I move now to Deputy McDonald-----
Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions
A Cheann Comhairle-----
-----to take Leaders' Questions.
A Cheann Comhairle-----
No Taoiseach. Thank you.
A Cheann Comhairle, I am taking issue with what has happened here today.
I call Deputy McDonald. Taoiseach, please.
I have not been allowed to address this in any shape or form-----
Deputy McDonald on Leaders' Questions.
-----and I have offered.
Thank you. We resume the business of the House.
For the record of the House, I offered to intervene-----
Taoiseach, please.
----- and I have been refused.
Throw him out.
I call Deputy McDonald to continue with Leaders' Questions.
Dublin city centre is no longer safe. That is a statement of reality. People who live, work and visit our capital city have been robbed of their sense of safety and this has been the case for some time. Ask anyone who walks through the city centre and they will tell you they do so either with their heads down or looking over their shoulder. Those who live in the inner city could write the book on just how unsafe our streets have become. The everyday climate of danger has taken root, not least because of the lack of Garda presence on the ground.
Over the past two weeks, we have had serious incidents that have added to people's feeling of danger and fear. The horrific knife attacks in Stoneybatter last Sunday week in which three people were injured left the community reeling. Then on Saturday a man was fatally stabbed on South Anne Street in the aftermath of a public order incident. Adding to public concern is that those arrested for these attacks had been on bail for other serious offences. The man arrested for the attacks in Stoneybatter was facing charges in relation to a drug seizure, while two of the men arrested in connection with the fatal stabbing on Saturday have been on bail for other serious offences.
This is not the first time this issue has arisen. I am sure the Taoiseach is aware of a number of high-profile, serious cases where the perpetrators had been on bail for other offences. People are now asking why it is that so many serious crimes are being committed by people who have been released on bail. They are asking whether our bail laws are adequate and properly enforced. People are also asking how individuals who have been involved with serious crime in other countries are able to be here in Ireland. There is a real sense that public safety and the right of every person to go about their lives without fear have been undermined by neglect and the failure of Government to respond to the reality on the ground. Knife crime and the carrying of knives now present a clear and present danger to the public.
While the Minister for Justice, Deputy O'Callaghan, has stated that parts of Dublin are unsafe, he has failed to specify which parts. The reality is that we have had years of failure and of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil policies on crime prevention, community safety and rehabilitation.
Ní mór don Rialtas plean a leagan amach chun Baile Átha Cliath a dhéanamh níos sábháilte do gach duine a bhfuil cónaí orthu sa chathair, a bhíonn ag obair anseo nó a thagann ar cuairt. We need more gardaí on our streets and more investment in community, youth services, youth diversion programmes, rehabilitation and in our probation services. We need to reform our bail laws urgently. We need a response to knife crime and the carrying of knives, which is now endemic. The price of Government failure in all of these areas has been high, too high for too many. What is the Government's response to this lack of safety? What will be done to make Dublin, in particular, safe again?
Ar dtús báire, is mian liom a rá gur uafásach ar fad é an méid atá tar éis tarlú, ní hamháin in Stoneybatter ach i rith an deireadh seachtaine. Déanaim comhbhrón le clann Quham Babatunde a fhuair bás agus leis an duine a bhí gortaithe mar aon leis sin. Níl sé sásúil gan amhras in aon chor. Tá plean ag an Rialtas agus ag an Aire Dlí agus Cirt, an Teachta Jim O’Callaghan chun an méid gardaí atá ann a mhéadú agus a dhéanamh níos láidre, chomh maith le dlíthe eile a thabhairt isteach. Beidh níos mó gardaí ar na sráideanna san am atá le teacht. Tá na huimhreacha ag méadú. Níl aon amhras faoi sin. Is olc an scéal é, áfach, nach bhfuil daoine in ann dul ag obair nó dul timpeall na sráideanna gan an baol agus dainséir seo go mbeidh ionsaí ann. Is uafásach ar fad é.
