Sustainable Energy Bill, 2001: Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister of State at the Department of Public Enterprise (Mr. Jacob)

It is my great pleasure to open the Second Stage on this important Bill in the Seanad. I am looking forward to a lively and informed debate. The Bill's enactment will impact on the vital issue of sustainable use of energy. It will also impact on the need to supply energy to a rapidly growing economy without continuing adverse effects on the environment.

The principal objective of the proposed Sustainable Energy Ireland Bill, 2001, is to establish the necessary legislative framework to allow the Irish Energy Centre to operate independently of Enterprise Ireland as a statutory body and to effect a change of title for the centre to the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, which will be commonly known as Sustainable Energy Ireland.

The Irish Energy Centre was established in 1995 as a joint initiative of the Department of Public Enterprise and the agency formerly known as Forbairt, now Enterprise Ireland. The centre was established as a unit within Enterprise Ireland and underpinned by a memorandum of understanding between the Department of Public Enterprise and Forbairt. The original memorandum of understanding was intended to be an interim measure only. Establishing the centre under statute is an important element in its evolution into an independent operationally autonomous agency. This legislation will serve to clarify and improve the strategic direction of the centre and allow it the flexibility to develop its full potential as the significant implementing agency in the Government's strategy on climate change and promotion of energy efficiency measures and renewables. The enactment of this legislation will be an important step in the context of giving real intent to the Government's energy efficiency policies in a liberalised energy market.

There are other factors in the Government's desire to establish the centre as a separate entity. Following the amalgamation of a range of different agencies under its umbrella in 1998, emphasis is now being placed by Enterprise Ireland on its core industrial development functions. While technically a joint venture between Enterprise Ireland and my Department, the Irish Energy Centre is independent in the exercise of its functions. Neither Enterprise Ireland nor its parent Department, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, has any substantive input into its operations. Enterprise Ireland provides some support functions, such as human resource management.

Another factor is that we are learning from experience abroad. The practice across the EU has been to establish similar agencies on a stand-alone basis with a clear identity and mandate, with their policy direction coming from energy ministers. Such agencies have operated successfully and I am confident that the new Energy Authority will also be a success.

The publication of the Green Paper on Sustainable Energy by the Department of Public Enterprise in September 1999 proposes a framework for energy efficiency in Ireland. The Green Paper sets out policy for both limiting energy related COf8>2 emissions and promoting the use of renewable energy sources to help ensure Ireland's compliance with the UN Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Many will be aware of recent developments in the negotiations on the Kyoto Protocol. Difficulties with ratification of the protocol have been widely reported in the news this year, principally because of the opposition of President Bush. The new US administration considers the protocol an unfair and ineffective means of tackling climate change, potentially damaging to the US and global economies.

The Government here, through the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, has expressed its deep regret at this US stance and has reaffirmed Ireland's and the EU's commitment to making sure Kyoto remains the firm basis for future negotiations and actions to reduce emissions. The EU member states are committed to maintaining a firm common position on the protocol and are looking forward to engaging in meaningful dialogue at the resumed conference of the parties in Bonn in July.

Under the terms of the Kyoto Protocol, Ireland has agreed to limit greenhouse gas emissions to 13% above 1990 levels. Ireland's greenhouse gas emissions are currently over 20% above 1990 levels. The latest ESRI forecast suggests a rise of 27% above 1990 by 2010 if we continue on a business as usual basis. Energy related C0f8>2 emissions accounted for 55% of greenhouse gas emissions and are forecast to increase to 63% in 2010 if we do not devise policies and measures to abate such emissions. These are stark statistics, which we cannot ignore. There is too much at stake for us and for future generations. The Government's recently published national climate change strategy establishes the framework within which we will seek to achieve the necessary cuts in emissions. The strategy foresees, as does the Green Paper on Sustainable Energy, a major implementing role for the centre.

The centre is currently a unit within the Forfás-Enterprise Ireland family of agencies. Conscious of the need to have the necessary institutional arrangements in place immediately on enactment of this legislation I appointed an interim board for the centre last December. Professor Frank Convery of the environmental research unit in University College Dublin is chairman of the interim board. I am delighted at the progress made by this board in carrying out its mandate to oversee the transition of the centre from Enterprise Ireland and examining institutional issues such as structure and staffing arrangements. The interim board has had a number of meetings and is currently meeting on a monthly basis to progress the many issues that arise. Considerable work has been done in developing the work programme for the next three years. The bulk of that programme is based on the funding provisions of the economic and social infrastructure operational programme within the framework of the national development plan.

The interim board was instrumental in ensuring that a professional study was carried out to ensure a structure and staffing level appropriate to the proposed mandate for the new authority. As a result the centre has sanction for a new structure and 30 additional posts which will bring the staff complement to 50. The first phase of the process aimed at recruiting ten of those much needed extra staff is currently in progress.

I want to mention the position of the existing staff of the centre. The legislation provides that all the staff currently working in the Irish Energy Centre will become members of the staff of the new authority. The current staff of the centre are either permanent or contract staff of Forfás. I am satisfied that the provisions of the legislation in relation to tenure of office, terms and conditions, salaries and superannuation ensure that all current staff of the centre transfer to the new authority with conditions no less favourable than those which they enjoyed as members of the staff of Forfás. It is only to be expected that some staff might have concerns regarding these issues and others such as career paths, promotional outlets and opportunities for training and development. These questions must be addressed quickly and with openness and frankness as to the opportunities that transfer to the new authority will present.

In recognition of that need my Department has set up a consultative forum to address these issues. The forum which meets once a week consists of senior officials from my Department, the relevant trade union representatives of the staff and Enterprise Ireland. I believe that with the necessary dialogue and goodwill on all sides, these matters can be resolved to the satisfaction of the existing staff. What we are endeavouring to achieve is to provide the utmost clarity for existing staff of the centre. I assure this House and the staff in question that as an independent body under the aegis of my Department the ethos of the new authority will be one with a strong human resource focus and a commitment to the proper training and development of all the staff. This is a situation where we can truly say that the experience and expertise of the staff is the most valuable resource of the centre. We will ensure that the new authority will manage and develop that resource accordingly.

I wish to state my personal appreciation of the staff of the Irish Energy Centre. Most of us are fully aware of the excellent work they do in the area of energy awareness, through energy awareness week, car free day and their excellent schools programme. Their work over the period of the economic infrastructure operational programme has been very worthwhile. The energy efficiency investment support scheme which the centre designed and implemented disbursed grants of over £7 million to support 217 projects. These grants leveraged £31 million in private sector investment. Indicative energy savings on these projects amounts to £8.5 million per annum with an average payback on the investment of four and a half years.

The centre's self-audit scheme is also an indicator of significant achievement by the staff. Senators will be aware that part of the centre's current mandate is to promote the development of an energy efficient economy with particular regard to improving competitiveness and contributing to the wider awareness of energy efficiency opportunities. The annual self-audit of energy accounts scheme has broken new ground in the Irish industrial sector. A network of high energy consuming companies with individual energy bills of not less than £500,000, or 635,000, per year has been established under the direction of the centre and the scheme is in its third year of reporting the members' management programmes for energy reduction. The total energy usage of the member companies accounts for 33% of total Irish industry energy consumption. Membership in 1999 increased from 65 to 72 companies and members have shown a commitment to active energy management and public reporting of their results.

The overall results for 1998-99 show an energy decrease of 296 gigawatt hours, which resulted in a decrease of 124,341 tonnes in C0f8>2 emissions. I am satisfied that this scheme will continue to develop alongside other programmes that will be designed to reduce energy usage over the period of the current operational programme up to 2006.

I look forward to the new work programmes of the centre getting under way. I have already mentioned the important work being carried out in the area of energy awareness. I believe that many Senators agree that much can be achieved in this area. There is no cheaper solution to the energy emission problem than the conservation of energy and the careful use of energy by us all. I firmly believe that it is possible to change the lifetime habits of a society. I am satisfied that with effective awareness campaigns and proper education the harmful effects of wasteful use of energy can be reduced.

Speaking of education, this is where I believe that real progress can be achieved. I would like to see a comprehensive campaign for schools developed for teachers and students starting with the junior schools and working up to secondary and beyond. I know and am pleased that the centre is working hard on developing its website and making effective use of the Internet to promulgate the message. We are all aware of how adept present day children are in the use of modern technology so I applaud the efforts of the centre in this regard. I look forward with great anticipation to future developments in the centre's schools programme.

I want to address some aspects of the Bill, other than those relating to staffing and terms and conditions of employment. The functions of the new authority are set out in a comprehensive way in section 6 of the Bill. The functions of the authority are essentially to promote and assist energy efficiency measures in the supply, demand and use of energy across the whole economy, to assist and promote the development of electricity generation from renewable sources and, importantly, to advise Ministers in all matters relating to its functions. In this respect I would foresee that the authority would provide crucial input to future policy development in the area of sustainable energy.

In furtherance of its remit, the new authority is being given a range of powers. These are set out in subsection (2) of section 6. I am confident that the powers proposed under this section are comprehensive. However, I am proposing in section 7 of the Bill that the Minister of the day may, by order, assign to the authority new functions within the energy family. I am making it a requirement, however, that the relevant Minister bring a motion before both Houses of the Oireachtas and that the order devolving new functions will not be made until passed by both Houses.

