Vol. 955 No. 3
58. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment when the final draft of the national mitigation plan will be published; his plans for a full and robust debate of this plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29883/17]
68. Deputy Catherine Connolly asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the status of the national mitigation plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29840/17]
69. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the timeframe for publication of the national mitigation plan; if the plan will be debated in both Houses of the Oireachtas before it is enacted in view of the fact it will be a vital document which will solidify the State's response to climate change for future generations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29770/17]
77. Deputy Joan Collins asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment if the national mitigation plan on climate change has been brought to Cabinet; and when it will be brought to Dáil Éireann for debate. [29799/17]
When will the final draft of the national mitigation plan be published? What plans does the Minister have for a full and robust debate on this plan? I ask him to make a statement to the House.
An tAire has two minutes.
My Question No. 68 is similar. Is the Minister taking it with Question No. 58?
A number will be taken together. Questions Nos. 58, 68, 69 and 77 will be taken together.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle might indicate what time we have.
Ten minutes each.
The Deputy will get two supplementary questions. I ask the Minister to repeat the numbers.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 58, 68, 69 and 77 together. Does that give me eight minutes?
Well-----
The objective of Ireland's first statutory national mitigation plan is to set out what Ireland is doing, and is planning to do, to further the national transition objective as set out in the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015.
The national mitigation plan has been prepared having regard to the provisions set out in the 2015 Act in close collaboration with all relevant Departments and, in particular, with the Departments of Transport, Tourism and Sport; Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government; and Agriculture, Food and the Marine. As well as being supported by a range of technical, economic and environmental inputs, the national mitigation plan has also been informed by the submissions received during a public consultation in March and April 2017.
In addition, I invited the climate change advisory council, following my publication of the draft national mitigation plan, to engage directly with me and with other relevant Ministers with a view to providing its recommendations to feed into the preparation of the final plan. All input received from the advisory council has been considered in finalising the national mitigation plan.
In accordance with the provisions of the 2015 Act, the national mitigation plan was circulated to Government in the required timeframe and I am pleased to confirm that the Government has, at its meeting today, approved the national mitigation plan for publication. I am looking forward to publishing the plan and formally laying it before both Houses of the Oireachtas very shortly.
In addition to setting out the full range of measures the Government has implemented or is considering to reduce Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions, the plan will include more than 100 individual actions to be implemented across Government to advance the national transition agenda. These actions are the individual building blocks that will enable the Government and wider society to implement deeper reductions in emissions in the years ahead. This will be an ongoing process aimed at incremental and permanent decarbonisation.
In order to debate the national mitigation plan in the Houses of the Oireachtas, the 2015 Act provides that relevant Ministers deliver an annual transition statement to each House. The first such statement was delivered last December and I intend that the 2017 statement will be delivered shortly following the presentation of budget 2018. I also intend that the annual transition statement will incorporate an annual progress report on the implementation of the national mitigation plan. In this way, each Minister with a role in the national mitigation plan will be accountable to the Oireachtas for reporting on progress within his or her respective sector.
The first national mitigation plan is a work in progress, reflecting the reality of where we are in our decarbonisation transition having regard to a number of factors, including curtailed public and private investment over the course of recent years. The first plan will not provide a complete roadmap to achieve the national transition objective to 2050, but it will begin the process of development of medium to long-term options to ensure we are well positioned to take the necessary actions in the next and following decades.
The plan will become a living document accessible on my Department's website and will be updated on an ongoing basis as analysis, dialogue and technological innovation generate further cost-effective sectoral mitigation options.
The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 specified that the Government of the day must periodically publish a national mitigation plan outlining Ireland's path to a low-carbon future. It is an important piece of cross-departmental planning, something that is clearly crucial if we are serious about making a transition to a low-carbon economy and society. The national mitigation plan was supposed to be published 18 months ago, after the passage of the legislation, which meant that the plan should have been published by June 2017. In response to a parliamentary question I tabled, the Minister said the draft mitigation plan was circulated to the Government on 10 June. That is more than two weeks ago. Is climate change such a low priority for the Minister and the Government that two weeks later he has still not managed to publish the plan?
