In yesterday's Irish Independent newspaper, a headline read Ireland should seriously look at the option of nuclear power, says the Taoiseach. He said in Yerevan, and I quote the Taoiseach directly, "we certainly should look at and examine options like nuclear power seriously." I asked the Taoiseach the exact same question in the Chamber two weeks ago.

His answer was that "the direction of travel has to be in the renewables area". He dismissed the Barryroe oil field. He defended the 2021 ban on oil and gas exploration. He cited the enormous costs on nuclear energy - that is the record - as a reason for caution. That position is on the record of this House in response to my question. Which is it? Is it the answer that the Taoiseach gave this Chamber two weeks ago or the answer that he gave the cameras in Armenia?

The contradiction continues. The Minister for Finance and Tánaiste, Deputy Harris, says that nuclear energy should be considered with an open mind. The Minister for public expenditure, Deputy Chambers, has said that there is an argument for nuclear energy, that the argument is decades old and that we are now living in a different world. Billy Kelleher MEP, the President that would be, says that he would back a motion to overturn the 1999 ban at the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis later this month. The Taoiseach's Ministers, MEPs and backbenchers are all moving in one direction, yet the 1999 ban remains law, the 2021 oil and gas exploration ban remains law and the Government has not introduced legislation to lift the nuclear prohibitions and does not have plans to reverse the exploration ban.

I made the point to the Taoiseach in this Chamber two weeks ago - it is on the record of the House that he did not deny it - that Ireland bans nuclear energy at home while it imports nuclear-generated energy directly from France through the Celtic interconnector. That is not climate leadership but policy contradiction, which is sitting unanswered on the record of this House. Ireland imports 86% of its energy, one of the highest dependence rates in Europe. Norway and the United Kingdom face the same markets - and the same pressures, indeed - but they produce energy; we import it. They have options; we have none, because of Government policy that has closed every door and dressed it up as Government policy.

Will the Taoiseach today in this House, on the record, commit to bringing forward Government legislation to lift the 1999 nuclear ban? Will he reverse the 2021 gas and oil exploration ban to allow Barryroe to be excavated? Will Irish families continue to pay the highest prices in Europe? Will the Taoiseach save his real answers for foreign summits?

When the Deputy asked that question last month, I stressed the importance of renewable energy. In Armenia, I made it very clear that our immediate focus is on offshore wind. I pointed out the very significant progress we have made in respect of onshore wind and, indeed, solar. Solar is moving at pace in Ireland and I trust the Deputy is supportive of that. Deputy James O'Connor is introducing legislation which the Government will examine, along with the question of a legislative response in respect of nuclear, but we understand that it will take time. It is not going to immediately alleviate the pressures that people are under. One of the reasons we announced investment in a strategic reserve of liquefied natural gas, LNG, for example, was to deal with the security issue of energy supply. If anything were to happen to gas interconnectors through malign third-party actors, we would need a fallback. That got attacked as an anti-climate measure-----

It is.

-----or was somehow portrayed as rowing back when, in fact, it was the very strong advice in the Department in respect of our vulnerability to anything happening to those gas interconnectors.

We are not connected yet to France so we are not yet importing nuclear. That has been delayed a bit, through no fault of the Government or anything like that. I take the Deputy's point that once that connection happens, we will, to all intents and purposes, be importing energy generated through France's nuclear capacity. If we connect to Spain in the fullness of time, it would more likely be renewable of one sort or another, given the prevalence of renewable in the Iberian Peninsula.

I believe we should have a serious examination of nuclear because we need to work out costs and timelines. There have been advances in technology in the smaller reactors and so on, and I am all for that.

Barryroe has been around a long time.

So has the Taoiseach.

Not quite as long as Barryroe, although I do travel the length and breath of the Barryroe parish.

The oil issue has been around for a long time. Successive companies - this is the only point I will make in respect of it - did not feel the capacity was there or were not in a position to bring it to the surface and so on. It did not appear at any stage to be economical through its a long history. I am not an expert on that. We are very clearly focused on the renewable agenda and have made huge progress in this country. If we are honest, fossil fuels have impacted negatively on the world for a long time.

I thank the Taoiseach. What he has done in this Chamber is exactly what he did in Armenia, namely he said a great deal while committing to nothing. Within the past hour, the Taoiseach has twice referenced renewables and connecting to Spain. It is worth putting this on the record of the House because people hold up Spain as the great renewable energy country. Renewable energy in Spain is at 21% while its nuclear energy is at 20%. If we connect to Spain, which is the Taoiseach's plan, we will take nuclear energy from it. We have to admit there is a policy deficit here. We are looking at taking nuclear energy from a foreign body but there is a ban in the Government's legislation on such energy.

We have spoken about Barryroe. We have been back and forth on it. Deputy Collins has been brilliant in speaking about Barryroe. Lift the ban, let them drill and let them decide. Let them see if there are 1.6 billion barrels of oil in that oil field. Let us take that because we realise we will be stuck with that type of energy for the next decade.

I thank the Deputy for his commentary. I am consistent. We should examine the issue of the potential of nuclear power given the changing technologies and how technology has advanced. However, our first priority in the here and now is renewables, including wind, solar and anaerobic digestion. We have made a lot of progress on those fronts, in particular solar latterly. Industry, in particular, has adopted solar, be it rooftop or in farms adjacent to major factories. There has been a very successful outcome.

On the accelerated EU proposals for greater EU level co-ordination, the EU grids package is key. That means connecting to Europe more and more and Europe developing strong grid connection to give it energy security and independence. The biggest negative impact on Europe is this energy question. We have had numerous crises going back over five decades and we need to make sure the next five decades are not similar.