The accommodation needs of the new authority are dealt with in section 20. For clarity, I propose to set out the background to its current accommodation. The centre is located in a purpose-built energy efficient building in the Enterprise Ireland complex in Glasnevin. The site is wholly owned by Enterprise Ireland. Under the original memorandum of understanding, which established the centre, Enterprise Ireland under took to provide the necessary accommodation. A site was provided and a specially designed building was constructed on the site with European Union funding.

A number of issues now arise in relation to the Glasnevin site. First, Enterprise Ireland intends to relocate its own entire staff currently located in a number of offices throughout the city to the Glasnevin site. As one would expect, this will result in an evaluation of the buildings, structures and accommodation already on the site. Second, the current Irish Energy Centre building will need to be extended to house the proposed increase in staff. Third, there is the consideration that the new board may wish to ensure its independence from Enterprise Ireland physically as well as statutorily.

In response to the many considerations affecting the Glasnevin site, it was necessary to find a solution which, on the one hand, would ensure that the authority would have accommodation for its staff on vesting day and, on the other hand, would enable Enterprise Ireland to retain ownership of the entire site. I decided, with the approval of the Government, that the new authority should be given a licence to remain in its existing building, at least until there is greater clarity in relation to the intentions of all the main parties towards development of the site.

Needless to say, the accommodation issue is exercising the minds of Professor Convery and the other members of the interim board and I understand from the chairman that the issue is high on the interim board's agenda. It is more likely, however, that the new authority will move quickly to find suitable accommodation outside the Glasnevin site. Section 20 provides that the authority is to be given a licence to remain as tenant with effect from vesting day.

I now turn to the financing of the new authority. The Bill, in section 21, provides that the Minister shall from time to time, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, advance to the centre out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas such sums as the Minister may determine for the purposes of expenditure by the centre in the performance of its functions. Provision is made in the National Development Plan 2000-06 for an allocation of £146 million over the duration of the plan for the purpose of increasing energy efficiency and promoting renewable energy related initiatives. This funding is intended to support the measures outlined in the Green Paper on sustainable energy. Particular emphasis is placed on the promotion of energy efficiency measures, research and development, renewable energy and combined heat and power as well as energy efficient houses and public sector buildings. An element of that funding relates to the day-to-day activities of the new enlarged centre. Funding arrangements for the new authority are, therefore, largely in place.

I look forward with enthusiasm to the establishment of the new authority. The interim board has already given us a feeling for how energetic the new agency will be. I am encouraged by the enthusiasm being shown by existing staff and the boost that will be given by the infusion of new staff over the coming months. I am more satisfied than ever that we are going in the right direction. I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Caffrey

I welcome to the House the Minister and this very important Bill. Future generations will either thank us or chide us for our efforts in securing a reduction in greenhouse gases while, at the same time, promoting a sustainable level of economic growth and development. Achieving those twin aims will constitute a major task for the new authority.

Discussion of greenhouse gases and emissions requires us to look at the present position of the Kyoto Protocol. It is disheartening to see the President of the United States showing such disregard for the protocol and ironic when one considers that the total emissions from Ireland pale into insignificance when juxtaposed with those of one of the smaller US states. California, for instance, is running out of power and has already experienced a number of blackouts. Only last night, I learned that in a bid to circumvent the rigorous controls of the California state legislature, two gas powered generating stations are being built just across the Californian border in Mexico. The pollution from these will possibly affect the entire global system.

We face a major task and the new sustainable energy authority will have an important function in dealing with it. I know from the work of the centre to date that it is well up to meeting that challenge. Much remains to be done to promote an energy saving culture. We need only consider how we devise ways to reduce energy consumption in our own households and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

I compliment the Minister and his Department on taking a first step. On receiving the Minister's speech, I remarked on how short it was, before discovering that it was printed on both sides of the paper. That might be a small gesture but by having less work for the photocopier and typist, it results in energy being saved somewhere along the line. We could replicate that small gesture in many areas of our lives.

Developing a culture of carefulness must be the foremost consideration. We can only achieve that through small steps which create public understanding of where we are coming from in terms of conserving energy. Curbing energy consumption requires correcting the non-pricing of environmental damage associated with it. This is a major objective for Irish energy policy in taking sufficient cost-effective action to meet Ireland's obligations on COf8>2 abatement.

It is disconcerting that we have already exceeded the EU limit on emissions of 13% between 1990 and 2010. Deciding how we will get back to the levels demanded by the EU will be a major task for this new body. The level of economic growth we are experiencing will ensure that if we do not do something to conserve energy, we will increase rather than decrease the level of greenhouse gas emissions. The task confronting this new agency is to curb this massive threat to the global eco-system while maintaining economic growth.

When I looked at the Bill initially, I thought it did not contain enough measures but, having read it, the real meat is in section 6, which states that one of the functions of the authority shall be to promote and assist environmentally and economically sustainable production, supply and use of energy. There are only nine or ten words in that sentence but therein lie some of the real challenges facing this new body. With the Corrib gas find off the west coast and all the possibilities for generating power from natural gas, this debate may gain a new momentum. While I know that the on-going debate on the Corrib gas field is reaching the stage where we could become too reactive and sensitive in our approach and while the environmental impact study on the Corrib gas field has been widely studied, and disagreed with in many instances, nevertheless the planning process cannot be delayed indefinitely in the case of a major find like this because gas-fired generating stations are possibly the least damaging to the environment. Since this falls within the remit of the new agency, it adds a new dimension to the debate on the Corrib gas field. I hope all the relevant considerations are dealt with. The planning process, which is comprehensive and elaborate, is being conducted by Mayo County Council at present and therefore we should not become unduly conscious of the negative side of this development in the debate on this Bill.

There is an idea abroad that pollution is the price of progress but that is not necessarily so. This agency, through the efforts it is making and has already made, illustrates that we can reach sustainable levels of economic growth and at the same time curb those dangerous and noxious emissions which are destroying the upper layers of the atmosphere. Only the other day somebody remarked to me that if the current good weather is the result of climate change, then let us have more of it. However, in view of the long-term ill effects which greenhouse gas emissions are having on our climate and the predictions of the experts as to what will happen if we keep going down this road, it behoves us all to develop a sense of urgency regarding this problem.

Ireland's manufacturing base is becoming ever more conscious of the need to conserve energy. The fact that combined heat and power units are being examined by many firms illustrates that there is a growing awareness of what can be done. Combined heat and power projects are the way forward for major industry in Ireland. While these imaginative projects are only in their infancy, they have great potential and they must be encouraged.

It is not widely known that consumers who reach a certain level of demand can purchase power from any producer of electricity. This frees up the market and moves us towards liberalisation. As more companies become conscious of this facility, that will be the way to proceed in the future.

I acknowledge the work of the centre since its inception. The Bill will give it a new impetus and focus and will put it on a statutory basis. It places the agency in a position to meet the challenges thrown out by the current systems and levels of activity within the State.

Another function of the new agency shall be to promote and assist energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy. Renewable sources of energy form the most exciting area of development in this debate. Bord na Móna has conducted pilot programmes on bio-mass energy and all forms of renewable energy, some of which have been successful. Where energy may be produced from land set aside on which one is not allowed to grow anything except weeds, this sustainable energy body should look at areas where it might facilitate farmers to grow a new cash crop and at the same time contribute to the energy requirements of the State.

In some South American countries renewable energy crops are very popular, and that popularity is growing. That is something to examine as mainstream farming is going through a difficult period and things are likely to become even worse. Anything providing a cash crop to the farming community and a source of renewable energy is valuable. Considerable work has been done in this area by Bord na Móna, and others, which could be revisited. Though some of the crops they grew were not viable, others held out considerable possibility and opportunity. We need to look at all of that.

To promote and assist the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and transboundary air pollutants associated with the production, supply and use of energy entails many challenges, as in the case I outlined of Mexico and California, where pollutants come from an area over which one has no control. We have the classic example here with the nuclear power station at Sellafield right on our doorstep, yet we seem virtually incapable of controlling the level of pollution that may or may not be emanating from that facility. When we look at the negative effects of nuclear power, especially the Chernobyl incident and the ongoing radiation effects from that catastrophe, we must put pressure on the British Government to ensure that we are not subject to pollution from Sellafield. This agency will have a function there, in that we cannot allow other countries to pollute our atmosphere or our waters. That may well be happening currently since no one knows the implications of the Sellafield operation. Scientists make educated guesses but no one has definitive knowledge of the effects on our marine life, our atmosphere and of the possibility of an accident like the one which occurred at Chernobyl. We cannot rule out any possibility when it comes to nuclear power.

Section 6(c) of the Bill describes the function of the authority as being to promote and assist the minimising of the impact on the environment of the production, supply and use of energy. There are areas to be looked at such as pollution from other states and it is certainly very challenging. The Minister is determined that this body will be at the cutting edge, working at the coal face as it were, of energy conservation and the control of emissions from all sources. There is a strong international consensus that if we do not curb greenhouse gas emissions we will seriously exceed the limits laid down by the EU – the 13% limit which it imposed seems already to have been breached. One despairs of returning to a balance but I sincerely hope that with this Bill, which gives new focus and impetus to this sustainable energy authority, may go part of the way.

There is possibly no disagreement among all shades of opinion in relation to what this legislation is trying to achieve and I will be supporting the Bill on all Stages. Whether or not there are amendments we would like to see, at this juncture we have not decided. By and large this legislation is to be welcomed. It contains many provisions that are necessary in a modern economy.