I thank Deputy McDonald for raising this important issue with me. My thoughts are with the deceased, Quham Babatunde, and his family and friends, and the other victims. We also think of the victims of the attack in Stoneybatter, which was an appalling attack on people going about their daily lives leaving their homes and walking along the streets.
One has to condemn the level of violence involved. We must be very clear and absolutely intolerant of people carrying knives in their possession if they go out for a night's recreation. This is a growing phenomenon. It is reprehensible and is putting the lives of people in danger. There is a wider societal piece we must focus on in respect of all the factors that give rise to the level of violence we are experiencing and which individuals are getting involved in.
The Deputy raises a valid question regarding the bail laws. It is clear to me that people should not be granted bail if there is a risk they might commit a serious crime or offence. The bail laws have been comprehensively strengthened in recent years by a series of Acts in 2007, 2015 and 2024 in terms of increased penalties. The Courts, Civil Law, Criminal Law and Superannuation Act 2024 increases the penalties for several knife-related offences under the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act 1990. That includes an increase of five to seven years in the maximum sentence for the offences of possession of a knife, trespassing with a knife and producing a knife to unlawfully intimidate another.
In respect of our bail laws, the decision to grant bail in a particular case, as the Deputy knows, is solely a matter for the judge. There are various guidelines the court must have regard to, particularly any persistent serious offending by an applicant and, in specific circumstances, the nature and likelihood of any danger to a person or to the community arising from the granting of bail. I accept we must keep the bail laws under constant review for both the constitutional rights of individuals but also the rights of citizens, victims and potential victims of people who commit crime on bail. That is something the Government will continue to assess. If we can make it tighter, we will, but obviously in a way that is constitutionally allowed. The bottom line is there is no tolerance on the Government side in respect of these crimes. They are reprehensible and should be condemned.
Aontaím leis an Taoiseach gur olc an scéal é gan dabht. Cén plean atá ag an Rialtas? Tá sé soiléir nach bhfuil an plean ceart aige. Dithering in the face of all this is not a sufficient response from the Government. I could write a lengthy thesis on the underlying causes of crime - the poverty, the lack of investment and the lack of opportunity. We could all do that but we are facing a situation now where in Dublin in particular, but also elsewhere, people simply do not feel safe. The Taoiseach says there is zero tolerance of knife crime. Tell that to people on the street. The fact is knife crime and the carrying of knives is now endemic. What is the Taoiseach and the Government going to do about this? We cannot afford a laissez-faire approach in respect of the granting of bail. I know it is at the discretion of the judge but if the guidelines are clearly failing, if they are inadequate, and where you have serial offenders out on bail offending again, surely to God Government needs to take a stand on that.
There is no laissez-faire. Níl sé sin fíor. We have a robust legal framework to deal with knife crime. As I said, in September we increased the maximum penalty. There is a proactive policing operation to seize knives. There has been an increase in the number of knives being seized each year and that proactivity will continue. Again, we have to support the Garda. We have to give more resources. There is good CCTV of the violent disorder in South Anne Street, for example, but our Garda force should be able to use facial recognition technology. That was opposed in the previous Oireachtas. I hope the Opposition will support the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, when we bring legislation of that type forward and other legislation designed to strengthen gardaí on the front line, especially body-worn cameras, the proof-of-concept phase of which is under way in Dublin, Waterford and Limerick.
We want to roll these out to all gardaí on the front line. There has not always been a welcome for such measures in this House, if the truth be told, but there will be total proactivity. Numbers have increased by 40% in the Dublin metropolitan area over the past-----
We will move to Deputy Bacik.
We know that housing is the single most immediate challenge facing this Government - the civil rights issue of this generation. Last week, the Labour Party offered a motion that was the first opportunity for TDs to debate housing in this Dáil term. The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage was a no-show and there was tumbleweed on the Government benches during the debate. No senior Minister showed up to contribute to the debate on our serious and constructive proposals which offered a credible pathway to ramp up the delivery of homes. The lack of input from Government suggests it is not taking the housing crisis seriously.
