastructure as well but this is a key component of it.
I can assure the Deputy that I have put a lot of work and effort into this since I spoke to him and my colleagues since he raised this with me before. The commitment is there from the Government in terms of the money. It is about getting the site and the other parts right, and making sure we deliver, as the Deputy said, for the people in the area. They are waiting a long time for that, but I am working within the Departments to make sure we deliver this and get it to construction.
Legislative Measures
11. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to outline the rationale for section 7 of the Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27626/26]
17. Deputy Réada Cronin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the reason for the disapplication of section 15 of Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 to a relevant public body as part of the Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27646/26]
I want to ask the Minister, Deputy Chambers, about his intentions through the Critical Infrastructure Bill, particularly section 7, in terms of the removal of the climate duty, a duty on all public bodies to assess the climate impact of infrastructure projects they are advancing.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11 and 17 together.
The Critical Infrastructure Bill is a central pillar of the Government’s broader infrastructure acceleration agenda. The need for a Bill to fast track a limited number of strategically important projects through approval processes was identified in a report and action plan published last December.
The Bill has been drafted and introduced on a priority basis. Its primary aim is to allow the Government to designate certain projects or programmes as critical. This then requires all public bodies that may have an authorisation function for these projects or programmes to prioritise consideration of them within their approval processes. In practical terms, this means that relevant bodies will be required to prioritise, avoid delay, reduce timelines, parallel processes and co-operate to fast-track designated infrastructure.
I have proposed to disapply section 15 of the climate Act because of the risk of delays that this section gives rise to. The provisions in section 15 of the Act have opened up a new channel for the judicial review of the decisions of public bodies. The net effect is that it could slow the pace of infrastructural development. Delays to infrastructure roll-out are a key reason we are not reaching much of our climate and renewable energy targets. The report by Mario Draghi on EU competitiveness, for example, specifically identified Ireland as having the slowest approval process across the EU for renewable electricity.
Designated projects or programmes will still have all relevant climate considerations built into their development. Every Exchequer-funded project, for example, is already required to measure and price its greenhouse gas emissions under the infrastructure guidelines. Under the Bill as drafted, climate and environmental obligations will still fully apply. That is important to state because that is not being reflected in what the Deputy has said so far. Disapplication of section 15 simply removes an unnecessary layer that risks driving judicial reviews, and we need to remove all risks around judicial reviews in the legislative framework when it comes to infrastructure delivery.
Ireland will still be bound by climate and renewable energy targets. That is part of the Government's wider work to transition to a climate-resilient, biodiversity-rich and sustainable climate-neutral economy by 2050. All that will change in practical terms is the ability to challenge decisions of public bodies as they relate to how they have considered the impact of an individual project or programme against that particular section of legislation.
Mario Draghi may have rightfully highlighted real challenges in our planning system but I do not think he placed the blame on the climate action Act or section 15. As I said in the Chamber on Tuesday, we are talking in a context where the previous Government signed up to legally binding international and European targets but the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, announced over Christmas that we would not reach those targets. The climate Act was central to our ability as a state to reach those targets and now the Government is systematically trying to take out one of the central elements, the climate duty under section 15. It has been systematic. It is seen in this legislation, it is seen in the airport cap and it is in the strategic gas Bill.
I asked the Minister to name the judicial review cases taken on the basis of section 15. Can he name cases that have been taken on the basis of section 15?
I have read judgments that relate to section 15 and some of them do have a chilling effect on infrastructure delivery. I am not going to set out the judgment here - I do not have it in front of me - but I have concern with how the interpretation of section 15 as it relates to the infrastructure system presents a risk in overall delivery. There have been a number of judgments relating to section 15 that present risks, and I need to be clear about that. The deference to creating a legal avenue and risk to infrastructure delivery relating to section 15 has to be addressed in the context of delivery.
To take the most recent example, last week we had a permission validly given by An Coimisiún Pleanála relating to the ring road in Galway and we already have a particular NGO saying it is considering a case under section 15 for that particular infrastructure project. It has already gone through all of the statutory processes and has already gone to An Coimisiún Pleanála. The growth, the deference and the risk of all of these projects ending up in the courts bring a risk to infrastructure delivery.
There is a whole other extensive area of reforms that we are doing and we are trying to make it more efficient, but a lot of what we are trying to do here relates to building a low-carbon economy in terms of our grid, which has to be developed, and many of our transport projects, which are actually in public transport. We want to derisk appeals that are taking through judicial reviews. This is one element of it. Others relate to the work that the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, is doing and the work that the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, is doing around environmental legal fees as well. The judgment that was set out and the test that is given around that judgment presents risk and that is why are seeking to disapply section 15.
The Minister continually puts the blame for judicial reviews on environmentalists and on people who are concerned about climate action but let me cite three actual judicial review cases. Not the hypothetical ones that the Minister continues to cite, but actual cases that took place on three major public transport projects. There was the judicial review on DART+ West in our constituency that was taken by a landowner. There was the judicial review on the BusConnects project to Blanchardstown in our constituency that was taken by a landowner. There was the judicial review taken against the Luas Finglas project that was again taken by a landowner. In each of those cases, section 15 of the climate Act, which the Minister wants to disapply, would actually have strengthened the case of the National Transport Authority, NTA, the State agency looking to take the particular project, just as section 15 strengthened the case of An Bord Pleanála in the Coolglass case.
The Minister is getting this wrong. He is not looking at the implication of what he is going to do. The Minister should read the Coolglass judgment and understand that he is weakening the State's hand in defending judicial review cases on major projects that will actually help reduce our carbon emissions.
I am against all judicial reviews whether it is environmentalists, landowners or anybody in the economy. When a decision is made by An Coimisiún Pleanála, we need to allow it to be built and respected. We have seen the enormous deference to allowing this system and industry of judicial reviews to build up. It is undermining delivery systems right across the board. I am against landowners taking judicial reviews, I am against developers taking judicial reviews, I am against anybody taking judicial reviews, but I respect the statutory process and appeals systems that we have.
What we are trying to do is remove the risk of a particular legal avenue that is there. That is what I am saying. I have a similar view on anybody who wants to take a judicial review. I just gave last week's example because it happened to refer to section 15 and how it related to an infrastructure project that we wanted to deliver as a Government. I have read the judgment, and it sets out a particular test relating to individual projects, which present risks.
Public bodies should and do climate assess projects. That is set out in the infrastructure guidelines. We need ensure that continues and there is no change to that in the context of publicly funded projects. We should allow public bodies to do that and adhere to the infrastructure guidelines. They already set that out in a transparent way and do it properly. At the end of all that and when a particular project has received permission, we should not present a legal risk to that project being delayed for two or three years. That is something that all of us need to address in the context of reform.
Section 15 brings that risk in terms of overall delivery.
On the Deputy's point, I get frustrated with anybody taking a judicial review on any project we want to deliver. The Deputy and I share the same views around ensuring DART+ West and many other public transport projects can advance.
Departmental Bodies
12. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation if he will report on the new infrastructure regulatory simplification unit in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27467/26]
Will the Minister report on the new infrastructure regulatory simplification unit in his Department and make a statement on it?
On 3 December 2025, the Government published the accelerating infrastructure action plan. The report sets out a comprehensive programme of actions designed to speed up the delivery of critical infrastructure across the State and includes 30 actions across four key areas. The second pillar is regulatory reform and simplification. This means identifying where regulation leads to excessive process rather than improved outcomes. It also means examining the structure of our regulatory environment, the practices applied by regulatory bodies and how they communicate with one another and applicants.
It is important to note that regulation also brings important benefits. It protects consumers and society as a whole through the application of safeguards, such as environmental protection. However, it also implies a cost and quicker and more simplified regulation can help balance this cost with the benefits.
The overarching objective of pillar 2 reforms is to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden, thereby minimising time and cost impacts on infrastructure delivery and speeding it up. The establishment of the infrastructure regulatory simplification unit, as I announced in February, marked the commencement of action 9 of the report.
The new unit is conducting a risk-based review of the current regulatory landscape, analysing and mapping existing processes and engaging with the bodies involved in consenting, permitting and licensing to identify and remove bottlenecks. The unit will also seek to identify opportunities to enhance co-operation and streamline processes for more effective delivery of the national development plan. It will focus on simplifying and improving the complex regulatory processes across critical infrastructure sectors, namely, housing, energy, transport and water infrastructure.
