I thank the Minister of State for his speech. We support the intent and objectives of this Bill. Cleaner air is something that every one of us wants for our families and communities, and for future generations. We agree that local authorities do need stronger powers. We all know that the main sources of air pollution are solid fuel burning and transport emissions. While air pollution is often framed as an urban issue, it is very much a rural problem too. Across my own county, families depend on solid fuel for their heating. The open fire and the range are not just appliances, they are part of our culture also. While I fully support the aim of the Bill to ensure that the fuels being sold are cleaner and safer, we must also recognise the cost pressures that people are under. Not every household can afford more expensive, higher standard fuels. We cannot create a cliff edge where people already struggling to heat their homes are pushed into deeper hardship. We must have a just transition to renewables. Cleaner air cannot come at the cost of those who can least afford it. As is the hallmark of recent years, there has been a plethora of new rules and set targets without outlining the pathway to get there. Many ordinary people have seen cliff edges that see them punished because they cannot afford to access an alternative. The local authorities need to be resourced to enforce the new rules. There needs to be a just transition for solid fuel homes and local retailers, more protection from the carbon tax for many rural and elderly homes that have no choice but to continue using solid fuels, for whom it is unrealistic to expect them to transition over. With the approach we have seen, it is not surprising that illegal smoky fuel imports have increased, which has to be dealt with. Behind the technical language and all the amendments, people have been left behind, people on solid fuels. Energy poverty is spiralling. We need an all-Ireland strategy on it or we will never get to grips with air pollution. It is a public health crisis. Over 1,600 premature deaths, as was mentioned by the Minister of State, occur every year in Ireland due to air pollution. It must be addressed but balanced with the fact that energy poverty harms people too - older people, rural households and low-income families. A record 320,000 households are in arrears on energy bills. As substantial as that is, it obscures the scale of the problem and it does not capture the hundreds of thousands of families on hardship pay-as-you-go meters who regularly get cut off for one, two or three days at a time. Nor does it capture the 750,000 households reliant on home heating oil who cannot afford to fill their tank because the price of home-heating oil has doubled over the past five or six weeks and the supports have not been there to address that. Importantly it does not capture the households the length and breadth of the country that have no other option than to use solid fuels but have been hit by price hikes since the introduction of the carbon tax. In the past week in particular, we have seen the Government, Labour and Social Democrats cosying up to each other, holding hands and dancing around the carbon tax bonfire but without more accessible grants, it is a double tax. It is a wealth transfer sometimes for people in wealthier households. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have left these households behind. There is a crossover between those who live in energy poverty and those who are reliant on solid fuels. The very people who most need the SEAI retrofitting supports are the ones who cannot afford them. At the climate committee yesterday morning, we heard about the two-year waiting list for the warmer homes scheme. One third of grants for electric vehicles are given to people who buy cars that are worth €55,000 or more. Is that acceptable? Does someone who can afford a car costing that much really need a grant of €5,000? We have been warning about this for years. The Government's failure to support solid fuel homes is putting people at risk. It cannot talk about a just transition when designing schemes for the well-off. It cannot criminalise people for heating their homes when the alternatives are not there. We need to make retrofitting work for everyone not just the well-off. We need targeted supports for rural houses and solid-fuel homes, and we have been calling for that for years. Phasing it out without providing alternatives is madness. Measures on air pollution that target solid fuels have to be accompanied by affordable schemes and targeted supports. For too long, local authorities have been asking for a task force to enforce environmental regulations. They simply have not been provided with the tools or the resources and then the Government blames them for the regulations not being upheld. This Bill finally gives them the ability to issue on-the-spot signs, the ability to seize non-compliant fuels and clearer authority to tackle illegal trade. They are positive and will protect honest law-abiding fuel merchants who register properly, meet the standards and sell clean, compliant products. They should not be undercut by those who ignore the rules and sell cheaper, dirtier fuels. Local authorities which are already stretched very thin also need personnel. If the Government is serious about enforcement, it needs to fund and staff local authorities as otherwise we will be setting the councils up to fail, just like announcing all the new SNA posts and then not filling them. I am glad the Bill does not interfere with turbary rights. We also need an all-island strategy. The Border of this island is once again exposed as unnecessary and harmful. We need to think beyond county lines, beyond the Border and take a united-Ireland approach. Air pollution does not stop at Newry or Aughnacloy, as we have long said. We need co-ordinated regulations, co-ordinated enforcement, co-ordinated public awareness and an all-island strategy. My colleagues in the North are already advancing policy in this area. Linking up with them is not just sensible; it is obvious and essential. We support the intent of the Bill and we support cleaner air. I would like to make one point and we may come back to this on Committee Stage. The original 1987 Act states that owners of non-domestic houses shall use the best practicable means to limit or if possible, prevent air pollution. Given that the consequences of allowing pollutants from non-domestic operators are so serious, perhaps we could look to tighten that up. If a prosecution is taking place, does it not give a polluter, who is allowing microparticles to go into the air, too much leeway by just referring to "the best practicable means"? Should we look at moving to more of a strict liability situation in improving the Bill? We support stronger enforcement but it must be fair and must be affordable. Local authorities need to be properly resourced. Rural communities must be protected. The strategy must be all-island in nature. Cleaner air cannot come at the expense of those who can least afford it. We must have a just transition. This Bill is a step forward to it. We look forward to working with the Minister and the Department in advancing it as quickly as possible.

Sentiment score: 0.08