Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 15 Dec 2015

Vol. 901 No. 1

Priority Questions

National Broadband Plan Implementation

Michael Moynihan

Ceist:

35. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the status of the timeline to connect all premises under the national broadband plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44873/15]

Before getting to this question, I am astonished that a priority question I submitted relating to mobile telephone coverage throughout the country was disallowed yesterday. The same question was tabled and allowed in September and I wanted an update on what has happened since. It was not allowed in December, so I am at a loss as to how that happened in the Ceann Comhairle's office. I would appreciate an explanation.

I will investigate the Deputy's point.

My question asks the Minister to comment on the timeline to connect all premises nationally under the national broadband plan via commercial operators and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The national broadband plan aims to ensure that every citizen and business, regardless of location, has access to a high-quality, high-speed broadband service. This will be achieved through a combination of commercial investments and a State-led intervention in areas where commercial services will not be provided. The commercial telecommunications sector is currently investing approximately €2.5 billion in network upgrades and enhanced services. These very significant investments represent a step-change in the quality of broadband services available.

In November 2014, I published a national high-speed coverage map for 2016. The areas marked in blue on the map represent those areas that will have access to commercial high-speed broadband services. Those marked in amber show the target areas for the State intervention. All premises within the amber areas will be included in the State's intervention. The map allows all members of the public, be they business or residential, to see whether their premises or home will have access to commercial high-speed broadband services by the end of 2016 or whether they will be included in the Government's proposed intervention. The high-speed map contains a breakdown of premises covered per townland. It is anticipated that speeds of at least 30 Mbps will be also delivered through the Government's intervention and the network will be designed to cater for future increased demand from consumers and business. Consumers may also consult the websites of the various commercial operators to ascertain details of current and planned future deployment intentions.

Over 40 responses were received following the publication of the national broadband plan proposed intervention strategy last July. Non-confidential versions of these submissions are being published and can be accessed on the website. In the meantime my Department continues to review the technical and financial detail relating to potential new commercial investment proposals. I expect to proceed to formal procurement before the end of this month. The Government is determined to ensure that the network is built out as quickly as possible and engagement with industry stakeholders has indicated that this could be achieved within three to five years of the contract award. In this context, the national broadband plan proposes that through the combination of commercial investment and State intervention, 85% of addresses in Ireland will have access to high-speed services by 2018, with an ambition of 100% coverage by end of 2020.

There are a number of issues relating to this. The Minister expects to proceed to formal procurement by the end of the year, which is in two weeks, so is he fully confident that this will happen or is he 90% confident of it happening? The concern that people have relating to broadband around the country is that it is being promised but it looks like it will be 2021 before high-speed broadband will be available in a number of counties, including Cavan, Clare, Donegal, Mayo, Monaghan, Galway, Kerry, Leitrim, Kilkenny, Offaly, Roscommon, Sligo and parts of Cork.

Representatives of Eir, which used to be Eircom, have recently indicated that the commitment it had for 300,000 homes and businesses to be connected can no longer be fulfilled. Has the Minister taken this into account? He has stated across the floor and in committee rooms that his Department is working as hard as possible on this. There is much concern in the places that do not have broadband as there does not seem to be an absolute commitment to get this over the line once and for all.

There is an absolute commitment to doing this and it is not just a commitment; we are delivering on the plan I outlined to the Dáil as a new Minister in July 2014. As I reminded the Deputy before and will do so again, I stated there would be three key events between July 2014 and December 2015. The first was the publication of the map, splitting the country into areas that the commercial sectors would look after and the rest of the country, in which the State would have to intervene. I said I would do that in November last year and it was done at that stage. I stated at that stage that we would bring forward the full and detailed strategy, including technical, financial and legal aspects, that needed to be dealt with and it would be published in July 2015. I did that. I then stated that the third of that trio of actions that needed to be taken in order to move forward in the process and meet the concerns of the people whom the Deputy speaks about would come by the end of this year. To answer his question, "Yes", it will be done before the end of 2015.

Eir made a statement over the weekend regarding 300,000 homes. How will that impact on what is now a broadband wasteland? I wrote to the Minister late last week about an issue with exchanges in Kanturk in Cork. Although I do not expect him to comment on that on the floor, it reflects what is happening around the country, with a proper broadband service not being distributed to the villages and towns. Will the Minister specifically comment on Eir's statement about the 300,000 homes?

