Select Committee on Environment and Climate Action díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 21 Feb 2023

Vote 29 - Environment, Climate and Communications (Revised)

Chairman

The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Revised Estimates for Vote 29 - Environment, Climate and Communications, programmes A, B and C. I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, Deputy Ossian Smyth, to the committee this morning. The proposed format is that we will deal with the Vote programme by programme. The Minister of State will first make an opening statement. There are three programmes and we will consider each of them separately with questions from members.

I remind the members of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are only allowed to participate in the meeting if they are physically located in the Leinster House complex. In this regard, I ask members who are joining us online that prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they confirm that they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus. I call the Minister of State to make his opening statement.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications (Deputy Ossian Smyth)

I thank the committee for the opportunity to present the 2023 Estimates for programmes A, B and C at the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. The Estimates for programme D, the connectivity and communications programme, were considered by the Select Committee on Transport and Communications on 8 February 2023.

The total provision for the Department this year is €1.066 billion, comprising just under €194.2 million in current expenditure and €871.8 million in capital expenditure. This represents a 59% increase over last year's allocation when funding for the electricity credit and the once-off emergency generation capacity schemes are taken into consideration. However, excluding these two exceptional items, the 2023 provision represents a 23% increase over the original 2022 Estimate for the Department. This demonstrates the Government's commitment to transforming Ireland into a climate-neutral, circular and connected economy and society.

I will now outline some key priorities across the climate action and environment leadership, energy transformation, and circular economy programme areas. Programme A, which covers climate action and environment leadership, includes licensing and enforcement, monitoring, analysis and reporting on the environment, research and development, and implementation of climate action measures. This programme provides €43.8 million in operational and capital funding for the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, to deliver its range of functions to protect our environment. The allocation includes funding for 19 additional staff across a number of policy areas, including circular economy, climate change, licensing and energy security.

Some 17.2 million is allocated to environmental and climate research, including €12.1 million for EPA research activities, which is in line with its published research strategy. In addition, funding of €4 million is allocated to the climate action modelling group to continue its work in providing technical support for wider climate and environment policy development. Funding is also included for the land use review to provide an evidence base to determine the environmental, ecological and economic characteristics of land types across Ireland.

A sum of €26.5 million is allocated for contributions towards international climate commitments, which is a significant increase over last year and is another step towards Ireland's goal to more than double its annual funding for developing countries to tackle climate change to €225 million by 2025.

A sum of €9.6 million is provided for the Just Transition Fund to support the low-carbon transition in the midlands region through local-led projects. A further €2.8 million is allocated under the EU Just Transition Fund programme to the Department's Vote. In December 2022 the EU Commission approved Ireland's programme for the EU Just Transition Fund, which will see up to €169 million invested in the midlands region over the coming years both through my Department and others involved in the programme.

Nearly €11 million is being provided for climate initiatives, which include the climate action regional offices, national dialogue on climate action and a local authority climate action training programme. A sum of €2.9 million is allocated to the carbon fund for the purchase of carbon credits. This will be Ireland's final purchase of credits relating to our 2020 targets.

Programme B, concerning the energy transformation programme, provides support to the energy sector to achieve a high-renewable, low-carbon system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It aims to ensure continued secure and reliable energy supplies necessary to support our economy and society on the pathway to net-zero emissions.

A sum of €28 million is being provided to cover the operational costs of the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. This includes funding for an additional 40 staff to enable it to deliver on its wide range of programmes.

A record €348 million in capital funding is allocated for residential and community energy upgrade schemes, including the solar PV scheme, and to support the delivery of the national retrofit plan. Of this amount, €291 million is from carbon tax receipts.

A sum of €82.7 million is provided for other energy-efficiency programmes, including supports for the business and public sectors. These measures, administered by the SEAI, are aimed at improving energy efficiency, increasing the use of renewable energy and developing retrofit policies and measures.

A sum of €30.4 million is provided for energy research programmes, including applied energy research and demonstration programmes and projects.

A sum of €7.5 million is provided for measures to lay the groundwork for Ireland to achieve its goals of 80% renewable energy generation by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2050. This includes the establishment of a cross-departmental offshore wind delivery task force to drive delivery of offshore wind by public bodies and capture its wider and longer-term economic and business opportunities.

Programme C, concerning circular economy development, supports the transition to a circular economy, protecting and restoring our environment through sustainable resource use. A sum of €114.5 million is being allocated to the programme in 2023 to tackle environmental damage, manage waste, safeguard our natural resources and support the move to a circular economy. This includes €26 million for the remediation of environmentally degraded landfill sites. The programme also includes funding of €16.6 million to protect our environment through waste management initiatives and enforcement activities by local authorities.

A sum of €36.8 million is provided for the conservation, management and regulation of Ireland's inland fisheries resource. Some €4 million of this allocation is ring-fenced for the Loughs Agency, a North-South body.

A sum of €14.8 million is provided for Geological Survey of Ireland services for geoscience projects, research and activities, including improved groundwater and drinking-water supply, the supply of critical raw materials, tackling coastal vulnerability and geothermal energy development.

Appropriations-in-aid are income receipts of the Department other than from the Exchequer and total €10.6 million in 2023. Receipts are mainly comprised of mining income, amounting to €5 million; additional superannuation contributions payable by public servants on their pensionable pay, amounting to €3.3 million; and miscellaneous income, amounting to €1 million.

I am happy to take questions relating to the Revised Estimates for programmes A, B and C.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State for his statement. We will now proceed to questions from members on programme A. In posing their questions, they should indicate clearly the subhead they are referring to within the programme. They should limit their questions to one subhead at a time to allow other members with questions on the same one to speak before we move on to another. The same procedure will apply for the other programmes.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

I thank the Chair. I am not sure I understand the Chairman's request to confine questions to one subhead. We might move more quickly if we stick to programmes.

On the carbon fund, I note the allocation of €2.9 million. The Minister of State says this is the last allocation for our commitment to our 2020 targets. Could he outline our estimated international obligation, if any? Are other schemes involved in respect of carbon credits? In this regard, I am referring to subhead A5.

I have a couple of follow-on questions. On subhead A7, one of the output targets relates to local authority staff trained for climate action. Could the Minister of State speak to the difference in the annual figures? The 2021 outturn was 13,581 and it dropped to 3,500 last year. The target this year is 8,000. What happened in this regard that caused such a significant drop-off last year?

