Apologies have been received from Deputies Michael Murphy and Paul Nicholas Gogarty.

Today, we are meeting to resume our work on the implementation of the UN sustainable development goals. Before the summer, we held two hearings with interested stakeholders and last week we had a very productive meeting with the Minister of State, Deputy Neale Richmond. Today we are joined by the Minister of State at the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment, Deputy Timmy Dooley, who also has responsibility for the marine. I am very grateful to him. This gives us an opportunity to explore the implementation of the sustainable development goals domestically and the important role of the EU in supporting and funding this work. After this, we plan to prepare and publish a report on this issue. There may be input from another witness, but we are working towards that anyway. I remind members that the focus is on the EU-level implementation and the efforts undertaken in conjunction with the EU institutions and their agencies. I also inform members that the Minister of State will have to leave at 5 p.m. and we are under a small bit of pressure to conclude by then.

Members will be aware of the notice on privilege. I am obliged to read it out. I remind witnesses of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect 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. If there is a member joining us online, we will come to that in due course.

I invite the Minister of State to make his opening statement and then we will go to questions from members.

I thank the Chair. I thank the committee for the invitation and for its work. Certainly, we appreciate an opportunity to discuss where we are at on the sustainable development goals, SDGs.

In July this year, at the United Nations High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development in New York, the Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, reiterated Ireland's commitment to the SDGs, noting that living up to the promise of the 2030 agenda is a shared responsibility, with effective co-operation among all actors leading to more practical, inclusive and adaptable solutions for accelerating progress towards achievement of the SDGs. The SDGs are universally applicable, and we in Ireland can be proud of our commitment to supporting them. In an era of uncertainty, crises and conflict, the 2030 agenda for sustainable development and, indeed, the 17 SDGs could not be more important, providing a plan of action to end poverty, protect the planet and secure peace and prosperity for everyone, while ensuring that we leave no one behind.

As the committee will be aware, in Ireland, we have taken a whole-of-government approach to implementing the SDGs, with each Minister having specific responsibility for implementing individual SDG targets related to their ministerial functions. The Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment has overall responsibility for promoting the SDGs and overseeing their coherent implementation across government, including the development of national implementation plans. The second national implementation plan for the SDGs sets out the overarching national governance, co-ordination and monitoring for the SDGs and its implementation is ongoing. The third national implementation plan, currently in development, will build on previous plans and, as committed to in the programme for Government, focus on the integration of the SDGs into national policies and initiatives, ensuring that each goal is actively pursued across all levels of government.

The public consultation process for the development of the new plan, which we will launch in early December, will include several phases and different strands of consultation, both online and in person, to reach the widest possible range of stakeholders. A collaborative and participatory approach is being taken to develop the plan and will involve multiple stakeholders, including Members of the Oireachtas, Departments, local authorities, non-governmental organisations, civil society and various sectoral actors, such as business and academia, youth and marginalised groups. That is where there is a real opportunity for the committee and the Oireachtas generally. I have always taken the view that when issues are discussed here, they get reported on and, consequentially, they get discussed elsewhere. It is important to see the work that this committee is doing.

Ireland's recent participation in a multi-country OECD project entitled Building Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development across national and local government in Ireland will also inform the development of the new national implementation plan. The OECD policy coherence scan for Ireland report was published in July 2025 as part of this project and examines Ireland's efforts to achieve the SDGs through enhanced policy coherence for sustainable development. It provides an overview of Ireland's legislation, institutional mechanisms, policy tools and processes aimed at promoting policy coherence for sustainable development, PCSD, identifying strengths, weaknesses and possible ways forward to enhance PCSD. The report acknowledges significant progress that Ireland has demonstrated in aligning national policies with the SDGs and that ongoing efforts aim to bridge the remaining gaps between policy ambition and implementation.

Ensuring ongoing and meaningful stakeholder engagement is crucial to ensure successful, inclusive and equitable outcomes. The SDG national stakeholder forum was established to provide a mechanism for stakeholders from all sectors to discuss and workshop innovative ideas and solutions for achieving the SDGs in Ireland. The SDG national stakeholder forum committee has also been put in place, and its role includes ensuring the fora adapt a whole-of-society approach, ensuring increased awareness of the SDGs across society and the use of accessible communication. There will be two SDG stakeholder fora in 2025. The first took place in Croke Park in September. I was pleased to have participated in that. It formed part of the consultation process for the development of the new national implementation plan, with participants getting the opportunity to give their initial inputs. The second forum will take place in UCC on 2 December on the important theme of SDG localisation - the SDGs working locally. Registration is currently open for this event. I will try to be there, if I can. I certainly hope that other Members of the Oireachtas, particularly those based in Cork, might also try to be there because that would generate publicity for the event and get better communication out there.

