6 February 2003 Edition
Protecting the environment - Coalition doesn't care
BY ROBBIE SMYTH
Everyone wants to protect the environment don't they? Not if you're in the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrat coalition.
Environmental protection is, it seems, the last thing on their agenda. It's not that this government won't stand up to Britain or the EU over their support for nuclear power, nor that the coalition is actively promoting the incinerator option, no, this week's environmental capitulation is on greenhouse gases.
Not only is there not one voice in the Dublin government actively articulating a pro-environment voice, there are many who are actively lobbying against pro-environmental policies.
Last week, the Department of Finance released discussion documents produced in advance of last December's budget. The Tax Strategy Group's deliberations centred on what energy taxes were needed, if any, to help the 26 Countie state fulfil its obligations under the 1997 Kyoto Convention on Climate Change. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 26 Counties must not let greenhouse gas emissions rise by more that 13% of their 1990 level. By 2000, greenhouse gas emissions here were already 24% above their 1990 level.
Martin Cullen's Department of Environment and Local Government had proposed a carbon tax levied on fuel, with the higher rates falling on fuels that gave off larger greenhouse gas discharges. The tax would have increased household energy bills by 6% and increased industry fuel bills by 9%.
Cullen wanted the tax introduced in 2003, without giving industry or homeowners the chance to change their energy consumption patterns and even though their own tax strategy paper concludes that "the tax should be directed at the agents most capable of the behavioural changes". The paper also concludes that it was power stations and motorist that should be taxed, yet the Cullen proposals were much more extensive and would hit all households.
It fell to the department of Social and Family Affairs to point out that up to 300,000 26-County households are dependant on fuel allowances and would be hit hard by the price increases.
It is unclear in the Environment Department's thinking how imposing taxes on the consumers of energy would create the conditions for the producers of energy to find ways of producing emissions.
Charlie McCreevy's Finance Department has effectively vetoed the Cullen proposals, refusing to include them in the last budget and saying that proposals would be announced at the end of 2004, seven years after the Kyoto Accord was agreed.
Also opposed to the carbon tax is Mary Harney's Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment, which instead favours using "negotiated agreements". This means buying emission quotas from other European states without actually doing anything to lower greenhouse gas emissions here.
The government policy ranges from penalising consumers, to doing nothing or simply buying our way out of responsibilities. In the same budget, Charlie McCreevy withdrew tax relief for wind farm projects, even though increased use of renewable resources as a method of generating electricity could reduce Irish greenhouse gas emissions.
What is not in the tax strategy papers is a recognition of the need for the government to take a proactive stance and begin a process of offering incentives to move electricity production into renewable resources, more funding for public over private transport or investing in new innovative methods of energy conservation.
Instead, the message from the coalition is a simple one. You can do nothing, buy your way out of trouble or make the weakest in society carry the cost. Once again, it is business as usual from this coalition.
Everyone wants to protect the environment don't they? Not if you're in the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrat coalition.
Environmental protection is, it seems, the last thing on their agenda. It's not that this government won't stand up to Britain or the EU over their support for nuclear power, nor that the coalition is actively promoting the incinerator option, no, this week's environmental capitulation is on greenhouse gases.
Not only is there not one voice in the Dublin government actively articulating a pro-environment voice, there are many who are actively lobbying against pro-environmental policies.
Last week, the Department of Finance released discussion documents produced in advance of last December's budget. The Tax Strategy Group's deliberations centred on what energy taxes were needed, if any, to help the 26 Countie state fulfil its obligations under the 1997 Kyoto Convention on Climate Change. Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 26 Counties must not let greenhouse gas emissions rise by more that 13% of their 1990 level. By 2000, greenhouse gas emissions here were already 24% above their 1990 level.
Martin Cullen's Department of Environment and Local Government had proposed a carbon tax levied on fuel, with the higher rates falling on fuels that gave off larger greenhouse gas discharges. The tax would have increased household energy bills by 6% and increased industry fuel bills by 9%.
Cullen wanted the tax introduced in 2003, without giving industry or homeowners the chance to change their energy consumption patterns and even though their own tax strategy paper concludes that "the tax should be directed at the agents most capable of the behavioural changes". The paper also concludes that it was power stations and motorist that should be taxed, yet the Cullen proposals were much more extensive and would hit all households.
It fell to the department of Social and Family Affairs to point out that up to 300,000 26-County households are dependant on fuel allowances and would be hit hard by the price increases.
It is unclear in the Environment Department's thinking how imposing taxes on the consumers of energy would create the conditions for the producers of energy to find ways of producing emissions.
Charlie McCreevy's Finance Department has effectively vetoed the Cullen proposals, refusing to include them in the last budget and saying that proposals would be announced at the end of 2004, seven years after the Kyoto Accord was agreed.
Also opposed to the carbon tax is Mary Harney's Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment, which instead favours using "negotiated agreements". This means buying emission quotas from other European states without actually doing anything to lower greenhouse gas emissions here.
The government policy ranges from penalising consumers, to doing nothing or simply buying our way out of responsibilities. In the same budget, Charlie McCreevy withdrew tax relief for wind farm projects, even though increased use of renewable resources as a method of generating electricity could reduce Irish greenhouse gas emissions.
What is not in the tax strategy papers is a recognition of the need for the government to take a proactive stance and begin a process of offering incentives to move electricity production into renewable resources, more funding for public over private transport or investing in new innovative methods of energy conservation.
Instead, the message from the coalition is a simple one. You can do nothing, buy your way out of trouble or make the weakest in society carry the cost. Once again, it is business as usual from this coalition.