Vol. 1063 No. 3
72. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if he is aware of the proposed sale of Bord na Móna Recycling; if he has met with it to discuss this sale; the measures taken to ensure the protection of jobs and pensions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7042/25]
73. Deputy Ciarán Ahern asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if he intends to intervene to halt the privatisation of Bord na Móna; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7037/25]
75. Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications to clarify his plans to sell Bord na Móna Recycling; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7031/25]
Questions Nos. 72 and 73 are grouped, but I thought there used to be a protection on priority questions.
If they are grouped because we are raising the same issue, what are the timings for it? How does it-----
Outside the initial 30 seconds to ask a question, you are all given the same amount of added time. It is 18.5 minutes altogether.
My response will be six minutes for three questions. I asked about this group. It is the first time I have seen priority questions grouped. We queried that yesterday and apparently it is appropriate. We might work that out post this round of questions.
It has happened a couple of times in the past while but did not previously.
Is the Minister aware of the sale of Bord na Móna Recycling? There is a lot of concern about this. Has he met with the board to discuss the sale? What measures are being taken to ensure the protection of jobs and pensions? Will he make a statement on the matter?
I thank the Deputy for this important question. I propose to take Questions Nos. 72, 73 and 75 together.
Bord na Móna is a commercial semi-State under the aegis of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, established under the Turf Development Act 1998. Bord na Móna is a corporate body and a separate legal entity to the Department, as Members will know. The board and management of Bord na Móna are accountable for the strategic direction and management of the organisation. My Department is responsible for the corporate governance oversight of Bord na Móna, including the provision of consents relating to certain activities. I will return to that in a moment.
I intend to meet with the chair of the board in the coming weeks, I hope next week, to discuss all governance matters, including this matter. Bord na Móna's brown to green energy strategy has seen the company conclude all former peat operations and use of peat as an energy source in its operations and succeed in the delivery of renewable energy infrastructure at scale. Bord na Móna has transitioned from the largest fossil fuel provider, previously emitting 10 million tonnes of CO2 per year, to a leading renewable energy provider. Bord na Móna continues its transition into a climate solutions company, with a focus on renewable energy and peatlands restoration, committed to helping Ireland achieve its renewable target by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2050, which we all support.
Bord na Móna has commenced development of a €2.7 billion pipeline of renewable energy projects across wind, solar and hydrogen to deliver 3.5 TWh of renewable energy by 2030 and has delivered a 1 GW pipeline of renewable energy projects, generating 1.7 TWh of energy powering the equivalent of 350,000 homes. I state that to show where the company is going and its direction. I commend it on the work that is there. It has developed amenities as part of its infrastructure projects, including facilities for park runs, educational school tours and sensory gardens, and contributes €1.2 million annually to communities through community benefit funds, near neighbour schemes, scholarships and grants. The board has commenced the largest peatland rehabilitation programme in Europe, potentially securing storage of up to 100 million tonnes of carbon, which also enhances biodiversity and enables amenities. Bord na Móna has rehabilitated approximately 18,000 ha to date.
The board has transitioned employees from primarily operatives in peatland operations to a skilled workforce focusing on renewable energy, peatlands rehabilitation and biodiversity. As part of that transition, Bord na Móna has upskilled employees. For example, employees previously employed in peat operations now work as community liaison representatives on renewable energy projects. The board has significantly invested in just transition initiatives, such as the Accelerate Green programme based in the midlands, which continue to foster innovation and sustainability leadership across the Irish business community.
Companies on the programme span industries such as renewable energy, land management and biodiversity solutions. Since its inception, the programme has supported 60 companies, with many achieving substantial growth and industry recognition. To date, more than 600 jobs have been enabled through the Accelerate Green programme. Bord na Móna has provided a new beginning, a start your own business programme, for former peat operations employees, which includes business mentoring and support to develop a business plan. Twenty-three former employees completed this programme, exited the company and started their own businesses in the midlands. Collectively, those businesses are now generating more than 40 jobs.