The EU working party on the 2030 agenda for sustainable development follows up, monitors and reviews the EU internal and external implementation of the 2030 agenda and Ireland will chair the working group during the Presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second half of 2026. The agenda and work programme will align with the overall Presidency high-level thematic priorities and will be finalised next year. I look forward, as I said, to further engagement with the committee as the preparations for the Presidency continue into next year. I remind the committee that the Tánaiste launched the consultation for Presidency themes last week. It is an online platform. There is an opportunity for people who would wish to make submissions on that. The platform will be open until 12 December. I am sure the Tánaiste would welcome any thoughts the committee might have in that regard.

I thank the Minister of State. Members will each have five minutes. I call Deputy Butterly.

I thank the Minister of State for coming in. I appreciate the time that he gives to this committee.

I welcome the sustainable goals and some of the objectives we have in regard to reducing marine pollution, especially from land-based activities, protecting and sustainably managing our marine and coastal ecosystems. However, I am also mindful that EU fishing rights in British waters were cut by 25% after Brexit. Ireland was worst affected by this, but Louth, in particular. As the Minister will be aware, I am a TD for Louth and east Meath. We really got the brunt of the blow from Brexit in regard to fishing.

In the past 20 years our fleet has gone from 400 boats down to 120 boats. I know from engagement with fishermen across the county, be it Clogherhead or Carlingford, that they are very worried. They realise that offshore wind, which will affect County Louth in particular, is very important for our economy, but when we talk about Dublin prawns or Carlingford prawns, they are actually fished off Port Beach from Clogherhead. We had a situation where that was worth €70 million to the local economy. That has been significantly reduced. I also believe, according to the fishermen who catch the prawns, that once the prawns migrate they never come back and, while it is accepted that there is an initial temporary disturbance to the surface when offshore wind turbines go in, it actually helps the marine background, but not in the case of prawns.

We also have a company that fishes for razor fish and clams. Its hands are tied because it fishes in an area that includes Dundalk Bay, which is an area of conservation. Its hands are tied by the very fact that, first, the quota has to go for the wildlife before they actually fish. Fishermen in my area are really struggling to make an income and wondering where their income is going to come from. I would welcome the Minister of State visiting County Louth. We will take a walk around Clogherhead; it is absolutely gorgeous. The fishermen really are struggling to find a sustainable income and they worry about the future. I would like to hear some of the plans and proposals, especially from the EU side, because we hear about transfers of quotas, but they do not seem to transfer over to us. They go to Norway or, worse, we sometimes see Canadian trawlers coming into our waters.

I thank Deputy Butterly. I look forward to going round the head at Clogherhead with her at some stage. I know Deputy McGreehan has been on to me as well, so maybe we can all get together and go to meet the stakeholders there.

Deputy Butterly has raised a number of important issues in terms of the sustainable goals in the first instance and how the Government's approach to marine ecosystems might be better managed. Today a memo went to Cabinet in relation to the marine protected areas and a proposal we have to move ahead on that. There was legislation in planning for some time. We are moving ahead with that now and we do want to identify by 2030 30% of our sea space. We have seven times more sea space than we have land and we have to designate 30% of those as marine protected areas by 2030. We are at about 9% at the minute under the SAC directive from Europe. We are moving ahead with that, and that is going to help.

Regarding the overall impact of fishing on coastal communities, it is very significant. We have seen scientific advice over the last number of years reducing the allowable catch for many of the main species, including Dublin Bay prawns. There are still some species that are not quota restricted, but fewer and fewer. Some of the pelagic species fish stocks are being reduced dramatically this year and that will have a very real impact on our coastal communities. Today, a memo went to Cabinet on this issue, outlining for the Cabinet the issues of greater concern and how the State might respond. It is yet to be decided how the State might respond to this significant loss of fishing effort and the impact that is going to have on coastal communities. The Deputy raises this in a timely way. It is something we are very mindful of. The approach and how we address it is yet to be determined. I am happy to come back and engage with this committee or any other committee in that regard.

The fishing sector has taken very significant hits in recent years. The Deputy correctly identified that Brexit reduced the fishing effort particularly on some of the pelagic stocks by 26%. Scientific advice last year reduced the allowable catch by another 20% and the recommendation this year is to cut it again, by 70%. Cumulatively that is a lot of effort lost. It impacts not just on the fishermen but on the processors and the knock-on supply chains. We are going through a really difficult time on that. The scientific advice speaks to two things: one is overfishing for sure, and it is something we must address. We recently signed the High Seas Treaty or biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction, BBNJ. agreement, which was a commitment by countries globally that the high seas and waters outside jurisdictions would also be given protection and that there would be certain agreements on how we work collaboratively and collectively on that. That is a positive because there are some parts of the world where fish stocks are continuously overfished in unregulated, unreported and illegal activity.