On the Just Transition Fund, the Revised Estimate shows a decrease of €21.5 million. Could the Minister of State clarify why there is such a decrease given that the fund is a significant priority? Is it accounted for elsewhere? I refer to the allocation from the European fund last year.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I thank the Deputy. I will start with the carbon fund. There is a €2.905 million Estimate for 2023. This is for the purchase of carbon units to meet our targets for 2020. It is the final amount of money that we have to pay for not meeting our 2020 targets. To date, we have paid €117 million. It was expected that the final payment would be paid during 2022, but I believe that it will be paid in 2023 for accounting reasons. It is the last payment to meet our obligations up to 2020. I understand we had some choice as to how we obtained those carbon credits. I believe we got them through negotiation with other countries in surplus. I think the Deputy's question concerns the future of carbon credits, because we are back into this again up to 2030. Some analysis has been done on this by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. Really, it comes down to scenarios. We are now in 2023. If we meet our obligations by 2030, no payment will be due. If we do not meet them, a payment will be due. The next question concerns how much that payment would be. It depends on the future price of carbon credits, which is indeterminate at this stage. The prices have been highly volatile and have moved up by a large amount in recent years, so it is difficult to estimate how much a carbon credit would cost. However, if we meet our targets, we will not pay anything. A scenario analysis has been done by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. I am happy to share that with the Deputy.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

Very good. It is a 2030 target from here on out.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

Well, there is an intermediate 2025 target and then a 2030 target. However, I do not think we are due to pay anything until 2030. Some kind of accounting will be done at the end of 2025. I will come back to the Deputy with some estimates but, as I stated, it all depends on the future pricing of carbon and whether we meet our targets.

I shall move on to subhead A7.

The question is about the variation in the numbers of local authority staff who have been trained. It was in excess of 13,000, I think, in 2021; 3,500 in 2022 and 8,000 in 2023. The Deputy asked for a reason it is so variable and I do not have that information with me. I will come back to him on it.

The next question is about subhead A8. There is a dramatic change in the Estimate between 2022 and 2023 for just transition funds, which goes from €34 million to €12.4 million. There are two funds involved here: a national fund, which in 2022 was approximately €11 million, and the European Union Just Transition Fund, EU JTF, which is €23 million. That is how that splits. To explain what the change is, the grantees have reported to the Department that they are experiencing challenges in the delivery of their projects. That results in delays to drawdowns. These factors include unanticipated inflationary costs, particularly in respect of construction and procurement. As a result some projects have been delayed and grantees have been unable to make drawdowns at the pace provided in previous forecasts to the Department. The EU JTF estimate for 2023 is just over €2.7 million. That is a reduction of €20.2 million. In 2022, the full amount was allocated to the Department's Vote pending the finalisation of the underpinning programme. However, programme allocations for 2023 include funding to Departments involved in the delivery of individual schemes under the EU JTF programme. Previously, all this money was booked under the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, whereas this time four Departments are each going to be responsible for their own sections of the budget. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine will be allocated €10.65 million; Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, €1.5 million; Department of Transport, €225,000; and Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sports and Media, €4.5 million. The major change here is a reduction in funding from the EU JTF combined with a transfer of budgets to other Departments.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for his presentation. I am interested in the output indicators that have been presented to us. I think the Minister of State needs to look at them afresh. There are two for the EPA: the number of environmental and radiological decisions and the number of air quality monitoring visits. The EPA is an organisation of 473 people. It is delivering a range of services that are not adequately reflected in these indicators. The other aspect that worries me is that under context indicators and impact, the data offered to us for greenhouse gas emissions are from 2020. I know the Department is constrained by delivery but 2021 is published. We need to get more timely data from the EPA. If we are to have Ministers in here to account for their stewardship, we need a more accurate picture. That is more a comment than anything else. When were these output indicators last reviewed? It seems that they are slightly out of date for what we are confronting in the climate action programme.

On governance, to what extent in 2022 were the climate action plan deliverables on target and delivered? The 2023 plan is now published. To what extent are we off target on some of the 2022 actions? How is the governance system dealing with that? The sharper question in the medium term is the proposed approach in respect of Departments that miss their climate budget. We will undoubtedly see some Departments performing well and some badly. We will call in Ministers, no doubt, and examine what has gone wrong or right. If a sector misses its climate target, how is it proposed to deal with that? Will there be a financial or other penalty if they are proposing that they should carry over and borrow from the next climate budget to make up for what went wrong in this one? How is that going to work in practice? A lot of this will come down to the level of accountability and the consequences for not making a move on some of the policy actions. We could have a picture of policy actions not being delivered and potentially no consequences beyond coming in here and being asked why it happened and the Minister doing the best he or she can to explain. We need an effective governance model if the targets are to become real.

I would be interested in the progress on the land use research. The research the Department did last year dramatically changed our picture. We thought land use was generating approximately 4.8 million tonnes and now it is heading for 11 million tonnes. Does the Minister of State know why the estimates were so far wrong in the past? Is any light being shed on the potential actions in a land use strategy as a result of this new research?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I thank the Deputy. I will start with the first question on output indicators. I take his point that the output indicators are few and may not be so relevant to what we would expect to see as a list of key performance indicators for a budget. There is an attempt to keep them consistent from one year to the next so we can chart them from year to year and see how progress is going. If the Deputy wants to introduce any new output indicators, I am happy to take that on board. It is negotiated between the Vote section and the Secretary General of the Department, who is the Accounting Officer. The output indicators should show the kind of things that people think are the most important ways to measure a particular body, in this case the EPA. If the Deputy has suggestions for what he thinks should be measured, I will take them on board. In my view, they should be output indicators and not indicators of activity. It should not be about how many activities took place but rather how many outcomes took place or how many things were achieved. We could make that point about any of the output indicators across the budgetary categories. They tend to remain static from one year to the next to enable inter-year comparison, but they probably need to be updated. If the Deputy wishes to suggest to me what they should me, if he wants to contact me, or if the committee wants to come up with a list of preferred indicators, I am happy to see if we can incorporate them.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I would be delighted to try to come up with some but the Department taking responsibility for climate delivery ought to be suggesting more meaningful ones than are on this list, and more timely ones as well. While I agree with the Minister of State that we need to focus on outcomes and outputs, the extent to which the actions promised in 2022 were delivered by different Departments ought to be considered in our dealing with the Estimates for the following year. If we are seeing a Department, it might not be the Minister of State's Department, but one of the other Departments consistently not delivering any of its climate actions, we ought to be seeing that on our Revised Estimates Volume, REV. I am a member of the Select Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment as well but I am not on the other ones. We would then have material to cross-examine why a Department was not taking climate action seriously. It might be a cross-government indicator that we could use.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I would certainly want to have some input into that. The Deputy also asked about the timeliness of the EPA's data publication on greenhouse gas emissions.