Progress on this has commenced at pace and a new circular issued on 26 March. It seeks to embed the principles for better regulation of critical infrastructure. It includes a series of regulatory process reforms that must be implemented by public sector bodies with statutory, regulatory, operational or delivery responsibilities for critical infrastructure. It outlines eight principles for better regulation that public sector bodies are required to implement in their own regulatory processes. These are necessity, effectiveness and proportionality. I will detail them more in a moment.
I thank the Minister. I welcome the establishment of the regulatory simplification unit and the clear focus on accelerating the delivery of critical infrastructure. For too long, overlapping consenting, permitting and licensing processes have delayed progress on vital infrastructure projects. This is particularly evident in key sectors such as transport, energy and water services, all of which are essential to housing delivery, economic growth and balanced regional development. Communities across Offaly and regional Ireland want projects to move more quickly from approval to delivery. Will the Minister outline what specific reforms will be prioritised by the unit to remove duplication, improve co-ordination across Departments and agencies and shorten the time it takes for critical projects to commence?
Some of the principles of better regulation are necessity, effectiveness, proportionality, coherence, efficiency, being time-bound, transparency and accountability. The reforms and principles outlined in the circular will drive better co-ordination between bodies. We seek to simplify many of the overlapping and unduly complex regulatory frameworks. The unit will use these principles to drive reforms across many of the bodies involved in regulation for critical infrastructure to shorten timelines and simplify processes to ensure we better deliver across the infrastructure system.
The circular is a direction and agreement we brought to Government. Some agencies, which I will not name, have come before the infrastructure task force and are advancing some of the regulatory reforms, reducing timelines and being part of the solution. All agencies and bodies involved in infrastructure need to reduce timelines because they are, in many instances, resulting in slowing delivery across the board. We have had good, constructive and productive discussions with bodies and reforms are advancing. I can go into more detail on the specifics.
While the creation of the unit is welcome, what people want is delivery. We in the committee on infrastructure and the national development plan voted not to have pre-legislative scrutiny because we realised this needed to be done and we needed to set an example. We need to move this fast. Will the Minister provide a clear timeline for when these reforms will begin to have an impact? What measurable reductions in approval and commencement timelines does the Minister expect to see in the coming years?
One reform that has already happened is that of the infrastructure guidelines. We have removed the need, in many instances, for the external assurance process, which saves at least 20 weeks. We have cut the decision gates from three to two. A lot of process-related work goes into an additional decision gate where a matter is brought to Government. That process has been removed, which saves multiple weeks. The update from the joint utilities and transport clearing house is that there are about ten significant critical regulatory barriers across the utilities and infrastructure sector. The team in my Department is working to remove them.
We have a specific team doing specific work on removing barriers across the infrastructure system. It is also conducting a wider review of the regulatory landscape in our country. It is all about improved speed. We seek to apply the reforms on a Gantt chart so that we can try to truncate the project timelines that exist in transport, energy and water infrastructure and other areas to yield better delivery. The infrastructure guidelines were an initial reform. Other extensive work is ongoing in the Department and by the unit on changing the process and practice within regulators, which will make a significant difference in improving delivery. We will be able to set them out in the coming weeks.
Legislative Measures
13. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation to outline the statutory safeguards, oversight mechanisms and independent review processes that will be put in place to ensure that the significant powers assigned to him under the Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026 are exercised in a transparent, proportionate and accountable manner; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27624/26]
On the Critical Infrastructure Bill, it is good that there is a focus on trying to speed up these processes. We have heard from the Minister with responsibility for the OPW that it takes about ten years to deliver a Garda station. That is just one of many examples of how slow these processes are. It is not just about legislation, though. The Bill would give the Minister significant powers in terms of designation. What safeguards, oversight mechanisms or process would be in place to ensure that those significant powers the Minister is assigning to himself will be exercised in a transparent, proportionate and accountable manner?
I thank the Deputy. As I said, the Critical Infrastructure Bill is a central pillar of the Government’s broader infrastructure acceleration agenda. The need for a Bill to fast-track a number of strategically important projects through approval processes was identified in the action published last December. The Bill has been drafted and introduced on a priority basis to respond to this need. Its primary aim is to allow the Government to designate certain projects or programmes as critical. This then requires all public bodies that may have an authorisation function to prioritise them within their approval processes. This will avoid delays, reduce timelines, parallel processes, and introduce a duty to co-operate across the board.
In terms of the safeguards, I will make a recommendation to the Government that a designation order may be made in respect of a project or programme. The decision as to whether to designate the project rests with the Government. Where the Government decides to exercise the order, it must be laid before Dáil Éireann and if a resolution annulling the order is passed by Dáil Éireann within the next 21 days on which Dáil Éireann has sat after the order is laid before it, the order shall be annulled. This ensures that the power to designate projects or programmes ultimately rests with the Oireachtas.
In addition, under section 5, I may request a relevant body to provide certain information. That is set out in terms of strengthening project performance across the board. Section 6 of the Bill provides that I may give directions to a particular body to improve performance anchored in its duties and functions. Again, that is to ensure it is on board with broader infrastructure delivery.
Many of these critical projects are known. Many are in the national development plan or relate to a State body. There is no mystery about which projects will be involved. Within that, we will have to prioritise to ensure that the projects that are of critical importance receive prioritisation in the infrastructure system. They then need to be fast-tracked through existing approval processes.
Separately, we are working on emergency powers to try to skip stages but that will have a much higher legal threshold because it would involve skipping potential stages. That is not in this particular piece of legislation.
I accept there is no mystery about these projects. They are all good projects. I cannot see why anyone would want to bring a motion to the Dáil to annul prioritisation of any of the projects under consideration. That is not really the issue. The issue is the bit of mystery about how the prioritisation will be carried out. What will and will not be prioritised? How will that be decided? That is the bit the Minister and the Cabinet will have information on but the Dáil, Oireachtas and public will not. That is the missing part. How will prioritisation be carried out? Where is the transparency in that regard? The Bill is silent on this. It gives the power to the Minister, subject to Cabinet approval and laid before the Oireachtas but there is no information about how that decision will be made.
It does not work if everything worthwhile is prioritised. Decisions have to be made. I accept that but we will be in the dark as to why one good project was prioritised and another was not. If there is no transparency around this, it will lead to a situation where people will question why one project was picked over another important project.
We have a framework set out in the legislation detailing the factors the Minister in my position will consider when designating particular projects. Obviously, I will be accountable to the House as to why a particular project is picked and prioritised. I always respect my duties to the House in that regard. I can already see the political risk in how this will be managed in the House where Deputies will question why certain projects are not being prioritised over other projects. If this is how the Bill is used, it will undermine infrastructure delivery. The key element is that we have a limited number of strategically important projects we can seek to advance. If it becomes too big and if everything is prioritised, nothing will be prioritised.
I am very much anchored to many of the strategically important sectors that are critical to Ireland’s future, such as the energy, water, transport sectors. All of those sectors are involved in building more homes and contribute to the wider social and economic development of our country. I take that national responsibility carefully, and it is grounded in how we make decisions around this. I hope, as an Oireachtas, we all get on board with that because, ultimately, if we bog it down with too many projects, the upside of this legislation gets undermined.
The point I always make about legislation is that it has to be drafted not just for this Government but the governments that come after. It has to be drafted for Ministers who will take these responsibilities in the absolute public interest but also for Ministers who may not do that. My concern is having that concentration of power without information around the process. If we have information as to how the decisions will be made on each project, at least we will be able to understand the rationale as to why a certain project was prioritised and another was not. Without that information provided to the Oireachtas, the Dáil and the public, it will lead to people questioning why a project in Cork, for example, was prioritised but one in Galway was not. It will create a problem. If people see how and why the decision was made, it provides a bit of protection to both the Minister and the Government, as well as proper accountability and transparency. We will obviously look at this on Committee Stage but I ask the Minister to consider what I am putting forward.
We have set out a framework on the factors the Minister can consider in the context of designating projects. Anchoring decisions around those are important. I assure the Deputy and anyone in this House that any decision I make on designation will be fully in the public and national interest, yielding overall delivery. I will be accountable to the House in that regard.
Prioritisation always creates winners and losers in any scenario, whether it is capital projects or in a budgetary context. Trade-offs happen. For example, we have referenced programmes or projects in the energy sector. We have a programme of investment with ESB Networks and EirGrid that must be carried out. It is fairly clear that it will be a necessary national programme. It is nationwide anyway. There are other well-documented projects that are critical for Ireland. That is what I will be grounded in and the basis on which I will make decisions. We have a framework in place. I will be accountable to the House and transparent about how we come to particular decisions.
Question No. 14 taken with Written Answers.