In the debate, I suggested that the Government was devoid of ambition and ideas in tackling the housing crisis. It seems, however, that it does have ideas and we have heard two ideas from the Taoiseach and the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The first is to end rent pressure zones without a safety net for renters while the second is to return to the era of Celtic tiger tax breaks for developers. Indeed, just now on the radio, the Minister said that tax breaks must be on the table. These ideas from Fianna Fáil represent an audacious step for sure but one in the wrong direction and not the radical reset for which the Housing Commission called. If the Taoiseach was so convinced that lifting rent pressure zones and introducing tax breaks for developers would solve the housing crisis, the question is why Fianna Fáil did not seek a mandate for those policies in the last general election. It seems as if it is making policy on the hoof and it seems Fine Gael agrees with this critique. There is now a clear split in Government ranks. We understand the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, has set his face repeatedly against the introduction of tax breaks for developers. The former Minister for housing, Eoghan Murphy, documented this in his own book where tax breaks were previously ruled out. Both parties are contradicting each other on this on the airwaves. If they cannot communicate with each other, how does this sound to those at the sharp end of the housing crisis - the parents of the 4,500 children in emergency accommodation? How does this sound when Government cannot agree on what policies it is going to introduce?
We understand the Cabinet committee on housing has met and has agreed to draft a new housing plan. We welcome this focus and the fact we may now say farewell to Housing for All, which has patently failed, but we are concerned about what this new review will deliver. We do not want to see it deliver tax breaks that fail in the supply of more homes. We want to see a vision for an active State - a State that would take on stronger CPO powers, provide protections for renters, ensure the delivery of homes as a public good and intervene to address the real scourge of vacancy and dereliction across the country where we know 81,000 residential properties were vacant in the final quarter of last year, of which 14,000 were in Dublin. That crisis is just one example of lack of ambition and lack of radical policies. Will the Government's new plan take seriously the need to protect renters and take seriously the scourge of vacancy and dereliction or will we see a return to failed Fianna Fáil policies on tax breaks for developers?
The Opposition has a habit of making assertions that are not grounded in any facts. I challenge Deputy Bacik-----
Is the Taoiseach saying that is ag insint bréaga?
It is telling a falsehood, yes. I challenge Deputy Bacik-----
That is being Jesuitical.
-----to find any statement where I said I would end RPZs and replace them with nothing. That is what she just said. I challenge her to find that statement for me and present it because it is a deliberate distortion of what I said. The Housing Agency began a review of RPZs last year - not me, the Housing Agency. The expiry date is the end of this year. The Housing Commission says the same thing but Deputy Bacik now challenges me to go back to the Housing Commission. It is in the Housing Commission report about reference pricing. Threshold wrote to every party in its election manifesto saying we should go that route. We have not decided to do that, by the way. Is it possible to have a debate on housing without name calling?
Please, if we could-----
I did not interrupt the Deputy and I did not finish my statement but, again, the heckling starts because the Opposition does not like what it is hearing.
We have been asking for-----
Is it possible to have a serious debate, which the people deserve, on housing without the name calling and attempts to politically undermine and distort what is being said?
I do not think it is possible to have such a debate with the Opposition, given the Deputy's contribution just now and her misrepresentation of what I said publicly. I will say again that the last Government moved from a situation where we were doing approximately 20,000 houses in 2020 to more than 30,000 houses in 2022, 2023 and 2024. Some 130,000 houses have been built since the last Government was formed in 2020. That was a step change compared with what had been achieved in the preceding five years. It turned a corner but that is not enough. The Housing for All plan exceeded its targets and when it did so, the Opposition's response was to say the targets were not good enough or high enough.
Everyone knew they were not.
There are two types of targets. There is what we need-----
The ones you meet, and the ones you miss - they are the two types of targets.
Does the Opposition not want this debate?
Please.
The people did not buy Deputy Ó Broin's stuff in the election. They just did not buy it.
At least we told the truth.
The Deputy persuaded nobody.
We persuaded 400,000 people.
The Deputy persuaded nobody with his codswallop of a set of proposals.