Deputy Richard Bruton

And the REV too. The REV is for 2020.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

The EPA is the statutory body responsible for keeping track of our national greenhouse gas, GHG, inventory. I know that estimates appear much earlier than their definitive figures, and those estimates appear from different Government agencies. It does take some time to see a final, definitive statement from the EPA as to how large our emissions were. The figures tend to be published certainly more than a year after the emissions have happened. Is the Deputy's general question why it takes so long to-----

Deputy Richard Bruton

We are looking at the Department's stewardship of climate action, and then we look at greenhouse gases and get a 2020 figure of 57.7 million tonnes. We know that that is completely irrelevant to what is happening today. These output indicators should be taken seriously by the Government. I do not mean the political Government; I mean the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform and its oversight. It would be preferable to see a 2022 estimate and a 2023 forecast. It would be more meaningful. Maybe this is not the place where the Minister of State wants to present them, but I think it would be a useful place to do so. We would see the whole thing in one picture. I would like to see that for other Departments too, not just the Minister of State's, such that when it comes to looking at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the agricultural emissions would be in its REV in order that anyone coming in here would be able to cross-examine the Department on not just the financial but also the climate budget dimension.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I think the REV is published in December. It should have the latest data in it. If there are data that have been agreed or signed off, they should be in it. I take the Deputy's point.

The Deputy also asked about the climate action plan and who is in charge of keeping track of its deliverables and do on. I understand that the Department of the Taoiseach has a co-ordinating role in keeping track of how the climate action plan is going.

Deputy Richard Bruton

As for the penalty clauses, what happens if a Department is off target?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

If we look at the budgets, there is a five-year budget until 2025 and another one until 2030. During that time any Minister can of course be called before a committee. There is a legal requirement on the Government to meet those emissions ceilings. There are sectoral emissions ceilings for which a corresponding Minister can be found in each case. In any event, where a target is not being met, the Minister can be directly quizzed, and there is a legal requirement to meet the targets. There is also an examination by the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform as to how each Department is doing on its allocations. The point I want to make is that the oversight of how people are doing on the climate action plan or whether they are meeting their emissions ceilings is not a function of my Department, and it cannot be. Our climate action plan is a whole-of-government plan, so something like the Department of the Taoiseach has to have the co-ordinating role to keep track of all the other Departments. It is not a-----

Deputy Richard Bruton

My question, I suppose, is whether the Department of the Taoiseach, in conjunction with the Minister of State's Department, has thought out what will be done if a Department is proving to be consistently off target. We can see that in 2023 and 2024, the budgetary requirement will not be met. What then happens? Is it a financial penalty? Do we just call them in? We probably need to move towards some approach that offers a penalty.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

That has not been decided yet, and there is a conversation going on with the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to determine how those costs would be allocated.

The Deputy asked about the land use review as well.

Deputy Richard Bruton

Yes. I am just interested in it.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

When the land use review was set up there were two phases to it. The idea is that the review would cover farmland, forests and peatlands, find optimal use options and inform Government decisions. The review will balance environmental, social and economic considerations and involve a process of evaluation of the ecological characteristics of the land. It will include considerations of emissions to air and water, carbon sequestration and climate adaptation challenges.

There are two phases. The first is the evidence-gathering phase. That started in the second quarter of 2021 and is now complete. That phase was chaired by the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, with the EPA having a role in setting out the evidence base. A memorandum for the Government on that phase went to the Cabinet on 7 February seeking approval to publish. The next phase of the land use review, phase 2, will build on the evidence from phase 1. Phase 2 will consider policies, measures and actions in the context of the Government's wider economic, social and climate objectives. Proposals for this phase will shortly be submitted to the Government for approval.

Chairman

May I pick up on Deputy Bruton's point on the output indicators? The Minister of State suggested that the committee might be interested in looking at this. I agree, but would the Minister of State or the Department be minded to provide a briefing note on the output indicators as they are, perhaps to help us in a piece of work on which we could then revert to the Minister of State with the kinds of output indicators and what we would like to see in the indicators, including additional indicators or additional information, in the future?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I feel that the civil servants are looking at me now. I will send you a note, Chair, to clarify how the indicators are agreed, the process whereby they are agreed, how long it takes before an indicator is agreed and then data are got out of it. It would be an idea to think of which indicators we should be following. That should be something between maybe the committee and the Department to follow what it is we should be measuring each year.

To go back to Deputy Bruton's point about the timeliness, the publication schedule should not be such that we have an indicator that comes out just after the REV is published. If the REV is published in December, we will not get our full-year stats. We want to look at that and make sure that the data are as up to date as possible.

Chairman

Two indicators jump out at me here. One is the number of local authority staff trained for climate action, which is increasing two-and-a-half-fold, which sounds very positive, but we do not know what that training is or what the output of the training is. It is something, I think-----

Deputy Ossian Smyth

To be fair, I was asked about that earlier and I have committed to come back with more detail as to what the training consists of or what the reason is for the variation in numbers between years.

Chairman

The other matter is the number of air quality monitoring visits, which is staying static between 2022 and 2023 at 115. It does not sound like a lot, given the size of the country, but maybe it is. Maybe it is satisfactory but maybe it is something-----

Deputy Ossian Smyth

Would you like some information on what those air quality monitoring visits consist of?

Chairman

Yes, that would be very helpful. If it is adequate, fantastic, but my concern is that we are not doing enough air quality monitoring.

I will move on to programme B. I call on Deputy O'Rourke.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

Do we have a significant increase in funding for the residential and community retrofit programme? Could the Minister of State speak to that under this programme?