Strategic Infrastructure
15. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the action he is taking to overcome the key barriers to infrastructure delivery; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27468/26]
What action has the Minister taken to overcome the key barriers to infrastructure delivery?
As Minister, I am responsible for setting the overall capital allocations across Departments and monitoring monthly expenditure at departmental level. The programme for Government set out clear prioritisation for the national development plan review to ensure that investment can be maximised in the coming five years for strategic infrastructure.
Last year, my Department worked on the identification of barriers to infrastructure delivery. In December, it published the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan, aimed at removing those barriers. This is critical to allow the Government to meet the increased supply of homes and support competitiveness.
The plan sets out 30 targeted actions grouped under four pillars, each addressing a key area of reform. A key achievement in the first quarter has been the publication of the Critical Infrastructure Bill. Core regulatory foundations have also been put in place through the establishment of the infrastructure regulatory simplification unit; the issuance of cross-Government circulars on better regulation and reaction to legal precedent; and strengthened engagement with regulators and EU institutions to support legislative simplification.
Progress has also been made on delivery and co-ordination with the completion of the national development plan review and sectoral investment plans; revised infrastructure guidelines approved and issued; enhanced National Development Finance Agency support arrangements for sponsors; and improved focus on priority projects. The removal of bottlenecks has been progressed through the joint utilities and transport clearing group. Capacity and productivity reforms within the construction sector have been advanced through publication of the workforce and skills plan and the restructuring of the construction sector group to drive procurement, innovation and digitalisation.
Engagement to support leadership and public acceptance has intensified, and that work is ongoing.
In quarter 2 of 2026, the focus will be on advancing priority legislation, progressing planning, regulatory and EU-related reforms, strengthening oversight of delivery risks and bottlenecks, embedding procurement and productivity initiatives and further improving co-ordination on utilities, land availability and public engagement to support timely delivery of critical infrastructure.
I thank the Minister for the response. One of the key issues facing communities is the length of time it takes for major projects to move through the system. At present, pre-planning stages for major road projects can exceed one year, while electricity, water and wastewater infrastructure can take three or four years before delivery even begins. These delays are having a direct impact on housing and enterprise development and the ability of communities to grow and remain vibrant. Will the Minister outline the immediate actions being taken to reduce these timelines, as well as the new target timeframes he expects for roads, energy and water infrastructure?
There are a few changes being made. I referenced the infrastructure guidelines earlier, and that is an important change. They will save significant time and they have already advanced. Separately, we are seeking to put in place a standardised template on business case development. We know a business case can take a short time with particular agencies and utilities but, in certain instances, it drifts into years. The wider public discussion often focuses on judicial reviews and reforms in that space - we need to advance that reform - but there is also a lot of time wasted at the early phase of a project around concept design. That is why the National Development Finance Agency is being stood up. It is broadening its remit to reduce the time at all elements of the project lifecycle.
The Critical Infrastructure Bill will also help fast-track projects through the respective permitting, licensing and approval processes. The infrastructure task force is already bringing about reforms and changes to some of the regulatory functions that exist within regulators in respect of how they deliver infrastructure and how their processes need to be reformed to better enable infrastructure delivery.
Communities want certainty that these delays are being tackled with urgency and that the providers of these utilities, especially in water, electricity and transport, are capable of doing the work that is needed. Will the Minister confirm when people can expect to see reduced timelines in practice, particularly for projects linked to housing and regional growth? How will the Department ensure that the acceleration of infrastructure delivery is felt across County Offaly, and indeed, across the whole island of Ireland?
To build homes, we have to have transport, energy and water systems in place. That is why the work with utilities to build that enabling infrastructure is absolutely critical. There will be wider co-ordination with the housing activation office, which is working on this at a local level, for example, in Offaly. What are the opportunities to advance housing supply and growth at a local level? Where is there particular road or water infrastructure or a need from an energy perspective to advance housing supply? That work is happening with the housing activation office. What we are doing in my Department is with the utilities at a national level to remove the blockages, barriers and constraints to overall delivery, which they have. All of that will yield improved delivery, improved timelines and ultimately strengthen housing supply. We know from local authorities and developers that the infrastructure gap is something that constrains overall housing supply. All of this reform will help speed up the housing supply.
We are moving to the last question.
I indicated that I wanted to ask a supplementary question, which I am entitled to do.
There are no supplementary questions. There is only six and a half minutes per question and there are no supplementary questions. That rule was made about three weeks ago. It was communicated to all TDs. Supplementary questions are out unless the TD asking the question gives time to the other TD.
We move now to the last question, and we only have two minutes. Deputy Burke can ask his question, but I can only allow him back in once.
Question No. 16 taken with Written Answers.
Question No. 17 taken with Question No. 11.
Question No. 18 taken with Written Answers.
Flood Relief Schemes
19. Deputy Colm Burke asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the status of progress on the Blackpool River Bride flood relief scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27643/26]
28. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation for an update in relation to the Blackpool flood relief scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27251/26]
My question is in relation to the Blackpool flood relief scheme. It has been going on for 13 years, going into 14 years. The OPW sent the report in to the Minister of State's Department nine or ten months ago. I do not understand why we still do not have a decision on this matter. Why is it taking so long? On the previous occasion, the Department sat on the report. By the time it came to a decision, the environmental report was out of date, so it had to go back to drawing board. When will this project proceed?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 19 and 28 together.
I am not going to go and read it. The Deputy knows the story in relation to this. It is with the Department, but we are working together collectively. I am working with the Deputy as-----
It is here for 12 months.
I ask the Deputy to allow the Minister of State to answer.
The Deputy comes in here and gives out the whole time, but he rarely engages in a proper manner to try to constructively deliver this for the people of the community. He comes in and says, "This is delayed. That is delayed." We have to work together for the betterment of those people and protect them. The Deputy knows the objection that was placed on this. He knows exactly the people who placed the objection. He knows what I am doing with him and the people trying to deliver on this. It is unfair of him to come in and accuse us of not working and trying to deliver on that. It is very unfair.
The report is in for over 12 months. Why is there not a decision taken on it to proceed?
When the report comes out, we will constructively come back to the Deputy and we will work together to deliver it. I cannot interfere with the process. I can bring it to where it is today. If I could interfere, I would do it, but I cannot. The Deputy will just have to wait. While it is annoying for him, as it is for me and the people, I have to wait for that to come in.
It is 12 months that we are waiting for the response from the report. The environmental impact study will again be out of date unless a decision is made on this matter.
I fully concur. I know the frustration that the Deputy has. I know people are on to him. I assure him that I am doing everything I can to deliver on that.
Ceisteanna Eile - Other Questions
Questions Nos. 88 and 89 taken with Written Answers.
Climate Change Policy
90. Deputy Paul Lawless asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the amount of carbon emitted in the State in each of the past ten years. [26603/26]
This Government has signed Ireland up to a number of binding carbon targets which carry enormous fines for the taxpayers of this country. Will the Minister and Ministers of State provide an update on where Ireland stands with regard to those targets and on the potential fines that this State will face in 2030?
The Government is committed to delivering on Ireland's responsibility to address the climate crisis. Work remains ongoing across Departments to carry out climate mitigation efforts every day. The roll-out of retrofitting, renewable energy and more affordable electric vehicles, EVs, continues at pace. Ireland now has the lowest level of greenhouse gas emissions in over 35 years, despite a population increase of more than 1.5 million, an additional 1 million new homes and 1 million extra vehicles on our roads.
The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, compiles Ireland's national greenhouse gas emissions inventories. As the data requested by the Deputy covers a ten-year period, and given time constraints, I will provide him with a tabular statement setting out the exact emissions data for each year, as requested, and confine myself now to highlighting the most significant trends from the data.
The year 2024 marks the second successive year that our national emissions have fallen below the 1990 baseline. The 2024 figures follow a substantial 4 Mt CO2 equivalent reduction in 2023, the largest annual reduction since 2010 to 2011. This demonstrates that our climate policies are taking effect. The delivery mechanisms underpinning these emissions reductions include a fivefold increase in renewable capacity since 2005 and a rapid uptake in EVs and retrofits. Furthermore, the Government has approved an investment of €18.9 billion in our electricity grid which underpins our continued roll out of clean energy.
It is really important that the Government understands that the targets Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have signed the Irish taxpayer up to carry with them significant fines. According to the Climate Change Advisory Council, CCAC, and the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, the fines involved range from €3 billion to €28 billion. The Minister of State has responsibility for this. I am asking him about the fines. What are the factors that will determine whether we face fines of €3 billion or €28 billion? The Government is accountable for this. It signed the Irish taxpayer up to these incredible fines. Where are we in relation to this? What are we likely to pay in fines? What cost-benefit analysis has been done? What are the Department's current projections in relation to these fines?