Thus far Ireland has been struggling to meet its 2020 targets. In March 2016 the EPA published projected emissions for 2020, which indicated that Ireland's emissions at that stage could be in the range of 6% to 11% below those of 2005 when we were supposed to reach 20% reductions. That will result in significant fines for this country from the European Union.
Climate change is an issue we are taking seriously. In fact, in the first contribution of the Taoiseach, Deputy Varadkar, in the House, he made the point that we will have a full Cabinet meeting to discuss climate. It is a very serious issue and it is one we are taking seriously.
The plan was submitted to Government for approval on 9 June. My Department is a co-ordinating Department. I need to get other Ministers on board as well. It was right and proper that I would circulate the plan to them and give them an opportunity to read it, which they did. In fact, I spoke with a colleague afterwards and I probably should not say it but we had a very constructive discussion at the Cabinet today on the issue. I look forward to the further discussion and debate that will take place in the coming weeks. It was the right thing to do to give that time to colleagues to digest the information on the national mitigation plan as we had a very good discussion at the time.
We are being criticised about not doing enough about agriculture. However, it is important to acknowledge when we do things right. An article in last week's Irish Farmers Journal showed that through the beef data and genomics scheme, we have genotyped 31% of our national beef herd. Nowhere in the world has come anywhere near doing that. We are the global leaders in this area. Many of the colleagues I meet when I travel abroad also have responsibility for agriculture and they ask me about the beef data genomics scheme because it is one of the most innovative measures taken in the agriculture sector anywhere in the world. That, and the smart farming initiative operated in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency are two innovative measures that are driving the change forward as well.
It appears there will be an ongoing discussion among Ministers but could the Minister give a timeframe or, if possible, a date on when the plan will be published?
It is great news to hear about the things that are going right but the Minister must focus on what is not. While I accept that the agriculture piece is going well, that was before the Minister's time in the Department and he will be measured by the decisions he needed to take and perhaps did not. He does not need me to tell him where the priority is, but it is in the transport sector and the heating sector. I welcome the fact that the Minister is bringing proposals to Government on the heating initiative. We have found a way around the issue in the agriculture sector and I am pleased that is the case but the other areas are of far greater importance so let us focus on them.
When can we see the plan? Has the Minister met resistance from his ministerial colleagues? Given that the discussion is so protracted at Cabinet level, could he identify whether there are Ministers that are somewhat hesitant about recognising their responsibilities?
No, there is absolutely no hesitancy at all. The mitigation plan was approved by the Cabinet today. We had a very good and constructive discussion at Cabinet today on it. Some fine-tuning of the document needs to be done and the plan will be published soon after that. Two of my colleagues came to me after the Cabinet meeting looking for copies of the plan. We will publish it as soon as it is available. The plan has gone for translation into the Irish language and I am anxious to have it published as quickly as possible, but in advance of the Cabinet meeting to discuss the issue so that my colleagues have further time to consider it.
We intend to come forward with proposals quite soon on the renewable heat incentive scheme. We will also come forward with proposals on a renewable electricity support scheme, which will make progress on the former. Significant progress continues to be made in agriculture, transport and housing and planning. They are issues with which all Ministers are engaged and that will continue to be the case.
I welcome the fact that the mitigation plan has gone to Cabinet. However, I am worried that the Minister has not given a date for its publication. This week the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill is being pushed through the Dáil and any amount of time is being given to it. We have been advised that this is the last Dáil that will have any chance to do something about climate change, such is the seriousness of the issue.
It has been repeatedly pointed out that the failure to deal with climate change will cost a lot more. Going back to 2006, the ground-breaking Stern review pointed out that it would be 20 times cheaper to deal with climate change than with its effects. I do not have the time to go through all of the reports but the Minister is aware it is much more expensive to deal with the effects of climate change than to prevent it. The draft plan I saw was described by a non-governmental organisation as defeatist and cautious. The organisation in question has been very active on the ground and I share its concerns about the lack of ambition in the plan. Could the Minister please tell me when exactly the plan will come before us? Will it be before the end of the summer break and has it adopted a more realistic approach in respect of meeting our targets?