Regarding Bord na Móna Recycling, the Department was made aware in 2024 that the company was undertaking a strategic review of this business. The board informed my Department on 7 February 2025 that after conducting the strategic review, it proposes - I want to be clear on that - to sell its shares in Bord na Móna Recycling Limited to Irish recycling provider, KWD Recycling, a waste collection, recycling and recovery operator in the south west. Bord na Móna has stated that the proposed sale aligns with its strategic focus as a renewable energy business committed to helping Ireland to achieve its green energy targets by 2030 and, as I mentioned earlier, carbon neutrality by 2050. The board has stated that, in its view, the recycling business will no longer be part of Bord na Móna group if regulatory approval is received and Bord na Móna disposes of its shares in the company. Any proposal to sell part of Bord na Móna's business is subject to regulatory approval, including ministerial consent. That will be very carefully considered on receipt, which I have not got yet, of a formal request from Bord na Móna. While a formal request has not yet been received, my Department continues to engage in dialogue with Bord na Móna on all governance-related matters, including the aforementioned. My Department understands that the company has submitted documents to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, on 7 February 2025 as part of the proposed sale process. It is my understanding that Bord na Móna is actively engaging with employees of Bord na Móna Recycling and has run a series of town hall meetings with its staff over the past week and is considering any questions raised during those meetings. It is understood that a proportion of Bord na Móna Recycling staff are in SIPTU. I have corresponded with SIPTU and I will come back on the supplementary on that, if I may. I received correspondence from SIPTU on 10 February 2025, which I reviewed and responded to.
Bord na Móna has stated that employees will continue to work for the recycling business, with no change to their contractual terms and conditions of employment.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Was there any consultation with the Minister prior to Bord na Móna taking the decision that it proposed to sell off the recycling business? The potential sale of the last public waste company flies in the face of all the latest expert opinion. I come from a place where all of the public waste collection companies were sold over the past 20 or 30 years. Can anybody say this has been a success? There have been recommendations from the Government's own Dublin task force, but rather than further entrenching a dysfunctional, privatised model, which has a history of being bad for workers, customers and the environment, as can be seen in the increase in fly-tipping over the past 20 years, we should follow international best practice and move back towards more public ownership. It is within the Minister's gift to stop the sale. We met representatives from SIPTU last week who said there were serious risks to Bord na Móna Recycling. Nothing is guaranteed for the workers, not their working conditions, pensions or even their jobs. That is their concern and I am sure the Minister is aware of that. Bord na Móna makes massive profits. Will the Minister intervene to halt this sale?
As Deputy Daly outlined, this is the last remaining domestic waste collection service in public control. We have big-picture concerns with the sale of this and what this means for the State provision of domestic waste collection services into the future. We also have very specific issues with the details of the sale. In this case, it is being sold by way of a share sale rather than an asset transfer, which avoids the application of the transfer of undertakings regulations, which would give some certainty to workers that their terms and conditions would be upheld after the sale. Far from being given any guarantee about their terms and conditions, the workers have been told they will be held as they are for the transition, but what guarantees has the Minister that the terms and conditions will not be downgraded, reduced or, in industry speak, "harmonised" following their integration into KWD Recycling?
I concur with my colleagues on this. There are concerns for the workers' futures and for the future of the industry. If this sale goes ahead, we will have a 100% privatised model of waste collection, which is not what anyone wants to see, particularly in the public arena. It also flies in the face of Government policy of a just transition. This was set up primarily to support the workers in Bord na Móna to transition from brown to green.
I have specific questions regarding the Minister's consent. He has repeatedly emphasised that it was Bord na Móna's view when he was reading out the issues. What is his view on it? What will he be taking into account when he gives his consent to this? It seems to me there is an assumption the Minister will give consent. If the CCPC was formally contacted on the same day as the Minister, it seems to me this is seen as a done deal. This undermines the Minister's position and his ability to row back on this. Perhaps the Minister could give me some information on that.