It is regrettable that other countries do not have the same sense of commitment to the targets set out in the Kyoto Protocol. As in all cases regarding our membership of the EU, we have been very good pupils and have tried to obey the laws laid down by the Union in all areas. The only violation I have heard of was that of the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, when he got into trouble with the budget and was rapped on the knuckles. Prior to that we had been great EU pupils, having done nothing wrong, and we will quite possibly reach the targets set out pertaining to greenhouse gas emissions. However, we will not do it without a comprehensive educational programme and an awareness by the public as to how it can contribute to the reduction of these gases and the conservation of energy.

Like everything, it starts in the home with the conscious decision to reduce energy consumption by switching off lights when we do not need them and by lagging hot water cylinders. Simple things like that create a culture of awareness and conservation and that is what has to be promoted. We start with the small things and we develop along the same lines while, simultaneously, some of our major companies are involved in the very useful self-audit programmes, the implications and results of which will become obvious in the next year or two. An emphasis on combined heat and power plants with all contributing, in great and small ways, adds to our overall sense of awareness of the problems.

I do not intend to deal with the other provisions in the Bill, many of which are standard techical provisions dealing with the establishment of the authority. The real meat of the legislation is in section 6 and that is where I wish to put the emphasis. I know that the results will come from this particular section if they are all implemented. I certainly wish the new authority every success in the extremely difficult task which it faces in the years ahead.

Mr. Chambers

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, who has presented the Second Stage of the Bill to the House. I welcome my colleague, Senator Caffrey—

Mr. Norris

What about me?

Mr. Chambers

My apologies to the Senator, I did not see him.

Mr. Jacob

There is no exclusion.

Mr. Chambers

This Bill provides for the establishment of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland on a statutory basis. The Bill is to be welcomed because it gives recognition to a new focus and the importance of energy for the future of the country and our responsibilities therein. The legislation will serve to clarify and improve the strategic direction of the Irish Energy Centre and allow it the flexibility to develop its full potential as the significant implementing agency in the Government's strategy on climate change and promotion of energy efficiency measures and renewables. We can see changes in our national energy structure over the past 20 or 30 years, since the building of power stations and the utilisation of the bogs and natural resources. In the past most of our power generating stations were powered by peat or coal and we were very dependent on those systems for the provision of power for the development of industry and for our energy needs.

A very strong campaign begun by the Green Party has now become the responsibility of all of us. This Minister and this Government have taken on the responsibility within the context of the national development plan to look at the whole concept of energy, sustainability for the future and long-term planning and needs. It is recognised that besides the generation and use of energy, we have a responsibility towards our own long-term sustainability. We have a responsibility to the whole planet.

This Bill sets about the establishment of this agency as the prime authority with responsibility for our future energy use and production. Section 6 sets out the functions of the authority. This statutory body will be responsible for co-ordinating the roles of the different Departments, the regional authorities and local government agencies. The authority will play a part in assisting Ireland in its compliance with the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse emissions. We have not achieved those responsibilities to date. Because of the growth of our economy, we are currently over 20% above the 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions. We have a challenge to meet and this authority will meet that challenge head on.

I concur with Senator Caffrey's disappointment at the attitude of the United States in relation to the Kyoto Protocol. People living below the Equator see how the developed world burns oil and other world resources. This has created global imbalance as well as climatic changes which are very apparent. There have been changes in sea levels and coastal erosion with substantial damage to coastlines. I hope that the United States and its new President will be willing to shoulder their responsibilities and make the necessary changes.

The reduction of COf8>2 emissions is very important. We have a responsibility in this regard because we are signatories to the Kyoto Protocol. It is in our own interest to abide by that agreement and we should make the necessary changes within our own economy to do that. This Bill will promote the use of renewable energy sources. We in Ireland have an advantage because of our long coastline and maritime area. The recent development of a natural gas field off the north-west coast provides a great national resource and an opportunity to help fulfil our energy needs.

I ask the Minister if there will be co-operation between this new agency and its counterparts in Northern Ireland in relation to the use of our natural resources and whether there will be co-ordination of responsibilities for all our energy needs with our friends in Northern Ireland.

Under section 7 this agency will have responsibility for research and development. New technologies will present great opportunities. There is a great national awareness in relation to alternative energy sources, such as wind energy development. I have said to the Minister on several occasions that there is a need for local authorities to play an important part. Provisions could be made in county development plans for the use of alternative energy sources. There are young entrepreneurs within the wind energy sector who are anxious to develop alternative systems in the national grid.

We should encourage more local involvement. There is a need to provide for shareholding, capital tax write-offs or some other encouragement to get people involved at local level. This would enable us to deal with some of the objectors who are holding up developments in some counties. It has to be led by the national agency through the local authorities. This would enable greater progress to be made in regard to new developments.

The agency will assist the minimising of the impact on the environment of the production of energy. The advice which the agency will have to give to those involved in energy production will be important for the advancement of the system and its impact on the environment. It will provide information and advice to the Minister, energy suppliers and users. It is important for the Minister to listen to and be advised by the agency, which has experience in dealing with the developments and which will have ideas from its own research work. Users will have much to learn from the agency. The agency will be the licensing regulatory authority and will have control of energy activities. This is welcome. There is need for a licence. There is also need for management and for somebody to have overall responsibility for the development of this important sector.

Sections 9 to 12, inclusive, deal with the terms of office. The duration of appointments for the first term is three years. This is for the purpose of continuity and to give the board an opportunity to develop. I compliment the Irish Energy Centre on the manner in which it has conducted its business since its establishment by the Minister in 1998. Its consultative work has helped the transformation of the agency and the incorporation of the staff and their rights within the public service. Its approach is open and fair and it recognises the needs of the staff and the transfer of responsibilities. It deals with appointments, terms of office, duration for three years and the retirement of three members on an annual basis, which is generally the acceptable level. It allows the authority to set up sub-committees to deal with aspects that need a certain focus and concentration. This gives the board flexibility.

As a politician who has come through the ranks with my colleagues here, the only people who seem to be debarred from anything are politicians. I am surprised local authority members have no right to be on the board. They give a good service which has been unrewarded down through the years. Given that they are elected at local level—

Mr. Norris

It is the same for Members of the Oireachtas.

Mr. Chambers

I will not say that because I am one of them. We accept its terms.

Mr. Norris

No, we do not.

Mr. Chambers

I welcome the Government's commitment to the provision of £146 million under the national development plan. It is genuine recognition of the Government's commitment to the renewable energies. It gives the agency the wherewithal to have a meaningful input into the development of the State's energy needs and to plan the energy industry into the future. It gives for the built environment £23 million for changing conservation in the area of house structures and recommendations for economies in the use of energy. It provides substantial investment for the development of new ideas in energy production and for the administration and development of the service.

Section 21 deals also with the local authorities in the working of the system. There is a great opportunity for the development of natural gas in the western region and we would like to see the maximum input. I am sure the new agency, in conjunction with the Government, will have a strong input into this development. It will play an important part in sustaining economic growth and supplying the energy needs of a clean natural facility which will be established in the next few years.

The hold-up in some of the developments for alternative systems will have to be considered. A substantial number of planning applications have been refused. People have had major difficulties in getting their projects off the ground due to planning problems. There is a need for a focused opinion to be delivered by the new agency. There are also issues of public awareness and education. I welcome the reference in the Minister's speech to the need for education of students in this area within the education system. As a parent I am aware of this and perhaps when I was a young fellow I was careless about these matters. When I go into the house five lights may be on and nobody bothers to switch them off. Young people are genuinely conscious of the environment and how the workings of our daily lives affect general things around them. There should be a greater focus on that and we can get a better return.

The centre has made tremendous improvements within the industrial sector through self-audit. That has been welcomed by the Industrial Development Authority. Most good industries are conscious of the energy burned and its cost in terms of production. They are also conscious of waste. They are playing an important part and that must be encouraged. The work which has taken place to date and its results are welcome. However, more emphasis needs to be put on the educational aspect. I welcome the Minister's commitment to the provision of financing for the new authority. The new agency will have an opportunity to play a strong role in a planned economy which, to a great extent, can be sustained in terms of energy in a well managed and usable way. That can only be for the betterment of the country, the people as a whole, the climate and the environment.

I welcome the Bill and I thank the Minister of State for its presentation here.

Mr. Norris

I wish to share my time with Senator O'Toole.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed?

Mr. Norris

I welcome the Minister and the Bill. It has had a soft landing in this House so far. I intend to be a little critical because it seems to be merely a framework and there is not quite suf ficient substance. There is much pious aspiration and I am not sure that the targets will be reached.

The Minister's speech is printed on green paper, which I suppose is a symbolic acknowledgment of green issues. Of the 22 paragraphs, only six deal with the core issues. The rest involve a recital of how the Irish Energy Centre was established, staff requirements, etc. In a spirit of generosity, I am glad the Government is taking on board these issues and that there is a response. However, there is not the sense of urgency in Government that many people feel. Thank God we are doing something.

I am reminded of the contrast between the response of the British Government over the foot and mouth crisis and our own very practical and energetic response. I hope we will have a parallel energetic and practical response to these substantial issues.

This is a matter that concerns people and this is a relatively new phenomenon. There are immediately discernible effects from the overuse or misuse of energy. I have recently come back from America and, while there, I flew across the United States. I have been there many times and I see an astonishing increase in atmospheric pollution over every major city and industrial centre. On the ground it is hardly noticeable but from an aeroplane, it is possible to get an indication of it.