The operators, including Eir, have put forward plans and proposals for the period 2016 to 2020. My Department and I have assessed those proposals and particularly their credibility from a financial, deployment, legal and technical perspective. When I make my announcement in the coming days, I will indicate whether we intend to change the map published in respect of the configuration between commercial and State intervention. That will follow a careful and detailed assessment of all the plans, including that of Eir, that has been done in recent months. In all likelihood, I will make those announcements next week, before Christmas.

Energy Policy

Michael Colreavy

Ceist:

36. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if and how he will encourage semi-State companies such as Bord na Móna, Coillte and the Electricity Supply Board to promote renewable energy generation as part of the White Paper on energy policy. [44985/15]

As I will not be going forward for re-election, it is safe to say I will not be asking questions of the Minister again in the Chamber. I take this opportunity to thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, the Ceann Comhairle, the Minister, the Minister of State and the former Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, as well as Department staff for their co-operation.

We have had differences of opinion but at all times I have tried to ensure that I was speaking to the issue and not to the person.

There are a number of issues about which I feel passionately and sometimes that passion might have spilled over into impatience. One of the first things I said when I put questions to the then Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, was that I felt that the Government had no energy strategy or policy. There was a document with the word "strategy" on it, but it was not really a strategy. As a result, I fully supported the Government when it decided to come up with an energy strategy. I am looking forward to seeing what is included in the White Paper tomorrow and would love to have a sneak preview of it tonight. One essential feature of such a White Paper which sets out the Government's vision for the future is the role semi-State bodies such as Coillte, the ESB and Bord na Móna might play in future energy policy because they have a great role to play in energy generation from renewables.

I thank the Deputy for his comments.

I also thank the Deputy for his comments and wish him well. My engagement with him has been always very satisfactory and I thank him for his unfailing courtesy. He has always addressed the issue, not the man, for which I thank him.

The Government has supported a range of policy measures and schemes to incentivise the use of renewable energy, many of which have been successful in encouraging a shift towards using more renewable energy by semi-State companies, including Coillte, ESB and Bord na Móna. The renewable energy feed-in tariff schemes support the development of a range of renewable electricity technologies, including hydro, biomass combustion, biomass combined heat and power, landfill gas and onshore wind. These schemes are open to all interested parties, including relevant semi-State companies.

The ESB has a long history of successfully delivering hydro power, made significant progress in divesting much of its older inefficient thermal plants, is building its renewables portfolio based primarily on wind energy and has established an investment fund tasked with sourcing, evaluating and executing appropriate investments in technologies with breakthrough potential in renewable energy generation. I also welcome the company's commitment to decarbonise its generation activities by 2050.

Bord na Móna is also making good progress in the renewable energy space and I understand the company is aiming to develop wind farms on land that was previously used for peat production. I was pleased to see in October this year that Bord na Móna published its Sustainability 2030 report, which outlined its plan to replace its use of large-scale peat production with alternative energy sources, including biomass, wind and solar energy by 2030. Many of the technologies identified in the report will be eligible for support under the new renewable support schemes under development by my Department. It is also important to note that EirGrid and the ESB are co-ordinating effectively to ensure the timely connection of increasing levels of renewable generation from all interested parties on the national electricity grid.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

My Department is in the process of designing a new renewable heat incentive scheme to encourage an uptake of renewable energy in the heat sector and also working on the introduction of a new renewable electricity support scheme. Both new schemes are expected to go live at the end of 2016, subject to Government approval and state aid clearance, and will be open to all interested parties.

In the transport sector it is my intention to continue to support the deployment of sustainable biofuels through increases to the biofuels obligation scheme. The first such increase will take effect on 1 January 2016. The scheme has successfully incentivised an uptake in the use of biofuels in Ireland in both the semi-State sector and the private sector and will continue to do so.