Deputies, please, we have a Gallery full of people.
There is what we need, and we need 50,000 houses per year according to the ESRI.
What we get is very different.
The question then is how we get there. I will say again that the Department of Finance and everybody else says that we need approximately €20 billion in development funding for housing. At the moment, the State is spending €6 billion.
Not on housing it is not.
Sorry-----
Deputy Ó Broin, please.
If the rest of you could start telling us how to fill in the gaps and get to the €20 billion-----
I will happily do so.
No, you will not do it happily.
Whenever you want, Taoiseach.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
All the Opposition does is to say "No" to everything.
I will do so whenever the Taoiseach wants and in whatever forum.
I would welcome an engagement with the Deputy on housing-----
Thank you, Taoiseach, time is up. Deputy Bacik to respond.
-----but please, less of the misrepresentation.
What about the 1 million houses? Where have they gone?
This not Deputy Danny Healy-Rae's question.
The Deputy should sit on the other side of the House.
(Interruptions).
How dare the Deputy say that?
Excuse me. We have a Gallery full of people and we have the public watching. I ask for decorum to allow Deputy Bacik to finish her part of the question and to allow the Taoiseach to answer.
She might want to-----
Thank you. That is quite enough, Deputy.
It seems that the Government and its lackeys on this side of the House-----
That is not acceptable.
-----are simply going to use any opportunity to shout down members of the Opposition who are making serious points about housing. The Taoiseach is letting himself down.
What is the Deputy doing?
The Taoiseach is letting himself down.
What is the Deputy doing? She is shouting across the House the whole time.
Deputies, please.
Instead of engaging seriously with the Opposition on our constructive proposals for housing, the Taoiseach simply engages in name calling and suggests we are misrepresenting things. I ask the Taoiseach to listen back to his housing Minister who was on the radio just now. He said that tax breaks were on the table.
I was talking about what the Deputy said to me.
That is an absolute statement of fact.
The Taoiseach said he would not interrupt. Let the Deputy finish.
It is beneath the Taoiseach to say "ag insint bréag" about members of the Opposition and to accuse us of misrepresenting. The Taoiseach is in government. It is his job to fix the housing crisis.
Hear, hear.
We in opposition offered the opportunity for a debate last week but the Taoiseach and housing Minister did not show up. Barely anyone from the Government showed up.
Thank you, Deputy.
We have another opportunity this week. The Opposition is providing opportunities-----
Taoiseach, now is your turn to respond.
-----to debate and address the housing crisis but the Government is not engaging seriously.
Thank you, Deputies.
With the greatest of respect, Deputy, you had an opportunity to go into government but you did not show up.
(Interruptions).
We showed up.
We in the Labour Party have been showing up for years.
Yesterday, the housing subcommittee of the Cabinet met. We made some concrete decisions in respect of housing. There will be an additional €450 million of funding to build a further 3,000 affordable and social homes, and cost rental accommodation. We made the decision to establish a strategic housing activation office, as recommended by the Housing Commission, of which the Deputy is fond. That was decided and that is what we are doing. In addition, we have agreed the first revision of the national planning framework, which is extremely important in facilitating increased zoning of land to enable us to provide more houses. That will be published. I would appreciate the support of the Dáil in getting that through.
Thank you, Taoiseach. Your time is up.
The county development plans will allow us to reach, or give us a fighting chance of reaching, the targets identified by the ESRI.
Since last June, we in the Opposition have been seeking a serious debate on the Housing Commission's proposals and the Government has yet to facilitate that.
I hope it does so soon. It is hard to know where to start with the Taoiseach's rapidly unravelling housing plan. The Taoiseach cannot even convince his Fine Gael colleagues that his new approach is a good one. Yesterday, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, publicly slapped down some of the Taoiseach’s proposals. He recalled all the harm that was done by section 23 incentive schemes, a pointed reminder that Fianna Fáil tax incentives helped to bankrupt the country not so long ago.
Hear, hear.
