The decision by the new US Administration that that country would unilaterally renounce its obligations under the Kyoto climate change treaty represent a fundamental challenge to us all. It seems clear that the new US President has little regard for what his father once termed the new world order. There is no place for isolationism in a global world. The United States like all other countries will be forced to deal with the implications around global warming. As the largest contributor to that problem their obligation to tackle the problem is greater than others. I have no doubt that these are some of the points Chancellor Shröeder will be putting to the President when he meets him today.
The position adopted by the US delegation at last year's Hague conference on climate change which the President attended was in my view inadequate and led directly to the breakdown. That it has deteriorated further is deeply depressing. At the heart of the US decision is a fundamental contradiction. It is born of isolationism and the short-term commercial needs of those who backed the American Republican Party. At the same time it portrays an Administration that will be belligerent and aggressive in the conduct of its foreign policy. It displays too a worrying anti-intellectualism recently expressed here by former Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, giving credence to the dangerous view that climate change is not happening and that it does not pose a significant threat to us. This is a message that Ireland must bring to the new US Administration through our membership of the United Nations Security Council. That honour, as well as the access enjoyed to the White House by the Taoiseach and others recently, also conveys special obligations on us to make our voice heard.
Ireland should unreservedly condemn the US decision. Regrets are not enough. No doubt the Minister for Foreign Affairs would feel more comfortable expressing our views if our own record on this issue was more distinguished. The reality is that we have failed to put in place sufficient measures to fulfil our obligations under the Kyoto Agreement. Just as this Government's policy of the economy first and society second has had implications for family life through the policy of individualisation, so too has it confined and constrained action on the environment. Deputy Gormley is right on that.
We are the first generation to have the responsibility of looking after the future of our planet as well as our children. We are the first generation to know that what we do now will seriously impact on how people live their lives in the future. It is a special responsibility and one I am particularly aware of as a parent. The decision by the United States is a threat to the quality of life of all our children. It is a mistake of massive proportions. It is short-termist beyond belief and it represents a threat to us all. It was not endorsed by the US people at the recent election and it must be challenged.
I made one point in a contribution to the House earlier today. Commentator after commentator portrayed the battle between Al Gore and George W. Bush as one without issues and without ideology. It was not true on tax and it certainly is not true on the environment. But it is an easy line for some in the media to portray. The fact is that there remain significant ideological and policy differences not just in US politics but also in this House. It is my belief that those differences on issues like tax and spending are good for politics and good for democracy but it is certainly neither good for democracy nor for the future of our fragile environment when a country as powerful and influential as the United States unilaterally decides to renege on such an important treaty and the Kyoto Agreement.