In October 2014 my Department published a draft bioenergy plan in which a number of actions were outlined specifically designed to support the uptake of renewable energy. The draft plan contains measures to stimulate and support the supply of Irish biomass in the coming decade. In this regard, the key recommendations include continued support for the afforestation programme, the continuation of the bioenergy scheme for energy crops and the establishment of Bioenergy Ireland, a joint venture between Bord na Móna and Coillte. The energy White Paper which I intend to publish tomorrow will provide the framework for accelerating the development and diversification of renewable energy generation.

There is no doubt this nation faces a huge challenge following the agreement in Paris to pursue efforts to limit the increase in temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. It is about more than the semi-State companies using renewable energy. In addition, I thought that there would be a co-ordinating and leadership role and that they would share their expertise in exploring different forms of renewable energy. Will the White Paper address the issue of community energy co-operatives? I know that the Minister is talking about the energy citizens concept, but it can be nebulous. The community energy co-operative is very specific, working in other countries and means that the citizen can buy-in and there is immediate benefit from renewable energy developments. Will the Minister consider the semi-State companies having such a co-ordinating or leadership role and the potential of community energy co-operatives in reaching the targets to which we agreed in Paris?

The Deputy is right. The ambition underlying the Paris agreement calls for considerable change across the world, including Ireland. We have made decisions and are required to make more to ensure we can credibly decarbonise the economy, which is the objective. The issue of community energy co-operatives will be addressed in the White Paper. I agree with the Deputy that there is enormous potential in that regard. I again agree with him on the need for co-operation between semi-State bodies. He will be aware of the establishment of Bionergy Ireland, a key action in the draft bioenergy plan. Coillte is under the aegis of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine. While I do not have any role in its governance, a steering group that includes representatives of the Departments of Public Expenditure and Reform and Agriculture, Food and the Marine, newERA and my Department is working on the Bionenergy Ireland plan which, as the Deputy is aware, involves Coillte and Bord na Móna. I am sure there will be other initiatives also.

I thank the Minister for his reply. It is good to hear his response. I look forward to the White Paper. If the Minister can see his way to giving me a sneak preview of it tonight, I might be able to make a better contribution tomorrow at the official publication.

My final question concerns the role of educational establishments and universities. Has the Minister thought about talking to the educational establishments? This will be a continuing challenge for the next ten, 20, 30 or 40 years and Ireland needs people who are trained to maximise the benefits of renewable energy generation. Will the Government and semi-State agencies talk to the universities to make sure the education sector will meet the challenges of tomorrow?

It sounds as if the Deputy has already had a sneak preview of the White Paper because the role of the education sector, research institutions and the universities will be critical in the energy transition. We need excellent research in order that we can direct and have a plan in place to decarbonise the economy that will involve the State at its best in giving leadership and the funding of research in new areas such as the smart grid, into new products or ways of organising our renewable energy portfolio. The research institutions will be central to that process in which innovation will be critical to the transition to the decarbonisation of the carbon. The Deputy is right. We have very fine institutions such as Beaufort Research in Ringaskiddy, County Cork which does amazing and critically important work, as well as people in Galway and UCD who are researching integrated energy systems. Publicly funded research will be at the heart of the job we need to do.

I understand it has been agreed that Deputy Catherine Murphy will ask the next question in the name of Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly.

Renewable Energy Generation

Stephen Donnelly

Ceist:

37. Deputy Stephen S. Donnelly asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has considered the conversion of Moneypoint power plant to biomass; if he has conducted a cost-benefit analysis; if conversion would facilitate Ireland in reaching its 2020 carbon targets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44796/15]

This question relates to the energy mix, particularly the use of biomass at Moneypoint, and whether a cost-benefit analysis has been carried out, given that the Moneypoint plant has a lifespan up to 2025.

The overarching objective of the Government's energy policy is to ensure secure and sustainable supplies of competitively priced energy for all consumers. A well balanced fuel mix that provides reliable energy, minimises costs and protects against supply disruptions and price volatility is essential for Irish consumers. Fossil fuels will remain part of the energy mix as we transition to a largely decarbonised energy system by 2050.

The choice of fuel used in the plant at Moneypoint is, in the first instance, a matter for the operator, the ESB, and I have no role or function in this regard. No specific cost-benefit analysis has been undertaken by my Department of the potential or otherwise of converting the plant to use biomass. However, there are a number of important issues that would need to be considered in this regard.

