Paul Murphy: Demands moratorium on data centres and subsidies

The Taoiseach says a lot of progress was made, but it's just not true. The problem is, you look at the Taoiseach's speech in Egypt, fine words, and then he comes home and it is business as usual. I'll give you one example. The Minister for Local Government, in your government, has overturned the democratic decision of South Dublin County Council to ban new data centres for the duration of the next county development plan. It's a motion that was proposed by PBP Councillor Madeleine Johansson and passed back in June. South Dublin is the data centre hub of Ireland. About half of all the data centres in Ireland are there. We know that data centres in total are using 17% now of our electricity, more than all the rural homes put together. To add insult to injury, the Government didn't exempt data centres from the TBES scheme. So we're now going to be paying these data centres, consuming an inordinate amount of electricity, up to €30,000 a year, subsidising some of the biggest, richest corporations in the world. Do you not agree we need a moratorium? Will you not overturn the decision of your Minister for Local Government and reinstate the bank? Deputy Deputy Mayor McConroy Walsh. Deputy Mayor Thanks. Deputy Mayor Walsh. Deputy Mayor Walsh. Deputy Mayor Walsh, certainly in terms of retrofitting. When Sinn Féin makes propositions I do not know whether you ever want anything done at all, because it is a very good retrofit programme. There has been a 130 per cent increase in applications. It is about getting energy efficiency into our entire system. Its fundamental priority is energy efficiency and reducing energy waste. There are some very good schemes that are targeted, especially at those on low incomes. There is an independent local government retrofit scheme for local authority housing. Then you have the Better Homes programme, which is for people on low incomes more generally, and that has expanded. Then you have the 80 per cent grant for insulation, which is more general and it is more the first phase. Then you have more deep retrofit. The issue really is getting capacity in the industry up. I think it is very important that we give that certainty to the industry over the next 10 years in terms of getting all the skill sets in place and all the capacity there to get moving and to get going. I think a lot of work has been done and it is not about prioritising the wealthy. That is an outrageous kind of assertion that is made. This is about prioritising energy efficiency and getting a well-balanced scheme that does that. Deputy O'Sullivan was the issue of our targets and I do take your point in respect of speed and the need to really get going at speed. That is why the new Planning Act is endeavouring to try and streamline, codify and consolidate all of the Planning Acts over the last number of decades and to have a more streamlined approach between the new MARA, of course the Act is coming in also, but between the Board Penalty, between local authorities and between courts and that is a much more clear or transparent system with timelines in place for people who put in applications so that they can expect outcomes within specified timeframes. I think that is very important. On the wind, we do need to move faster than we are moving and I will check in with the foreshore licence because I was informed with the Minister of Agriculture that things have improved there, but I certainly would look forward to engaging with yourself and the Minister of Agriculture on that specific issue. I think we need to move on that. The European Commission is looking at a particular clause whereby it would be in the overall public interest to move forward on offshore wind that would transcend other interests in terms of getting wind farms built and offshore winds. At the moment, it can take eight years from concept for the construction of a wind farm across Europe, and that is not just good enough given the existential crisis that climate change represents. WB Smith raised the loss and damage. Could I just make a general point? Ireland is not responsible for the world. You know, one gets the impression from some of the contributions here today that somehow because COP didn't reach, no generally make a point through the Chair, that because COP didn't reach certain outcomes and so on is Ireland's responsibility. Like Ireland makes a very progressive and constructive contribution to these international gatherings and takes it very, very seriously, and our officials and political representatives of COP apply themselves seriously to this to try and get agreement. Because I think an agreement is better than no agreement. I genuinely believe that. In terms of the loss and damage and the failure, we have made proposals in that regard. We have put forward a target of £225 million per annum by 2025. We are not there yet, and that is Ireland's commitment in terms of funding, and we have to take significant increase of funding next year and the year after to reach that particular target, and we are doing everything we possibly can to reduce. The Deputy Batchett's question, never mind. I asked you about why you issued licences for drilling. I will come to that, but you also raised loss and damage. Yes, but the direct question I asked you was the irony of giving licences for drilling. For clarity, we have 30 seconds left and there are four remaining TDs waiting on their answers. I take that, but a lot of questions have been asked. I have dealt with loss and damage, and that would fail you to limit general temperature. I was coming on to your next one, which is licence extension to Europa and existing licence holders. I have others to come, so I do not know whether we can get just a few minutes. Yes, but we could just focus on the extension. Europa already have a licence. There are legal constraints on government in terms of existing licence holders. This Iraq has decided to ban any future or recommended the banning of any future licences to be issued. Government has adhered to that. That is part of the programme for government. But in terms of existing licence holders, of which there are just a few, one or two, to the best of my knowledge, in the case of Europa, the department officials, independently of the minister, examine that. Within the legal framework, we have to obey the law. We cannot break the law. I am shocked that the bill I am referring to would change the law. Please, no. In terms of existing licence holders, that is the legal position, and the vast, vast majority of fossil fuels have been left underground in Ireland. That is the reality. You know that. We are not entertaining any new licence applications. In terms of Deputy Boyd Barrett's view, your absolute zealous focus on the US is noted. I would say this to you that without the United States last year, there would have been no cop at all of any merit or substance. President Biden has brought a huge change internationally to the whole climate change agenda, along with his representatives Kerry