To come from the continental to the parochial, there is the consumption of energy through automobiles. In the city of Dublin there was a remarkable transformation when the current Tánaiste, Deputy Harney, introduced a clean air policy and removed coal from the equation. However, yesterday, I was behind the so-called air coach. I have never seen such concentrated black filth being emitted from a bus before. Are public transport vehicles subject to the same requirements in terms of the waste produced by their energy consumption as private motor cars? I do not understand how half the bus fleet, both private and State run, is allowed on the road. That is really just an aside.

Sustainability is now a buzz word. How sustainable is sustainable and what precisely do we mean by sustainable? People on all sides of the House have given a great welcome to the proposed policy shift from peat and coal burning to gas burning. We appear to have gas resources and these may increase, but I add a note of warning. That is not as efficient or anything like as sustainable as one might imagine. We are still looking at resources that are finite because we will need to continue to discover gas.

I would like to see a more radical shift in the direction of wind and wave energy. These are the only really renewable resources; gas is not. Gas has problems with emission of carbon elements. In this instance, I am on the side of our old colleague from this House, Pól Ó Foighil in the Aran Islands, who wants to put windmills there to generate energy. I know there is opposition on aesthetic grounds. However, to me a windmill can be a thing of beauty. There is no great noise pollution and I am very much in favour of windmills.

I carried out a test today by opening a newspaper to see what would be there about this problem. Every day there is something. There is a report from Dick Ahlstrom in The Irish Times about the fate of the emperor penguins. This is a practical result and explains why governments are concerned. There has been new research published in Nature, the distinguished scientific magazine. In this study they used the longest series of data available on penguin populations near the Terre Adélie weather station, stretching back to 1952. This demonstrated that the warmer water and the consequential reduction of the sea-ice shelf was bad news for the poor emperor penguins. Met station data indicated that average annual temperatures were -17.3 degrees until the 1970s. That decade saw average temperatures reach -14.7 degrees, an enormous jump over such a short period. This warming caused a decrease in adult survival during the 1970s. The net result is that the emperor penguin population is now 50% lower than it was 50 years ago.

Any single day this kind of effect is described in the newspapers. It is quite spectacular in terms of the emperor penguins, but it is there all the time. For this reason I welcome the Government's action, the public awareness, the fact that there is a "green" building in Temple Bar and the increased use of solar panels in what is usually a rather grey climate.

The 1997 protocol on climate change was really a compromise and many of us were disappointed with the targets set there. However, under this protocol, the European Union is supposed to achieve an 8% cut in its greenhouse gas emissions by 2010. Because of the burden sharing element, where we are allowed to pick up the slack from other countries, Ireland is actually allowed to increase its emissions by 13% from 1997 to 2010. However, we already surpassed this in 1998. What are we congratulating ourselves on? The Government's greenhouse gas abatement strategy actually predicts that we will exceed our greenhouse gas target by a whopping 180%. What will the new agency do about that?

Mr. Jacob

That is on a business as usual basis.

Mr. Norris

Yes. However that is why we have to be very vigorous indeed. I used to teach English in Trinity and the language in this is rather easy and relaxed. It largely talks about the excellent work that has been done and car free days, etc. It reminds me of the vicar's summing-up after a bring and buy sale rather than somebody confronting a global emergency, which is what it is. I agree with the Minister that we have provided a framework in this Bill, but that is all. We need a real sense of urgency and cannot be relaxed because we are beginning to see the impact.

The Minister refers to the Kyoto summit and the proposals for living, etc., but President Bush has retracted from that. Information has come out in the last couple of days about his funding from Exxon and Mobil. They dismiss any concerns in a cavalier way. It appears to many of us in Europe that the American Presidency was bought by the oil companies in exchange for a relaxation of all the improvements we are making. The United States with 4% of the world's population contributes 25% of these emissions and this will mushroom as a result of this rather unpleasant, squalid, commercial deal. I am very glad to see that groups here are calling for a boycott of the American oil companies. It is only a flea bite but, as someone who was once bitten by a flea, it can be very irritating. This little green flea ought to give the Americans a good bite.

The Minister, Deputy Dempsey, admitted recently that although our Kyoto target was ambitious, it was only a small beginning towards the deep cuts in greenhouse emissions that even we will need to make in order to reverse the threat of climate change. Despite appearances, I do go to a gym in central Dublin. One thing I am always told during aerobic classes is no gain, no pain. I will not believe this until I hear a few squeals of pain, particularly from the Department of Finance. I would like to see the Department of Finance more associated with the Bill as it is that Department which will hamstring these developments in the short-term perceived economic interest of Ireland.

The executive summary of the paper on sustainable energy states that the ERM consultants' report on Dublin concludes that the largest single hit emission reductions can be achieved in the energy sector. However, the ERM report concludes that the best way to achieve large emission reductions is to switch for electricity generation from peat and coal to gas. If the suggestion that natural gas should become the dominant power source is taken on board wholesale, it is forecast that it will account for 56% of fuel used in power generation in 2010. Why is there a mad Gadarene rush in the direction of gas? Unlike other renewable energies – wind, solar, tidal power, biomass – which are carbon neutral, emissions from gas are considerable. In 2010 natural gas will produce over two million tonnes of carbon dioxide above the amount produced in 1998, due to increased energy needs. Overall, electricity will be responsible for 16.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2010. Gas will contribute 56% of the energy and will be responsible for 47% of emissions. There will be an enormous increase even under the Government's existing strategy. It may be a reduction from a hypothetical target if we did nothing, but it is still a massive increase and we should be very concerned about it.

I am glad the Minister in his speech included a strong statement on education. It is crucially important that the ideas are implanted in the minds of young people, who will subsequently have an impact on the political system.

Regarding membership of the board, I am glad Professor Frank Convery will play a role – I understand he will be transferred from the Irish Energy Centre. He is excellent, and the establishment of the chair of environmental studies in UCD was most far-sighted. I am glad Senator Chambers raised the issue of membership, expressing worry that county councillors would not be allowed join. I am more worried that no Member of the Oireachtas will be allowed on the board. The fight on this issue was led by people like Deputies Gormley and Sargent and members of all the other parties. Why should we be disbarred from membership? Section 9(11) states:

A member of the board shall cease to be and shall be disqualified from being a member of the board where such member–

(a) is adjudicated bankrupt,

(b) makes a composition or arrangement with creditors,

(d) is disqualified or restricted from being a director of any company (within the meaning of the Companies Acts, 1963 to 1999).

The other people deemed unfit include Members of Seanad Éireann who are nominated or elected, Members of the European Parliament and Members of Dáil Éireann. I want an explanation as to why we are deemed unfit when Members of both Houses have shown such committed interest in this area. The only reason I can think of is to prevent foolish, misguided Ministers from inflicting their own party stooges on such boards. However, we could devise a system where such stooges could be hunted out. I am strongly considering tabling an amendment to remove this provision from the Bill as we have a role to play. We should not disbar very able people from working on the board.

Why is there to be no change in the composition of the board for three years? Some flexibility should be allowed. There should be a review after one year to see how it is developing as this is just a skeletal framework. I might also table an amendment in this regard. It will be necessary to examine the framework after a year and at that stage there should be an opportunity to change some of the members. This might involve introducing new people rather than getting rid of existing members. Concepts in this area are changing rapidly, yet we propose to freeze membership for three years and prevent the introduction of new expertise if there are new scientific advances. I do not think this is wise.

I gather from the expression on the Chair's face that it is time for the House to be given the wisdom of my colleague, Senator O'Toole.

Mr. O'Toole

I thank Senator Norris for sharing time. I welcome the commitment to renewable energy. It has and will continue to play an extraordinary part in the history of the State. I do not know if many Members have been to Ardnacrusha, the first major advance in harnessing renewable energy in the State.

I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to two aspects of the Bill about which I have the most serious reservations. One has been clearly outlined by Senator Norris, namely, the banning of Members of the Oireachtas and people elected to public office from membership of the board. I no longer accept this kind of nonsensical approach which implies that a public representative is unfit for certain offices. If there is a conflict of interest, they should not be members. However, we should show respect to Members of the Oireachtas and, rather than disbar them, put in place a proactive procedure to ensure Members who have something to contribute become members of such boards and authorities. There are Members who could certainly make a contribution. I ask the Minister to take my comments on board. Every time such a provision in included in legislation I will challenge it and bring the issue to a vote unless I am convinced it would constitute a conflict of interest for a Member to be on such a board. I remind the House that I chaired the audit review committee which had to report to the Committee of Public Accounts, and that there was no conflict of interest.

I wish to draw attention to section 22(5). There is a sleight of hand here as the explanatory memorandum states that section 22 provides that the authority must prepare and submit a report. However, section 22(5) is the kind of provision one would expect to find in legislation in a Third World dictatorship. I never thought I would see such words in legislation. If such provision has previously been included I stand corrected, but I have been in the House for 14 years and I cannot believe what it says. The subsection states: "In the performance of his or her duties . . . the Chief Executive shall not question or express an opinion on the merits of any policy of the Government or a Minister of the Government or on the merits of the objectives of such a policy." This is appalling.

Mr. Norris

Disgraceful.