The Deputy rightly identified how important our marine ecosystem is to climate change and to biodiversity generally. It is really important we do what we can, from our perspective. Our response now is from a conservation perspective really, because we have to cut the fishing take based on the scientific advice because the biomass is reducing all the time. If we do not make a difference now, there will be nothing sustainable in fishing into the future. However, it does have implications for coastal communities. We are mindful of that, and we will come forward with a policy response in due course.

I thank the Minister of State for being with us today. As he is aware, we have been discussing SDGs at this committee for quite a few meetings now and their importance cannot be stressed enough. Despite the fact that we are coming into the consultation for a third national implementation plan and this Government has a lot of focus on the implementation of SDGs, we are still seeing that, as a country, we are underperforming in a lot of key areas when it comes to SDGs, particularly in terms of energy, clean water and climate change. Why are we falling behind and lacking the public buy-in that is needed to get these over the line?

Regarding clean water, I am from a farming background and from Cork. Nitrates and the derogation is a really important issue for us. We are having difficulties retaining our derogation in light of the water quality, yet farmers are not the only ones feeding into that. It is a much bigger problem in terms of our water quality but we are falling behind on that. How do we rectify that? In terms of the public buy-in, does the Minister of State believe local authorities could or should be doing more to promote the implementation of SDGs? We are a very developed country. We are putting a lot of emphasis on this, but we are still failing on it. How do we get that public buy-in? As well as politicians advocating for it, we definitely need the public to buy into it also.

The Minister of State mentioned our upcoming EU Presidency in July of next year. How crucial a role could, or should, implementation of SDGs play in terms of our hosting of the Presidency?

I thank the Senator and appreciate her comments. On the Presidency, that gives us a real opportunity to highlight to our citizens what is really important in terms of a European-wide project, where we identify issues that are useful for us in getting a message out to our citizens. Certainly on climate change, I had the pleasure of being on this and the environment committees previously and there was a lot of really good work done. I feel in society generally there is almost a reduction in the effort of people generally. Some of that is coming from what is happening in the United States, quite frankly. Some countries in Europe are starting to be more reflective about whether or not we need to be meeting these targets. Of course, we do. The Senator identified energy and the effort we have to make. That also speaks to Deputy Butterly's point about offshore wind and the necessity to address that. We are dealing with that, and I will come back to it. We do have to identify the areas which will make the greatest progress, but that must be driven by Government. It has to be driven by local authorities where they have competency in that regard. It is down to investment. The Senator rightly identified the water issue, our basin management plans that are there and are working really well. However, we must do more. We saw it in Cork with the fishkill in the River Blackwater. When I got my teeth stuck into that I saw that, maybe, some of the controls that are there are not fit for purpose.

Repeat offenders keep getting their knuckles rapped. We have now undertaken a review of the penalties associated with it. That is something the State can do. The carrots are there with investment, supports, grant aid and so on, but there has to be a stick element too if industry does not perform to the acceptable standard to ensure we get clean water. We did the same in the recent budget under the national development plan with the significant investment that went into Irish Water. I do not have the number to hand, but I think it is close to €10 billion. I will come back to the committee with that figure. It is a commitment from the State to say this cannot continue. It is being done so that Irish Water will be in a position to treat sewage effectively so we do not have sewage from municipal facilities entering watercourses. We have to do more in this regard.

We have done the same with EirGrid and upgrading the national grid. A minimum of €14 billion will go into that development between now and 2030. Core capital of approximately €3 billion was assigned by the State to allow EirGrid and the ESB to borrow on the markets and fund that development. We are rolling out a plan and there will be a bid announcement on 9 December of the next wave of offshore wind energy. We are driving ahead with that and we have a commitment to have an additional 5 GW in early 2030 and 20 GW by 2020 of renewable electricity offshore. In addition, we are investing significantly in supports for solar energy. Collectively, we are doing well. For citizens from their own action, it might not be as obvious.

We are doing a lot on the circular economy as well. My colleague the Minister of State, Deputy Dillon, is developing plans on that and recycling. These all lead to the implementation of many of the goals. It has to be State-driven and through investment. To get citizen buy-in, we have to make it worth people's while and relatively straightforward because if people are forced to make difficult choices, they may not see it as being worth their while. We will continue with that.

I think I captured most of what the Senator raised with me.

Yes. I thank the Minister of State.

The Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, was here last week and we discussed SDGs. One issue that was highlighted was the extremely aspirational nature of the goals. There are a lot of goals on a huge expanse of issues. Then there is the issue of how to measure the progress on those goals. Social Justice Ireland brought out a document on measuring progress and it talks about progress as moving towards what we value, which is a good way of summing it up.