and former American presidents who are all really focused on trying to get outcomes at these cop. That needs to be acknowledged, unlike other big powers who are not making the same contribution at this stage to the international effort. The US has an awful lot more to do. It is not just about military, it is just generally. There is a far more polarised debate within the US on this issue, as you know. It is far better that we would actually commend, affirm those who are progressive in the United States, who make no issue about climate change and are trying to advance climate change, rather than to be decrying them all of the time. The US is the big baddie of the world and nobody else, it seems to me, in terms of your presentations. Deputy Murphy raised the data centres and I would say, for the duration, you represent County Dublin. First of all, because of the digital age, data centres are a reality, unless you want to de-digitalise the entire society and economy. Do you want to de-digitalise it? You need to be honest, I think, through the chair and front up on that. We have a framework that the CRU, the Commission on the Regulatory Utility Body, has come up with a policy proposal which the government has adopted, and the government has published a statement in respect of a moderate position on the utilisation of data centres and further data centres. The bottom line is that there are thousands of jobs depending on data centres. Many investment companies coming in here are saying that it is not just one or the other, but you do not really worry about FDI investment because, according to your economic model, you would not favour the FDI model. Deputy Murphy, just one minute. It is not an interaction, and we are already reduced on the next line of questions down to ten minutes, so if we could just get the answers, please, to the questions. It is not an interaction. Deputy Murphy, okay, fair enough, but I do get constantly interrupted as well, but it is just fair enough, I do not have an issue with it. Deputy Batchik, climate finance, that is our commitment, 225 million by 2025 on a permanent basis. Within that, then, we allocated 10 million to the global shield. What is not required, actually, is concrete proposals and initiatives around the climate finance that we can support. Our embassies bilaterally are working with, particularly in Africa, are working with governments and NGOs to see how best we can apply that money on climate finance issues. I think also there is a need for integration across other files as well. In other words, I do not think we can deal with it in silos, as the World Food Programme made the point, that there is too much silo thinking across the entire aid programme now. We need more crop resilience, we need to invest more in all of that, and all that is kind of part of climate finance, because in many countries now their food production systems are failing because of climate, so how can we make their food production system more resilient? I think that is where some of our climate finance could usefully be applied and allocated. I think we need to work with other NGOs, other governments, like-minded governments across Europe, because the European Union still remains the biggest donor in all of this respect, and the European Union is probably the most constructive contributor, in my view, to COP more generally, along with others as well. Deputy Barry referenced again the lead last year for COP26 in Glasgow, who did a fantastic job in what he achieved at Glasgow. Again, I do not believe the corporations and their puppets as politicians. Sometimes I wonder, through the Chair, I often wonder, have we some useful puppets here too for other jurisdictions, but that is another day's work, because believe me, who are you a puppet for? Who do you think? Well, we let people think and reflect and cast their own views on that. I think your record for the last 10 years, when you guys were neutral, when Crimea was invaded, it kind of tells me who you are useful puppets for. No, we weren't. The point is that the European Union Government, Deputy Barry, is extremely constructive and protective. The European Union Governments are the most consistently constructive and proactive on climate change, and you can never bring yourself to acknowledge that. Thank you. All you guys can do is attack the European Union and attack the United States every single day, he shook away. Almost to the exclusion of anybody else. I don't know why. I don't know why. I'm going to ask questions 15 to 22 together. As I said out of my statement to the House on the 16th of November, I attended a meeting of the European Council in Brussels on the 20th to 21st of October. Issues discussed included developments in Russia's war on Ukraine and its wider impacts, supply and price challenges on energy, economic issues and a number of external relations issues, including preparation of COP27 and the upcoming EU-ASEAN summit. On energy, we agreed to take steps to take forward work to tackle the price and supply crisis urgently, including improving the functioning and stability of energy markets, addressing spikes in prices, saving energy and accelerating deployment of renewables. Given the extent to which the issue is having a negative impact on citizens and enterprises, it is important that the European Union and its Member States continue to work collectively to create stability in the market. We also discussed the latest developments in Russia's war on Ukraine, including its impact both in Ukraine and further afield. We condemned and discriminate Russian missile and drone attacks on civilians and infrastructure, including the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, as well as the illegal annexation by Russia of Ukraine's Donetsk, Lehansk, Zaporizhia and Kherson regions. The European Union will never recognise these illegal annexations. We stated our intention to continue to provide political, financial and other supports to Ukraine for as long as it takes, and reaffirmed our commitment to hold Russia to account for its war crimes. The European Council condemned action by Iran in support of Russia's war, and we welcomed sanctions adopted on the 28th of October 2022 in this regard. We also called on the Belarusian authorities to stop enabling the Russian war of aggression by permitting Russian armed forces to use Belarusian territory. Through its tactic of weaponising food in its war against Ukraine, Russia is responsible for the global food security crisis. To counter this, the European Union-Ukraine solidarity lanes have made the export of Ukrainian crops, agricultural products and fertilisers possible. Leaders expressed support for the call by the United Nations Secretary-General for the extension of the United Nations Black Sea Grain initiative. On Iran, we condemn the unacceptable use of force by Iranian authorities against peaceful protesters, and protesters, in particular against women. Women in Iran are being denied their civil and political rights. The meeting also held a strategic discussion.