As I said earlier, we are making significant progress and we need to continue that pace and ensure that we have full delivery of all planned measures in regard to our legally binding targets. That is exactly what we are intending to do. Let us be clear, we have the policies and the necessary funding in place and the governance is being strengthened. The Government has continued to remove blockages and accelerate projects. We have focused on the -impact actions. We have a climate action plan that is more focused, covering the carbon budget period. We will also have implementation oversight. We want to ensure that we continue to upgrade homes, bring more renewable generation on stream and have cleaner transport. That is our focus and that is responsible government. That is what we are trying to achieve together, and it is making a significant impact.
A responsible Government would be able to answer basic questions on the fines that we are going to face and that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael signed us up to. The Minister of State mentioned significant progress and stated that policies are in place. Policies should have been in place before the Government signed us up to these measures. We have been laggards in relation to this. In fact, when the Government signed us up to these targets in 2023, it accepted an increased target of 42%, when Ireland was already missing its original target of 30%. What was the basis for that decision? The Minister of State talks about responsibility. I am asking him basic questions. Can he outline the level of fines we will face? Is it going to be on the lower end, at €3 billion, or the higher end, at €26 billion? What are the factors that will determine that? What are the policies that the Government is implementing today? I ask the Minister of State to give an update in relation to this.
Just to address the rhetoric and some of the-----
No, the fines-----
----- issues that the Deputy is raising.
Not the rhetoric, the fines.
Sit down.
Answer the question.
Allow the Minister of State to answer it.
Relax.
Go ahead, Minister.
We are trying to have a civil conversation on oral parliamentary questions. As I said earlier, we have reduced our CO2 emissions below 1990 baseline figures for the second consecutive year, and we are making significant progress on expanding home retrofits and bringing more renewable energy on stream. The best response we have made in recent years is that our emissions are falling. That is the reality. Our investment is unprecedented, and we want to do even more. Our policies are being implemented across all sectors, including energy, homes, transport and land use. Most importantly, in the here and now, we have not paid 1 cent in EU fines, absolutely not. Not €1 has been diverted away from public services. No cheques have been written by the Government in that regard. That is because we have chosen to act, not to delay or deny.
What about IFAC, the climate advisory council and the €26 billion? Has the Minister of State no idea? Come on.
We will not dismantle our climate policy. We have continued-----
The Minister of State should conclude.
Those warnings were calls for compliance. Check out the facts. They are the facts.
The Minister should address his remarks through the Chair.
With the permission of the Members, we will go back to Priority Question No. 87 in the name of Deputy Byrne. He has brought a note and has apologised for being late.
Nuclear Plants
87. Deputy Malcolm Byrne asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment if he will consider nuclear energy as a method to meet Ireland’s future energy needs; if he will facilitate the development of small modular nuclear reactors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26493/26]
I know of the Deputy's interest in this area as he and I have discussed this on a number of occasions. Currently, the Department has no plans for the development of nuclear power, including small modular reactors, as part of Ireland's electricity system. As the Deputy is aware, there are two specific legislative prohibitions on nuclear power in place in Ireland. Both the electricity legislation, in section 18(6) of the Electricity Regulation Act 1999, and the planning legislation, in section 182 of the Planning and Development Act 2024, prohibit the development of nuclear fission for electricity generation. Those provisions would need to be replaced as a first step if we were to plan for the introduction of domestic nuclear fission energy generation.
The reality is that, as things stand today, it is not clear to us that public opinion is in favour of removing those legislative bans on the development of domestic nuclear power plants for electricity in Ireland. Building that majority would require an extensive conversation with the people of Ireland. There have been a lot of conversations about who represents the people of Ireland in recent days. Nonetheless, I think there is probably a consensus across the House that the notion of moving ahead with the introduction of the generation of electricity with a nuclear base to it, regardless of the system, would not gain a social licence in the current climate.
I am conscious, in my daily life as a representative of the people of Clare, of the pushback that is currently in existence regarding wind energy and the permissions for wind turbines. They are hotly contested, objected to in every possible way and then taken to judicial review. I do not think there would be too many at a public meeting in support of a nuclear reactor, regardless of the setback distance. I think we have a way to go in that regard.
The reality is that we are already using nuclear energy in this country, as the Minister of State knows, because we have to import through the interconnector. The level of that import has grown in the past few years from 10% of our energy in 2023, to 15% in 2024, and to 17% in 2025. Of what we are taking already, a lot of the energy is provided through nuclear energy. I know the Minister of State is a strong supporter of the Celtic interconnector with France, and we know the majority of energy that is produced in France is produced through nuclear energy.
I do not believe we are going to see an overnight change. This is not something that is going to happen immediately but to completely rule out a discussion on using this form of energy is wrong. As part of the long-term strategy for the State, it is something we have to consider.
Nobody wants to rule out the discussion but from a Government perspective, for us right now, it is about action and about meeting our targets on the demand for energy. Our efforts are concentrated on capturing wind to bring the electrons ashore. Of course, we take electricity from France that has its source in nuclear energy. Nobody has a problem with that. The French have a lot of expertise in that area. I think we are better concentrating on an area where we have an abundance of electricity off our shoreline. We are developing expertise in that area, and we can bring that on relatively quickly.
I am conscious that many nuclear plants have been in production for decades at this stage, and they are still not generating electricity. Our targets are towards 2030 and 2040. We are heading in the right direction with the strategy that we have. As for a conversation about it, we are all open to that but at the moment, the Government is moving beyond just talking about stuff. We want to get things done, and we are getting it done in that regard.
Our transition to renewables is critical. The Minister of State knows that I strongly support all of the investment that we are seeing in wind and solar, and I want it to happen much more quickly. The question is around future capacity, when we are looking to 2040 and beyond, and whether enough will be generated even at that stage by renewables. Given what we have seen with the types of models we are talking about, I specifically asked about small modular nuclear reactors with regard to being able to fuel our future digital infrastructure, for instance, data centres, in the context of this being a digital economy. I believe it is something that needs to be considered. I accept this is not something that is going to happen immediately, but when we are looking at Ireland's future energy needs going to 2040 and 2050, this green technology, which it is, has to be part of the discussion.
Absolutely. While the debate and discussion are somewhat academic at the moment, it is appropriate that we are looking that far ahead because we do not want to find ourselves in the situation that we currently do - reaching a point where there are constraints on our grid. The lesson we have learned from that is that we now have to get the generation piece right. I really believe in what we are doing on the renewables side, in solar, wind and offshore wind. There are opportunities for floating offshore wind as we move forward, which will bring an even greater quantum of electricity onshore. We are also looking at the smart use of the grid. With interconnection, I think we are in a good space with the plans, which will get us to 2040 and, I believe, 2050 and beyond in terms of the quantum of electricity that can be bought ashore. There is the potential for us to be net exporters, particularly in relation to green hydrogen and ammonia, which can form part of the storage component of that offshore wind electricity.
91. Deputy Darren O'Rourke asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment if he is considering building nuclear power plants in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26919/26]
It is clear from the last priority question, and from the comments from TDs, MEPs and the Taoiseach himself, that Fianna Fáil has gone nuclear, probably in more ways than one, in the past 24 hours. I wonder if the Government is going nuclear.
I thank the Deputy. His sense of humour, as always, is timely and appreciated.
We are also renewable.
We can all be renewed.
The two questions were separate but we have the opportunity to follow one with the other. It is very clear that other countries have a considerable advancement in relation to the use of nuclear energy as a method of driving their economic activity and producing electricity. They have been doing it for decades and have made certain advances in that area. We have not been in that race due to decisions that went back to the early 1970s on Carnsore and other matters. It has been very clear that no social licence really exists among the general public for that.
What we have been doing in recent years is concentrating on capturing clean energy.
That is the one thing about wind and solar; they are absolutely clean. Nobody really talks about the storage of the by-product or the waste product from nuclear energy, which is, in most cases, dumped at sea, albeit, we believe, in a very safe environment. We would be better to concentrate on what we have and the fact that would not have to import all that much by way of equipment. We have the knowledge and experience, which we are developing, and there is a great opportunity for employment, particularly in coastal communities away from the centres, which would have had a greater level of employment in the past.