The SDGs emphasise economic growth. That is the measure almost above all else. GDP growth is the benchmark of progress towards most of the goals that are outlined. Growing the economy can clash with the urgent need for emissions reductions. Ireland's slowness in moving towards more renewables for energy production hampers progress. For instance, I do not know whether our welcoming attitude towards data centres has been mentioned this morning. I do not think it was mentioned last week, but it is another crippling blow. It is not as though they are even planned. It is often down to the local authority deciding where it will go, so they can pop up anywhere. There is no consideration of how it affects our grid in particular areas.

Balancing the SDGs with climate goals requires reconciling economic interests and environmental sustainability. It was reported recently that many European countries again intend to use carbon credits to help them to meet their 2030 targets. We have done it in the past. We have bought them from developing countries. Buying from other countries so we can continue the growth of our economy is a false economy, if we are talking about fixing what is happening to the planet, as it is for other economies across Europe to do so. Does the Minister of State have a view on the buying of carbon credits? It is not sustainable in the long term. What happens when developing countries stop selling them? Aside from that, it is just morally wrong. We are supposed to be moving towards particular goals and we are not.

On the lack of centralised control of data centres, in south Dublin, part of the development of one of the data centres was that the heat mass would heat the local hospital, South Dublin County Council and so on. Surely if we are moving forward with data centres, we have to be thinking - we understand how important they are for the tech economy - and structure them so they benefit all society. We have not been doing that up to now. It is part of those goals. If we are going to continue to roll out data centres, the heat generated should be used for the common good in those communities. The idea that we are buying carbon credits to offset our failures is not sustainable in the long term.

I appreciate the Deputy's line of questioning. Carbon credits are a necessary tool to force change. Their continued use is not sustainable. They are useful in encouraging countries or entities at the point when certain targets are set. As we head towards net zero in 2050, we have set targets for 2030, 2040 and onwards. They are useful as the stick in telling people they cannot keep doing what they are doing, that they must change and if they do not, that there will be a significant cost. We have to be careful about their implementation because as we get closer to 2030, perhaps elements of our economy will not have reached the target that was set. If we are paying for carbon credits, it is money that would be better spent in reducing dependence on the things with harmful effects. If it is about reduction of fossil fuels, it would be better to invest in green, clean energy than to pay the penalty so we have to find ways around that. I take the Deputy's point that an entity could just say that rather than change it will buy the credits and offset them but it cannot be like that. That would be a misuse of the system that would not support sustainable development in the future. While they are a useful tool in adjusting and changing behaviour, their long-term use is not envisaged.

The Deputy raised an important issue about the economy generally. We recognise that we need a growing economy and to be able to support in a significant way the kind of change needed to decarbonise the economy and do things better, differently and cleaner. We still need to keep business alive and to keep generating the income for the State to be able to do that.

Data centres are very much part of that. We probably have a greater number of data centres per head of population than any other country. Approximately 20% of our metered electricity is used in data centres and that is due to increase to around 30% by 2030 based on permissions already provided. That is significant. Some of that is because our economy has focused on external investment, including foreign direct investment from tech companies that see Ireland as a good country to invest in. We have benefited from that in the pharmaceutical and tech sectors.

We have to be very careful in suggesting that we cannot do this, but we have got to get the energy investment right and invest in our grid. We will ultimately have to move towards a more plan-led approach as we have done with offshore wind. Developers previously identified sites, went after them and we had all of the complications and permissions, etc.

Speaking to what Deputy Butterly was saying, we now identify areas suitable offshore wind developments. Under the Maritime Area Planning Act 2021, it is known as the DMAP tool. Within that we identify sites and we go to auction. We do a lot of the mapping and provide the information to the bidders, etc. That is a more careful and useful way of doing things rather than letting everybody chase after the next place they see an opportunity.

The element that to the greatest extent will guide the next phase of data centre development will be proximity to the grid and where is the capacity. We have to be upfront with developers as well when it comes to identifying places where it can happen. Dublin and south Dublin is well and truly gridlocked, but there are other opportunities throughout Ireland that will attract further investment.

Some people are ideologically opposed to data centres. They see them as big and bad. I am not one of those. They are a really important component of the next phase of our economic development. The control of data is so important. If we do not provide a safe space within Europe or Ireland for data storage, some other country will and it will have its energy mix right. The last thing we want to see is our personal and commercial data having to go to other countries outside the sphere of influence of the European Union. We would want to be very careful about that.

With the emergence of AI, the demand for data storage is increasing exponentially. We have to watch that while at the same time ensuring that our grid is fit for purpose and that our generation is clean, green and at a quantum that meets the needs and expectations of this growing economy, all the while providing the wherewithal to bring along those who may feel left behind at the minute. The beauty of the development goals is that the need to ensure it benefits everybody as well as the environment is at their core. Sustainable economic growth protects the weakest and the most vulnerable and I include all aspects of the environment in that. I hope that gets to the core of that.