The plan will absolutely be before the House before the end of the summer break. I intend to have it published as quickly as possible. I cannot give a definitive date here and now but the Cabinet is meeting the week after the House rises and it is my intention to have the plan published in advance so that Ministers can have a copy of it to discuss at that full-day Cabinet meeting. I will publish the plan as soon as I can. As soon as I have the document available it will be published and laid before the Houses.
Deputy Stanley is one of the people who was here at the time but the timelines that are used in respect of the mitigation plan are unfortunate purely from a logistical point of view. That is why I want the reporting mechanism to come in after the budget. Many of the decisions we have to take must be taken in the budgetary context. We cannot take them in isolation. Many of the measures we have outlined in the mitigation plan such as the renewable heat incentive scheme and the renewable electricity support scheme will be included in the Estimates process as part of the budget and that is why it is important that in tandem with the budget taking place in October we would have the annual transition statement very soon after that.
We are establishing a national dialogue. It would be wrong to set everything in stone and then have a discussion about where we should go. Whatever comes up in the course of the dialogue also needs to be input into the plan, which is very much a living document.
We welcome the dialogue, but we are beyond that stage and we need to take action. We set up a climate advisory council, which gave very clear guidelines on the need for a stable plan and targets. All of the non-governmental organisations have highlighted those issues and we know the poorest and most vulnerable in the world who contribute very little to emissions will suffer because of our inaction.
I repeat this is the last Dáil that can take any effective action against climate change. If I had any power in this Dáil I would put this item on the agenda this week and not the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill. This cannot wait until the end of the year and it cannot wait for a budget. I appreciate what the Minister has said in respect of the budget but at some stage there must be a complete shift in thinking and a realisation that whatever about the October budget, we will end up paying a lot more. Deputy Barry has quoted Joseph Curtin of the Institute of International and European Affairs to the effect that Ireland will miss its targets by €610 million by 2020 and by up to €5.5 billion by 2030. By any stretch of the imagination we need an urgent debate in this Dáil well before October in order that we can all have an input into the targets that are set and monitoring of them.
I am quite happy to have a debate at any time. That would be helpful. I am not 100% sure about the long-term costs but Deputy Connolly is right that they are very significant and in the scale of billions of euro. I do not believe we are beyond dialogue. A fundamental weakness of environmental groups up to now is that it has been very much about top-down lecturing to people and telling them what they must do, rather than by engaging with communities on the ground. We shall come to this later in respect of another question as I do not want to get into it now. This has been the fundamental weakness up to now. People think that they can deal with this issue at a high level and not engage with people on the ground. We need to engage with people on the ground, to work with communities and to explain to them what needs to be done by every single person doing their own small, little bit. The one thing in which Ireland has been globally successful is in engaging with young people. There is nowhere in the world that has done this better than Ireland has, with its Green-Schools initiative. Yes, we have challenges but the Deputy knows the reality as well as I do. I was not inundated with people talking about climate change during the last general election. I was not inundated with people-----
I was.
-----and we need to change that debate. We need to change that dynamic and the only way we can do that is to engage with people and explain to them how this is impacting on their day-to-day lives. To try to do this, my focus is on the issue of air quality, which has the knock-on impact with regard to climate but also deals in the here and now for the public.
59. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment if he is satisfied that the actions agreed by the mobile phone and broadband task force implementation group are on course to deliver broadband coverage for the Oldtown area of north County Dublin and other rural areas without adequate broadband access; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29483/17]
I listened to the Minister's earlier reply on broadband provision. Conscious of the consistent promises of 100% coverage, I raise the specific example of Oldtown, a village in north County Dublin less than 30 km from Dublin city centre. When I asked the Minister previously about this issue in November 2016, Oldtown was in the amber category on the broadband implementation map, which indicated an area marked for State intervention to be included in the State's programme. The area is now in the light blue section of the map with no commercial provider servicing that area or parts of it.