I support the comments that have been made on the output indicators. In this programme they are a little more satisfactory, in my opinion.

Regarding the indicators on page 132, we do not have the 2022 figures for context and impact indicators for the warmer homes scheme and the warmth and well-being scheme. When will we have those?

On subheads B11 and B13, electricity credit and emergency generation capacity, might we expect to see Supplementary Estimates on those in 2023? We will have electricity credits in this year and my understanding is that there is some way to go on the emergency generation capacity, so how will that be accounted for?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

We are starting with subhead B4. The Deputy asked about the big increase from €94 million to €355 million. It states in the Deputy's briefing note that the figure of €94.952 million excluded a capital carryover of €57 million during that year, which understates it somewhat. We did have a capital carryover that went into that.

The plan in 2023 is to retrofit 120,000 dwellings to BER B2 or cost optimal standard and to install 45,000 heat pumps. Significant funding during 2023 will come from the increase in the carbon tax, which is ring-fenced partly for retrofit. This will increase the number of homes that can be addressed. That is how the increase in funding comes about in the retrofit programme.

Moving then to the figures for the warmer homes scheme, which I think the Deputy is pointing out are in the Revised Estimates under the key indicators. In 2021, 2,270 homes were upgraded under SEAI energy poverty schemes, and this increased to 4,400 in 2022, which was a 96% increase, partly accounted for by the fact that there was a restriction on building because of the pandemic during 2001. That was a welcome 96% increase. If the Deputy is looking for any data on the detail of the numbers on the warmer homes scheme, I am happy to supply them.

Regarding subhead B11, which is the energy credits, as far as I understand it, the way that is being accounted is that all of the energy credits in 2023 and 2022 were accounted for in 2022. Each energy credit costs approximately €400 million. There are four energy credits. There was one at the start and one at the end of 2022 and there are two in the spring of 2022 so the four energy credits come to €1.6 billion. There is nothing allocated for energy credits in 2023. The Deputy said he expected that there would be energy credits later in the year.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

No, it was more that there will be energy credits coming in next month.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

Yes, next month. That was accounted for last year. The way the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform requested that this be done was that all of the money be drawn down before the end of the calendar year, then the money was transferred to ESB Networks to make sure it had the entire €1.6 billion for distribution to customers by the end of the year.

The Deputy asked about subhead B13, emergency generation capacity. The expectation is that no money will be required for that. The Exchequer portion of that money has been spent. I understand that other parts of the emergency generation work are funded by EirGrid from its own capital budget and the transmission use of system charge, TUoS, levy as well. Between the TUoS levy and EirGrid's expenditures, we do not expect there will be any Exchequer expenditure on emergency generation capacity for 2023.

Deputy Richard Bruton

It is encouraging to see the substantial build up in retrofits under the warmer homes scheme, which may have been a bit suppressed in 2020 and 2021, compared to 2019 when there were more than 6,000 homes in the scheme.

I presume the 6,000 new homes will be a much deeper retrofit . Does he attempt to distil from these programmes what the climate impact of them is? Presumably a lot of shallower retrofits are going on in the general scheme, which comprises 24,000 homes. Some of them probably give faster bang for the buck. Would we get a better picture of how we are progressing if some sort of relationship between the work being undertaken and the climate impact was tracked and reported? That might be of interest. There are 162,000 homes with cavity walls that are not insulated. That is low hanging fruit and cheap to do. One would wonder why we are not able to reach them. There is this sort of balance between setting the BER B2 as being where we want to get to by 2030 and beyond versus picking up the low hanging fruit at the moment. I am interested to know how we might mop up whatever is there.

We are missing a beat on the low take-up of the smart meters. They are a tool in the hands of the public but most people probably do not know what their potential is. Active sign-up is required because of GDPR rules. Has the Department looked at the possibility of sitting down with the Data Protection Commissioner to see is there any way of overcoming the data protection requirements? There could be a much higher take-up of something that can save money for people at this time, switching to cheaper usage times. I just find it hard to understand how we roll out a programme to 2.5 million homes at quite considerable expense and then GDPR rules mean that the meters are predominately not being availed of.

I would like the latest update on the loan scheme. I know it has had some teething problems. Are we close to being in a position to knowing how the loan scheme will work?

Is the Minister of State beginning to see the trends on the breakout between the one-stop shop where people sign up for the big job versus the people who decide to do work in a piecemeal fashion with the warmer homes scheme being a third strand? Are there any early indicators of the number of people willing to go the one-stop shop route and a deep retrofit?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I will start with the first question, which is about the climate impact or the carbon impact of these schemes for retrofit. The Deputy will appreciate that there is not a simple relationship between the amount spent and the volume of emissions saved. Different interventions have different results. This is why we are targeting for example, attic insulation and wall insulation with an 80% grant, because we were advised that they would have the highest return on investment in emissions saved.

The carbon impact of the schemes is being measured by the SEAI and it will publish a report on the outputs in the coming weeks. That should provide some information on that. Last year, 9,183 attics were insulated and 7,275 cavity walls had insulation installed. Clearly, therefore, there has been a high take-up of the 80% grant, which allows people using quite a small amount of money to get a high return on investment. Then again, we cannot force people to do things. These schemes are optional. There is customer demand for certain interventions, and customers may opt for things that have a lower return on investment. That is their choice because it is their lives.

The next question is about the take-up of smart meters. Questions were asked about data protection and so on. I am glad ESB Networks is now publishing or allowing customers to see their own data from their smart meters. This was one of the simple benefits. I went through the process of getting my own data. All I have to do is input my own meter point reference number on a website. Smart meters will be key to our variable and renewable energy sources when power is in surplus and can be given to people cheaply. It should be possible for people to turn on appliances in the middle of the night or charge their electric vehicles using cheap power, thus dissuading them from using power at peak times. Since 2019, when ESB Networks commenced the programme, 1.1 million smart meters have been installed. Approximately 40,000 meters are being installed each month. Deputy Bruton said the roll-out has been slow.

Deputy Richard Bruton

No. I was referring to the take-up, whereby people opt for cheaper electricity at night. Many people have this capacity but the take-up is in single figures.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

There are two points to be made on that, First, there should be a clear benefit to switching, and the packages should be better value than with the dumb meter version. Second, the data should be available in a simple way to everybody. If these benefits are not spelled out, people will not change readily. I take the Deputy's point on that.