I thank my colleagues for the questions. There is a process to be followed here. The original engagement with the Department was in 2024, as I read into the record. Bord na Móna submitted papers to the CCPC on 7 February, just short of two weeks ago. I have not received any request for ministerial consent, which would be required. I read in detail the correspondence dated 10 February that I received from SIPTU's divisional organiser. I acknowledged that and responded to that letter, outlining the process. I have not met the chair of the board or the chief executive yet. I intend to do so on a number of matters, which is why I read into the record where the company has gone and the success it has had in that transition it has made, which is good and which I fully support. I would take very seriously any decision on a potential disposal of a part of a company like this. I would assess the information I have to hand. I do intend to meet the organisation. I have corresponded on this already with the unions and SIPTU specifically, and I will continue that engagement. I have yet to form a view on this because I do not have all the information. I take on board what Deputies here have said. I do not see it as a fait accompli either.
The protection of current employee terms and conditions is very important, not just in a transitional phase but potentially into the future. I am fully aware that change can be a cause of concern for people when it comes to jobs and livelihoods. I will be engaging with the company but there is a process to be followed. I cannot intervene at this stage. The strategic review was done and engagement with the staff is happening. I would encourage that to be continued and to be done in a very detailed way to take on board any concerns. I have also outlined to the House the number of new companies and new jobs that have come from the transition to green skills Bord na Móna has made, which is something we support. I will keep Deputies advised of the progress with this. I intend to meet the board in the next week or so. I am aware of the concerns of the workers that have been outlined to me in the correspondence with SIPTU, which I have responded to.
It seems to me, from a practical point of view rather than any ideological one, that the for-profit model of waste collection is not good for society.
We must also address the broader issue of rising waste costs because the side-by-side model is bad for workers, it seems to be bad for the environment with all the extra fly-tipping, and it is bad for customers because most of them must keep a certain amount of money on account and must deal with a service charge every month or every six months.
The result of the privatisation has been that 23% of households in the State do not have a waste collection. This is because many people either cannot afford to, or do not want to, pay for waste collection. Illegal dumping costs more than €100 million per year to the State. Costs continue to rise. We saw the largest provider, Panda, increase charges to more than 300,000 customers by way above the rate of inflation. The bin company is also raising its half-yearly service charge. This is the inevitable consequence of increased privatisation. It is inevitable that the State or local authorities will take over refuse collection. Again, it is only a matter of time.
I thank the Minister and it is good to hear he is meeting the board in the coming weeks and that he shares our concern regarding the continuation of the terms and conditions if the sale is to proceed. We also have to look at to whom it is proposed to sell this part of the State company. Killarney Waste Disposal is an unlimited company. There is a complete lack of transparency with regard to its group structure, its financial health and its profitability. Its accounts are not published. We do not know where the profits are going. There is a reason companies opt for unlimited structure, which is that it gives them much less transparency. We want to know whether the Minister is happy this strategic State asset is being sold to a company that has been fined in the past year for failings in the provision of its services.
I thank the Minister for his response. I am glad to hear this is not yet a done deal and the Minister still has serious consideration to give to it, including the fact he will consider the future for the workers, which is fundamentally important. We need to consider Ireland's position on our requirements to reduce waste. This country is way off and we will not meet our 2025 EU targets. We have a lot of work to do in the waste sector and this will only be done through a more public model. This has come out of the blue for many people. There were discussions last year but this was not in the programme for Government. It was not identified in any manifesto. There was no information on this prior to the election. When it becomes widely known, there will be a lot of concern.
I ask that the Minister uses the Oireachtas committee as a way to investigate and examine this issue from an Oireachtas perspective. I am not sure when the committee will be set up but this should be the first item it considers, after which it can make recommendations to the Minister for his consideration as he goes through the subsequent process and dialogue.
I thank the Deputies. I have taken on board what they have said and I have also taken on board the constructive manner in which it has been raised. To be clear, the board of management of Bord na Móna is responsible and accountable for the strategic direction and management of the organisation. It is a commercial State body and it will manage its operations. The piece with regard to consent sits in the Department. To be clear, I had no discussions late last year as it would have been my predecessor. I am not sure on what the State organisation had to advise the Department and my predecessor other than that it had gone through a strategic review.