If Deputy Clare Daly has heard the previous reply I will not go through it again but will answer the Deputy's specific question. Yes, the area is in light blue, which means that in the next 77 weeks Oldtown will have high-speed broadband as part of the Eir commitment agreement. This is some good news for north County Dublin. They are no longer in the intervention area and they will be part of the 300,000 premises that will get high-speed broadband. I encourage people in the Oldtown area to make direct contact with Eir to find out the timetable for the roll-out over the next 77 weeks. Off the top of my head I do not know when the fibre will come to Oldtown during the 77 weeks. It does address the problem in that community and it is just one of the examples where the Eir commitment agreement is working; we are actually delivering fibre to the door of 300 farms every single week and we will continue that for the next 77 weeks. Once this is completed, I am determined to drive forward with the programme for the remaining 542,000 premises across rural Ireland to ensure that every single premises has access to high-speed broadband.
I am delighted that the Minister has replied in that regard because one of my constituents did contact Eir, as the Minister has suggested. The roll-out map stops 5 m from the entrance to his house. He offered to pay for the extra 5 m from the entrance to his house but was told there are no plans to extend the line and this was where it was going to stop. Effectively, he cannot work from home or live in that area. Living in a rural community now means that one must have access to high-speed broadband and he is not going to get it. He even offered to pay for the extra length and was told he would not be able to do that. As far as I know, Oldtown exchange is the only part of the greater Dublin area that does not have broadband. Eir seems to be putting the issue of cost in the way. To upscale the entire exchange would cost some €700,000 and that is not being envisaged in this plan. This means that around 170 houses in the area are excluded from this plan. Given that the area is in our capital city or on the periphery of it, this seems absolute lunacy. What can be done for those residents to be included such as this man who is 5 m out? What would the remedy be for him and others like him?
If the resident in question is in the light blue area of the map then he will get broadband as part of the commitment agreement. That is the agreement and I expect Eir to comply with that to the letter of the law. If it is outside the light blue area then it will have to wait for the next phase of the national broadband plan. In the interim, however, we are working with mobile operators and wireless broadband operators to facilitate them in rolling out their infrastructure. Currently the commercial companies are spending some €1.7 million every day. Imagine is rolling out a wireless network service. Eurona Ireland last week announced an upgrade in its network. I understand that there are many other wireless operators across the State that over the next period will be enhancing their services. On top of this we have released the 3.6 GHz spectrum, which will improve the data capacity of the mobile operators and allow for the expansion of wireless operators. There are opportunities there. Recently I also spoke with a satellite operator that is looking to come in to the State with very high speeds, well in excess of what would have been traditionally envisaged around satellite services. They are available. If the Deputy's constituent is in the light blue area and he puts in his Eircode postcode, and if the company now tells him it will not provide the service to him, I would appreciate the Deputy coming back to me on the matter.
I certainly will. If the commercial provider is not willing to connect all houses in the area then we have a problem. I will check the map and I will ask the resident to check the postcode. If it is on the periphery then what assurances can the Minister give? Does the Minister believe that a 5 m border is sufficient? The resident made an offer to be included at his own cost. Is this so bizarre if a premises is outside the light blue area? What other remedy could be found? If the alternative is that his premises goes into the amber area of the map and he must wait in the never-never land then I do not know what solution I can offer to him. I believe this matter relates to the fact that Oldtown exchange is the most archaic one in the county of Dublin. It probably needs special attention because there are a number of residents who are in the townland of Oldtown who will not be connected and who will not be provided for by Eir. We need to plug that gap and this is what I am trying to do.
The commitment agreement we have with Eir is that Eir must pass a home every minute of every working day for the next 77 weeks. That is a monumental task for the company and we have pushed it to the wire in that respect. I had looked at including in the contract intervention by individuals outside of this, but Eir was of the view that if this happened it would actually delay the roll-out. This is what we are tied into with Eir.