As Ireland approaches the SDGs, we have a high-minded eye on it in so far as a lot of the SDGs in a global context do not apply to us, or at least we think they do not. Some of the issues raised here relate to SDGs 6, 11 and 14 in terms of water sanitation, for example. We still have serious issues. At the same time we are talking about the nitrates directive, we need to work on the quality of our public watercourses and the seas around our coasts as well.

I do not mean to make this parochial but in Dublin we have a Victorian sewerage system. It is completely out of date and creaking at the seams in trying to deal with the modern pressures that are placed upon it. Earlier this week we had two days of heavy rain. The same day that heavy rain came, a big black slick appeared in Dublin Bay, just off the West Pier in Dún Laoghaire. That happens because water run-off from roads is channelled into the West Pier pumping station before being pumped to Ringsend wastewater treatment plant. There is an attenuation tank at the West Pier that has a capacity of 70,000 m3, but when we have a lot of heavy rain and all of the run-off and all the rest goes into it, it fills up quickly. This week it filled to capacity and when it is full, there are two options. It can be closed and then all of water backs up in the drains in south County Dublin, which nobody wants to see, or it is released at the other end. That is what happened. This tank has raw, untreated sewage in it, albeit it is diluted. It is released into Dublin Bay where people swim and fish. People eat the food from Dublin Bay and it is also an area we use for leisure sports.

How can we say that we are working on high-level development goals when we are not doing the basics at home? There does not appear to be a proper plan for how we are going to deal with the outdated sewage system in Dublin, which is totally beyond capacity.

The Deputy has described the problem very succinctly. The biggest crisis we face on a daily basis in relation to environmental protection is our water and sewerage systems. It will not be a surprise to anyone that we underinvested in our key infrastructure for decades, particularly in water and sewage, but also in relation to the grid.

That is coming into sharp focus, which is why Irish Water has been given significant resources to address these issues. I suspect it will need even further investment in the years to come.

It is not just about meeting the needs of new estates, which is what we concentrated on. We grew suburban areas where there was no infrastructure at all and done it to a very high standard. There has, however, been underinvestment in the pre-existing infrastructure, as the Deputy rightly identified.

We have the same issues in north County Dublin. A plan for the main drainage system has been going around for a decade or more. Everyone needs it but nobody seems to think that it should infringe on their personal rights. We have to find a way to get key projects done more efficiently and quickly. The problems do not go away by ignoring them; they just get more expensive. We need to get political buy-in and we need to put financial resources behind them. There is no defence of that Victorian sewerage system in Dún Laoghaire and it happens to be the case in many other areas. The Deputy's point is well made.

There is a concept called sustainable urban drainage systems. When I was on the council, we put them in all new council builds. It means that every drop of water that falls on the site of a housing development, whether it is on the roof or the paved areas is gathered in a sump and is recycled for use in grey water systems to flush toilets and things like that rather than drinking or cooking. Why is it not a building regulation that sustainable urban drainage systems are built into every new development?

I would be supportive of that. It falls outside my area of responsibility, but I will pass on the Deputy's comments to the housing Department as it is responsible for this area. There were some supports there for people to capture water at their homes. It was generally captured off the roofs and has worked well. It would seem like an obvious measure we should be taking on new developments.

I thank the Minister of State for attending. I read an article the other day in which Denis O'Brien was quoted. He is not the first to make the point, but he noted that we have a number of data centres waiting to be plugged in and it is all dependent on them getting access to the grid. As the Minister of State said, the reason we have data centres and the reason they are needed by Ireland is we are an international technological hub. Multinationals, including massive corporations in the data sector, are based here. The point has been made a number of times that these companies are putting through the profits made on business done in these poor countries through their offices here and we are living on the backs of poorer countries.

We are here to talk about Ireland's contribution to the European effort in the achievement of the sustainable development goals. Is our system militating against the capacity to achieve those SDGs in poorer countries in a way that undermines all we say about all the money we and the EU are contributing in overseas aid?

Is that in fact set at naught by our profiting on the backs of poorer countries?

The Senator raised an argument that has been raised by Denis O'Brien and others, but it is clear that if Ireland or Europe stand still, those sub-Saharan African countries that are most impacted by famine, climate change, etc., will not have the basic wherewithal to provide services to meet their own needs and expectations. What we have to be mindful of, and it is why I believe so strongly in decarbonisation of our economy generally and the reduction of fossil fuels, is that as temperatures rise, the ones who suffer most are those who are just about to be encroached by desert. The amount of arable land is decreasing all the time, animals are dying and people are migrating. We are seeing the complications that is creating for the political system in Europe.