Bord na Móna has done very well in many aspects of the transition to green energy and in transitioning the workforce. The just transition has worked well and I want to accelerate it. We have removed peat from our electricity system and this is something we welcome. It is now a big deliverer of renewable energies. Workers' rights and the terms and conditions they hold are very important and I do not take this lightly. To reiterate, I have noted very seriously the concerns raised by SIPTU. I have not yet had the opportunity to meet Bord na Móna on its strategic direction, the overall management and its plans as to how it will help the country with energy stability, energy security and green energy. This will also be on the agenda when I meet it. I will meet all of the agencies under the aegis of the Department and it will take some time to get through them.
I am aware that, right now, there is concern for the people who are working in the recycling company, but there is a process to be followed. As I have said, on 7 February, the CCPC received papers from the company. I have not been asked to give ministerial consent at this stage. I have to follow the process and I cannot intervene at this stage. This is being very honest. I am watching it very closely and carefully. With regard to how any future Oireachtas committee would deal with this, I will certainly look at it. I am not sure whether it is appropriate in this instance. It may be or it may not be. Certainty is required as soon as possible for those who work in the company. This is something I will impress upon the chair of the board and the management of Bord na Móna when I meet them. I do not want to see a process that drags out for months and months. I am sure that is not an atmosphere or environment that people would want to work in. I assure the Deputies I have taken on board their views. I also have my own views. I want to assess this in the round when I have all of the information available to me, which I do not yet at this stage.
74. Deputy Pa Daly asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications the funding model for supporting the roll-out of renewable energy and for supporting the grid; if he has plans to reform current models; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6768/25]
I want to ask the Minister about the funding model for supporting the roll-out of renewable energy, the public service obligation, PSO, levy and the carbon tax, and whether the Minister has any plan to reform current models. Will he make a statement on this? We have great renewable potential. A group of parliamentarians from Germany were here last year and all they wanted to talk about was our renewables potential. What funding models are there?
I thank Deputy Daly. Specifically with regard to the roll-out of renewable energy onto the grid, it is an absolute priority for the Government. We have very exacting targets. We also have a climate action plan. We are making progress on renewables. We have further renewable resources we can tap into. We have offshore renewables but I believe we have more capacity for onshore renewables. We have been successful, particularly with regard to onshore renewables.
The PSO levy charged to all electricity final customers in Ireland is a vital policy support for the development of the renewable energy sector in Ireland. It will help to enable us to reach our national and EU energy and climate targets. The PSO funds a number of Government schemes for renewable energy generation. Just over 4,000 MW of the approximately 7,000 MW of renewable generation in Ireland is supported by the PSO, which is significant. The annual renewable electricity support scheme, RESS, auction programme, which guarantees funding through the PSO, is a critical enabler of the investment needed to underpin the renewables-led energy system. Any consideration of future funding models will need to deliver reductions in electricity bills for households and businesses and ensure there continues to be a stable and sustainable investment framework so Ireland reaps the long-term benefits of its indigenous renewable resources.
Regarding the funding of the electricity grid, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, is responsible for the regulation of ESB Networks and EirGrid, the electricity system operators. Expenditure by EirGrid and ESB Networks is agreed with CRU in five-year cycles. As Deputy Daly knows, these are referred to as the price reviews. Work has commenced on the latest price review 6, which will see CRU sanction investment in the grid between 2026 and 2030. It has seen ESB Networks request a baseline investment of €10.1 billion, with the potential to grow to €13.4 billion.
I appreciate what the Minister has said. It is obvious that the PSO is a vital policy support, as the Minister has said. We have great potential to transform our energy system from import dependence to becoming a global leader in renewables. Significant investment will be required. At present, there is an inequity at the heart of climate change where the causes and effects are not equally shared. Recent Governments have preferred an inequitable model, where there is a disproportionate burden on ordinary households and the wealthiest get off practically scot-free.
The indiscriminate carbon taxes place a disproportionate burden on those for whom alternatives are unaffordable or unattainable and they fail to deter the greatest emissions. However, the current Government, including the junior Minister, Deputy Michael Healy-Rae, and Government-supporting Deputy Danny Healy-Rae, have agreed to continue to support these increases over the next five years.
