I appreciate the contributions of all who spoke in the debate today, some down standard political lines, but others fully understanding and cognisant of where the Irish economy and the various sectors are at. They are really negatively impacted by the massive disruption to the supply of oil from the Middle East to the Irish economy. At the outset, I thank Deputy Danny Healy-Rae for his comments. I know where he is coming from. As the Minister of State with responsibility for the fishing sector, I know there is no immediate solution because the oil that is used does not carry the same taxes as petrol and diesel at the pumps, so there is a difficulty. I take the Deputy’s point with regard to the subsidy. The difficulty with subsidies is that they have to be paid for from somewhere else, and it is a challenge to try to burden some other sector of society. It is a transfer, effectively, or a tax that would have to be raised elsewhere, so that is a challenge. What the Government did this week was to look at the tax model through the excise. I know that some have sought to represent that as being mean or not being an appropriate response, but it was the only response that could have been taken, unless we were to start looking at raising taxes elsewhere. Others have sought to undermine the carbon tax. In fairness, Deputy Healy-Rae did not go down that road.

Sentiment score: -0.04

I accept that. The reality is that the carbon tax funds significant investment in reducing aspects of our economic dependence on fossil fuels. Some Deputies talked about a weakness in the SEAI grants scheme. We have brought forward simplification measures, which I am sure we will get to in due course. We are bringing in a grant scheme for windows and doors to help people to upgrade the energy efficiency of their homes, so their dependence on fossil fuels is thwarted in the best possible way. We have to continue that, notwithstanding the price shock that is there at the moment. It is the appropriate way. There are good grants for wall and attic insulation, and increased grants for heat pumps. We have to drive that ahead. The funding for that comes from the carbon tax. I sat on the committee. I managed to get the party that I represent, from an Opposition perspective at the time, to support the introduction of the carbon tax. There was a political challenge, frankly, but the members of the party bravely took the decision at the time. We did not suffer electorally for it because the public actually wanted to hear how we take difficult decisions. It is not always possible for the Government to rectify issues that are from a different source. This shock to the oil system comes from outside our shores. It is beyond our control. Yes, we can reduce certain excise duties or try to assist people who are in greatest need in a targeted way, but that comes at a significant cost. Nearly everybody had an ask this evening. I respect and understand that, because my phone rings too, my office is busy and we hear the concerns of people. However, it is beyond the capacity of the Exchequer to resolve every aspect or facet of this. We hear how the European Union intends to address the consequential rise in interest rates. They will rise as a result of this, inflationary pressures will increase and it will have an impact on food stocks. There has been a kind of knee-jerk reaction by some to immediately get in and address the price increase on fuel alone, but there will be other consequential impacts that will have reverberations throughout the economy. The Government cannot carry all of that. The only way to do that is to raise taxes elsewhere, which will further add to the burden. We have to be careful. With any measure that we bring forward, we have to be able to sustain it. All of us in the House, regardless of which side we are on, know that there is no clarity as of today on where this ends. We would like to hope that this issue will come to a head shortly, that the Strait of Hormuz will be opened up and that oil and gas will start to move around again. However, there are backlogs in the system, refineries have been taken out and the entire supply chain has been disrupted, so there is a significant way to go. Others sought to have the standard go at the data centres and said they only create a small amount of money. Data centres create a very significant reduction in the use of energy, when we see, in a co-located environment, the racks that would ordinarily sit in offices or other buildings dotted around the country. That consolidation leads to an energy reduction. Some on the hard left seek to set that at naught. I want to pick out Deputy Gogarty, who, in fairness, is on the message here. Carbon taxes are about reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, and we have to move ahead with them. Deputy Whitmore had a concern that the funding that comes from NORA and is used for significant other investment streams would, somehow, be lost as a result of this. NORA is significantly well funded and has the capacity to meet all its demands in that regard. The Deputy talked about bringing forward amendments because she felt that, somehow, the reduction of moneys going to NORA would go on for 18 months. That is not the case. My understanding is that the provision in the legislation gives the Minister the flexibility to retain this in exceptional circumstances, if there is sufficient necessity, but it is just for the initial period of time, as set out. However, rather than having to go back to primary legislation in the event of any further uncertainty, this provision is there. My feeling is that the Government is aligned with Deputy Whitmore, but rather than having to burden the House again, flexibility is created there. As the Deputies are clearly aware, the Strait of Hormuz is a key transit route for approximately 20% of global oil supply, but this has effectively been closed since 20 March. That is the cause of all of this. Together, we have a responsibility to the economy as a whole to try to hold our trajectory. I know that people have identified that this is the transport sector versus the tractor men, as Deputy Healy-Rae would have said. We support farmers in so many different ways. However, by also supporting the haulage sector, we are supporting employment and supporting the capacity of our productive sector to get goods to the market. I know that farmers and fishermen will rightly make the same claim, and we will have to look at that in due course. With regard to home heating oil, again, because it does not carry the same taxation model, it is not possible to adjust it in the way that was done for petrol and diesel. However, we have looked at targeting the most vulnerable by a further month’s extension of the fuel allowance. That is significant, particularly at a time of year, May, when we would hope the weather has improved, and there is not the same dependence on oil or gas to heat the home. We have tried to bring a proportionate response. We are trying to be responsible with taxpayers' money. When anybody is looking for more money to be spent here, it is taxpayers' money and money that has already been allocated in the budget. Some political parties have the stock answer that there is a surplus. Multiples of that surplus get spent on a daily basis here and we must be careful about that. We have to continue with the transition away from fossil fuels. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle indicated a desire to look a nuclear reactors. That may or may not be something the Government will look at. I have my worries about it. In my constituency it is a phenomenal challenge to get a wind farm built. There is a lot of push-back. I regularly ask constituents if they would take a nuclear reactor instead. I have to say the response is not all that positive. Maybe it is different in Kilkenny, or is it Carlow the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has in mind? In all seriousness, we have to respond appropriately, with compassion and in a way that is sustainable. We also have to show, as a Government, flexibility to the vagaries of what is going on in the Middle East.

Sentiment score: 0.16