Pardon the pun - I do not like the phrase - but there is a double win or a win-win here as opposed to a "wind-wind". There is a win-win with the wind, and we need to continue to advance that. We are planning ahead with the designation of sites around our shoreline and offshore from now to 2040. We are also looking to 2050. We will have completed the programme of designation by the end of 2027. That will provide significant clarity to those investing from outside.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit. I appreciate his response. I wonder about this new focus on nuclear energy. There has been a lot of commentary and priority questions in respect of it. I mentioned the newspaper headlines which state that the Cabinet is considering it. I am deeply concerned about this matter from a number of perspectives. The Minister of State touched on it when he referred to the waste involved, public support and, more importantly, the fact that Ireland's strength needs to be in the delivery and advancement of renewable technologies, particularly offshore wind. That is our great strength. Others have strength, well-developed for decades, in the area of nuclear energy, and we will use some of that. I do not see a contradiction in that regard. We need to play to our strengths. The real risk here is that we get distracted, go down a rabbit hole and continue to miss the really important milestones that we have to reach. That is where the focus needs to be.
I agree. From a departmental perspective, we are not losing focus. We are absolutely targeting this. We are looking at interconnection as well. As the Deputy knows - the North-South interconnector is kind of in his area as well - we will have the Celtic interconnector. We want to build a more complex grid right across the European Union, which will help to balance the load, the demand and the generation, and we can do that. However, there is nothing wrong with accepting an academic debate. I do not say that in a throwaway manner. Of course, it always good to have checks and balances and if there is an academic debate going on, we will facilitate that and participate in it but our action-oriented plan is about capturing the wind, both onshore and offshore. It is about putting in place a structured grid that will allow electricity to be used without constraint across the State. We want to connect North to South, which is an important one, and then there is the Celtic interconnector. We also need to look then to other storage opportunities, which we have at the moment in relation to battery, but we need to do more than just an academic conversation around hydrogen because there is demand for that and for ammonia right across Europe at the moment.
On the opportunity to innovate, I had correspondence this week on how we are further developing and innovating in our existing offshore projects, and how they are coming back and refining their proposals in a really innovative, progressive and environmentally considerate way. Of course, we need to think of the potential implications of nuclear energy, particularly in terms of waste but also in the context of planning consent. We need to think about base-loading. We have renewables. We should have more and a lot more but we also need to look at battery technology.
On data centres, I am fundamentally opposed to the idea that we would bring nuclear power plants here in order to further expand our data centres. The opposite needs to be the case. Our data centres need to play a helpful role in advancing our renewables and balancing our grid, not the opposite.
I am in broad agreement with the Deputy, but I am a big supporter of data centres. They are like the advanced factories that were there in the seventies.
Not with nuclear power plants.
In fact, I read a report recently which suggested that the use of data centres will reduce the use of electricity-----
Not if you put a nuclear power plant beside one.
Deputy O'Rourke, allow the Minister of State to answer.
-----rather than having racks in isolated locations all over the place. You commingle and co-share a resource and, ultimately, you reduce the amount of electricity used. We have to be in control of our own data because there are other energy-rich countries that would be delighted to have the opportunity to store European data. If we do not get our act together, somebody will steal our clothes and that will be a loss. There are a lot of tech companies that want to be close to where the data centres are in the context of the resilience of the communications systems, etc. We have a job to do and, of course, we have to build houses, etc. I am all for advancing what we have to do in regard to offshore and wind. We must of course recognise that gas will be an important transition fuel as we move towards renewables, but we have got to do it at a pace and maintain the economic growth and control of our data at the same time.
Legislative Process
92. Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the way in which he will ensure that the integrity and intention of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 is preserved in light of planned legislation such as the Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026, which seeks to undermine it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27440/26]
Can the Minister outline how he is going to ensure that the integrity of and the intention behind the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 are preserved in light of planned legislation such as the Critical Infrastructure Bill, which seeks to undermine it, and will he make a statement on the matter?
The Critical Infrastructure Bill is a central pillar of the Government’s Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan and represents a significant step forward in strengthening delivery across all key sectors, including energy, which I will turn to in a moment. Accelerated delivery of infrastructure does not disapply our climate commitments or our targets at national level, but recognises an urgent need for the completion of major infrastructure projects in the State. Many new infrastructure projects, including critical electricity infrastructure and public transport projects, are themselves absolutely essential to supporting climate, environment and other social and economic objectives.
The Bill provides for the disapplication of section 15 of the amended Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015, which the Deputy referred to, in very limited circumstances for designated critical infrastructure. Climate impact will still be one of the influencing factors when decisions are made and will continue to be accounted for through decision-making processes, particularly through the planning system where climate impact is already woven into the policy hierarchy, as confirmed recently by the Supreme Court in the Coolglass case.
I assure the Deputy that climate impact and considerations will remain absolutely central to the ambition of this Government, though they must be balanced against other critical factors like housing shortages and energy security particularly, and when it comes to these projects of national importance. I assure the Deputy that I will continue to work across government to ensure climate impacts of projects are well-evidenced and incorporated into proposals at the appropriate time.
No one can argue that we do not need to speed up infrastructure in this country. We have had a huge infrastructure deficit for decades and there are major infrastructure projects that we need to move on very quickly. Many of them will have a climate-positive outcome. However, it is incredible that while the Government is saying that climate obligations will remain central to those projects and the assessment of them, the Minister and the Government are bringing in a Bill that will disapply the climate Act. It essentially sets it aside and says that it will not be part of the process in the designation and the assessment of it. What the Government is doing by doing this is completely eroding the strength of the climate Act and the need for it. The Minister knows how difficult it was to get that climate Act through in the last Dáil and how important it is. All the climate Act says in section 15 is that a relevant body "shall have regard to". It is not a large or high bar for this Government to meet when it comes to building infrastructure. Why is the Government trying to undermine it?
If the Deputy takes our offshore wind projects that are in planning right now as an example, she will see that many of them are the subject of requests for further information. We have already had groups say to us that if and when they are granted, these projects will be subject to a judicial review, JR, and will be brought to the High Court or the Supreme Court. That is not acceptable either. We are talking here today, and rightly so, around energy security and the acceleration of renewables, which, thankfully, we are doing really well. If you even look at solar, just over ten years ago, we had 2 MW of solar in our grid; we have 2,400 MW now.
It shows what can be done. That does not even include over 1,000 MW of rooftop solar. The Deputy and I know that there are critical projects that need to be delivered, particularly on the energy side. Energy is really where a lot of this is going. If we can reduce our dependence on fossil fuel, it is good for the climate, for the economy and for people. In some instances, we have very small groups or individuals who have been holding up these projects and have been weaponising a good climate Act and its purpose to slow and stall development. We cannot have that any more.
Being able to object to developments is a core part of our democracy, it absolutely is. The projects need to be able to withstand those objections. The projects need to get those balances right. Oftentimes, the objectors are highlighting key flaws in the plans. It cannot be that we just throw them away because otherwise what is the point of the climate Act? Why bother bringing it in and why have it in legislation if the Government is just going to decide to set it aside whenever there is a project it wants to get through? Look at liquefied natural gas, LNG. This is exactly what the Government tried to do in relation to the strategic LNG legislation. It tried to disapply the climate Act there and essentially said that legislation would meet the obligations of the climate Act.
This is completely eroding the strength and the purpose of the climate Act at a time when we need to double down on climate action. It just beggars belief that the Minister is actually going to do this.
I do not think it does. I respect what the Deputy says but I disagree with it. Take the example of the floating gas reserve - the floating storage and regasification unit, FRSU - which we absolutely need. That is consistent with the climate Act in relation to the energy security of this country. That needs to happen. It will be debated in the Dáil and we will see whether it receives the support of the Dáil. It needs to happen. We are in no way setting aside the climate Act. What we are saying is, for critical infrastructure projects, what an acceptable length of time for objections to go on for is. I was the Minister responsible for planning in the last Government. I got rid of things like the fast-track planning system that went straight to what was An Bord Pleanála and brought it back to a two-stage planning process through the local authorities and the board. Decisions should be made by planning authorities, not by courts. That is my view and I have always said that very clearly. I fully respect and will defend the right of people to make observations, be they objections or observations in support of a project. What we cannot allow as a country is the continued use of methods by a very small number of people to delay critical infrastructure projects and the weaponisation of very good legislation, which is the climate Act.