A total of 33,740 customers registered their microgeneration installations and have had smart meters installed. This enables them to measure the electricity they export to the grid and get payments back for the electricity they generate when not at home.

I believe the Deputy asked about allowing the electricity companies to choose the correct plan for somebody and stated there was a problem with data protection.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I understand the companies cannot say a customer's usage is X and that they could save a lot of money by switching to a certain arrangement. The initiative has to come from the customer's side. The customers must decide to behave in a particular way and examine the potential savings now that they have smart meters. De facto, many people are not volunteering to take up this mechanism. It seems that the GDPR rules are being over-interpreted. I am not an expert in the field but would it be worth the Department's while teasing out with the Data Protection Commissioner what is permissible and whether we could go a little further to offer what is an energy-saving option to people?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

Does the Deputy envisage ESB Networks or the retailer analysing the usage?

Deputy Richard Bruton

I do not know where the restriction came up. I presume there is access to some sort of personal information, such as when one is coming in or when one is having a shower. If such information were available to someone who wanted to burgle one's home, he or she would have a pattern. I presume it is a matter of that sort of thing but I am wondering whether we are shooting ourselves in the foot a little. Could other protections be used to overcome this fear?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I am told the CRU is leading on GDPR discussions both nationally and at EU level. The current position is that it must be customer-led.

Deputy Richard Bruton

Somebody in the Minister of State's Department should talk to the Data Protection Commissioner and determine whether the intention of data protection is to have customers miss out on something that there is now a national effort to achieve.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I will make sure somebody speaks to the Data Protection Commissioner. We can discuss this again but I take the Deputy's point. It should be possible to be told easily the best plan to be on. It may require a degree of consent unless it is possible to anonymise the data or present them in an aggregate way that does not compromise people's privacy.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State. If there are no more questions on programme B, we will move on to programme C.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

Could the Minister of State give an update on the intention to produce a policy statement on geothermal energy for the circular economy? I believe a pilot or feasibility study was done recently. The area is being examined in the context of several challenges, particularly that concerning communal heating systems for apartments in Dublin and elsewhere.

Could he also update us on the landfill sites for remediation? Is the number decreasing? Can he comment on the expenditure for this year? I think the number of sites is 71.

What is the funding allocation for the Inland Fisheries Ireland this year? In answering, he should have regard to the ongoing issues in the body and the question of when we might see the matters addressed, whatever that might look like.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I thank the Deputy. One of those issues may come under programme C. Certainly, landfill sites for remediation-----

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

We are on programme C.

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

I hope the three matters fall under programme C. I am referring to geothermal energy, landfill and inland fisheries.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

The Deputy asked about district heating. There is a new subhead for it. A new research programme will start on it, or a new scheme is being scaled up. There has been ongoing research on geothermal energy. A report is due for publication shortly. Research has been done involving my Department and Grangegorman campus. Some boreholes have been dug to depths of 1 km and 3 km to explore the possibility of creating district heating systems with them.

There has been co-operation with the equivalent body for geothermal in the North of Ireland. Northern Ireland appears to show more potential than the South. There has been an allocation of money for that North-South co-operation for next year. The report is due for publication later this year.

I will move to landfill remediation for a moment. These are historic dump sites that in many cases are sources of great pollution, sometimes by the coast, and they are being remediated in many cases to form public amenities such as public parks. The best known of them is Kerdiffstown in County Kildare, which is now in its final works phase. It is the largest project of its kind in the State and it will transform from being an illegal landfill into a recreational park. The total works contract awarded was €19.6 million, and, of that, €7 million is for 2023. There are sites around the country. So far, €6.4 million has been allocated in 2023 for closed landfills. That covers 120 different sites. Some €9 million has been allocated for private and illegal sites. That covers ten illegal sites. Then there is another €200,000 for so-called pre-1977 sites, which covers six different sites. In fact, there is one on the border of Wicklow and my constituency in Dún Laoghaire, which is on the coast and is constantly eroded by the sea, leading to historic pieces of dumped material landing in the ocean. I am well aware of the work that goes on there.

Deputy O'Rourke also asked about the Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, budget and the situation that is going on there. He will be aware that the chair of IFI resigned her position by letter on 11 January in line with the provisions of the Inland Fisheries Act 2010. The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, considered her resignation and that of other board members and the implications for IFI. As there were five vacancies on the IFI board, with the chairperson's resignation and the challenges this has created in allowing the board to effectively carry out its statutory functions, the Minister decided to exercise his powers under section 18 of the Inland Fisheries Act 2010 and he removed the current members of IFI on a no-fault basis. This will allow for the appointment of a new board, which will happen later this year. The Minister intends to appoint new members of IFI as soon as possible and in accordance with the provisions of the Inland Fisheries Act. To ensure that IFI is in a position to perform its functions effectively as quickly as possible, the Minister has also used his powers under section 18(5) of the Act to appoint on an interim basis Mr. Tom Barry and Mr. Seamus Neely, the former chief executives of Carlow and Donegal county councils, to perform the functions of IFI, pending the appointment of a new full board through the statutory appointments process, with the support of the Public Appointments Service. In addition to the core functions of IFI as set out in section 7 of the Inland Fisheries Act, the Minister has instructed Mr. Barry and Mr. Neely to prioritise the full and prompt consideration of a number of protected disclosures within IFI's protected disclosure policy, which are understood to have been received by IFI in recent months. These could not be progressed by the board of IFI as a result of the recent resignations. As the Deputy is aware, there are a number of criminal investigations following the protected disclosures and I am not in a position to comment on the likely outcome of the criminal investigations. I think Deputy O'Rourke is aware there is a situation there.

Deputy Darren O'Rourke

Yes. I thank the Minister.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I have a few questions for the Minister of State. The first relates to what he just spoke about in regard to IFI. We will not go into it now but there are obviously issues if the entirety of a board resigns. That would illustrate that there are considerable issues with the entity. Is there a review planned of IFI and its functions? IFI is in a difficult position because it is responsible for the conservation of fish stocks but at the same time it also has an angling function and sometimes they can be very difficult to marry. I wonder whether there was a bit of a lost opportunity when the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, was being reviewed to look at whether components of IFI could have been incorporated into the NPWS remit from a conservation perspective. In reviewing the functions of IFI, is there a plan to look at what the governance issues were, why there were such difficulties for the board and what can be done to resolve them?