The conversion of Moneypoint to biomass would require significant levels of capital investment by the operator. In recent weeks I have seen the figure of €300 million for the cost of conversion. Support tariffs substantially higher than those available for wind, which has been the most cost-effective renewable technology in the Irish electricity market, would also be required which could lead to increased electricity prices. Substantially more biomass than is available domestically would be required, with large amounts of the resource having to be imported, leading to potential uncertainty in terms of security of supply. The sustainability of transporting large amounts of imported biomass would also be a cause for concern. The commitment of substantial amounts of biomass to Moneypoint would divert scarce biomass away from the renewable heat sector, where biomass can be used more efficiently and where fewer alternative technologies exist. Before Moneypoint comes to the end of its operating life in its current configuration, in 2025, the most suitable replacement low-carbon generation technology will have to be identified.

Given that Moneypoint generates a large amount of energy and has a lifespan to 2025, the ESB must have done some thinking about the future of the plant. While I accept that biomass has to be imported, so does coal, which will not be sustainable. No matter how one views this there will be cost implications. There could be cost implications if we do not meet our targets that we are perhaps not counting at the moment, such as fines. Would the ESB keep the Minister apprised of its thinking if it was doing a cost-benefit analysis? I presume it would. Does the Minister have any idea what it is thinking about for Moneypoint, given the amount that plant generates?

The ESB would and does keep me informed of its thinking. It is a decision for it. The White Paper will be published tomorrow but in the context of the transition we are embarked upon and that we must deliver to achieve a low carbon economy the fuel mix is an important policy question for the State and will have to be dealt with. Decisions will have to be made on Moneypoint within the next five years because it will come to the end of its current configuration in 2025. Moneypoint is well served by the grid. It is an important facility. I see a good future for it as a generator but the question is what to do if and when coal is phased out. The ESB could replace it with a new coal station and we would all have doubts about that. Some people advocate some carbon capture and sequestration for which there are new technologies. Would it be replaced with a gas-fired station or incorporate partial biomass? I do not exclude any of these possibilities but I listed the negative indicators that need to be addressed for conversion to biomass and the cost that would be visited on the consumer.

What is the thinking, given the prospect of fines if we do not meet our targets? Some of the old generating stations attract subsidies. Presumably those subsidies would not apply if they use fuel that would lead to our paying a fine because that would be a double whammy. Has that been considered?

The supports for the peat stations will cease in 2019. Decisions have been made about those subsidies. This will be a transition. It will not happen in one fell swoop because there are people whose livelihoods and jobs depend on many of these generating stations. We have to ensure that the transition also serves people who have worked for many years with these old technologies and show them the positive opportunities and potential that now exists in terms of embracing new technologies and renewable energy. There will be jobs and great potential for jobs and job creation in the renewable energy sector, not just in onshore wind but across the board. These issues are being actively addressed and are treated and elaborated in the White Paper, which will be published tomorrow.

Renewable Energy Feed in Tariff Scheme Funding

Michael Moynihan

Ceist:

38. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the value for money of subsidies for wind energy on consumer energy bills, if these will be continued after 2017, the average amount they contribute to consumer electricity bills; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44808/15]

What is the value for money of subsidies for wind energy on consumer energy bills; if these will be continued after 2017; the average amount they contribute to the consumer’s electricity bill, and will the Minister make a statement on this matter?

The renewable electricity feed-in tariff, REFIT, schemes are the principal means of supporting renewable electricity generators for energy exported to the grid. Based on power purchase agreements between generators and electricity suppliers, REFIT schemes assure a minimum price for each unit of electricity exported to the grid over a 15 year period. Projects seeking support under REFIT must apply to my Department by 4 p.m. on 31 December 2015.

REFIT forms a key part of the public service obligation, PSO. The PSO levy is charged to all electricity customers in Ireland to support national policy objectives related to renewable energy, indigenous fuels, peat, and security of energy supply. The PSO levy is determined each year by the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER.

Ireland’s REFIT schemes have proved effective in attracting investment into the renewable energy sector. In addition, the REFIT schemes have been found to be a very cost-effective tool to support renewables development, as indicated by a report published by the Council of European Energy Regulators earlier this year. Furthermore, renewable electricity generation in Ireland in 2014 is estimated by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, to have avoided €250 million worth of fossil fuels imports.