The public service obligation, PSO, is another regressive financing lever which hits the lowest income hardest. According to the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, the cost of this levy is 12 times larger. In the programme for Government, the Government said it will explore other funding models that will reduce electricity bills for households and businesses. Will the Minister commit to some other funding models that will do that?
All of us understand and accept that we have vast future potential to harness additional renewables that will deliver price savings and stability in our energy market, which we need unquestionably, and help us to reach the exacting targets we have set with regard to climate. We saw very recently in some areas of the country how fragile our grid is to withstand very severe weather events. That is something we take very seriously as well. As the Deputy rightly said, we have committed in the programme for Government to intensify the transition to lower-cost renewables and electricity generation and continue the transition away from expensive and volatile imported fossil fuels. We will look at other potential funding models as well. We committed to doing that too. However, I have stated how central the PSO levy is to energy generation, particularly around investment in renewables. It is critically important and I would see that remaining a very critical part into the future.
The question is about what other funding models the Minister has in mind. There is a broader issue of the increased investment in public ownership as a means of funding and accelerating the transition. Recent governments have created an energy system where profit maximisation seems to be the most important part of it. With the privatisation of our energy generation, the market share transfer from public to private sector means that profits have flown into corporate dividends. Is the Minister happy with that model, which has resulted in increased bills for ordinary people? The transition presents an opportunity now for us to reform our energy system for the betterment of all, but it seems that opportunity is being squandered. As the Minister mentioned, the vast majority of renewable energy under the renewable energy support scheme, RESS, is privately owned or publicly owned by other states. It is crazy to think that Norway's state-owned Statkraft and EDF France own more of our offshore resources than we do. Even more of our renewable resources are owned by private corporations. We feel that there should be increased public ownership. What measures is the Government taking to increase public ownership, if any? Furthermore, what will it do to reduce our energy prices, which are some of the highest in Europe?
Fundamentally, as the Deputy will know, the grid itself is owned by the State. We operate an all-island electricity market. The State owns the grid itself both North and South. The further expansion of that to harness offshore renewables in particular, as the Deputy knows, are the RESS auctions. We have five applications in planning right now. They are a very important part of actually expanding our renewables. There are other funding methods available. The Deputy will be aware of the corporate power purchasing agreements, CPPAs. They are critical enablers of the investment needed to underpin the renewables. The big focus over the coming years, now and this year and beyond, is actually strengthening the grid onshore and expanding it offshore. That has to be done. EirGrid will have a very significant plan for future investment and has been undertaking that. However, price review, PR, 6 is going to be critically important with between €10 billion and €13 billion of investment between 2026 and 2030. That is up from approximately €5 billion in the previous five years. That is critical to ensuring that we move towards a stable energy environment and can actually expand our electricity output to allow us to grow further.
76. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications if he is aware that the emissions impact of imported liquefied natural gas, LNG, is worse than that of coal; and if he envisages the building of either a State-led or commercial LNG terminal in that context. [7030/25]
Is the Minister aware that the emissions impact of imported LNG is worse than even coal? It is the dirtiest fossil fuel. Despite that, the Taoiseach has said that we will "have to have an LNG facility of some kind." Will the Minister be going along with the Taoiseach? Will that be a so-called State-led project, as the previous Government was in favour of, or a commercial LNG? Can the Minister update us on the progress of the memo his Department is meant to be bringing forward?
As outlined in the programme for Government, the Government is committed to taking decisive action to radically reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and achieve a 51% reduction in emissions from 2018 to 2030, and to achieving net-zero emissions no later than 2050. In the programme for Government, we also set out commitments to achieving 80% of Ireland’s electricity generation from renewable sources by 2030 and to take all necessary action to ensure and protect Ireland’s energy security. It is through delivering on this commitment that we will deliver a secure and sustainable energy future. The commitment to a secure an energy future builds upon the Energy Security in Ireland to 2030 report that was approved by the previous Government and published in November 2023. Specifically with regard to natural gas, this report concluded that Ireland does not have adequate resilience in case of a major disruption to our subsea gas imports pipelines and does not currently meet minimum EU standards in this area. I agree with its analysis on that. We are in quite a precarious situation in that regard.