I also have questions about the illegal dumps the Minister of State mentioned. These are specific questions so I am not sure if he will have the information in front of him. Whitestown in County Wicklow is probably one of the ten illegal dumps. Is there an update on it? Specifically, how much it will cost? Is the Department contributing to that? My understanding is that under the Court of Appeal decision, it was to have been remediated within three years. That was 2019, so we are probably coming close to that point now.

I would also welcome a more detailed update on the dump near Bray, in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown, that the Minister of State mentioned. What is happening with it? What money is being allocated and when will it be resolved? Could I also have an update on the Avoca mine remediation? That would be great.

Chairman

I thank Deputy Whitmore. Those questions are in the context of the Estimate before us, in particular the first one. I think she is asking if an amount has been set aside for the review of IFI, similar to the NPWS review.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

Yes, absolutely. Are there any plans to do that? It is difficult to talk about it. The particular part of the Estimates relates to HR, and pay and salaries. Are there any plans for a review? Is there an allocation being set aside to facilitate that?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, has asked Mr. Barry and Mr. Neely to oversee the preparation of a governance review of IFI, and that is to be delivered within three to six months. No amount of money has been set aside for the costs of that. A review had been commissioned from a senior counsel last May. If Deputy Whitmore wishes, I can go into the details of that. It was a review of the board by Conleth Bradley SC. Does she want me to talk about that?

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

Yes. Are the details of the review available?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

Was it published?

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

Yes.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

If Deputy Whitmore could bear with me for a moment, I will look for the information.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

If the Minister of State wants to go into a bit of detail he can, but I am also happy for him to send on the information if the review has been published.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

On 5 May last year, the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, appointed Conleth Bradley SC under section 18 of the Inland Fisheries Act 2010, which relates to the removal of members from office, those members being members of the board of Inland Fisheries Ireland, to carry out a review of the exercise by the board of its functions under the Act. Mr. Bradley's report was received by the Minister on 27 July. The report was considered by the Department and was issued to the chair of IFI on 26 September 2022. The accompanying letter communicated the Minister's expectation that IFI would give full effect to all the recommendations set out in the report and revert to the Department by the end of October with an update on the implementation process. That report was discussed at a meeting between the board and officials of the Department on 26 October 2022 and at the meeting it was agreed that the review was warranted. All the recommendations therein were accepted by the board at that time and it was agreed that the board would implement them. The primary focus of the Minister, the board and the departmental officials was to implement the recommendations and work in close collaboration with the executive and board of IFI for the benefit of the entire inland fisheries resource. The report was published on 7 November 2022 but, regrettably, it has not been possible to build on the recommendations made in the report because of the challenges brought about by the board resignations in the interim period since the review was carried out.

There have been a series of protected disclosures and complaints to the Garda. There is a formal process for investigating protected disclosures and there are of course criminal investigations. It is difficult for me to comment on the likely outcome of any of these investigations without subverting natural justice.

Chairman

We will leave it there because the issue is not on the agenda of the meeting. We will stick to the Estimates.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

What is relevant to the Estimates in terms of Inland Fisheries Ireland is subhead C8. There is a new funding programme totalling €500,000 to support IFI in planning to address the mitigation of barriers to fish passage. This is part of a long-term programme which is starting under the EU water framework. It is work we are required to do, managed by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. The purpose of the scheme is to find ways for fish to pass freely around the inland water network. That is of practical interest to people in terms of what is happening in research on fish.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I cannot find the relevant information. How much is being allocated for that?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

It is under subhead C8. Does the Deputy have that in her Estimates? It is the Estimate for 2023 and totals €500,000.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

That is incredibly welcome because it is such an important area. A focus on barriers will free up other things. A third of the catchment in Wicklow is not accessible to any migratory fish because of barriers. I am working with IFI, the East Wicklow Rivers Trust and the council to try to remediate some of the barriers. It is fantastic to see the Department putting more focus on that, which I welcome. A sum of €500,000 is not a lot of money and I hope it will be increased over the coming years as the programme is rolled out. Freeing up those aquatic systems could be one of the most important things the Department and IFI could do. I welcome that move.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

There is another €500,000 allocated from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Although €1 million is a small amount of money over a year, it is a first step. Some work can be done. There is a period of time where capacity is being ramped up. It is a long-term multi-year programme, over ten to 30 years. I expect the budget in future years will be in the millions, rather than just this. It will address every type of barrier to fish, from the largest weir to the smallest type of barrier. It is a welcome programme and I am happy to see it.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I thank the Minister of State. I had questions on two dumps, namely Whitestown and Bray, and the Avoca mines.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

What was the question about Whitestown and Bray? Can the Deputy repeat that?

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

The Minister of State mentioned ten illegal dumps. Whitestown is one such dump in Wicklow and the council was tasked with remediating it. There were questions over whether the council would be solely responsible in terms of paying for the remediation or the Department would contribute towards it. I am not sure whether that has been finalised. The Minister of State mentioned the Bray-Dún Laoghaire dump. I ask for an update on that.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

On the Bray dump, I understand works are being carried out by Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, with the co-operation of Wicklow County Council. Funding was allocated and they are more than two years into the work. I will revert to Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and ask how it is progressing with that. On the specific question on the dump in Bray, I may have some information for the Deputy.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I am referring to the one in Whitestown.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I am sorry; I will have to revert to the Deputy after the meeting. I do not have that information to hand. There is an allocation of €9 million for ten illegal dumps. I will get the details the Deputy wants on any specific dump.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

That would be great. The Avoca mines remediation programme is also mentioned in the Estimates.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

There is an allocation of €550,000 for the remediation of legacy mines, which are listed as Avoca silver mines and others. A feasibility study for the management and remediation of the Avoca mines site was completed in 2008. It costed two options for the long-term remediation of the mine, with capital costs of €58.5 million and €46 million, respectively. Both have recurring annual operating costs of about €1 million. Under a Government decision of 21 July 2010, the Government decided to proceed with €3 million in funding for the most urgent health and safety works and to keep the rest of the remediation plan under review. To date, in excess of €5 million has been spent on remediation and monitoring costs at the site.