Energy Policy
93. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment if his attention has been drawn to the significant barriers being faced by small-scale renewable energy generation groups and communities; when the review of tariffs will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26175/26]
All across Europe, community energy is thriving, in places like Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Scotland in particular. Communities are building wind and solar farms, district heating systems and energy co-operatives. They are lowering bills, keeping profits local and accelerating the transition, doing exactly what Irish communities want to do. Here, in respect of the small-scale renewable electricity support scheme, SRESS, we are told it is up and running but there are difficulties. I want the Minister of State to outline the problems it is having because only eight projects have qualified and not a single one has actually been built.
The programme for Government commits to promoting the SRESS to simplify market access for communities, SMEs and farmer-owned solar and wind projects. The SRESS export tariff is designed for community, SME and farmer export-only projects above 50 kW to 6 MW. SRESS offers a simpler route to market for those groups, with fixed tariffs for solar and wind. All export projects up to 1 MW can also apply to SRESS, and need not be community, SME or farmer-owned projects.
To further support communities, the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, provides a range of supports to develop renewable energy projects, including free access to specialist technical advisers and free comprehensive guides, available on the SEAI website. These guides cover various issues such as community groups and governance, stakeholder engagement, business planning and grid connection. The SEAI has also undertaken 13 county-level grid studies to help communities identify economically viable connection areas.
In 2025, my Department published an assessment of barriers and potential of development of renewable energy communities, as required by the renewable energy directive. My Department has also secured funding under the European Commission's technical support instrument to further assess barriers and propose recommendations to further support community energy development. This assessment is being carried out by the OECD, with initial policy recommendations due this year, which will help inform future policy approaches.
In February 2026, my Department commenced a review of the tariffs available under SRESS. This review is being undertaken to ensure the scheme continues to provide appropriate support. It is expected that the review will be completed later this year. In the meantime, the existing SRESS rates continue to be available and apply until the review process is complete.
I know the review is taking place, but will the Minister of State tell me exactly when it is expected to give its findings? As I said earlier, and as the Minister of State acknowledged, there are barriers. Only eight projects have qualified and not one has been built. While it looks okay on paper, there are serious problems with the scheme in practice. There are massive delays in the enabling grant. There are huge ESB network connection costs. These projects are made almost impossible financially. Having access to the SRESS tariff is another difficulty. It only matters when you are exporting electricity to the grid. It seems to be mired in bureaucratic difficulties and delays. What exactly has the Minister of State mandated the Department review to come up with? Is he trying to remove the barriers or what exactly is he trying to do to make sure that the progressive advances we have seen across Europe can be brought into play here?
I fully accept that the uptake must increase. I know there is one project in Kerry and there is also a project in my own constituency of Mayo. That is exactly what we are working to do, to unlock the barriers.
In terms of our commitment, we are reviewing whether 100% community ownership remains the right model. We are also examining options of partnership between communities and developers, and also aligning the tariffs and supports for projects, that they are deliverable, bankable and compliant. We have to do this within the parameters of getting state aid rules right, to ensure we are not putting communities at any financial risk. The Government is very much working to ensure that we can have more viable projects in the pipeline and that they can be delivered faster and with certainty, protect communities and are designed to be simple in nature while having maximum impact.
The Minister of State has not really answered the question, though, as to when exactly the review will take place. Is there a deadline on it? Let us be honest, the problem is that in Ireland there is only one community-owned renewable energy project above the 50 kW level, that is, in Templederry, and that was built more than a decade ago. Since then, there has been a huge demand out there and a huge hunger for sharing the benefits of renewable energy properly within communities. I see it is in the programme for Government, but 18 months later, there seems to be serious stagnation about it. Maybe with a new leader there might be more impetus in getting these kinds of project over the line.
Is the Deputy trying to get rid of me?
When will the review be completed so that things can be pushed forward and the bureaucracy and problems can be ended?
To answer the question, we met as recently as yesterday in regard to it. We hope to have the review published before the end of the year. I understand the urgency around it. We listen to the frustration from communities that are giving their time and energy in trying to get these projects off the ground. We are very much committed to the community-enabling grants.
That has not changed and we want to ensure that anything we implement is legally sound and can be delivered safely. That is why we have an independent technical review - the tariff review - under way. Once that is complete, processing enabling grants will be a priority. We will have clarity and certainty for the communities that want to deliver these projects because we know how beneficial they are and we know what impact they will have locally.
Climate Action Plan
94. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment to provide an update on the planned publication date for the 2026 climate action plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27598/26]
151. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the reason for the delay in the publication of the 2026 climate action plan, which was initially due to be published in December 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27599/26]
Today is 16 April and we are almost a third of the way through the year. When will the Department publish the climate action plan for 2026?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 94 and 151 together.
We are committed to delivering on Ireland’s responsibility to address the climate crisis and work remains ongoing across Departments to carry out climate-mitigation efforts every day, as evidenced by the roll-out of retrofitting, renewable energy development and deployment, and more affordable electric vehicles. All that continues at pace and is progressing well. These ongoing efforts are supported by the Climate Action Plan 2025, in tandem with its predecessor, the 2024 plan, both of which remain in place and provide a strong framework for continued delivery of climate action across all sectors, given that many of the measures and actions in these plans are multi-annual in nature and effect. Work remains ongoing across Departments to deliver on these commitments and carry out climate-mitigation efforts every day, supported by recently enhanced governance and delivery arrangements.
Progress is being made. Ireland now has the lowest level of greenhouse gas emissions in 35 years, which is notable given concurrent demographic and economic growth, including a population increase of approximately 1.5 million people, more than 1 million new homes and over 1 million extra vehicles on our roads. Those are extraordinary growth figures, which we have been able to underpin by reducing emissions.
We are making very significant strides towards our target of 80% renewable energy by 2030. Last month significantly, nearly 50% of our electricity was delivered by renewables. We have reached a milestone of 8 GW of onshore renewable electricity generation. We have more than doubled our wind energy capacity in just ten years. I mentioned last month's record 50% of our renewable electricity generation. We are now also prioritising the development of our offshore wind capacity. We had another successful auction with Tonn Nua. Underpinning this is the investment of €18.9 billion in our electricity grid for the period from now to 2030, which is critical to the electrification of homes, businesses, transport and our society.
On the Zero Emission Vehicles Ireland, ZEVI, front, we reached our target for electrical vehicle sales of 195,000 in October 2025, with sales now at 212,000. I have recently announced an unprecedented package of new and enhanced grants for homeowners, which I am glad to say have been really well received and we are seeing a significant uptake in grants by bringing forward the retrofitting passport committed to in the programme for Government.
Work on the next climate action plan, CAP, 26, is under way. Following the extensive recommendations delivered by the Oireachtas joint committee on climate late last year, the Government is taking the necessary time to carefully finalise the carbon budget process. We will be doing that. I am of the view that the next climate action plan should reflect the outcome of that process. In that regard, my Department is working towards bringing a draft of the new climate action plan to the Government later this year. I also want to look at how we report on it.
The ongoing transition to a climate-neutral economy has profound implications for our economy and society. In formulating the next plan, the Government must carefully consider a wide range of factors to ensure the approach is ambitious, feasible and sustainable. It is vital that our climate policies and emissions-reduction pathways deliver the best possible value for money while maximising the net benefits to society. We must protect the long-term competitiveness of the economy, maintain the State’s attractiveness for investment and maximise employment opportunities while ensuring a just transition that supports communities right across the country. That is central to it.
I specified the date today because last year the climate action plan for 2025 was published on 15 April. At least last year there was there was some excuse for delay - there was a general election followed by the formation of a new Government, and the Minister needed to get a sense of his new Department. This year, those excuses do not exist and it starts to look like a lack of interest, a lack of urgency. With the Minister saying, as he has just done, that the plan will be published later this year, that sense of urgency is not coming across to me. By his own admission, Ireland will not meet its 2030 targets. I know he has been trying to reverse what he said over Christmas since then.
The climate action plan for 2026 is vital not just for this year but also for the next five years. Beyond trying to convince me about the importance of these steps for the Government, how can the Minister convince the Irish people if the central policy document for what happens next is delayed? He has given me a list of what brought us to here. Where we are is that we are behind our targets. The next big steps we need to see have to be set out in the climate action plan. The 2026 one is particularly important because it is the start of the next carbon budget cycle. We know we are a long way off and it needs to see some really big ideas, really big policies and how they will be funded within it. We are a third of the way through the year. We are losing time and we are losing the opportunity to implement these policies. Can the Minister give me any better sense of when it will come in?