People look at this as an all-or-nothing situation. I am determined to make sure that people will have a long-term solution under the national broadband plan for every single premises in the intervention area. This does not mean that things are not happening at the moment. I urge people to go and look at the alternative options because there are options available. I was with a business last week in Deputy Eugene Murphy's constituency and they had the exact same argument; they are 500 yd. from the light blue area.
They had a wireless option, a mobile option and three fibre options at that site, but they did not realise it because they were looking at the Eir solution only. I encourage people to look at the other solutions that are available. Other operators and competitors are willing to provide services. I actively encourage people to consider them.
62. Deputy Bobby Aylward asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the progress made in implementing the recommendations of two reports (details supplied) on the future and reform of the post office network; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29759/17]
Deputy Aylward has given permission to Deputy Niamh Smyth to introduce Question No. 62, which is in his name. Is it that agreed? Agreed.
I would like the Minister to set out the progress that has been made in implementing the recommendations of two reports on the future and reform of the post office network and to make a statement on the same issue.
As Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, I am responsible for the postal sector, including the governance of An Post, to ensure that the company is fully compliant with the code of practice and governance of State bodies and the governance functions included in the statutory framework underpinning An Post. Operational matters and the role of developing commercial strategies for the post office network are matters for the board and management of An Post. As Minister, I do not have a statutory function in respect of such matters. Consequently, measures to maintain, enhance and diversify the post office network are matters for An Post. The Post Office Network Business Development Group was established at the end of 2014 by the then Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources to explore the potential for commercial and additional Government services which could be transacted through the post office network. I was one of the five Members of the House who made a submission to that group at the time. Following the publication of the final report of this group in January 2016, two working groups were established to make progress with the recommendations of the report, namely, the network renewal implementation group, chaired by Mr. Bobby Kerr, and the post office hub working group, chaired by the then Minister of State, Deputy Ring.
On foot of a reconfiguration of Government Departments in July of last year, responsibility for the post office network transferred to the Minister for Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. When the Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs published the final report of the post office hub working group in March of this year, it outlined that it is pursuing the possible opportunities for the network to provide services such as community banking and motor tax renewal. Arrangements are in hand to reassign responsibility for the post office network to the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment in light of its overall responsibility for An Post. The recommendations of the post office hub working group will continue to be finalised between both Departments. I understand that the report of the network renewal implementation group, which was undertaken by Mr. Bobby Kerr on behalf of An Post, is under consideration by An Post. The policy of the Government is that An Post should remain a strong and viable company that is in a position to provide a high-quality nationwide postal service and to maintain a nationwide customer-focused network of post offices in the community.
I do not think that is the first time the Minister has given that reply today.
It might be the last.
As the Minister knows, I represent the very rural constituency of Cavan-Monaghan. The post office is an integral part of the cultural and social fabric of the constituency. I would like to give the Minister a feel for the concerns of people in this regard. Over 150 people attended a recent public meeting in the small town of Shercock, County Cavan, which is near the border with County Monaghan. It is of the utmost importance to see additional services like community banking being provided in our post offices so that they become more viable and sustainable. It was very interesting to see the demographic attending the public meeting I have mentioned. We have to make sure our post offices function for our young people as well as for older people in rural communities and in society in general. I wonder how the Minister intends to address that. The postmasters and postmistresses are very anxious because they feel they are contending with unfair competition from private courier services. They want to be able to deliver the same type of efficient services through post offices, but they are restricted from doing so. Their hands are tied behind their backs. Does the Minister have any proposals? If our post offices are to survive and to be able to deliver these services, they must have broadband, which we discussed earlier.
