On behalf of the Institute of International and European Affairs, I thank the Chairman and the committee for their kind invitation to address them today. Given Trócaire's emphasis in its presentation on the international situation, on impacts and on adaption, we will concentrate on domestic climate change mitigation and, more specifically, on climate legislation. There are several key milestones approaching in terms of the roadmap. We are currently awaiting the publication of both the interim NESC report, which focuses on how Ireland can meet its 2020 targets, and the results of the public consultation conducted by the Department in the spring.
We therefore welcome the timely opportunity for an exchange of views with the committee, especially considering the influential role it will have in the pre-legislative scrutiny process and the legislative process itself over the coming year. The committee's final report to Government will be crucial in determining whether Ireland will get the kind of climate law it needs.
I will outline the rationale for climate law before discussing our view of the key components of an effective climate law. Why should we legislate? We believe there is a lack of consensus about the purpose of a line of climate law which in the past has resulted in inertia or in political polarisation in the case of theClimate Change Response Bill 2010. Should a law introduce binding emissions reduction targets for Ireland that go beyond EU targets? Should it decide between differing types of measures to reduce emissions? Should it decide which sectors - agriculture, industry, transport or residential – should contribute most in terms of emissions reduction?
We believe that the main purpose of a law is not to do any of these things, but rather to create an effective policy framework within which such decisions can be made. Why do we need such a framework? Simply put, Ireland has a historical implementation challenge and a significant challenge to meet its 2020 targets, which must be overcome if we are to reach the target.
It is welcome that Ireland is now on track to meet its Kyoto Protocol commitments under the first commitment period, which expires this year. As I said Ireland has a considerable challenge if it is to meet its legally binding EU target by 2020. Unless additional policy measures are agreed and implemented in a timely way, Ireland is on course to overshoot its emissions by 2015 or by 2017 even in the best-case scenario according to the EPA data. We will therefore have to identify and implement new policy measures that enable compliance with the EU target, if we are not to rely on the purchase of credits to meet our targets. Beyond 2020, the level of global ambition and the green economy imperatives to 2050 increase the scale of the challenge before us. It will also present opportunities.
The key hurdle in compliance terms for Ireland is its unique emissions profile. Ireland has a comparatively low level of trading scheme emissions where opportunities for reductions are higher and cheaper, a dispersed settlement pattern which leads to high car dependency, and a high proportion of agricultural emissions. The two sectors considered most challenging from an emissions point of view are transport and agriculture which account for more than 70% of domestic sector emissions . Agricultural emissions are set to rise following the removal of milk quotas in 2015 and in the context of Food Harvest 2020 strategy.
The considerable challenge to 2020 is coupled with an implementation deficit in Irish climate policy, a trend by no means unique to Ireland. Although comprehensive packages of measures to address Ireland's climate challenge were outlined in the first and second national climate change strategies in 2000 and 2007, many of the announced measures were not implemented or were implemented only after considerable delay. Had these measures been put in place in a timely manner we could have met our obligations from domestic measures under the Kyoto Protocol.
As a result of the implementation gap, together with rapid economic growth to 2008, it is only the onset of severe economic contraction that has ensured that we will be able to meet our Kyoto Protocol obligations and even then only with the use of offset credits already purchased. The public interest can suffer as a result of delays to policy implementation. Many of the measures contained in both strategies could have improved the quality of life of Ireland's citizens, decreased energy bills and reduced Ireland's need to purchase carbon credits.
The difficulties of implementation can partly be attributed to an inadequate framework for policy delivery where, crucially, progress was not systematically reviewed. Given the scale of the future decarbonisation challenge, we believe that a legal framework for policy implementation can assist us in achieving the level of ambition that will be required. A well designed climate law that puts in place an effective policy cycle can help to bridge the implementation gap and to identify and implement the policy interventions required to meet Ireland's EU commitment. Climate law can do this in an impartial way but in a manner that is sensitive to the needs of different sectors.
What are the key elements of an effective climate law?We argue that a climate law need not focus on setting new or additional targets beyond those agreed at EU level, but rather on the creation of a framework for meeting the legally binding targets to which we have already subscribed. The establishment of a long-term target to 2050 may be beneficial in giving clarity about the overall policy direction. Additionally, because the EU emissions trading scheme sector is already regulated at EU level, we think a climate law could focus on regulating the domestic sector of the economy.