If the Taoiseach cannot even win over his colleagues in Fine Gael, he is in big trouble. This is the party that transcribed developer lobby documents and turned them into government policy. Fine Gael was also the first to roll out the red carpet for investment funds and it has consistently failed to close tax loopholes exploited by international investors. However, even Fine Gael Ministers are baulking at the suggestion that enriching developers and funds even further is a solution to the housing disaster.
The Taoiseach is actually very close to understanding the problem in housing: he has acknowledged that his plan is not working and he has identified that there needs to be radical change, but doubling down on failed policy is not a change. It is more of the same and people out there cannot afford five more years of failure. Last week, Accord released a survey which found that 84% of people are putting off getting married and having a family due to the housing crisis. This is not just a housing disaster - it is a housing catastrophe. There are people the length and breadth of this country who feel locked out and left behind because the Government and previous governments have failed them.
Every time I raise the housing disaster, the Taoiseach tells me that the Social Democrats have no solutions or are not being constructive. That is just lazy spin. Tomorrow in the Dáil, we will discuss a Social Democrats motion on housing that puts forward real change and real credible solutions. The Taoiseach asked about how to finance housing construction. One of our proposals is to use some of the €160 billion that is on deposit in Irish banks to fund the construction of affordable homes. This has been done successfully for decades in France. Why not do it here? We also want to use EU funding streams to deliver affordable homes. When I said this to the Taoiseach last week, he dismissed it out of hand even though a report commissioned by one of his MEPs goes into great detail about how this can be done. That report was done by Housing Europe, which is the leading expert in how to fund the construction of affordable housing in Europe. The Taoiseach dismissed it out of hand. I do not know if anyone in the Government has even read the report.
I have two questions for the Taoiseach. Has he now dropped his proposals for tax incentives? Will the Government vote for and implement the constructive solutions put forward by the Social Democrats in our motion tomorrow?
As I said earlier, yesterday the Government took a number of key decisions on the national planning framework, which is key - I hope the Deputy agrees – and will lead to more zoning of land which is important given the numbers of houses that we have to build in the coming years. We approved an additional €450 million for 3,400 social, cost rental and affordable homes. In excess of €6 billion has been allocated for housing in State expenditure for 2025. We need about €20 billion to get to 50,000 per annum. That is the scale of the challenge. I respect the views the Deputy has put forward but I respectfully suggest they may not reach that gap in the level of investment we require.
I think the Irish banks should do more and I think the cost of financing house building is an issue. I also say without apology that we must look at mechanisms to bring an increased level of private sector investment into house building. Any attempt to deny that is flying in the face of reality. I have noticed a reluctance on the Deputy’s side to even accept that premise. I get condemned for even suggesting that we should increase the level of private sector investment in housing as if I am committing some sin in saying that and then Deputies jump to all sorts of conclusions. Then I get accused of saying things because I am listening to lobbyists. I have not met half the lobbyists that people on the Opposition benches have met.
And yet the Taoiseach is captured by them.
They might be doing it in the best interests of housing but you cannot say one thing and then have it both ways, as Deputy Ó Broin has been doing serially. I will look at that and I will discuss with the Deputy mechanisms around utilising that €160 billion he spoke about and how we release more private sector capital into housing.
That is what I have been saying since this Government was formed. That is what I have been condemned for, by the Deputy's colleagues and others, but it is a simple truism. The State will not be able to spend the €20 billion to get to the 50,000 houses per annum. Maybe we can go over €6 billion - there will be discussions within Cabinet - but you are not going to get to the levels required. Therefore, we have to be creative.
Yesterday's housing sub-committee also indicated that will be a number of other areas that we are now going to pursue in respect of activating and incentivising private sector development, particularly on brownfield sites. In the previous Government, all of us agreed on sustainable housing development. Key to that was the idea that we would develop brownfield sites. They have not taken off. Prior to that, they had not taken off the previous ten or 15 years. They make sense, given services available, given the rejuvenation of cities, etc. As far as I am concerned, everything has to be considered to enable us to get brownfield sites developed, in particular in the cities.