If the Deputy is speaking to her colleague, Deputy Dooley, after Question Time, she might tell him that within the next 77 weeks, approximately 97% of all post offices in this country will have direct access to high-speed broadband. We can look at the options for the approximately 30 post offices that will not have such access. I am sure Deputy Dooley will be delighted to hear that. I know there is public concern in this regard. People see digital as a threat to the post office network. I see it as an enabler. It is one way we can bring business into our post office network. Like Deputy Niamh Smyth, I am aware that young people do not go into post offices as often as older people. Younger people go into the post office at Christmas to buy stamps and in the summer to use foreign exchange or passport facilities. What can we do to encourage people to use the post office more frequently? Opportunities in areas like parcel services are available to post offices that have access to broadband. I disagree with the Deputy in so far as I think there is an opportunity to provide a very cost-effective service. It does not cost An Post anything extra to send a parcel from the GPO in Dublin to Caherciveen because it has a fleet of vans that are already providing services across the country under the universal service obligation.
Both post offices and broadband fall under the Minister's remit. It is very difficult for the post offices we are trying to keep in local areas to survive if they do not have a basic service like broadband. I agree with what the Minister said about bringing in younger people and providing extra services. Something that happened in my constituency today provided another example of why broadband is needed. Flair Showers Limited, which has the potential to employ 40 people in the east Cavan area, has had to move its small factory to Kingscourt because it cannot access broadband in Bailieborough. While that is wonderful for Kingscourt and for the county, the company had an established presence with a building and everything else in place in Bailieborough but it was not able to access broadband. We are going to lose jobs out of the town as a result. I have tabled a separate parliamentary question on this matter today and I look forward to the Minister's response. I want to know whether something can be done to enable small factories, companies and post offices to stay in local areas. It is dreadful to see them having to leave because they cannot get something as basic as broadband. I think not having broadband is like not having electricity.
That is why I am determined to ensure that we continue to roll out high-speed real-fibre broadband across this country. At present, we are passing one door every minute of every working day. My intention is to continue that momentum until every single premises in Ireland enjoys access to this facility. I encourage Deputy Niamh Smyth to make direct contact with the local broadband officer in her local authority to see whether options exist in the specific case she mentioned. I encourage people to look at the options that are available. I mentioned an example in response to Deputy Clare Daly a couple of minutes ago. We need to build on the strengths of An Post and its post office network. I refer, for example, to its brand recognition and to the trust it enjoys among the public. An Post has a nationwide network of post offices across the country. Its vans pass every door in this country five days a week. It is frustrating that these advantages have not been exploited in the past. In fairness to the chief executive, David McRedmond, I think he understands that opportunities exist. A pilot project that is taking place down the road from the Acting Chairman's locality is looking at using An Post vans to bring other services out into rural areas.
63. Deputy John Curran asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment further to Question No. 1643 of 16 September 2016, the details of the new pricing structures that will be applied by waste collection companies following the price freeze for waste collection which is due to expire at the end of June 2017; if the significant price increases that were attempted to be applied in 2016 will not be a feature of the new pricing structure; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29468/17]
As the Minister will be aware, the proposed introduction of pay-by-weight waste collection last year gave rise to significant controversy when companies tried to increase prices significantly. As part of a voluntary agreement that was subsequently reached, a price freeze was introduced to give the Minister an opportunity to work with waste collection companies to find a way forward so that rates of recycling, etc., can be increased. Given that the voluntary agreement is now coming to an end, I ask the Minister to provide an update on the new pricing structures and arrangements that will come about as a result of the most recent discussions.
I can give the Deputy an update that is literally hot off the press. I intend to introduce an incentivised pricing structure that will provide the flexibility for customers to be offered a suite of pricing options to encourage householders to reduce and segregate their waste. This approach is in line with the Government's policy as articulated in a 2012 policy document, A Resource Opportunity - Waste Management Policy in Ireland. A specific measure in the policy provides that the household waste collection sector will "operate pricing structures designed to incentivise environmentally sustainable behaviours by households in terms of waste reduction and segregation".
Incentivised pricing should encourage us, as a community, to prevent and reduce the amount of waste we produce and to utilise the value of our waste through reuse, recycling and recovery. This will also enable Ireland to meet its legal obligations as well as current and future targets under EU waste legislation.