The protected funding for the Avoca remediation project in 2023 will be €450,000. This funding will provide ongoing monitoring, maintenance and health and safety works at the Avoca old mines sites. In 2023, the Department also intends to begin reviewing the outstanding remediation plan from the 2008 feasibility study and to undertake an update to reflect more recent technological methods and advances in mine site remediation and update projected remediation costs since the last costs were produced in 2008. The geoscience policy division, GSPD, is progressing the receivership of Avoca mines and the registration of land with the Property Registration Authority and the Office of the Chief State Solicitor.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

I thank the Minister of State. Does that mean the feasibility study for 2008 will be reviewed? Is there potential for a feasibility study to be rolled out, rather than simply having a maintenance programme for the Avoca mines? There is a lot of potential in the area.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

My understanding is the Government has, based on the feasibility study, made a decision to proceed and on what course of action to take. It will spend €3 million as soon as possible on urgent health and safety works. Some €450,000 has been allocated for this particular mine for this year. Does the Deputy feel a further feasibility study is warranted?

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

My understanding is there was a big project and then we hit the financial crisis which meant it was put aside and only the maintenance aspect was being looked into. A lot could be done there. There were plans to examine leaching in order to try to prevent contamination from entering the water source and other such work. The Minister of State mentioned a figure of €58 million. It is a really big project. Rather than providing that level of funding, only €1 million or €500,000 per year was provided for maintenance and preventative measures. If the Government was considering a larger or more holistic project, that would be a really good step forward. I would certainly welcome it.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I will come back to the Deputy on that. The 2008 study is old. A feasibility study from 2008 looks at technology options which have changed a lot since then. The Department has committed to updating that report based on the technology that exists now and coming up with a revised remediation plan and costs later this year.

Deputy Jennifer Whitmore

Okay. I thank the Minister of State.

Chairman

I thank the Deputy.

Deputy Richard Bruton

If the Minister of State is providing some information, perhaps he could give me an update on the dump in Belcamp in due course.

On the circularity section, I do not think I need to tell the Minister of State the context and impact indicators being offered here are wholly inappropriate to meet the circular economy challenge I know he has set for himself.

From his own Department or with the help of the committee we need to identify what target indicators we will track. I have a few ideas. In the context of the Act that was passed, the Government has undertaken a commitment to set sectoral targets in areas like reuse, material usage and so on. What departmental work is ongoing within the different sectors, be it food, construction or retail? There are huge opportunities and the Government has undertaken to develop circular economy strategies in each of the key sectors. However, it will be down to the Minister of State's Department to kick-start that process by either setting targets or indicating that we will move towards European targets. As he probably knows, we are way out of line on this front. However, we will not see the progress changed. For example, in the construction sector, unless designers, architects and those who commission buildings have an understanding that they will have to change, they tend to go for the line of least resistance and they do not adopt better materials or look at flexible design. They do not look at how waste is recovered at the site. We still have a lot of sites that have no proper waste segregation on site. Waste that could be reused is just dumped into a mixed situation where it can never be recovered. The Minister of State needs to start setting frameworks in each sector. I am interested to see how the Department is setting about doing that.

My second question relates to the Minister of State's other responsibilities. When the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, was before the joint committee last week, he told us that as yet there is no baseline for green procurement. I know the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, produces some data on green procurement. However, we ought to be seeing the EPA's indicator on green procurement being reported in these Revised Estimates so we can see that the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform and other key Departments are changing and the Office of Government Procurement is not waiting until someone comes knocking on its door looking for a green procurement framework. It should be proactively pushing that and setting ambitious targets. I am interested whether we can start seeing a baseline for green procurement that can be tracked across Departments. Can we see which Departments are adopting and applying it? Is it happening in our housing and hospital procurement and so on?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I thank the Deputy. I will ask my officials to get back to him with a note on the dump in Belcamp in a similar way to other dumps. He made a general point about circular economy indicators. Similar to the previous question about key indicators, it would probably be worth having a review of them. I am open to any suggestions on that.

The Deputy also asked about the sectoral targets. Following the Circular Economy and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2022, he asked how sectoral targets and so on will be formulated. The work on the new circular economy strategy is well under way and it is expected to be published this year. That will include sectoral targets. He mentioned key areas like construction and food. The area with most room for improvement is construction. That is the area we need to tackle, even though it is not as tangible or relatable as areas like food and clothing. To give an example, I can see from visiting construction sites that a lot of clay and aggregates are often removed from the site and taken away to be put in landfill. More clay and aggregates are brought into the site from quarries. Particularly in cases where the knowledge is not there, it can be difficult to reuse clay and aggregates on the same site. Even when the knowledge is present, there can be a regulatory impediment to moving clay and aggregates from one site to a neighbouring site that might need it. I think that is more the norm in other countries that are doing better on their circularity statistics. I would like to see less quarrying in future and less clay and aggregates going into landfill. We are looking at a range of regulatory options to dissuade people from quarrying and using landfill for clay and aggregates.

On the question of eco-design, the Deputy is right that design is critical to having a circular economy. It is very difficult to retrofit afterwards. When you are retrofitting things, it means they were not designed correctly in the first place. When I speak to designers, they tell me they might be given 100 criteria for design of a mobile phone or something, but if the criteria are not there for it to be repaired or reused, that is not one of things they build into the design. The question is to get it into the design. There is already an eco-design directive from the EU, with a second one coming out soon. There is also an organisation called CIRCULÉIRE, which is a public private partnership created by this Department in co-operation with Irish Manufacturing Research, the EPA and EIT Climate-KIC. It aims to test, finance and scale circular manufacturing solutions to deliver significant reductions in both CO2 emissions and waste across its members. CIRCULÉIRE is an opportunity to develop state-of-the-art circular manufacturing techniques in Ireland. The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications is committed to the future development of the project. The Environment Fund will be renamed the circular economy fund in line with the Circular Economy and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2022. The purpose of that Act is to facilitate the move to a circular economy and I can see that design is one of the elements to be promoted. I suppose we will have to change how we teach people in our third level institutions.