I fully accept the need to provide clarity on timeframes. I just want to explain what is happening on this. The last two climate action plans for 2024 and 2025 are still in place and the actions within them are still being worked through. I want to enable us to set climate priorities. The Deputy has previously asked me in the House about our climate targets. I have just said very clearly that while our projections and carbon emissions are going in the right direction, it does not look like we will hit our 2030 target. Having said that, we need to see how we can bridge that gap between the projected reduction and the target itself. That is why CAP 26 is so critical.
I want us to look at the most impactful measures that we can make and to get off an administrative hamster wheel on this whereby one plan is being produced while the actions of the previous year's plan are still being worked through. I have had this discussion with the Climate Change Advisory Council, CCAC. I have met it in plenary. A new chair, Alex White, has been appointed to the CCAC. I meet the environmental pillar regularly, including just couple of weeks ago, and they understand that too. What are the most important measures we can take in CAP 26 to help us bridge the gap and continue the progress that has been made in many areas, no less so than on the energy generation piece? That is a genuine thing and I want people to understand what CAP 26 is and for it to be a readable document. Notwithstanding all the really good work across government on the publication of the plan, it is fair to say, as is acknowledged by the environment pillar as well, that what is really important is how many people actually know what is in the plan itself. I want to bring that down to a grassroots level. That is the level of work that we are doing.
We are not looking to delay it at all. I intend to bring options on climate priorities to the Government in the coming weeks and that will flow into CAP 26. That is the timeframe. We are talking a matter of weeks for the climate priorities and following from that will be the climate action plan.
I will not get into a back-and-forth over what was said at Christmas because I do not think it is useful at this stage. However, given how far off track we are at this current time, the climate action plan for this year, which sets out the priorities for the next five years within the carbon budget, is absolutely crucial. The Minister spoke about priorities. He will need to take some really big extra steps. It is not just about ticking the box and puttering along from where we are now.
I see the focus that the Government is putting on the Critical Infrastructure Bill, as this is going to be some big part of it. Deputy Whitmore made some points about it earlier and I have made some points to the Minister, Deputy Chambers.
I think what the Government is proposing there is actually counterproductive, but we will have that debate another time. In terms of the big step that was taken last week with a huge package of additional funding to deal with the emergency crisis to end the protest and the blockades, does the Minister believe the Department will get the financial backing across the Government to take some of these really big steps, steps beyond what have been budgeted for previously and steps that might make eyes water in the Department of public expenditure and in the fiscal council, but steps that are now necessary when we see for the second time in four years the vulnerability of our economy to its addiction to fossil fuels and the consequent impact on our emissions? If this climate action plan does not contain some big, bold and new ideas to decarbonise and does not provide greater energy security or affordability for Irish people, and if it does not have a clear financial commitment behind it, it will not be worth anything.
I will take a couple of examples of where the commitments are. I agree with the Deputy. The next plan has to question how we can look to bridge the gap. We need to recognise the progress that has been made by our people and by successive Governments in this regard. That is why, looking at our retrofit programme, we have made some very significant changes to the grants to make them more accessible. People are responding to that already, just short of two months since we made those changes. We can do a lot of things to improve our resilience, reduce our energy use and make our homes more climate friendly and healthier. We can also do the same for business. We are looking at a suite of business grant measures to reduce energy use in business. Again, I agree with the Deputy on this. The reliance or over-reliance in certain areas on fossil fuels and our dependency on imported fossil fuels are a risk and a weakness, and we need to move away from that.
I will take two areas. I refer to grid investment and the €18.9 billion. PR6 is critical, and I know Deputy O'Gorman knows that. It is a matter of our taking more renewables into our grid. We are already the number one country in Europe in the integration of renewables into our grid, but it is a matter of our expanding that further and bringing more storage so that we can deploy and dispatch energy at the appropriate times. We have over a gigawatt in storage now. We can now trade in the electricity market, which is a good thing, too. We need to increase our storage and our renewable capacity. The projections in that regard to the end of the decade are good, while not hitting 80%. In the CAP 2026, for example, on energy, we will see how we can get to 80% without the offshore renewables because the offshore will not be electrified by 2030. The focus there is getting it into construction.
On transport, €2 billion of the climate and nature fund, as the Deputy knows, has already been deployed to MetroLink, which would be one of the biggest decarbonising projects from a transport perspective. That is backed with money. I want the CAP 2026 to be a real plan that people understand. It has to be ambitious and has to be backed financially, and I intend that it will be.
Electricity Transmission Network
95. Deputy Catherine Ardagh asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment for an update on current interconnection projects. [27252/26]
I know Deputy Byrne is taking this for Deputy Ardagh. As he may be aware, the Department and the Minister do not have a role in respect of the delivery of the offshore electricity grid. That is handled by EirGrid as the transmission system operator. I will endeavour, on Deputies Byrne and Ardagh's behalf, to ask EirGrid to communicate with both of them in relation to the projects and where they are at. I am very conscious that our interconnection projects and those that are envisaged will be an integral part of the stabilisation of our own electricity grid and will assist us in continuing our pathway towards removing the need for fossil fuels as part of our generation mix. We are very strongly in favour of that, as Deputy Byrne knows.
The Celtic interconnector with France is under way and significant works are already in place there. I think it was the Taoiseach, or perhaps it was the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, who recently signed a memorandum of understanding, MOU, with Spain. The Taoiseach certainly had been involved at a stage in the discussions on that. I think at one of the events last year, I had conversations with Spanish representatives. We really believe in the necessity to connect ourselves in an important way with the rest of the European Union. Of course, the North-South interconnector is such a fundamental part of that all-island electricity market so, of course, that is important. I will have EirGrid communicate with the Deputies on that, on those projects.
I am rather concerned. This has been described by EirGrid and others as the biggest infrastructure project this decade, which it is. The timeframe has already slipped, with commissioning meant to happen in 2026 but now happening in 2028. I am kind of concerned that the Minister of State says that he does not know on the floor of the Dáil and that he will have to get EirGrid to let us know. This is a critical piece of infrastructure for the State, as he says. It is important that we know the timeframe as to when it will come on because one of our concerns in terms of energy demand for the State is about having the infrastructure in place. I am concerned, as the Minister knows, that we have been pushing out some of the deadlines with regard to some of our targets on offshore renewables to 2031 or 2032. It is critical that the commitment that was made that it would be in 2028 will actually be delivered, and the House is entitled to hear that.
In reality, none of us is happy that there are potential delays. From a departmental perspective and from the Minister's perspective, we are very clear on the importance of getting it done. What I am saying to the Deputy is that EirGrid is independent of the Government. It is established in that way as a TSO and it is responsible through the CRU, which has the potential to be brought before the committee. We are very anxious to do that.
Just a slight correction: the Minister reminds me that, in fact, the MOU with Spain has yet to be signed and will be done next week.
I will ensure that EirGrid communicate with the Deputies. I will ask that it update me as well in that regard.
I am sorry but I have a problem with that. Yes, there is a reason EirGrid, in terms of operational activity, is independent, but EirGrid is responsible to the State. Deputy Dooley is a Minister of State responsible for energy with regard to a critical piece of infrastructure. We should know in this House about progress on this critical piece of infrastructure. I say respectfully that it is not good enough to say that EirGrid will tell us when it will have this critical piece of infrastructure finished. It is not for the benefit of EirGrid; it is for the benefit of every citizen, every business, every home in this State in order that we can have reliability of energy into the future. We should know and we are entitled to know in this House about progress on major infrastructural projects such as this. EirGrid is doing it on behalf of the State. I appreciate that the Minister of State will send me on the answer, but people are entitled to know if it will be finished in 2028, at the postponed date, as was originally committed.
I hope the Deputy does not think I am being evasive but I am just providing him with the information I have. I am aware that the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, meets with EirGrid monthly. He seeks to get an update on projects and he is very anxious that in all those instances he communicates to EirGrid the Government's priorities in this regard, and the Government's priorities have not changed. We are accelerating the development of infrastructure. There are State agencies that are established with their own independence, their own governance and their own boards of directors, so there is a limit in those circumstances as to what the Government can do other than to set out what policy is. We must be mindful, too, that we must follow the democratic principles that are established. EirGrid is answerable to its board, to the CRU and, ultimately, to the Oireachtas through the committee.
We represent the citizens of the State. We recognise the importance of this and we will continue to pursue that. In fact, I am meeting with Errol Close and a number of other people from EirGrid today, albeit in relation to separate projects, but I will communicate again the discussion here, and rest assured, I will continue to drive that. It is a recognition, too, that the Taoiseach has even established a clearing house in relation to offshore wind, of which the grid becomes part as well as an action-oriented plan to get delivery on these projects.