Mr. O'Toole

I cannot believe that legislators would bring this forward in a western democracy or would countenance it for a minute, and I intend writing to the leaders of both parties in Government to ask them if they are aware that this provision has such control, censorship, oppression and suppression of views, which gags the very people we expect to lead on this issue. Are they supposed to sit there, watch the Government make mistakes and not say a word about it? It is not acceptable. The provision relates not only to expression of opinions in public. I would have difficulty with the subsection if it only concerned criticising the Government publicly, but even private observations are not allowed. They must accept the word or views of a Minister or Government.

I do not believe any real politician would include that provision or that anyone in this House believes they are above criticism. I do not think anyone in charge of a Department believes all wisdom in that area is vested and rooted in that one person only. It is disgraceful legislation which will seriously embarrass the Government. I am aware the Minister of State present, whose views on these issues would be very liberal, progressive and tolerant is sitting in for his colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, who would also share these views.

I ask that that provision be deleted from the legislation because there is no reason for it, it is unacceptable, embarrassing and it is not in line with the kind of openness and transparency we look for in the affairs of Government and in the way in which we do our business. It is quite appalling. I would like a clear response in relation to this issue which it is not mentioned in the memorandum. The provision should be mentioned in the memorandum and this is seriously out of kilter with the way we do business. I do not believe this aspect will pass through both Houses of the Oireachtas but if it does, public representatives in this country will go down in my estimation. I do not believe it would be possible for people to accept this provision.

We will be appointing a chief executive of a board with various powers and duties, including promoting and assisting energy efficiency and promoting and assisting the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, which is crucial. It is extraordinary that the chief executive can say nothing if he or she is unhappy with the way Government is implementing that policy. I would like to know who advised the Parliamentary Counsel in this regard. I will be raising the issue with the Minister and I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, to convey to her my concerns. I know other Members share my reservations. As people normally read through Bills quickly, one could miss these aspects but I do not believe the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, was aware of this provision.

We have a commitment to develop wind, wave and solar energy. The use of wind, wave and solar energy is crucially important in terms of moving forward. We should say clearly to those reactionary forces in Irish society who try to tell us that windmills despoil the landscape and that this is an unacceptable form of energy, that it is not. In fact, in many cases it adds to the beauty of an area. As Senator Caffrey said, there are very few sights in Ireland as beautiful as turning the corner at Bellacorick Bridge and seeing the languid movement of the windmills not just harnessing the wind but also providing a picturesque framing of a beautiful landscape. They do not despoil the landscape. The old power station to the left might be far more important in terms of its impact on the landscape. We should say to people who argue against windmills that they become part of the environment. Anyone who has difficulty in relation to this aspect should travel to Holland to see how windmills can add significantly to the beauty of an area.

We have made significant progress in the area of harnessing wind power but we have made far less progress in the harnessing of wave power. The new authority should be asked to do research in that area because of all the areas in western Europe, Ireland is probably ideally located to at least have research carried out into the possibility of harnessing wave power. To date, this has proven to be quite inefficient in most cases but theoretically it works. It is now a matter of converting theory into practice, which has failed so far. There has been much development in the area of wind energy and I now look forward to such development in the area of wave energy.

In terms of solar energy, it is important to recognise that driving around the streets of Dublin all the parking ticket machines have a solar energy gathering panel to take in and harness solar energy. Similarly, people like Senator Fitzgerald and myself who sometimes take to the sea are aware that many of the larger buoys are fully operated by solar energy. Much can be done in this area. I often felt that if we developed solar energy, many of the buoys could harness wave energy because they are ideally suited to this and would have no transition problems.

In terms of the bigger picture, we need to be very open about this aspect. I spoke at length in this House recently about changes in the Finance Act which have inhibited the development and investment in wind energy development. The Minister of State and his Department should not stand in the way of progress, which they have. The Department of Finance pulled a fast one over the Department of Public Enterprise. Policy in this area is being determined by the Department of Finance which should not be allowed to happen. This is a real issue which needs to be looked at.

Energy management might be considered by the authority. The list of what it is entitled to do is a little vague and includes promoting, assisting and providing advice. It could be given some teeth in certain areas, if just to approve some projects. I am aware it can do certain things in the context of promoting and assisting. Assisting probably means investment and money but I am not sure how that is intended to work.

This Government has been good in the area of energy development. Speaking as an Independent Member, successive Governments in the past 15 years have taken a highly responsible attitude in dealing with these issues. I compliment in his absence the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, on the strong stand he has taken during his tenure in office in the area of nuclear energy, which has heartened a number of people. The previous Minister of State, Deputy Stagg, took a similar stand. There has been real commitment in this area.

I appeal to the Minister of State to delete this regressive section 22(5) which adds nothing to the Bill, reflects poorly on the Government and is unacceptable in a democracy which is open and transparent and encourages participation and the articulation of views. The idea that a chief executive shall not question or express an opinion on the merits of any policy of the Government and so on is unacceptable. I ask the Minister of State to bring this issue to the Government as a matter of urgency. This is not a party criticism because I do not believe the majority of members of the Government or of the Houses of the Oireachtas would support that. I ask the Minister of State to ensure that provision is deleted. We should put in place a proactive way of approaching the membership of boards or authorities by Members of the Oireachtas. Whenever a Member of the Oireachtas is appointed to a committee, board or authority, that should need the approval of one of the committees of the Houses. In other words, there should be an agreed way of dealing with the issue subject to the approval of a committee of the House rather than this blanket banning of people.

I have no interest in being a member of this board, nor do I know of any Member of the Oireachtas who has an interest in being a member of it. That is not the issue. I would make this point on legislation even where there is no conflict. There is no conflict here. It can fit in with the work.

Apart from those two serious reservations I am supportive of all the the sections of the Bill. I commend the Department on its good work in this area. I would not like my criticism of that section, which has obviously been put through by some draftsperson, to reflect in any way on the good work of the Department, its Ministers and officials.

Mr. Gibbons

I welcome the Minister of State. As Senator O'Toole said, the Minister and the Department are to be complimented on bringing this legislation forward. It looks ahead, which is what we need to do in Ireland. Senator O'Toole referred to Ardnacrusha being the first attempt to harness energy from water in the country.

Mr. O'Toole

The Senator is not going to say it was Carlow.

Mr. Gibbons

I correct the Senator. The first place energy was harnessed from water in this country was Milford in Carlow and Carlow was the first town in Ireland or the UK which was fully and totally supplied with its own lighting system from its own local electricity.

Mr. O'Toole

I thank the Senator. I accept the correction.

Mr. Gibbons

I will not get involved with the details of the Bill at this stage as other Senators have gone into those details. I take on board Senator O'Toole's points about section 22(5). That needs to be looked at in more detail on Committee Stage.

Some forms of energy can make a significant contribution to the national grid in the years ahead – even though certain difficulties are perceived in relation to them – and wind energy is one. Senator O'Toole said some wind farms can blend into the landscape while others do not. This has led to many problems with planning applications.

As a practising landscape architect I feel there are great opportunities to place wind farms in the proper locations and they can be camouflaged very constructively in particular areas of the country. We do not necessarily have to put them all on the top of hills, though that is the general perception. If one plans the topography and associated planting, particularly trees, one can funnel wind and direct it in a particular way. That concentrates wind speeds and can enhance the efficiency of these windmills enormously in locations that would not otherwise be considered appropriate. There is tremendous scope in that area if we look at it in greater detail than we have to date. It is one of the best forms of energy in that it is clean, it is always there and our location in Europe is ideal for us to benefit from harnessing it to the full. Regarding the planning problems associated with this, those can be overcome if our planning authorities take a more enlightened view and expand their perception of how these matters should be judged.

Biomass is another issue that should be addressed. In a previous existence I worked for what was then An Foras Talúntais in Oakpark in Carlow where there was an EU aided research programme through the late 1970s and early 1980s into the use of biomass. The objective was to see if it was possible to use cutaway bogs to grow trees of particular species that would provide a source of fuel for the peat burning stations of the ESB. Peat is renewable but it takes a long time to regenerate and we are running out of it. The project was viewed as a way of dealing with the problems we faced at that time and continued for many years, proving very successful in many respects. However, one of the difficulties associated with it was the problem of trying to grow anything on cutaway bogs, which is extremely limiting. The species involved were mainly salix and populus which tolerated the conditions to varying degrees depending on the nature of the bog itself. The idea was that the produce would be coppiced off, chipped and burned as a source of fuel.

If we look at the way the Common Agricultural Policy has developed over the past 20 years since this project was conducted we see there is now a large area of set-aside in the country and it is quite likely that that will continue for many years to come. If we are to get high levels of production of various species that are suitable for coppicing we should look at using that set-aside land for that purpose. It is not bringing the land into the regime of agricultural production again per se and adding to the over-supply of certain foodstuffs within Europe but it would use the land we have to provide a clean and renewable energy source which we need.

The Minister of State referred to levels of carbon dioxide and the rate at which those levels are increasing, saying that the latest ESRI forecast suggests a rise of 27% above 1990 to 2010 if we continue at present rates. Elevated COf8>2 emissions account for 55% of greenhouse gas emissions and are forecast to increase to 63% by 2010.

One way of dealing with carbon dioxide is to use broad leaf trees. They require carbon dioxide and if we plant more broad leaf trees we can help to reduce the levels of carbon dioxide, which will be returned to the air in the form of oxygen. We should be thinking in these terms all the time. We have had forestry programmes for many years which have been mainly centred on production of the fast growing evergreen species but we need to take a different approach. I know growing broad leaf trees is a longer term project but the benefits accruing from it are far greater than those resulting from over-use of the evergreen species.