The amount of waste being sent to landfill has increased in the past two years. Last year, local authorities had to exercise emergency powers on two occasions to make additional landfill capacity available. Had it not been made available, we could not have allowed the collection of waste in this country. We must act to encourage further waste reduction to avert a return to an over-dependence on landfill. The introduction of an incentivised pricing structure for household waste collection will be an important measure in this regard.
If we do nothing about the amount of material going into landfill, within the next three years there will be an 18% shortfall in landfill capacity, effectively meaning we will have no landfill capacity for two months of the year. There are a couple of solutions. One is that we expand the existing four landfills. We had 24 in 2011 but are down to four at the moment and I do not think any colleague from the vicinity of these landfills would want that to happen. The other option is to open up new landfills, and I am willing to listen to any suggestions from Members if they have a proposed site for a new landfill. Finally, we can reduce the amount of material going into landfill and this is my preference.
The Minister knows my views on this. I am very supportive of reducing the waste that goes into landfill and increasing recycling, but I will go back to what happened last year. When the proposals were made to go to a pay-by-weight system to encourage people to change to green bins, and to brown bins for biodegradable material, the people in Dublin who had been used to a multi-bin system saw very significant price increases of 50%, 60% or 70% in the new regime. They were able to compare, year by year and like for like, what the new charging regime would be. I fully accept what the Minister is doing and support pay-by-weight, as well as the diversion from waste to recyclable, but it has to be in tandem with a realistic pricing structure, and this was not the case last summer. We did not have a fair pricing structure and the Minister of the day had to take emergency action. I support the Minister's programme but it has to be underpinned by a guarantee that the increases we were forced to look at last year will not be on the table again this year.
I am not proceeding with the pay-per-kilogram scheme which was proposed two years ago and again last year. It was unfair, it was too inflexible to meet the different household circumstances in this country, it ignored the issue of incontinence wear and it penalised those who recycled more. We are going to provide flexibility for operators to ensure that if people segregate more or produce less waste, they will pay less. We will introduce an incentivised charging regime.
The State does not control or set prices. If anyone wants evidence of that they should look at the parliamentary questions tabled by colleagues which noted that there was a voluntary freeze in prices in the past 12 months but that operators were breaching it. I have no control over prices. I can set the regulatory environment and I have done so to allow us as much flexibility as possible and to allow operators to put in place as many types of charging regimes as possible. We are, however, getting rid of the flat-rate charge because it does not incentivise a reduction in the amount going to landfill.
I have the Minister's replies to parliamentary questions and he has been consistent in saying the companies set the rate, not the Government. However, it was the action of the previous Minister in trying to introduce pay-by-weight that led to this dramatic shift. It was driven by a Government policy decision and the Minister rowed back on it. The Minister said there would be a range of charging options in different companies and that the flat rate would be gone. I am speaking from the consumer's point of view. As companies roll out their new suite of charging options, I urge the Minister to oblige them to give their existing customers the breakdown and advice as to their most suitable option based on their previous usage. The intent of the legislation is to go increasingly towards recycling. A customer should be able to compare what they paid in the previous 12 months with what it would cost in the new programme. The Minister may not control prices but he does have a degree of control over this and he has some flexibility. I urge him to ensure there is transparency to avoid the chaos in the industry which there was this time last year.
Deputy Curran has raised a very important point. I do not know what powers I have in this area and I have to be very careful because of competition law. I commit to relaying the point directly to the 67 operators and to asking them to do this because it makes sense. Not all of them have a flat rate system and many have a user charge system, which they have done quite effectively, as Deputy Eugene Murphy and I have seen in our constituency. Over the next 12 to 15 months, as people transition from their current flat-rate charging regime to an incentivised system, it would make sense to advise them as to the most appropriate scheme for them, based on prior usage. I will relay that to the industry.
70. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment if he will redraft the terms of reference for the review of the north-south interconnector to reflect the wishes of persons in counties Cavan and Monaghan affected and groups (details supplied) as per the Fianna Fáil Dáil Éireann motion which was passed in 2017; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29474/17]
100. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment his plans to address the fact that his Department's terms of reference for the review of the north-south interconnector have been met with considerable opposition and disappointment from affected communities across counties Cavan, Monaghan and Meath. [29882/17]
114. Deputy Brian Stanley asked the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment the position regarding the implementation of the provisions outlined in the Dáil Éireann motion on the north-south interconnector project. [29480/17]
I ask the Minister and the Deputies to be brief with these questions.
Will the Minister redraft the terms of reference for the review of the north-south interconnector to reflect the wishes of the persons affected in counties Cavan and Monaghan, as per the Fianna Fáil motion which was passed in 2017?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 70, 100 and 114 together.
On 19 December 2016, An Bord Pleanála granted planning permission for the north-south interconnector project in Ireland.
Deputy Stanley is also entitled to speak so perhaps we could keep this brief.
Following the discussions we have had, I have looked at this again. I have told the Deputies about the difficulties I have in complying with the full motion because of the issues regarding An Bord Pleanála. As Minister, I have an overarching duty to respect a decision lawfully made by the bodies, unless lawfully challenged. However, on foot of discussions, I have decided to proceed with a second measure to look at the levels of compensation provided in a European context to land and property owners in the proximity of high voltage power lines. We circulated the terms of reference earlier today to interested Members and it is our intention to go to tender on that. It will take into account the issues that have been raised about distance from power lines, landscape, tourism, heritage etc. I have listened to the concerns of the communities and Members of the Oireachtas and have come up with a study to look at the levels of compensation. We will get it completed as soon as possible, published and laid before the House.
I have read the reaction to the terms of reference from one of the locals in the Monaghan anti-pylon group. They state that this type of study is exactly what they do not want as it obviously is intended to assist EirGrid in benchmarking landowners for compensation for overhead lines in an international context.
The feeling on the ground is that to talk about compensation, for starters, is to use the wrong language. People living in the area are worried about land devaluation, health and landscape. I am sorry to tell the Minister that the publication of a second study and terms of reference discussing compensation gets people's backs up. There is no other way of putting it. They are distraught and worried that it is almost as though the Minister is trying to assist EirGrid in ploughing ahead with its plans and completely ignoring the worries of the local community. Those people are not worried about compensation, they are worried about their health, the devaluation of their land and the area where they have to live for the rest of their lives.
This project has a very poor history. The cost to date is in excess of €30 million and there has not even been a JCB put on site. Compensation deals with one issue. The main issues that have been raised by those affected with Members and councillors from their constituency and nearby constituencies are health and safety, life quality issues and the effects on agriculture, the environment, landscape and tourism. This matter has been gone into in great detail with EirGrid and Department officials through questions and face-to-face meetings over at least the past year of my involvement. I am not convinced that the overhead option should be chosen. All Members know that the North-South interconnector is needed, particularly in view of Brexit and the need to integrate the two economies. All Members know that makes sense. The North badly needs our electricity. We need to stabilise our grid and the larger we make it, the more stabilised it will become, as well as providing another opportunity to feed renewables into the grid. All Members understand that and it has all been explained. Somebody now needs to deal with this issue and steer the project in the right direction.
Deputy Stanley is correct in regard to the need for this grid even before Brexit occurred. The first study to which I agreed on foot of a motion put forward in the House specifically considers whether it is technically feasible for an underground connection to meet the requirements about which the Deputy has spoken. I have been consistently told that it is not possible for an underground connection to meet those requirements. That is being reviewed.
I listened intently to what Members said on the previous occasion this issue was discussed. However, the difficulty is that people want me to listen but are not prepared to listen to the points that I have made. I have gone as far as I can in regard to the terms of reference. I also have to be conscious that there are judicial reviews underway, one of which, in which I am a named party, is due to come before the Commercial Court on 18 July. My intention is to proceed with both studies and publish them as soon as they are available. People also criticised the previous studies and then referenced them once they had been published. One cannot have it every way.