Commerce is commerce, and companies will go where the opportunity is and where they can develop their services, products, etc. Sadly, that is not in the countries that most need support now. We have got to look at it in terms of our obligation to ensure that we attempt to limit the increase to temperature to the lowest level possible. COP is taking place at present. Efforts are being made to try to get agreement there. That is important because will ultimately protect those countries. We then have to look to our overseas development goals and ambitions, and the kind of funding and structures we put in place. It is about ensuring that we assist businesses establishing there in order that we create opportunities for people in those countries.

While I understand the point the Senator made - it has also been made by others - I must state that if Europe pulls back and leaves it to others, the reality is that China, India, the United States or some other country will provide the vehicle for those who wish to invest. We should look at it in terms of the ethics of what we are doing, having a values-based system, knowing why we are doing it and knowing that we have got to protect our economic activity across the union, and then having a further piece involving much greater effort in funding appropriate growth and development in those struggling countries.

I had the opportunity to attend the UN Ocean Conference in, I think, May, at which there were countries from all around the world and small island states. From talking to politicians from those countries, the slightest rise in temperature will just wipe out those islands. If the sea rises by 2 or 3 feet, entire communities will be wiped out. We often do not reflect on that. This is why I say to people, when they are upset about a wind farm or something that might have an impact on them, which is not to undermine people's right to object and all of that, that sometimes the consequences of our actions are absolutely devastating for a body of people who are proud of their identity and nationality and whose little island may be wiped out completely. Many of them look to Ireland for support at a diplomatic level because we have worked with them through our diplomatic corps.

I agree with what the Minister of State said. What prompted my question, and I will not name any names, was we have often heard of very successful Irish people over the years, who are very magnanimous in their donations to various causes, but the point is made that they do not pay tax in Ireland. Their generosity and magnanimity is to some degree offset by the fact they are not contributing to the national budget in the way they could. Is there a parallel in that we might be doing very well in our official development aid, but are we taking away with one hand what we give with the other? In fact, are we taking away more than we are giving by being the beneficiary of the tax arrangements of large multinationals based in this country?

That probably was a charge that could have been levelled against us by other countries, which mischaracterised Ireland as being soft as tax. Some suggested in the past that we were a safe haven for tax avoidance, which we clearly were not. That was proven. Our signing up to the base erosion and profit shifting, BEPS, process previously under the OECD, where we set a minimum tax rate of 15%, was a very significant move. We got rid of some measures, such as the double-Irish and various different schemes, to make it more transparent and brought a level of equity to the entire tax system. By the way, other countries, including some in Europe, while they were levelling accusations against us, had interesting ways of supporting industry and investment as well.

That is do with our corporation tax rates. I am talking about the fact we are benefiting from the tax arrangements of multinationals based in this country, which are not paying tax in the poorer countries where they are providing services.

There was a process, which has not concluded, in respect of that. It was about the sharing out of the profits assigned to the countries where profits had ultimately been collected. To the best of my knowledge, that has not concluded or advanced in the way the minimum one did. An acronym was used at the time, the name of which escapes me, in relation to that sharing. The Department of Finance did an estimate at the time of what the impact of that might be on the Irish economy. It was flagged that we would lose about €2 billion, €2.5 billion or, maybe, €3 billion, a year in tax. It is significant but is not as big as might be addressed.

I take the Senator's point about the necessity of having an aggressive approach to our overseas development piece. This is about the ethics and values we place in ensuring others are treated equally and fairly and benefit from the growth of corporations here, which, for sure, offer and sell services into those markets because other countries do not have a stable political environment or an economy that is capable of attracting investment in the first instance. I am repeating myself a little, but the truth of it is if we, or even Europe, were to stop, I do not see it necessarily benefiting, any time in the short to medium term, those that are most impacted.

I welcome the Minister of State. It is great to see him. He is very active and hard-working, with quite a large portfolio, from fishing and pelagic fish to energy consumption and everything else. He is a man for all seasons. He will be well able for it.

A jack of all trades and master of none. That is what my mother would have said.

I certainly did not say that anyway.

I am curious. He read some of these figures from the International Energy Agency, IEA, about the consumption of power. It is mind-boggling. It is being said that using AI for five seconds is like having a microwave running for ten minutes. You hear all these figures. I do not know how right they are, but they are frightening. The IEA said, which I have heard it a couple of times - I checked and it still seems to be up there - that half of American power consumption by 2030 will be on AI, AI generation, data centres and all those linked things. These figures for the power that will be spent energising all this new technology, and where it will get us, are off the charts. Evidently, our humble country has links to a lot of these, such as Evidently and Alphabet, including all these massive companies that are based here like Google, Intel and Meta, to name but a few. We have one of highest, if not the highest, costs for power in the EU at present. Will we get to a stage where we cannot build a hospital or school, as a necessity for our people to progress, because there is a data centre in Blackrock or wherever else? Will we not be able to build a new hospital or put on a new wing because we put in a new data centre and just cannot get the power any more?