Energy Policy
96. Deputy Barry Heneghan asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment the position communicated by Ireland at EU level regarding reducing dependency on imported fossil fuels from geopolitically unstable regions; the role of his Department in EU level discussions on responding to recent disruptions in global energy markets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22801/26]
Go háirithe sna laethanta atá inniu ann, tá na rudaí atá ag tarlú timpeall an domhain thar a bheith suimiúil agus tá sé soiléir gur gá dúinn athrú an-mhór a dhéanamh ar ár gcuid fuinnimh. With the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and the risk to global security, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz, how are we positioning ourselves to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels? I have been pushing for, and I mentioned it yesterday, plug-in solar. Is there any update from the Department on allowing plug-in solar? I represent a large area of north Dublin with a lot of apartment dwellings and this will ease their energy costs.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as a smaointí ar an ábhar an-tábhachtach seo. Aontaím leis go bhfuil sé fíorthábhachtach agus go gcaithfimid athruithe breise a dhéanamh ar son fuinnimh in Éirinn agus fud fad na hEorpa go háirithe. I agree with the Deputy. We need to accelerate the changes we are bringing in given the existing crisis. Ireland has been to the forefront of many of the renewable energy generation initiatives. The past ten years have been good. Last year was particularly good but we need to accelerate this further. If ever there was a reason we need to continue to reduce our dependence on the importation of fossil fuels from other states, it is now. With the Middle East crisis, we do not want to lose sight of the fact - and it know it is not lost on the Deputy, in particular - that, while we are feeling it as an economic crisis and are feeling price shocks, we also have to be very mindful that it is a humanitarian crisis. Thousands of people have been killed in this war, following on from the brutality we saw with Israel's actions, its attack on Gaza and its continued attacks on the West Bank and the whole Middle East. It is a very uncertain situation right now.
I attended a virtual meeting of EU energy Ministers on 31 March to discuss an EU-wide response to rising costs caused by the conflict in the Middle East. The European Commission is due to provide additional details on specific proposals. I do not mind saying that we expected to get them last week, so the EU needs to act as a bloc. We are bringing forward changes in Ireland. We have deployed resources of about €750 million. It is still really difficult for our people but the EU response needs to be immediate in terms of what can be done at an EU-wide level. I have fed into that and I will come back to it.
Aontaím go hiomlán leis an Aire. It is definitely unprecedented but the price shock is not limited to the oil markets. It is also spreading rapidly through global gas markets in Europe and Asia. That just proves the importance. Roughly one fifth of the global LNG trade normally passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Qatar remains one of the cornerstone suppliers to the world's markets, which means any disruption tightens gas balances. Energy shocks also ripple into agriculture, as we have seen, beyond higher diesel prices, because natural gas and hydrocarbon liquids are key inputs in the production of fertilisers. We obviously note that this is all coming from the Strait of Hormuz but it feeds into the price of fertilisers. Can that also be looked into at EU level?
Has there been any reply in relation to the plug-in solar development? I have a lot of apartment dwellers in my constituency. To install a small-scale system on balconies to reduce bills would be very welcome to the Irish people, go háirithe na laethanta seo.
Aontaím leis an Teachta arís. Next week the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, and I are meeting the EU transport Ministers. We have already taken measures in respect of our supply chains. There has been no direction or unified approach by the European Union, which is regrettable. It is also regrettable that we are still waiting for the details of the toolbox - as it is now referred to - of what the European Union can do on behalf of its citizens. That needs to be done now and I will be reflecting that.
On plug-in solar, I know the Deputy has another question. Solar has expanded greatly in Ireland. Already we have 2.4 GW of solar in our system, with over 1 GW of rooftop solar as well that is not grid connected. I am very open to plug-in solar. Some safety concerns were flagged at official level but Germany and other countries deploy it well. On foot of the question that was tabled in this regard, the team in the Department is looking at this. If we can deploy more solar, then we should.
Tá sé an-mhaith go bhfuil an tAire ag rá sin, go háirithe inniu. It is a very interesting concept. If something is not safe, the Germans would not be doing it. The government there has been definitely allowing it and there has been a huge uptake of it. North Dublin, which I represent, has apartments. These apartment dwellers cannot use their rooftop. The plug-in solar systems which can be bought and installed within 15 minutes are a simple fix that would reduce their energy costs. Right now we need faster delivery of grid infrastructure and a welcome the Minister's engagement regarding private wires but, ultimately, it is about national security and affordability. One of the solutions that I am continuously shouting for, and I will continue to do so until it is done, is plug-in solar. Obviously, we can go with the private wires, long-duration energy storage, gravity storage and green hydrogen. We have so much potential and I do welcome the fact the Department is moving as fast as it is on it. I look forward to working constructively with the Minister on this matter.
I will keep the Deputy informed of the progress. We are trying to make it easier to deploy renewables. That is why the critical infrastructure legislation on bigger projects will be really important. There are things that households and communities can do. We have seen the growth, with 33,000 solar grant applications granted last year. We will accelerate that further this year, with about 73,000 retrofits. Plug-in solar is not an extremely new technology but there might have been some concerns with it. However, it is not being dismissed. I can assure the Deputy of that. We have a more detailed response on it in the written parliamentary question the Deputy has submitted. I will keep him directly informed on it. I made changes to the SEAI grants at the start of March in terms of making things more accessible for people to support. We have seen a really significant increase in applications for things like heat pumps, solar, wall cavity insulation and attic insulation as we have made it easier for people to do so. We also have to look at solar storage and battery storage in homes and at utilising our car batteries through EV and solar. I will come back to the Deputy.
Question No. 97 taken with Written Answers.
98. Deputy Roderic O'Gorman asked the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment if consideration is being given by his Department to permitting the use of plug-in solar panels for residential properties in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27602/26]
Over the last number of months, I have been asking the Minister about the issue of plug-in solar to ensure that more households in Ireland can benefit from cheap solar power. Will the Minister give me a timeline on when we will have a clear decision from him and the Department as to whether plug-in solar can be used in this country?
Plug-in solar systems are very small PV energy systems, usually two or three modules, and less than 1 kW in total per installation. They are connected to a micro-inverter and plugged directly into the normal household socket. This then feeds the house's internal electricity system. These low-cost panels can be put on balconies and outdoor spaces. The use of plug-in mini-solar technology has grown in some EU countries in recent years as consumers search for ways to save on high energy bills. It has seen particular growth in Germany. Officials from our Department have engaged with stakeholders on the optional provisions in the 2024 electricity market design directive, including the provision relating to plug-in mini solar systems and through a consultation that ran from September to October in 2024. Respondents to that consultation raised potential safety issues, so it is important that the introduction of the technology is given appropriate consideration. Some form of regulation may be needed before plug-in mini solar is promoted. Officials are currently engaged with the relevant agencies and regulators, including ESB Networks in its role as the system operator. Our officials are also in contact with officials from the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero in the UK relating to the recently announced intention for the UK Government to regulate for the sale and use of plug-in mini solar systems. EU guidance on the matter is also being considered.
The issue here is a question of speed. One million households in Germany use plug-in solar right now. There has been an 18-month consultation on this issue here. I agree that safety issues have to be addressed but the Minister has suggested that there may be a need for some form of regulation. We need some speed on this. Look at what the UK Secretary of State, Ed Miliband, did. He brought in the manufacturers, providers and installers to ask them about the specific issues and the regulatory challenges that needed to be addressed.
What are the regulatory challenges we need to address? As I have said, this matter has been going on for 18 months. Irish people, particularly those living in apartments, are being denied the opportunity to benefit from free energy in the midst of the worst energy crisis we have seen in this country. An assurance was given to Deputy Heneghan. I ask that I also be kept informed about the timeline for the delivery of this measure. Action needs to be taken now.
I thank the Deputy very much. He is right. Both he and Deputy Heneghan have continued to raise this matter. The Department is actively engaged on it. It is not good enough to just continue to say there are potential safety issues. We have got to address them, recognising that others have found methods to address those safety concerns. As I have said, we are engaged with our UK counterparts and we are also discussing the regulatory issues in relation to safety with our German counterparts, recognising that they have had a very successful roll-out. There are some grid issues. I do not offer that by way of excuse but, with regard to distribution, our grid is managed and constructed somewhat differently. Notwithstanding that, it should not be beyond our capabilities to find a pathway forward that is safe and that gives capacity to those who have the opportunity or potential to use these small-scale pieces of equipment.
Is féidir teacht ar Cheisteanna Scríofa ar www.oireachtas.ie.
Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.