Forestry has put an awful blot on the landscape of scenic areas in many cases over the last 30 or 40 years. That is a result of a lack of imagination with the plant. Straight lines are cut off in the area being planted but if one is trying to emulate nature in any way one does not do that. Nature does not deal in straight lines. Some more planning and thought regarding how we lay out our forests would enhance the landscape enormously and help our tourism industry.

House design and the approach of our planning authorities are other issues we should address. I was on the site of a house in Dunlavin last Sunday morning. The site was sloping and the planning authority would not allow the owners to erect a split-level house. I felt – and it is only my view – that such a house would be in keeping with the site. Regarding house design, there are many things we can do. If designed properly, houses could be built that do not require oil or gas. Electricity will always be needed, but we can heat our houses from the sun if we plan them properly.

Houses in the 18th and 19th centuries were located in carefully selected positions and orientated in a particular way. Senators will have noticed that in older houses, walls facing north are thicker and their windows smaller than the south-facing wall. If one uses a lot of glass on the south-facing side, plans the interior of the house carefully and uses red brick and tiles, heat will be absorbed during the day and released during the night, even during winter. That is a way in which we can cut down on our use of energy, but such thought is lacking in planning offices.

We do not use the skills available to us and not enough architects are employed, with the result that engineers make planning decisions in many cases. Although I realise planners are under an awful lot of pressure, the layout of housing estates is appalling. Houses are just thrown on to a site of ten or 15 acres. If we stop to think about proper long-term planning, we can do a lot to reduce the energy required to heat houses. It will not cost a lot more to build these houses, but a little more thought is needed. I fully support this Bill and I compliment the Minister and his officials on their great work.

Dr. Henry

I thank Senator Taylor-Quinn for allowing me to speak now. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Tom Kitt, to the House and I similarly welcome the Bill.

I echo Senator Gibbons's remarks about housing. We must constantly think about energy conservation when building new houses. Recent legislation has prioritised the insulation of houses and it is important we consider areas traditionally known to conserve energy and implement policies based on them. Terraced houses should be built, rather than semi-detached houses with an area between them not large enough for a wheelie bin. Energy conservation requires public education and I hope the Minister of State will get going on that. When I worked in the United States decades ago, there was a big campaign which asked people to "save a watt for Con Ed". When I look at the problems in California, I wonder if it is time to revive the campaign. I was horrified to hear from Senator Caffrey that gas-fired electricity plants are being built in Mexico to provide power for California because of the weaker regulations there.

Frank O'Connor once took his mother on holiday to Switzerland and while she was there she commented that the weather was great for drying clothes. When I was in California, I thought the weather was great for drying clothes too, but not once did I see clothes hanging out. I wonder how much energy is used by tumble dryers and whether Silicon Valley could keep going if Californians were a little more imaginative about the ancient Irish, and indeed European, ritual of running in and out with the clothes.

The attitude of the President of the United States to the Kyoto Protocol is very disappointing. I am delighted the European Union is to go forward as forcefully as possible with its initiatives.

The train strike demonstrates the importance of public transport. As the Minister of State knows, there has been a huge increase in the number of cars on the road. When the DART was closed down earlier this week the city was nearly impassable. The promotion of public transport is essential. Senators may be fed up of my mentioning that people should be encouraged to walk wherever possible. About 95% of children are driven to school, mainly because of poor public transport and parental fears as a result of the increase in traffic density. There was a certain amount of sneering about the idea of walking buses, but it is an idea which needs to be investigated. A huge amount of energy is used on car runs for children. There should be a greater number of lollipop persons around the city to direct children at crossings. Such efforts would be extremely important.

I have spoken in this House on numerous occasions about the weight problems that are developing in this country. To my horror, I recently discovered that about 75% of those who have type 2 diabetes, generally brought on by lack of exercise and being overweight, believe that their medication will solve the problem, which is untrue. We need to educate people about the small efforts that can be made to conserve energy.

It is similarly important that we promote those areas of alternative energy which are developing. We are supposed to supply 10% of our energy from renewable sources by 2010. The Department of Public Enterprise is currently running competitions for alternative energy schemes. Does there have to be a competition? As far as I know, there does not have to be a competition in Germany. I suggest that some of the Department's recent competitions have not been successful. The last such competition, AER IV, was solely for converting waste to energy which means from incinerators. As planning permission has not been granted for incinerators, I presume there was absolutely no interest in the competition, so many months were wasted.

The next competition, AER V, is mainly concerned with wind, but I gather that electricity supplied by methane collection will also be included. This is splendid as it is important we get these schemes up and running as fast as possible. Wind farms have been mentioned several times, but I gather that about 70% of applications to build such a farm fall due to a refusal of planning permission. Local authorities will have to look at this area more carefully as wind farms are an extraordinarily potent form of energy production. I congratulate those who strive to develop this area. Perhaps planning changes will be needed. I realise there are concerns about noise and visual pollution caused by wind farms, but energy conservation is a similarly important issue.

Methane gas from dumps, or what some people describe as landfills, will be with us for a long time as a result of our reliance for decades on dumping biodegradable waste. I applaud those involved in methane collection, who make elec tricity from it to feed into the national grid. There is a problem here too as companies which win competitions are sometimes unable to set up businesses. Are we making it too difficult for people to get in on schemes? Should we allow them to get up and going before letting them get involved in schemes, rather than competitions taking place within the Department?

I commend the Bill to the House. I am delighted we are doing something about this problem, but I do not see how 10% of our energy will come from renewable, alternative sources by 2010. It is good to see we are at least making an effort to do something about it.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

I welcome the Bill. It is a good one. During the Minister of State's absence words of congratulations were expressed on the way he managed his portfolio and dealt with the nuclear problem across the water. I want to be associated with those remarks.

I wish to comment on some of the remarks made by previous speakers on the absence from the board of Oireachtas Members or county councillors. In 1981 the then Senator Wright and I were on the board of BIM and we were disqualified from membership by the then Minister, Tom Fitzpatrick. I was annoyed about that at the time but, on reflection, I consider the legislation that was introduced then and the provision that is included in most Bills, which excludes Members of the Oireachtas from being members of members of State boards, is correct.

I would support local authorities to have an input into the work of such boards. The selection of a local authority, whether Donegal, Mayo, Clare or wherever, would pose a problem. The Minister of State might consider appointing a representative from the General Council of County Councils to the board and the general council could nominate a representative to serve on the board for a year or whatever.

Section 22(5) has been criticised by a previous speaker. That subsection states that in the performance of his or her duties under this section, the chief executive shall not question or express an opinion. I said to Senator Taylor-Quinn that I would like that provision to be included in every Bill. I would like if the chief executive, who is effectively the county manger, would do what he or she was told to do by the county councillors. Chief executives make up their minds and do their own thing. It would have been nice last week – I will not mention any names – if a chief executive had listened and done what he was told to do at a large shareholders' meeting held in the Burlington Hotel. I have no problem with this subsection. I am disappointed Senator O'Toole has left the House as I wish to stress this provision does not tie the hands of the board. The board members will still be free to do what they want, but, from my experience, chief executives generally do not listen to what they are told to do by the board or anybody else. They are a law unto themselves and that is evident from what is happening in terms of strikes that are taking place.

I wish to tell the House about something I sincerely regret having done in the past. I bought a sawmill in Dingle in 1968, which was water powered by an old mill wheel. I had plenty of energy at that time, but an antiquated old mill was not my type of thing. I wanted to put in electricity straightaway to power a variety of saws. That mill drove a threshing machine, which was on the outside of the building, a lathe, an upright saw, which would cut a 12 foot by 12 foot balk of timber into 1 inch planks – it had nine or ten blades, a plainer, a moulder and another saw. All were powered by the mill. We used the sawmill for a good length of time, but it was old. It was like the Tralee-Dingle railway or the west Clare railway. I am thinking, as I am sure is Senator Taylor-Quinn, if only we had them today.

A person can make a stupid decision when thinking he is going in the right direction. My brother has that sawmill – the Minister of State might know him – and he said to me in later years how stupid we were to do what we did. To try to restore the mill to its original condition would cost quite an amount of money. Both of us would love to get it back into working order. I spoke to an official in the ESB on one occasion and he said it would be no problem to put a turbine into it and the ESB would buy the electricity generated. Electricity could have been generated from the mill for nothing. The water is flowing by. Operating it costs about £80,000 a year and it is also a drain on electricity supply.

The record of the mill dates back prior to the Famine. A firm in England, Robinsons of Rochdale, wanted to take the old wheel and all the equipment back to London. That firm was still manufacturing saws and equipment. Regardless of that firm offering me a new building, electric saws, etc., I turned its offer down. That was one good thing I did.

It was interesting to hear Senator Gibbons speak of the simple ways we can use our resources to save energy, such as building a south facing house. My house faces south and the sun that comes into one of the rooms, which measured 20 feet by 14 feet, warms the whole house. That room is like a glasshouse.

Senator Gibbons's reference to the use of set-aside land was also interesting. Little use is made of land that is not fertile, irrespective of whether it is setaside land in Wicklow, Kerry or in other countries. Such land should be used. We have discovered that unless there is a surface of two or three feet on top of cutaway bogs; they are not suitable for growing trees. In regard to what we have done in the energy area, we have only ourselves to blame.