We made a choice. Are we having a look at the bigger picture here, as opposed to it being a case of a company applying for planning permission for a data centre somewhere and dealing with the ESB in the context of their energy requirements? The ESB will say "Yes" or "No", or will outline what it can offer. If the ESB does provide the power, the company involved is going to use up any power we can throw at it for the next 20 years or whatever. Do we have a larger framework in place to look at this? I know data centres are important and that we need a certain number of them. We cannot have it all one way and have all these great jobs in the Docklands or wherever and then say that this is great but we do not want any more data centres because they use too much power. We cannot have it every way, but we are getting to a point where other infrastructure projects will not happen because we are granting planning permission for data centres. Are we following a line of logic or reason here or is it the case that everybody can do what they want until the lights go off? Is there a bigger plan? The Minister of State has been looking at this at conferences everywhere.

The Senator has raised an important issue. He juxtaposed data centres with hospitals. In the minds of some, that is a no-brainer. Of course, you are always going to go for the hospital. As medicine advances and as artificial intelligence will become a greater part of the delivery of medicine, data centres will be coterminous with hospitals. We will need both. We have to plan for that. This may be an area in which, for a while, Ireland was not as good at longer term planning or investing in key infrastructure, which often does not deliver political results because it is hard-wired, under the ground and no one sees the benefit of it. It will be critical into the future.

The plan is to invest in the grid. That is part of the current national development plan. I stated that €14-odd billion will be spent in the next couple of years on building out the grid. Once we have the grid, we will need energy. At that point, we will look at how to energise the grid. We are moving into the offshore renewables sector. We have plans out to 2040 for another 20 GW. There is capacity to go well beyond that. As soon as floating offshore wind becomes commercially viable - it is slow and has, unfortunately, slowed even more because some of it based on decisions taken in other countries that are not being progressed - that will open up huge potential for a massive quantum of electricity. The late Eddie O'Connor was a pioneer in the renewables sector generally, but he had a vision to capture potentially 70 GW of electricity from the Atlantic. That would be of huge benefit to our economy. At some point, you will see a disconnect between the wholesale price of gas and the cost of electricity, which is guiding it at the moment.

We are also building interconnectors. There is an interconnector to the UK that is operational. The Celtic interconnector will be coming on stream in 2027. The cabling process is under way. That will open up the potential for us to export electricity. The ESB and others are looking at hydrogen and ammonia as a method of storing electricity in order that when the wind is blowing and electricity is being generated and we do not have demand for it here or it is not being utilised through the grid, we can convert it to a storable source that can be transported. I recently met with German colleagues. They are looking to Ireland because they have a hydrogen strategy that will ultimately power industry in some instances. They will use it on heavy goods vehicles, etc., which are difficult to electrify. We had a conversation about this at European level last week in Ostend in Belgium in the context of looking to the future.

To the Senator's point, there is work under way. A strategy is being developed to ensure that we have the grid capacity and the energy generation to meet the growing demand. Even with the best projections, we have the capacity to produce more than we will need in the medium to long term. There will export opportunities as well. If we build our grid into the European hub, we will have an always-on grid. This will means that at times when the wind is not blowing here, France will be generating electricity by means of nuclear reactors and another country further north will be generating it using hydro. There will be a combined necklace of various providers. There is a lot going on in that regard. It is a really exciting option that we have an opportunity to get right on this occasion.

I call Deputy Butterly. We finally came back around to her.

That is fine. I thank the Chair.

While Deputy Butterly is gathering her thoughts, I neglected to reply to her when she raised the issue about the spatial squeeze between fishermen and fisherwomen and the offshore renewables and how an array of turbines can impact on the migratory pattern of marine life, particularly Dublin Bay prawns. I am no expert on that, but I know it can have an impact. A seafood ORE working group was established before my time. That is the industry and the fishermen coming together to try to work out how they might manage a situation where there is a negative impact on those who engage in established fishing activities and work through the issues that arise. That is progressing, maybe not as quickly as we would like, but I know a lot of good work is being done under the chairmanship of Robert McCabe. We are advancing that work. I recently met with the group and spoke a little about where we need to go. It needs to happen. There is no doubt that there will be people who will be discommoded and who will lose out. There has to be an appropriate level of verifiable loss in the first instance and financial support to address that. Work is under way in that regard. Hopefully, it will meet the criteria of those both sides who are trying to have resolved.

