Private Members Motion on Energy Policy - 25th October 2006

Private Members Motion on Energy Policy - 25th October 2006
Mr. Norris: I would also like to compliment my colleague, Senator O’Toole, on putting down this motion. I know the Senator and Senator Brian Hayes have been pushing this matter. When I was considering it myself, I thought I had struck it lucky because I found something that was so absurd it would grab the attention of the House. Senator O’Toole beat me to it.
I am referring to this extraordinary and shameful Department memo pointed out by the Senator, which states the Department does not want to signal the situation to the outside because it might create some difficulties for hollow block manufacturers. It is staggering that the welfare of the country, our commitment to the Kyoto Protocol and the welfare of people purchasing these homes should be of less significance than a section of the building industry to which, lamentably, this Government appears to be still in thrall. That is something which is utterly shameful and which has not been faced in any contributions. I sincerely hope the Minister of State will have the guts to address the issue and apologise for this utterly shameful and unforgivable attitude. I hope the Irish people get to know a bit about this memorandum, the cynical attitude and the favouring of one section. There was a green cement company here but the Government did absolutely nothing to encourage it because of its commitments to the major cement groups. That is absolutely regrettable.
We are in a boom, and many houses are being built. From time to time the Government compliments itself on the numbers of houses being built. The problem with this is that houses consume much energy and produce various by-products. Buildings of all types account for at least 40% of our energy consumption, with a cost of €3.5 billion a year. As a result, and particularly with the projected rise in mortgages, young people especially will find great difficulties.
I am quoting to a certain extent from an article in The Irish Times by Mr. Frank McDonald from a very fine series of investigative reports. He quotes Sustainable Energy Ireland in estimating the average household’s annual energy bill for electricity and space heating at approximately €1,700. Associated CO 2 emissions are 8.5 tonnes a year for each household. One of the reasons for this is that the building of the houses is not energy efficient, as Senator O’Toole has indicated, particularly with the hollow block construction.
We have known this for a long time. Some ten, 20 or 30 years ago I remember people talking about the need to insulate houses, even just to keep the heat in. We were not worrying about Kyoto at that stage. We have done precious little to address this subject. This places the memo in a singularly cynical condition.
The new regulations were not introduced until 2002, and there was an exemption for planning permissions lodged before the end of the year. The consequence of that was nearly 300,000 homes being built with the old standards. They were energy inefficient. The Government, as I have stated, put the interests of one section of the cement industry above everything else.
We are part of the European Union. Whether it comes early or late, and whether we procrastinate, delay and seek derogations, we will have to face our obligations eventually. The European Union is involved in this area through the performance of a buildings directive. Under that, every house offered for sale or rent will be required to have a building energy rating. It will be just like the labelling spoken of earlier.
Again, this was supposed to come into effect on 1 January 2007 for new houses.
Mr. O’Toole: It was 2006.
Mr. Norris: I stand corrected. Regardless of whether the introduction was 2006, it will not be put in place yet anyway. Cynically, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, got a transitional arrangement agreement, under which construction works for which planning permission was sought on or before June 30 last are exempt, provided they are substantially completed by the end of June 2008. It is another exercise in procrastination, another delivery of a large number of energy inefficient houses on to the market. This is to the detriment of the customers and our obligations.
We have mentioned the Kyoto Protocol. We have already had to buy €185 million of carbon credits. If this matter is not properly addressed, it is estimated we could pay up to €5 billion in a few years’ time. That is a big bill for the taxpayer.
The general standard is still relatively low because nothing has been done. This is another area in which the Minister could be involved in, part L of the building regulations. That section deals with energy efficiency. Nothing has been done to strengthen the area since we adopted the current version in 2002. It will not be revised until 2008, as once again an option not to do so was exercised by the Government. It has again weaselled out of it, deliberately avoiding the targets set.
This makes the amendment to tonight’s motion one of the most laughable I have ever seen in this House. Senator O’Toole is completely correct. The penultimate paragraph has the gall to congratulate “the Government for its prompt action in implementing the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive”. Is the Government stark raving mad? How can it congratulate itself on actions it has not taken? It is congratulating itself on an absolute dereliction of duty in this area. I am surprised even the brass necks on the other side of the House are prepared to try to pull this one off.
The issue does not just concern homes, but businesses. There are a significant number of new office blocks, particularly in Dublin. These are not especially energy efficient. Office blocks, by and large, consume twice as much energy as naturally ventilated alternatives. I do not want to be seen to attack authority all the time so I wish to acknowledge that Fingal County Council has produced an environmentally friendly building in the shape of Fingal County Hall. It is energy efficient and the type of building we could construct everywhere instead of environmentally destructive buildings.
I have spoken about the way the Government, for its own reasons which may be fairly murky, favour one sector of the cement industry over another to the disadvantage of the green cement sector. The cement industry represents a highly carbon-intensive part of our industrial framework and is the second largest industrial source of emissions. It emits into the Irish atmosphere one tonne of CO2 for every tonne of cement it produces. A tonne for a tonne is a staggering statistic but it can be reduced and has been reduced by up to 300,000 tonnes per annum, or 7%.
In 1990, when wooden houses were first constructed, they represented 1% of the total but that figure now stands at 27%. In a few years it will be 50%. Senator Kitt might have been correct that in the early days they were relatively expensive, but they are now cheaper as well as more efficient than other methods of construction. They are much more comfortable to live in, being cool in the summer and warm in the winter. They can also be built much more rapidly than other forms of house.
Information on wastage in buildings and on suggested alternatives was communicated to the Government by Mr. McCaughey, who also drew attention to the Government’s obligations, in the course of evidence to the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government. He said:
Although I sent my original letter to the then Minister, Deputy Dempsey, informing him of the British Government Departments’ research on 4 February 1998, nothing was done about it until 1 January 2003. During those five years, a staggering 250,000 houses were built to a standard of energy efficiency that was 35% below what it should have been.
Again, this was a bad deal for the country, the house buyer and the house owner and something of which this Government should be thoroughly ashamed.
I commend Senator O’Toole on putting this motion on the Order Paper. I am astonished at the gall of the Government in tabling such an unrealistic and not entirely honest amendment. It is about time we faced up to our obligations to our young people trying to buy decent houses that will not bankrupt them in energy costs nor spoil the environment. I congratulate the Senator.
Mr. Brady: I second the amendment. I welcome the Minister of State and the opportunity to discuss this issue as a member of the Joint Committee on Environment and Local Government. The issue arises regularly and has been discussed with most of the stakeholders involved. My experience with the committee tells me that huge strides have been made in recent years. By the introduction of firm but fair policies over the past ten years, we have made huge progress. The figures speak for themselves.
Mr. Norris: They certainly do.
Mr. Brady: Emissions from the average dwelling have fallen by 30% in the past 14 years and are on target to fall by over 50% by the time we have to meet our commitments under Kyoto. That is a sign of prudent Government.
A certain amount of hysteria surrounds these issues. For example, approximately 250,000 native Irish are employed by the construction industry. If we were to interfere with that or try to change regulations governing certain areas of the industry just because some people do not like them, we would do a disservice not only to ourselves but the country. When so many people are employed in an industry, it must be strongly regulated.
Mr. Norris: Could they not be employed building better houses?
Mr. Brady: We are on target to fulfil commitments made even by previous Governments. At EU level, Ireland has led the way in many cases.
Mr. Norris: Why do we have to buy carbon credits?