My Department has been working with the SEAI, EirGrid and the CER to assess the costs and value of choosing the path towards 40% renewable electricity generation in 2020.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

Cost for overall renewable generation since 2010-11

Year

PSO funding for Renewables (€ Million)

2015/16

156.4m estimated as per recent CER decision CER/15/142

2014/15

94.3

2013/14

49.0

2012/13

64.8

2011/12

41.6

2010/11

52.2

Close to €150 million will be spent on subsidising wind energy in 2015-16. Is this value for money? The National Competitiveness Council, NCC, states: "It is critically important for the effective functioning of the all island electricity market that renewable generation capacity is subject to market forces to the greatest extent possible. As a mature technology, price supports for new onshore wind projects should be discontinued when REFIT 2 ends in 2017". What is the Minister’s opinion of those statements? Does he believe we are over-reliant on wind energy to meet our commitments on carbon and so forth?

The €156 million is the cost for overall renewable generation, not specifically wind. Of course it would be great if we could achieve our objectives without any State subsidy. It would be highly desirable not to have to subsidise the sector at all.

However, it has been demonstrated that to bring forward the new renewable technologies and investments, that subsidy is required. Other countries have discovered this also. I have had this debate before about solar energy with one of the Deputy's colleagues. Strategic decision-making is always necessary in terms of the extent to which, and when, new technologies should be subsidised. Perhaps if one held back from the subsidy, as other countries in Europe are discovering in the case of solar energy, it might have happened anyway without it because the market would have delivered all of these changes. That may well be so, but, ultimately, we will review the question of wind energy. I do not want the Deputy to imagine that I think our renewable energy portfolio should be confined to onshore wind generation; it definitely should not. It has proved to be successful, but it should not be confined to it.

Many countries in mainland Europe have been pulling away from wind energy generation which they view with a jaundiced eye at this stage, although we seem to be embracing it from a policy viewpoint. There are a raft of issues involved, with communities up in arms over it. Planners are now saying houses should not be built alongside wind turbines because such turbines are noisy and grant planning permission elsewhere. All things being considered, has the Minister factored what is happening in mainland Europe into his policy statement, the White Paper on energy? Given that many other countries are moving away from wind energy generation, should we not be doing likewise and look at alternatives such as solar energy?

The Minister mentioned the regulator setting the PSO levy. Is he satisfied that the Commission for Energy Regulation has the correct legislative tools to carry out its job into the foreseeable future? The commission was founded ten years ago, but is it not time to re-examine the legislation governing it? It should have new powers, not alone to set prices but also to reduce them.

There are periodic reviews of the regulators. If it is determined or believed at any stage that the legislative environment is not adequate, of course, the Government can review it. If the Deputy has a view of a particular aspect of the legislation that he thinks is deficient, I am keen to hear what it is in order that we can debate the issue. However, I have no reason to believe the legislative environment in which the regulator is operating is problematic.

I keep hearing people say countries all over Europe are pulling away from wind energy generation, but that is simply not true. There are some countries which believe, understandably, that they have reached a certain level in onshore wind generation as a percentage or proportion of their renewables portfolio and that they do not need to, or cannot, go any further. I know that decisions have been made in the United Kingdom recently, but it is simply not true to say there is a generalised abandonment of onshore wind generation. I support the Government's onshore wind energy policy, but I remind the Deputy that the policy was put in place by the previous Government. It showed great foresight and I think we are right to carry it on.

Alternative Energy Projects

Michael Colreavy

Ceist:

39. Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if the Environmental Protection Agency's study of hydraulic fracturing could be compromised in the public's opinion owing to the close relationship of some of the participants with hydraulic fracturing interests. [44986/15]

My question concerns the Environmental Protection Agency's study of hydraulic fracturing. Every time its representatives appear before the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources further serious concerns are raised about the independence of the study which the public very much regards as compromised. Will the Minister of State stop the practice of fracking?

I acknowledge the Deputy's consistent approach to this matter which he is keeping live. I also acknowledge the work done by him and his constituency colleagues, Deputy Tony McLoughlin and Senator Michael Comiskey, who have had regular meetings with me to discuss this important matter.