We have put forward a number of alternatives to tax incentives for private developers to finance the construction of housing and, significantly, the construction of housing that is affordable for people. Am I to take it from the Taoiseach's answer that tax incentives for developers are on the table? Does the Taoiseach accept the view that the section 23 tax incentives that Fianna Fáil brought in led to economic collapse, a banking collapse, a bank bailout, unemployment and emigration and ruined people's lives? Does the Taoiseach accept the damage they did or is he now telling us that the Government intends to reintroduce something similar to those highly damaging section 23 tax reliefs that were championed by Fianna Fáil? The finance Minister and Fine Gael at least seem to have the good sense to realise the damage that was done. Is the Taoiseach saying they are still on the table, that he has not learned his lesson? Is the Taoiseach trying to bring us back to that reckless type of policy?
First of all, I would say that the volume of new homes built in the past five years represents the highest level of delivery since 2008 - almost two decades ago. That is a fact, but it is not enough.
I never mentioned section 23 relief. In the past month, I never mentioned it. I repeat I was in government for the past four and a half years. Decisions were taken. Brownfield sites have not moved to the degree that they should. You can keep your heads in the sand all you like but we are going to have to work-----
Nothing is good-----
-----on how we activate brownfield sites because they make sense. At present, we are being told, they are not viable. At present, the apartment building is not happening, in particular in cities, to the degree that is necessary to give people a chance of either owning an apartment or renting an apartment at an affordable rate. We want to give opportunities to young people-----
I thank the Taoiseach. The time is up.
-----to either rent or to buy at affordable rates. That is our agenda.
We are heading for climate catastrophe. We know that 2024 was the warmest year on record - 1.6 degrees above pre-industrial levels. Already, extreme weather events, hunger and sickness related to climate change are responsible for the loss of 300,000 lives a year. That figure, unfortunately, will only rise.
We now have a climate denier in the White House. He says, "drill, baby, drill", but here we have a government supported by climate deniers which is saying, "Burn, baby, burn", to big tech and its data centres.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have turned this country into a dumping ground for big tech. They are currently using more than 20% of our electricity, more than ten times the European average. They will be using one third of our electricity by the end of this decade. Over the past five years, all of the additional wind energy produced in Ireland has been more than outstripped by data centre growth. The programme for Government gives the green light for even more of these data centres.
Now we have a proposed decision from the CRU which is explicit in saying that they do not even have to use renewable energy. CRU commissioner Dr. Harrington repeatedly, on "Morning Ireland", said it is a "matter for the data centres themselves to choose how they fuel and power themselves".
It is almost exactly the same as what Donald Trump said at the World Economic Forum, when he talked about doubling the amount of power produced to benefit data centres and AI. Trump was talking about coal but here it looks like being LNG, which the Taoiseach is planning to import wholesale from the US. All of the signs point towards the Government supporting a full commercial LNG terminal in Kerry, making Donald Trump and the Healy-Raes very happy but ignoring the science, which says that imported LNG is even dirtier than coal.
One of the first things Trump did when he came to office was to leave the Paris Agreement. We must not follow him in abandoning emissions reductions targets. There can be no more of this hypocrisy of imposing carbon taxes on ordinary people while allowing big tech to blow through the carbon budgets.
We already have the second most expensive electricity in Europe. More data centres will make this worse by driving the price of energy up even further. The new CRU policy envisages big tech profiteering from whatever electricity it supplies to the grid, saying that this can provide a revenue stream for them. It will be further privatisation, meaning even higher prices. Will the Taoiseach take the science seriously? Will he take climate change seriously? Will he try to avoid the €20 billion in fines the public will have to pay?
I thank the Deputy. The Taoiseach to respond.
Will the Taoiseach abandon the plan to import expensive-----
I thank the Deputy. His time is up.
-----and dirty fossil fuels from America and will he reverse the course on data centres?