I thank the Minister of State. When he does come to Clogherhead, he will get further updates and answers on that. Unlike the Chair, I feel no shame when bringing up parochial issues because I believe a parochial issue in Dún Laoghaire is a very common parochial issue in Louth. When you add it all up, it suddenly becomes a national issue. When it does so, we have go give consideration to it. Thereafter, it either becomes policy or we have to consider introducing policy. I concur with what the Chair said, because on days like today and yesterday when there have been such huge downpours, we are going to see raw sewage going into the sea at Blackrock and into the River Dee, the River Boyne and the River Fane. We have given Uisce Éireann an awful lot of money. Now we need to see the results.

Unfortunately, being from a rural part of County Louth, very often the conversation is about water quality. However, that conversation is in the context of what are the farmers going to do about it as opposed to how this raw sewage got there. As the Chair pointed out, if you go down to Clogherhead Beach or Blackrock tomorrow, you will see the effects of the release of raw sewerage, even if it has been diluted by rainwater. It is there. This is where we bathe and where we fish. There are health concerns. Those concerns have not been alleviated by the local authorities or the EPA. I would pressure to continue to be exerted in respect of this matter. I accept the fact that, as the Minister of State said, Uisce Éireann will probably need more funding because it has a massive task ahead of it in terms of addressing issues relating to drainage, sewage, old pipes and new systems. All of these matters have to be addressed.

Going back a little, if you were to brave the head on a day like this, you would find that there is nothing better than sitting back and eating some squid stew. However, the Minister of State is well aware that as a result of Brexit, Irish fishermen are no longer allowed to fish for squid. The waters are actually patrolled, I believe, by the Royal Navy to prevent them from fishing for squid. This was quite a lucrative business for our fisherman, particularly those who operated in the Rockall fishery.

Is there any possibility of reopening those negotiations?

The Minister of State spoke about the stick element and overfishing. Are there any plans or updates in regard to rope fishing? We have evidence of rope fishermen coming into our waters and overfishing, particularly from Russia and I believe also from Norway. Is there any progress or action being taken there?

I will deal with the Deputy's last point first. When I talk about the overfishing by Norway, scientific advice is presented by ICES which sets it out, based on its analysis of the biomass or amount of particular stock available. As ICES sees the biomass reduce, its advice is to reduce the allowable catch for that year. The Union, together with third countries within the same area, generally, based on historical theory, divvy up the quota. Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands just assign an amount of quota to themselves that is quite outside the negotiations and discussions and say that is what they will catch, ignoring the relationship with the European Union, and they will fish that out. That is having a huge impact. The estimate I last saw was that it was about 1 million tonnes over five years and our scientists tell us there are only 3 million tonnes of biomass of, say, mackerel, still existing. We have to address that.

My view has been that we should not be doing any business with Norway until such time as it comes into line. It is a little more complex than that because Norway provides other services to us and the trade relationship is complex but we have to call it out for what it is and we are doing that.

That is where that is at. We are working through an EU-Norway agreement at the minute. We are being obstinate, from an Irish perspective, in those negotiations. Again, the negotiations do not require unanimity. It will be a qualified majority. Ireland does not have a blocking minority capacity to do it, so there is a limit to the extent of our scope of influence there but we are taking the principled position on it.

The Deputy talked about Rockall and we did lose because the UK asserted its territorial rights for 12 miles around Rockall. We do not recognise it and never have because it is not habitable and is incapable of sustaining life so, therefore, it should not be designated as a territory. It did get tied up in Brexit and that squid fishery was useful because many of the boats that might be fishing for prawns at a certain time of year would go there and that helped the biomass for prawns because it took the pressure off them. I was in Scotland recently and we had some conversations about it. It is politically sensitive for sure but we are engaged on it. That is as much as I can say. We are trying to do some pilot studies and exercises there. I do not think any result is any imminent but it is something we are mindful of and pushing ahead on.

The Deputy's primary point was more agreement with the Chairman. All of us who have a constituency know full well the lack of investment is water and sewerage infrastructure has had hugely damaging impacts on water courses and on the environment generally, and it continues. Of course, it is always easier to blame run off from farmlands or whatever and yet the municipal facility either does not exist and is allowing untreated sewage into water courses or in an overflow capacity just dumps it in. The Deputy's point is well made but it is being addressed through the national development plan. However, we have a long way to go. This is not a one off hit. We will have to continue to invest heavily in our water and sewerage infrastructure over the next 30 years.

I thank the Minister of State. Are there any concluding remarks he wishes to make or anything he feels he did not get a chance to cover?

No. I thank the committee for its engagement and look forward to an ongoing dialogue.

We very much appreciate the time the Minister of State has spent in coming here and speaking to the committee. It is part of a broader project we have on the SDGs and we look forward to producing a report on that. We will go into private session to deal with private committee business before adjourning until 3.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 19 November 2025. Next week we will engage with the Minister of State, Deputy Thomas Byrne, on developments at the General Affairs Council. I move we suspend for two minutes. Is that agreed? Agreed.