I wish to raise the recently announced public consultation on the British Government's plan to develop a new reactor at Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in Somerset, England. Like my colleagues in the Civil Engagement group, I came to the Seanad from the world of activism. In my case it was ten years on Greenpeace ships combatting nuclear weapons and nuclear waste in the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian oceans. At that time nuclear power was an incredibly expensive and centralised way of producing power and it was marred by waste disposal and nuclear material proliferation issues. Sadly, all these concerns remain and the plans for the new reactor at Hinkley Point make a lie of the small government image of the Tory Party in the UK. Nuclear power is incredibly expensive, difficult to secure and still has all the attendant waste disposal issues of the past. In fact, it is such an expensive way to make power that one must wonder if the UK Government has other reasons for pushing such projects, such as providing new materials for weapons that should be confined to the dustbin of history. However, that is a discussion for another time.

My primary concern in raising the issue today is the news that local authorities will be opening public consultation on our reaction to the plans for the new plant, one that is only 500 km from our capital city and which would impact on our entire economy and society in the case of a serious incident. What particularly disturbs me is that recent legal challenges to the plan with regard to its compliance with the Espoo Convention succeeded not because of the intervention or activity of the Irish Government but because of complaints lodged by Norwegian and Dutch citizens. Now, it will be up to Irish citizens to step up to the plate and have their concerns heard, without any signal of support from the Irish Government. Irish Governments, both Fianna Fáil led and Fine Gael led, used to have a proud record of vocal opposition to the dangers posed by Sellafield and other UK nuclear facilities in the 1980s and 1990s. That led to significant improvements in the operation of those facilities, but now we appear to have lost our voice. Will the Leader explain why that is the case? Will the Irish Government put forward a submission in this regard? With the UK about to leave the EU it has indicated that it is also leaving the EURATOM Treaty, its last link to a common approach on information and safety with regard to nuclear power. We will have to find our voice again on this issue sooner or later, and I believe the time is now.

I wish to express my support of Senator Grace O'Sullivan's comments and concerns about Hinkley power plant. It is very important that submissions are made. Perhaps we should consider making a submission from this House on such a serious situation. We can discuss that in an informal way, but it is very important that the voices of Irish citizens are heard. I doubt that there would be much deviation from any of the submissions that would be made.

Today I wish to speak about the sale of the recent sale of mortgages to vulture funds.

I have spoken about this many times, as I am a member of the Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach. These are the very same vulture funds which have continuously refused to appear before the committee saying that they are adhering to the code of conduct of the Central Bank of Ireland. The most recent round of sales by Permanent TSB is shocking in its scale of €4 billion. There has been a lot of reaction in the Seanad and across the political spectrum but very little firm political commitment to solving the problem. Let me stress that legislation is needed as well as political pressure. In terms of political pressure, the Minister for Finance, as the majority shareholder, can tell State-owned banks not to permit further sales to vulture funds. Practical legislation is also required and in 2015, the Fine Gael and Labour Party Government failed to put in place the proper regulation of the vulture funds. Its legislation centred only the middle man or the credit servicing firm. That has given rise to all kinds of issues where the owner of the credit gets off the hook, but my Sinn Féin colleague, Deputy Pearse Doherty, attempted to make sure that the owners of the vulture funds were fully regulated but our amendment was voted down on Committee Stage in May 2015 by both the Fine Gael and the Labour Party, with the members of the Fianna Fáil Party not turning up for the vote. A Programme for a Partnership Government states: "We will provide greater protection for mortgage holders and tenants and SMEs whose loans have been transferred to non-regulated entities (‘vulture funds’). (Year 1 Action)." This commitment is classed as a "Year 1 action", but I do not see much evidence of any major progress so far since the programme was signed up for. The same promise is contained in the confidence and supply agreement, which Fianna Fáil has signed up to.

Will the Minister for Finance come to the Chamber because I wish to ask him what the Government plans are to deal with the vulture funds in the long term? The issue is that long-term products are being sold to short-term entities which want to make a quick buck, and many millions of bucks. As a result, the vultures are not interested in sustainable solutions but in cashing in, one way or another. Until this is done, many homes, businesses and farms will be under threat of maverick action by these vulture funds. If there is a write down to be done, it needs to be with the homeowner. Giving a write down to vulture funds is absolutely nonsensical and it is an exploitation of Irish citizens.

I voice my support for Senator Grace O'Sullivan's expression of concern on Hinkley Point C plant. It certainly used to be the practice that successive Irish Governments would engage very actively on matters pertaining to nuclear power, nuclear energy and the location and development of nuclear reactors in the UK. I recall back in the mid-1990s, when my former colleague, the then Minister of State, Emmet Stagg, had responsibility for energy matters, that he directly represented the views of the Government at an oral hearing in Cumbria on developments in the UK. That is something we should encourage. The concerns of the Irish public should be communicated directly to the British Government on Hinkley Point C at a bilateral level and multilateral level in the context of the European Union.

May I request a debate on the recently published Project Ireland 2040? This is a pivotal set of proposals that will dictate jobs and investment and the provision of public services in the country, not just for the next 20 years but for the next 30 to 40 years. It is my firm view that the plan is not sufficiently resourced. Since the publication of the plan we have read that the dedicated resources amount to approximately €115 billion, but when one scratches beneath the surface, the dedicated resources amount to about €91 billion, nothing near the €115 billion that we have been fed by the strategic communications unit that now seems to operate hand in glove with the Fine Gael press office. In reality, if the Government decided it was not going to introduce the type of tax breaks it is talking about, we would have the additional resources we need to provide the type of schools, hospitals and other public services that we need.

We would have the additional €15 billion to €25 billion that is required to ensure the Irish people get the public services they demand and are entitled to expect in a decent republic. Since Friday, we have been treated to an orgy of public relations stunts from the Fine Gael Party in the guise of the strategic communications unit. I went to the cinema on Sunday evening to watch a great Martin McDonagh film, "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri". When I was going home, I expected to see three billboards outside Drogheda telling me how great the national planning framework is for Drogheda.