Hammond Lane foundry manufactured a cooker, known as the Jubilee cooker, in the 1950s or even before that, which was to be found in almost every house in Ireland. It was popular because the smoke from the fire was recirculated around the oven and come out through little holes in the firebox before going up the chimney. It was unique until some person thought of converting the cooker to oil, as oil was considered to be a much better option. One might think how would one would keep a fire going all day, but our mothers and grandmothers did. We are getting lazy.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

Is it the women who are getting lazy?

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

The Senator might not be lazy.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

The Senator mentioned mothers and grandmothers. Is he saying that wives are getting lazy?

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

I have done my best to convince people in Dingle to put a swimming pool in the town. The main obstacle is not the building of it, but the heating of the water. We have just built an ice plant in Dingle, which cost £1 million. It can produce 100 tonnes of ice every day. Before this was built, I knew that for every tonne of ice produced, there is a tonne of hot water produced. In other countries, the water from ice plants is circulated through swimming pools and thus they have heating for nothing. In Dingle, I was told it was a hare-brained idea. There are many ice plants around the country and the waste of energy in them is massive.

I was only picking on the Minister and his civil servant regarding windmills. I am in favour of them, along with solar, wave and other kinds of alternative energy. I am the chairman of the Harbour Commissioners in Dingle. Over the years, it was a nightmare to maintain buoys in the harbour. They are not needed in every harbour, but in this one they are used to mark a channel. As Senator Gibbons mentioned, there exists a solar panel the size of an A4 sheet of paper on top of each buoy. It charges a battery that keeps a blinking light flashing all night.

The only problem with solar panels in Ireland is that we do not get enough sunshine, but recently I have seen panels that can produce power in daylight and do not necessarily need sunshine. We are becoming more modern in this regard.

Everyone in the House has welcomed this Bill. There may be small criticisms, but it is a step in the right direction. Will the Minister let me know if funding, interest-free loans or some type of compensation will be made available for people who are in a position to carry out an energy-saving project? If the Government or ESB were to agree to such a scheme, perhaps free electricity could be given in return. I am not exactly sure what form it would take exactly, but we are definitely on the road to alternative energy from wind, water etc. I congratulate the Minister on his work in this regard and regarding his protests against nuclear power and I welcome the Bill.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

I welcome the Minister to the House. He has a very specific area of responsibility. I too welcome this Bill, the overall details of which are positive. It is opportune that the Irish Energy Centre be given proper status as a semi-State body and be given the powers it requires to carry out its functions. Its informal work to date is highly commendable. The Minister has put on the record the nature of this work.

One of its most successful exercises was the annual self-audit of energy accounts scheme, which involved the industrial sector. That 33% of electricity use in the sector involves the companies involved in the scheme is welcome. The challenge before the new body will be to have 100% of the industrial sector involved in the scheme. The figures show how successful it has been, and the centre must be commended for the reduction of COf8>2 emissions by over 124,000 tonnes in 1999. They should be encouraged to proceed with their work.

Education has been spoken of already. The programme that was conducted in schools opened the minds of young people regarding energy conservation and environmental issues. This good work should be progressed further. Nevertheless, the figures to which we aspire, set by the Kyoto Protocol, are a little bit frightening. At the moment, we have agreed to strive to be just 13% over our 1990 emissions levels by the year 2008. Unfortunately, we are currently 20% over that figure. If we proceed down our current route, we will be 27% over it, 14% above the level agreed. Constructive action is required and this Bill is a move in the right direction.

However, Ireland is just a small, peripheral nation of the verge of the EU. We are but a drop in the ocean in the context of what is happening globally. I hope that the Government will continue at EU meetings to put pressure on the USA regarding President Bush's position on the Kyoto Protocol. President Bush's approach was very narrow-minded and showed a lack of vision, and it plays to certain vested interests within the USA. It deserves every criticism possible. At this stage, serious diplomatic discussions and pressure are required to put the USA back on track regarding the Kyoto Protocol. The Americans produce a massive amount of emissions relative to the rest of the world, given that they are an advanced country very much involved in highly developed industry. The US needs to get back on track.

It should not be a matter of party politics or playing to the various political vested interests in any country. It is far greater than that and everyone in a position of power throughout the world has a long-term responsibility to future generations. President Bush has a very serious role to play in that respect and both he and the Amer ican administration need to be educated with regard to the potential implications of their actions. The sooner that is done the better, and the fact that they are so powerful economically should not deter us from applying pressure in the interest of long-term global sustainability. We have heard of the predictions for the end of the world, and if the environment become so badly affected then it could happen. It is important that we face up to our responsibilities.

I am particularly pleased to see the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, in the House as we had a little to-do regarding the gas board. As I am originally from Kilrush I made a recommendation to him that he would contact the gas board to get the pipeline to come along the shores of the Shannon, towards Moneypoint and on to Kilrush. If that is done it would have a great benefit with regard to COf8>2 emissions. Scrubbers have never been put into Moneypoint and the volume of COf8>2 emissions is substantial. It would be in the interests of the environment and the Government is taking a particular line on that.

The general view exists that Moneypoint is in decline and that it may no longer be a coal-burning generating station by 2008. If that is the case, we still want a generating station in Moneypoint and gas coming west to the station would be very attractive and commendable. Coming as far as Kilrush it would provide an additional source of energy which would bring extra industry into the west Clare area. I again appeal to the Minister to address this issue as I know he is quite capable of doing. We will be first among those to invite the Minister to visit and give to him due praise for his positive action on this issue.

The ESB is no doubt anxious to comply with the Kyoto agreement and reduce emissions and is in the process of preparing plans to be submitted to Clare County Council for a windfarm on the current Moneypoint site. They are proposing to install between ten and 18 turbines into that site. As a county we have provided a high percentage of the national grid for the past 20 years. Our responsibility with regard to energy provision has been more than adequately executed. We would like to continue to do that at Moneypoint in the context of maintaining the current job numbers. The plan to replace it with windfarms that will provide no employment would not be acceptable to the community in west Clare as jobs are needed in the area. If the gas pipeline is brought west it would sustain the current job numbers and provide another source of energy for industry. I ask the Minister to review that point in relation to policy within his Department and related Departments.

Senator Tom Fitzgerald says he welcomes turbines and wind farms because they are environmentally friendly. One of the functions of the new body which is being established is to minimise the environmental impact relating to the production, supply and use of energy. With due respect to Kerry County Council I wish to take issue with the turbine erected over Kerry Head which is a total intrusion on the visual aspect of the beautiful skyline of the area. This rare and beautiful vista was untouched until Kerry County Council deemed it appropriate to give planning permission for this monstrosity to rear its head. It is not environmentally friendly and has a dramatic environmental impact on the tourism potential of the region.

Reference has already been made to the attitudes of county councils and I believe there is a need for specific directions with regard to the location of windfarms. The Department of the Environment and Local Government has a spatial strategy plan which is affecting each local authority and each county development plan. The sense of it appears to be to reduce the number of inhabitants in rural areas by bringing them into villages and towns. It is all very idealistic but not very consumer-friendly in that people who like the peace and quiet and isolation of rural areas are being affected by it. At the same time people are being refused planning permission for houses in particular areas on the grounds of their being visually vulnerable or sensitive. This is happening while objects such as these turbines are being erected, which suggests Government policy is that it is preferable to have a turbine in rural areas than a house with inhabitants.

We need to take stock and prioritise what we are doing and where we are going. Is rural Ireland to become merely a wildlife habitat with no people living in it? There is a need for balance and I am concerned about the position currently being adopted at European level in Brussels, into national level in each member state and down into each local authority. The speed at which we are moving in a particular direction is also of concern to me.

I agree with and commend the principle of producing energy in a cleaner way that has less impact on our environment. However, just because land is not viable for agricultural purposes does not mean it is suitable as a windfarm. The location of the land with regard to its visual vulnerability or sensitivity has to be taken into consideration. If people are not allowed to build on land for these reasons then neither should a windfarm because of its greater impact with regard to that issue. I ask the Minister to review that aspect.

With regard to the Bill itself, there is quite a substantial amount of money being allocated under section 21 – £146 million. I ask the Minister to elaborate on the £33.6 million allocated to "strengthened activities of the authority". Exactly what is envisaged under that and how will this large and substantial amount of money be spent?

I am concerned about section 22, about which Senator Fitzgerald and I had a brief casual discussion outside. I have not seen in any Bill before now the level of diktat contained in section 22(5) of this Bill, which deals with the chief executive. Section 22(5) states:

In the performance of his or her duties under this section, the chief executive shall not question or express an opinion on the merits of any policy of the Government or a Minister of the Government or on the merits of the objectives of such a policy.

Is the chief executive of this organisation supposed to be a zombie with no independent thought processes? I will refrain from using stronger language on this issue. If one does not have someone with initiative and a sufficient sense of freedom to be able to express what he or she thinks about an issue or openly discuss the merits or demerits of a certain policy direction or express a differing view to the Minister, one is muzzling the chief executive on Government policy.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

Only in relation to that section.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

It puts a muzzle on them in relation to the merits of any Government policy.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

Under this section.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Taylor-Quinn must be allowed to proceed without interruption.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

I will quote—

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator will have an opportunity to explore the detail of the section on Committee Stage.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

Of course I will but I am entitled on Second Stage to elaborate on each section as I choose. I will place on the record again that section 22(5) states:

That is fairly clear and specific to me. I suggest to the Minister, as an open-minded man who himself has been known to give vent and expression to his views, that he would not like to be associated with the muzzling of the chief executive of a newly formed State authority. I invite the Minister to put down an amendment on that section. This side of the House will undoubtedly put down an amendment but it would be better if we were seen to be at one on this issue rather than in disagreement.