The second lesson is that the principle of carbon budgeting can help to drive compliance. Carbon budgets essentially split long-term targets into manageable five-year envelopes. This makes targets more immediate. At present targets can seem distant to policy makers and the public alike. By using five year targets that mirror electoral cycles, this helps to ensure greater political accountability for compliance, making long fingering of policies less likely.
We argue that the establishment of an independent expert advisory body is a crucial component of climate law. This body could be contained within an existing organisation, once its independence is guaranteed and it can draw on relevant expertise as necessary. The role for the body is to have responsibility for drafting initial five-year carbon budgets and the strategies to meet those budgets. Each strategy could suggest what measures could feasibly be introduced and recommend the appropriate balance between different sectors, based on the principle of cost-effectiveness and taking into account competitiveness impacts on different sectors of the economy. The strategy could also help to establish the most appropriate ceiling for the purchase of emissions offset at the beginning.
The importance of the independent expert body cannot be overstated, especially in the context of competing agendas in society. As a politically neutral and expert rather than a stakeholder body, it would have the power to frame the debate in terms of Ireland's overall economic, environmental and social interests, facilitating constructive negotiations between sectors. Once the strategy was published, there could be a transparent political debate involving all stakeholders. If any stakeholders have a case for deviating from the experts' recommendations, that case would have to be made in the full public scrutiny of this committee and of civil society. The final decision on the strategy should, as in other policy areas, remain political, as long as the rationale for the political decision is made public.
The other key role to be played by the expert group is to serve as a watchdog, ensuring we are making sufficient progress on our emissions pathway. The expert body could conduct annual reviews and monitoring, with a red flag mechanism designed to identify and remedy distances to target. It is critical from a transparency and accountability perspective that all advice of the independent advisory body would be published as a matter of course. This committee could also have an important role once a climate law is in force in scrutinising initial strategies and annual reviews released by the advisory body and in enabling civil society input. It is very important to stress that this committee will be central once the law is in place. This would also bolster transparency and accountability and provide strong democratic underpinnings for climate action.
There were concerns in the context of the Climate Change Response Bill 2010 that the introduction of a climate law could give rise to extensive litigation if targets are not met, and the Climate Change Response Bill explicitly made the targets in the Bill non-justiciable in order to avoid this risk. The requirement for such a provision is not immediately clear if the law gives flexibility to Government to alter targets or plans or to reject the advice of the committee in view of, for instance, changed economic circumstances. What is really important is that the clear justification for so doing is made public.
If robust transparency and accountability mechanisms, together with duties of parliamentary monitoring, are introduced in law they can act as strong compliance levers in themselves. Ultimately a climate law is designed to enshrine an effective management framework for abatement and adaptation rather than to put legal pressure on Government through the legal process.
To sum up, a climate law could be a means of establishing an effective framework for meeting our short-term 2020 commitments and overcoming the historical implementation deficit in Irish climate policy. We do not believe in a climate law for its own sake. An inadequate climate law could risk increasing the regulatory burden for little gain at a time when the country can least afford it. A well-designed climate law should not only sharpen the focus on meeting targets, it should also give rise to an effective policy cycle that prompts long-term thinking, helps to frame consideration of different policy options in terms of cost-effectiveness and the overall national interest, and enhances accountability and transparency. Although Ireland is now Kyoto compliant, we cannot rely on ongoing economic contraction as the cornerstone of our approach to climate mitigation. The EPA reminded us in its latest state of the environment report that we have a chance to learn from the mistakes of the Celtic tiger years and to avail of the opportunities presented by the emerging global green economy. Long-term thinking is already happening as part of the roadmap process. I think that reflects an awareness of the need to make the right policy decisions now for the transition towards decarbonisation.
Next year will be a significant one for Irish climate policy. It will mark the start of our second Kyoto commitment period and our annual binding targets under EU law. It will also mark Ireland's next EU Presidency, which will give us an important opportunity to demonstrate leadership in this sector. Most importantly, we hope 2013 will mark the adoption by the Government of an overall climate policy, featuring a clear strategy and trajectory, and the introduction of a climate law. This committee is central to ensuring the process that takes place towards these ends is transparent, inclusive and constructive and has the support of a wide range of stakeholders. We wish the committee well in its important deliberations over the coming months. We will be more than happy to assist the committee in any way we can during the roadmap process and beyond.