It is in this context only that a State-led strategic gas emergency reserve in the form of a floating storage and regasification unit was recommended in the report in the context of ensuring energy stability and security. A State-led strategic gas emergency reserve, operating on a non-commercial basis for use only in the event of an emergency, would provide resilience to the gas system and mitigate the major consequences for our society and our economy that would arise from significant gas disruption in Ireland. In parallel my Department is developing the appropriate policy and legislative measures to ensure that a strategic reserve provides the resilience to our system that we need.
I note the Minister simply ignored the actual question. That is obviously a prepared answer; he has a prepared question. I could go again. Is the Minister aware that the emissions impact of imported LNG is worse than that of coal? This is research from last October by an environmental scientist called Robert Howarth. I will give the Minister some of the lowlights. The paper states that "LNG is 33% worse in terms of planet-heating emissions over a 20-year period compared with coal." It goes on to state that "Drilling, moving, cooling and shipping gas from one country to another uses so much energy that the actual final burning of gas in people’s homes and businesses only accounts for about a third of the total emissions from this process." The large resulting emissions mean there is "no need for LNG as an interim energy source". The paper adds that “ending the use of LNG should be a global priority” and yet the Government is going in the opposite direction. The Government is paying lip service to targets that the previous Government was not going to meet, and that this Government is going to miss by an even greater margin, unfortunately, than it was on track to miss them by. It seems that this is driven by the Healy-Raes on one hand and Donald Trump on the other.
Right, I do not know where to start with that. There is a reality. The Deputy has dismissed the report that was done and the research that was carried out with regard to energy security full stop. What would this country do if there was an unforeseen event that disrupted our gas supplies while we are transitioning away from fossil fuels? We have done that very successfully. I commend the previous Minister on the work he did in that area. I know the Deputy was consistently critical of the work he and his Department carried out. However, the reality is that if there is a disruption to our gas supply, Ireland does not have a strategic reserve. What would that mean for society? What would that mean for our hospitals, businesses and homes? It is in that instance, looking at the risks that are there, that we absolutely unquestionably need to move towards a strategic gas reserve.
With regard specifically to the Deputy's contention that emissions of imported LNG are worse relative to that of coal, that depends on a number of factors, such as the timeframe in question, the supply chains associated with both coal and LNG and the methods of transporting both fossil fuels.
It is not my contention, Minister.
I do not claim to be a climate scientist. It is the contention of those who have researched the matter. Perhaps the Minister is going to ignore the science on it. The answer in terms of energy security and resilience is, first, to stop expanding data centres. They are putting our energy usage on an accelerating upward track - they are going to be at 30% by 2030 - and the Minister is basically telling them to "burn, baby, burn", let it rip and go up even higher. First, we need to reduce energy usage where necessary rather than expanding it. Second are batteries and third is interconnection.
I will ask the question explicitly. Was there a secret deal with the Healy-Raes to give a wink and a nod to the Fortress Energy commercial LNG terminal in Tarbert, County Kerry? That is what the Business Post is reporting, saying that the line the Minister cited in the programme for Government was included, in reality, to get Healy-Rae support. Is it about appeasing Donald Trump? The Taoiseach said that Europe will have to buy more liquified natural gas from the US to appease tariff threats from Trump. Those are his words, not mine. Are we going to trade away our climate, our children's future and our energy prices to placate Trump's bully-boy tactics in order that the US fossil fuel giants can drill, baby, drill?
There is no secret deal done at all. I have mentioned and the Deputy has ignored completely the issue of what Ireland would do right now, next week, the week after or next year if there was a disruption to our gas supply. Gas is in our system right now and we are reducing our reliance on it. What would we do? Would we just have no strategic reserve of gas? Would we not run our hospitals for a period of time?
Hospitals, Minister?
It is a very serious proposition. If we have no energy and a major disruption to our gas supply, we need to have a reserve in place. This did not come about by any kind of deal that the Deputy suggests. It is about ensuring we have the adequate supports in place should there be a disruption to our gas supply while we are expanding renewables and increasing our interconnection, as the Deputy knows we are doing also. It is about the security and stability of our energy system for our people - nothing more, nothing less.