No doubt we will get into the Deputy's last question in a supplementary reply, but, first, I wish to respond to his initial question. I understand the contract for the unconventional gas exploration and extraction research programme was awarded following a robust evaluation process. The evaluation panel included personnel with the capacity to make informed decisions on the six tenders received. The constitution of the evaluation panel was approved by a broadly-based steering committee.

The evaluation panel found that the tender led by CDM Smith Ireland Limited provided the best response and a contract was awarded to the consortium in August 2014. The consortium includes commercial consultancies, academics, a geological research institution and a legal firm, each offering a particular specialism required by the project's scope, as was detailed in the terms of reference.

The project team was expected to include members with a comprehensive understanding of geology and hydrology, as well as an in-depth knowledge of a range of legal, environmental, health, socio-economic and technical issues, with a knowledge of mineral and fossil fuels.

I am aware that there has been some comment on the fact that, internationally, CDM Smith has provided expert advice for oil companies involved in the development of unconventional gas resources. I should point out that it has also provided advice for State bodies and regulatory agencies across its area of expertise. As I am sure the Deputy will appreciate, it is common for a broad range of parties to seek to draw on the specialist expertise available from a firm such as CDM Smith. The fact that disparate entities seek to draw on such expertise is generally seen as an indicator of a company's recognised experience.

One of the reasons I came to the Dáil was to have fracking banned anywhere in Ireland. The area most at risk from this pernicious technology is where my children and I live. It is where my grandchildren and great grandchildren will also live. Because I am not seeking re-election, I have the luxury of taking on this issue without political considerations. People are doing tremendous work in identifying weaknesses in the Government's approach. The EPA study is fundamentally and fatally flawed. It is one thing to say the EPA will recruit a firm with knowledge of the oil and gas industry but it is another when the company engaged to lead the project held an international symposium extolling the virtues of hydraulic fracturing. That was a bad choice and it will mean a bad study and a bad result. People will have zero confidence in the study which should be stopped.

Ireland is a small country.

This is a small island and I am on the record as having expressed my own reservations about this industry. It is also important to point out that this work was initiated in 2011 by the previous Minister, Deputy Pat Rabbitte, who wanted to find out what was best practice. There was consultation and the Deputy knows the history. Timeframes were set. I want to highlight a couple of important items. The first stage of the research programme is to conclude by the end of January 2016. It is a significant piece of work on the first phase. The plan was that, with work on the second phase, it would feed into a single report to be presented by July 2016.

I thank the Minister of State.

No; this is important, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. It is important to point out that that is not going to happen within the timeframe set. As the tendering process for the second phase of the research programme has not commenced, there cannot be a final report by 2018. I will ask the steering committee to publish an interim report on the significant findings made at the end of January.

I will come back to the Minister of State.

It was not envisaged and was not part of the original plan, but I will ask the steering committee to produce at an early date interim findings on the significant body of work done. No decision will be made on the tendering process until that work is carried out.

I thank the Minister of State. That is very wise. Will the interim report be placed before the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources for its consideration before any decision is made? Will representatives of the EPA be brought before the joint committee again in advance of any decision being made on the second tender?

I have tabled a motion to be taken at tomorrow's meeting of the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications. The TTIP-ISDS negotiations are going on at the moment. The Joint Committee on Transport and Communications was not included as one of the committees involved in preparing the political contribution - as it is unfortunately called - report to the EU even though it covers functions that would be intimately and immediately impacted by TTIP-ISDS. Will that be taken into account following publication of the interim report?

TTIP will involve the European Union and the United States, so that is a wider question. Sticking to this question and this issue, making that presentation to the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications will be considered. It is also important to point out that representatives of the EPA have appeared before the committee and made a very worthwhile presentation. The steering committee needs to be afforded space now because this question has just been asked publicly. I want to give it the space to produce an interim report on the significant body of work it has completed to date. That will happen. I am asking for that to be done sooner rather than later.

We now come to Other Questions. I call Deputy Ó Cuív.

On a point of clarification. Does that mean the land-based studies will not being going ahead from 1 January?

All I am saying is that we are asking the steering committee to produce the findings of its significant work. Nothing will happen until that is achieved.

So nothing further will happen.

Barr
Roinn