First of all, the Deputy is referring to the publication of the Commission on the Regulation of Utilities large energy users connection policy minded-to decision paper. It is a mouthful, but it is an important document. It is not as the Deputy has described it, by the way. I think a lot of people on the industrial side might see a bit of progress in this but it will take a lot of detailed reading. It seems to me that the hard left in this country - the Deputy represents that - decided some time ago that data centres were to be the new enemy of the people, in our economy and in society. I have watched in here as, one after another, Deputies have started to ratchet up language about the threat data centres pose. At first, it did not make any sense to me because the Deputy is as prolific a user of the services provided by data centres as anybody else is - probably more so. The new hostility to data centres is about the manifestation of the Deputy's eternal struggle against the great western capitalist evil. That is what it is. I ask the Deputy a simple question. He is hostile to the economic model, and that is fair enough. He does not agree with the economic model that has grown Ireland over the past 50 years, but we need to have sustainable development of our energy and data network. The CRU itself describes data centres as "a core infrastructure enabler of a technology-rich, innovative economy". We can ban data centres in their entirety but we need to follow up by asking the hard questions of what happens to the economy, workers and industry.
Hear, hear.
We will pay higher bills with the Taoiseach's policy.
Are we saying we do not want to participate in the AI revolution? The AI revolution is the most profound economic revolution currently occurring since the 19th century industrial revolution. It is, but it has a problem.
Who told you that, Elon Musk?
Deputy, please.
AI uses enormous amounts of energy. That is a problem. The US says it will be fossil fuels. The French say it will be nuclear power. Ireland will have wind energy but there will be a gap in between. When the wind starts to flow - offshore wind in particular - we hope there will 5 GW by 2030 and more in 2031 and 2032. We cannot shut the door on data centres in an absolutist way, which is what the Deputy is essentially proposing. We would damage our economy if we did that. It would damage workers in particular and their prospects for the future. We would be sending a signal that we do not want to participate in an evolving, growing, innovative economy that will develop despite us. There will be massive investment in AI across Europe.
I thank the Taoiseach. The Deputy to respond.
We need to solve the problems that the data centres throw up, and they do throw up challenges.
The signal the Taoiseach is sending is that he does not care about the climate change challenge and about the emissions targets, because we will blow right past them. He does not care. He does not care about the bills that are going up for ordinary people.
He does not care about people who are forced to pay carbon taxes when they have no other way to get to work. He does not care about energy resilience and sustainability when we now have over 20% of our electricity going to data centres. Why? Because big tech says this is how it should be.
I read the Taoiseach's column at the weekend. I listened to him describe it as the equivalent of the industrial revolution. He sounds like a man who has drunk too much of the big tech Kool-Aid. He needs to apply some critical faculties. It is not possible. Currently, over 20% of our electricity is being used on data centres. We are going to go to 30% and then beyond. We cannot go in that direction and meet our climate change targets. It is one or the other. That is why the Taoiseach wants to import LNG. He is also going for fossil fuels.
I thank the Deputy. I call the Taoiseach to respond.
This is the crisis facing humanity right now. We need to make the choices. The choice the Taoiseach is making is to put-----
I thank Deputy Murphy. His time is up.
-----big tech profits, the same companies that fuel hate for profit,-----
I call the Taoiseach to respond.
-----before our children's future.
This soundbite will be on X later. Watch it.
I call the Taoiseach to respond. He has half a minute.
Sorry?
The Taoiseach has half a minute. Deputy Murphy took the Taoiseach's time.
(Interruptions).
Not my half a minute.
I think we should respect the time of the House.
I care about climate just as much as Deputy Murphy does.
It does not look like it.
I also care about workers. I am not so sure Deputy Murphy does, really.
How many jobs are in data centres, Taoiseach?
The CRU has issued its paper. It bears reflection if people want to read it and tease it through. I have never believed that, when we have new technological innovations and fundamental change, you should turn your back on it, pretend it is not happening and go into some sort of cocoon where you are happy with yourself. That is not the real world. The only issue with LNG is energy security. It is not about a facility in Kerry or anywhere else. The nation has security vulnerability if anything happens to our gas pipeline. That is the bottom line that we need to address.