This subsection is a nonsense. It will deeply discourage some more able, competent, thinking people from applying for a job in the sustainable energy authority. I am sure that is not what either the Minister or the Government wants. They want the best applicants to go forward for this job because it deals with a very important issue for this country and the world at large from the point of view of future quality of life and the quality of the environment.

The board has done highly commendable work to date and I am glad it receives statutory recognition in this Bill. I welcome the Bill and ask the Minister to address these issues in his conclusion.

Minister of State at the Department of Public Enterprise (Mr. Jacob)

I thank Senators for their thoughtful and helpful contributions. The level of support for the principle of the Bill encourages me and I look forward to the Committee, Report and Final Stages in this House.

To digress briefly, the comments on nuclear power, which does not form part of this debate, are music to my ears. I welcome the ongoing support from colleagues across parties and in both Houses. The collective voice of the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Irish people on the whole nuclear issue has been heard far and wide.

Globally, there is no avoiding the harmful effects of modern lifestyle on the environment. Governments might disagree on the methods or measures required to tackle the problem but the scientific evidence available to governments showing that our environment is being seriously damaged by consumer behaviour is totally irrefutable. I can sense the concern of Senators during today's debate about environmental damage and the need to devise a more sustainable approach to energy use as well as a desire to pass on to future generations an environment not irreparably damaged by ever increasing consumption and associated emissions.

In my introductory comments, I mentioned that our Government and the other Governments of the European Union are determined to move forward and examine ways to allow all states to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. We are all agreed that succeeding with this goal is of vital importance in global terms. We in Ireland must endeavour to press ahead with our proposals and measures which would mitigate harmful greenhouse gas emissions.

In recognition of the role of energy use in emitting carbon dioxide, I pushed forward with the publication in September 1999 of the Green Paper on sustainable energy mentioned here today. I am very proud that the Green Paper still points the way forward for sustainable energy policy. It was widely welcomed both at home and abroad as a sensible and pragmatic framework containing measures aimed at mitigating greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector. Today, we are embarked on one of the policy recommendations of the Green Paper, namely, the establishment of the Irish Energy Centre as a stand-alone State body focused on implementing policies determined by Government and aimed at assisting Ireland to meet its Kyoto commitments. The funding is in place, the broad policy principles are established and the job of adequately resourcing the new body is in hand. With the enactment of this legislation, we will have in place an agency capable of delivering on the sustainable energy goal.

A number of Senators referred to the promotion of renewable sources of energy. I assure Senators that it is my intention to continue to promote increased use of renewable and alternative sources of energy as a priority. The Green Paper on sustainable energy set out a course for the further development for our renewable energy resource and a more focused approach to the adoption of energy efficient measures over the next five years. In the Green Paper I set a revised target of 500 megawatts of additional renewable energy generating capacity and the majority of that will come from wind energy. This revised target will, in effect, double the contribution which renewable sources make to meet our electricity needs over the next five years. At present, 5% of electricity consumption is based on renewable sources. The aim is to increase this figure to 12% plus by 2005.

In recognition of the fact that real constraints exist which are hampering the widescale deployment of projects, I established the renewable energy strategy group. We asked that group to examine all aspects of, and obstacles to, the further deployment of all renewable energy technologies. The group's first report on wind energy was published in July last. The report contains a number of recommendations and the group's suggested strategy into the future. My Department is currently concluding an assessment of these recommendations with a view to the formulation of a revised policy which can be submitted to Government for approval as quickly as possible.

It is my intention to announce by public notice the launch of the next competition under the alternative energy requirement programme, that is, AER V. That will be done this month. It will be necessary to obtain formal clearance of the associated support measures earmarked for the competition from the European Commission. My Department has submitted a set of draft proposals to the Commission in that regard.

I will touch on a number of issues in deference to the Senators who raised them and perhaps to allay fears. I thank Senators Caffrey, Chambers, Norris, O'Toole, Henry, Tom Fitzgerald and Taylor-Quinn for their excellent contributions. Senator Caffrey was critical of the US approach, as indeed were virtually all his colleagues. I certainly empathise with what Senator Caffrey and his colleagues had to say on that. The US position is that President Bush's opposition to the Kyoto Protocol is obviously influenced by domestic energy considerations and the absence of emission targets for developing countries such as China, India and Brazil. The US considers the protocol an unfair and ineffective means of tack ling climate change. It considers that it is potentially damaging to the US and global economies.

Of all the US allies on climate, including Japan, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, as far as we know only Australia is known to have expressed any understanding of the US position. The Irish Government has responded and will continue to respond to that position. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, issued a press statement on 29 March expressing his deep regret that the US has apparently decided not to implement the Kyoto Protocol. He also expressed his clear understanding that science shows that climate change is real, it is happening now and the situation will get worse. He reiterated the commitment of Ireland and the EU to making sure that the Kyoto Protocol remains the firm basis for future negotiations and actions to reduce emissions. Indeed, the Irish ambassador, at the request of the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Dempsey, who is the Minister spearheading the Irish effort on global warming and climate change, met the US State Department for the same reason. Therefore nobody is in any doubt about the Government's view on this matter.

I noted carefully that Senator Caffrey lauds combined heat and power technology. I am also enamoured with CHP technology. It is taking a bit of a blow at present, as the Senator will be aware, because of the rapid and serious increase in the price of gas across the globe, but we continue to encourage it. Currently 126 megawatts are produced by combined heat and power plants. We aspire to see that production virtually doubled to 250 megawatts, but there is certainly a difficulty with the price of gas at present.

Senator Chambers was disappointed with the US position also. He asked about the co-operation which exists in the energy area between the northern and southern parts of this island. I assure him and the House that there is an excellent rapport and strong working relationship in situ in the area of North-South energy co-operation. That co-operation is now on a formal footing. Senior officials meet jointly once a month. The Northern Ireland Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Sir Reg Empey, announced the upgrading of the North-South electricity interconnector in December 1999. That work is on schedule and it will be completed at the end of this year. An important point to note is that while energy did not form part of the Good Friday Agreement, it is now the most active area of North-South co-operation. I cannot say much more than emphasise the strength of the relationship. I know all Senators will join me in welcoming the interaction and rapport and the excellent working relationship which exists between both parts of this island.

There was a question of local authority provision for renewables in regional and county development plans. This was referred to by a number of Senators, including Senators Cham bers and Taylor-Quinn. The renewable energy strategy group recommended that local authorities should make such a formal provision for renewables within the context of their regional development plans, and we are pursuing it. Together with the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, we wrote to all local authorities some months ago asking them to identify strategic sites for renewable development. I look forward to that happening, to identifying strategic sites in regional development plans and I hope that the co-operation from local authorities will be forthcoming. I know that is also the aspiration of Senators from the debate here today.

Senator Taylor-Quinn asked about the figure of £33.6 million for strengthened activities of the centre. This amount is to cover a six year period and it relates to staffing, salaries and other payments, energy awareness measures, schools programmes and consultancies. It is very gratifying to have that funding in place. Another particular concern was also raised by Senator Taylor-Quinn and earlier by Senator O'Toole, whose contribution I missed as I had to nip over to Buswells for a short time to attend a meritorious energy event. In response to questions raised by Senators, this was a cross-Border effort involving Energy Action in Dublin and Bryson House in Belfast and they were presenting prizes for a competition run in the context of their invaluable work to improve the home comfort and health of older people and those at risk of fuel poverty. That has been a very important function, and hopefully will continue to be, of the Irish Energy Centre, but I compliment agencies such as Energy Action, Dublin, and Bryson House, Belfast, for their interaction and their meritorious work.

Senator O'Toole, in my absence, and Senator Taylor-Quinn had difficulty with section 22(5) regarding prevention of the chief executive questioning or expressing an opinion on Government policy. I hope I can allay some fears by saying the subsection relates only to the appearance of the chief executive before a committee of Dáil Éireann to examine and report to the Dáil on appropriation accounts, and the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General. I expect such a committee to be well able to challenge the Government, and the Minister's policies, without compromising a chief executive.

Senators Norris and O'Toole voiced objections to the ban on Oireachtas Members being on the board, but this is a standard provision in the establishment of State bodies, the rationale being to remove the possibility of conflict arising between the political aspirations of the person and the objectives of the board. Having said that, and while recognising that rationale, I too am a politician and empathise with what the Senators said. Since the function of the board is to advise Ministers on energy conservation and renewable energy policies and measures, it could perhaps be inappropriate to have a political view represented in that advice.

Regarding the question of a gas supply to Kilrush, I would dearly like to go along with Senator Taylor-Quinn as it is the place of my birth. The fact that Government approval has been given to BGE to build a ring main from Dublin to Galway and south to Limerick, will certainly increase the possibility of the grid, and its beneficial effects, being available in areas along the route. Kilrush and Ennis, and all of County Clare, will be light years closer to securing gas supplies after that work is completed. The prospect for the future is rather bright.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 16 May 2001.

The Seanad adjourned at 2 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 16 May 2001.

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 10 May 2001

Sustainable Energy Bill, 2001: Second Stage.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 10 May 2001