Deputy Bruton also asked about green procurement. The EPA publishes an output report on green procurement and the most recent version published is for 2020. There were very low levels of green public procurement in that report. Getting public procurement to go green is important from two points of view. It is a very large portion of expenditure in the economy, and it also has the effect of leading by example. I am worried that if we are not careful and do not update our procurement frameworks, the private sector will be doing its procurement in a greener way than the public sector. With that in mind the programme for Government included a commitment that we would update all of our frameworks for green procurement within three years. The deadline for that is the middle of this year, which is the end of June 2023. The last time I checked, we were in the high 80s for the percentage of procurement frameworks converted to green procurement.

The Deputy also asked how we can keep track of who is using these frameworks. I am responsible for procurement in the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, and I have been looking at the data we are collecting from frameworks. We have more usage data in some of our frameworks than others. We are able to see how often a framework is used and how often it is deployed. However, it is important to make sure that we are not running a green framework and a brown framework, the traditional classic framework, in parallel. We find that people just keep using the one they know, which is the one they understand. They do not switch over to one unless we retire the other. That is an important part of it. We will be publishing more detailed data on procurement. It will not just be the EPA reviewing us. We need to be ahead of that in seeing the extent to which we are using them. For example, there is an electric vehicle framework. This year, as part of the climate action plan, public sector bodies are not meant to buy non-electric vehicles unless it is impossible to do otherwise. I have usage data on how often electric vehicles are being bought and how often diesel and petrol vehicles are being bought. I can see that shifting dramatically over the past few months. I do not have data for the last quarter. It is absolutely critical.

One thing the Deputy has mentioned is procurement in hospitals. Our hospital procurement is the largest purchasing agent in the country.

Hospitals are not traditionally areas where a lot of green procurement would be found. They tend to burn all their waste for reasons of infection control, which is understandable, but that does not mean a hospital could not make an attempt at sustainability. We are looking at what best practice is in other countries because some medical institutions have done well and progressed well. I have been to visit factories in Waterford that are converting personal protective equipment, PPE, into other plastic products, for example. You might think all PPE would have to be burned but once it is brought to a certain temperature, it can be recycled. There are options for sustainability and green procurement and I am working with John Swords, the chief procurement officer of the HSE, to ensure we get better value for money and green procurement in our hospital sector.

Deputy Richard Bruton

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. He is right, and one of the CIRCULÉIRE projects he refers to is the recovery of injectables. Plastic injectables are being recovered in a successful project so there is no sector that is out of bounds. The key issue will be what targets the Department sets. Is the Department any closer to deciding if there will be a reuse target in particular sectors? If so, what will that look like and what will the Government be asking of people? Will there be a change to the extended producer responsibilities and those obligations? I ask the Minister of State to outline what the shape of the new regime for target setting will be, or does the Government still have some way to go on that?

On energy efficiency, every Department and agency is required to produce its energy efficiency details and the Minister of State is reporting that in this meeting. Should we not be doing something similar with the key public procurers in order that they see there is a framework available to them to adopt green procurement? There could be some tracking system within which they report on what is procured and do so in a different way to minimise their environmental impact. Could that be done in the same way that Departments report on their energy efficiency? I do not know if the Department is getting adequate reporting within the framework but a couple of years ago reporting was almost impossible. It was like trying to catch an eel as it was very hard to get a handle on what different Departments were doing. Can the Department get cross-government agreement to have some reporting regime on green procurement?

Deputy Ossian Smyth

The first question was about what shape the targets will take. When I look at the existing targets there are a lot of recycling targets but just about no reuse targets. I was looking at the waste electrical and electronic equipment, WEEE, scheme rules, which are due for update this year. The WEEE scheme, as the Deputy knows, is for bringing back electronics to retailers and so on. There is no reference to reuse in those scheme rules. We will be updating them this year, however, and I expect reuse will go into that update. In the past, there have been public procurement guidelines that have suggested not using reused products on the basis that they might not be trustworthy. I am addressing those matters one by one, as I find them, and that is a challenge.

The Deputy asked when the targets will be published. They will be published later this year as part of the updated circular economy strategy. The Deputy asked me to give a shape to the targets. I am not quite sure what he means by that. We are still working on the issue so we are not there yet.

Deputy Richard Bruton

The Department could have a target to reduce material use or it could have a reuse or recycling target. It could also have one of the broader indicators of impact that are being developed. The French have brought in a repairability rating that has to be produced on labelling. It would be interesting to see the flavour of things like that. I know the Government cannot impose those targets unilaterally and require that they be achieved in six months but it would be helpful to set the expectation that if, in two years' time, a product does not have a repairability rating, something will happen to the company's capacity to present to the market. That sort of thing would be a useful nudge.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I am not sure how avoidance would be measured, for example, which is what we are doing with coffee cups in that we are trying to get people not to use them, let alone reuse or recycle them. Avoidance is the first option. I am happy the French are introducing repairability ratings and there is an EU-wide scheme due on repairability and durability labelling. However, there is always an argument not to wait for the EU and to move first. We are carefully examining what the French are doing. They are concentrating on avoidance, which is honourable and a good idea. We are tracking what they are doing in the food sector, for example.

The Deputy asked how we would report on green public procurement usage. I did not quite understand the question. What kind of data is he looking for? What kind of reporting does he envision on green public procurement? What would he like to see that he is not getting?

Deputy Richard Bruton

I suggest the Minister of State ask the EPA to suggest a framework to be adopted by the Government and that all Departments be required to follow such an EPA-recommended framework. It would be something like that; I do not want to try to make one up.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

The Government mandates that every Department follow its public procurement frameworks and if the public-----

Deputy Richard Bruton

In the area of energy efficiency we ask for reports on the extent to which the use of energy is being reduced and on energy efficiency. My suggestion would be similar. The EPA could suggest a framework that would be relatively easy to apply and people would then be required to report against that framework. We would then start to get some sort of benchmark of where we are and a steady improvement would be seen.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

How would energy efficiency among public sector bodies be measured? Would expenditure be measured?

Deputy Richard Bruton

They already do that. It is already measured. Therefore, it is a question of introducing a new dimension and measuring green procurement. Material efficiency and energy efficiency would become criteria that would be reported by public bodies. I suggest something along those lines; I am not being prescriptive.

Deputy Ossian Smyth

I will ask the EPA for advice on that.

Chairman

As there are no other members indicating, we will conclude our consideration of the Revised Estimates. I thank the Minister of State and his officials for assisting the committee.