2026-05-14

I raise the possibility of having nuclear energy in Ireland. As people across both sides of the House will be aware, I am bringing forward legislation to remove the prohibition on generation of power by nuclear fission. I would like to get an idea from the Tánaiste, the leader of our coalition partners in government, of his views on whether this is possible. As we are in the House and it is being discussed by Members on both sides, Ireland now has the most expensive energy market in the European Union. We need to ask ourselves how we got here. Other parties on this side of the House have been in government over the course of the past 15 years. I just heard the leader of the Labour Party describe my proposal as a hare-brained notion.

Correct.

Hear, hear

Exactly

Sometimes I wonder whether Róisín Shortall had a point but I will say this. We have the possibility to follow what other countries in the 27 EU countries have done already by implementing nuclear power. We can look at Finland. The grand committee of the Finish Parliament was in Leinster House two weeks ago. Finland has the same population as Ireland and 40% of its energy comes from nuclear power. As a consequence, its citizens, small businesses and the economy of Finland have the cheapest energy in the European Union. We have had lots of discussion about renewables. Looking at the potential of nuclear energy and understanding the strategic aims and objectives of decarbonising our economy, common sense will tell us from what other countries have done successfully, that nuclear energy is the way to go. The technology is changing. It is safer in the era of AI and with what it can do for engineering it is now easier than ever to do this successfully. Is it time we looked at this as an option, as other countries have done successfully? People here will always pick the worst examples of where nuclear has gone wrong. I understand that is for reasons of safety and because of debates we have had in times gone by, but can we not acknowledge 30, 40 or 50 years later that things have changed, it is safer and, as a consequence of our inaction and the mistake of putting that prohibition in place, we have put ourselves in a vulnerable position when it comes to energy security and energy sovereignty. We have the opportunity to become, as other countries have, a cheaper place for people to get energy and to bring down bills in this country once and for all.

I thank the Deputy for the question and I genuinely thank him for the positive contribution he is making to this debate. This is what politics is about. He made the point about the different views the Labour Party might have. It is a good thing to have debate on policy. We do not do enough of it in this House. Politics has become far too performative, shouty and headline-grabbing. The fact that the Deputy is coming forward with a Bill, has engaged with us on it and is asking people for their views on it is a good and positive thing that we should be doing as legislators. Comhghairdeas and gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta on that. Energy security is an important point because we have found ourselves, particularly in Ireland but more broadly across the European Union, very exposed to what happens very far away from our country. We can all commentate on what leaders of other countries do - that is not inconsequential - but we cannot necessarily change that. A conversation about energy security is extraordinarily important. We have a tendency - I am sure none of us is innocent of this - to list everything we are against: we are against this interconnector, that or the other. There is an onus on all of us to stop saying what we are against in terms of energy security and start saying what we are in favour of. Different people will have different views on that but I take that point, too. My gut feeling on this is I do not understand why we have a legislative prohibition on nuclear energy. There might be policy reasons why people do not wish to pursue it and practical reasons why it is not efficient. We can debate that, but I am not sure primary legislation in the 21st century needs to prohibit nuclear energy. Why can we not assess, consider and debate rather than having that legislative prohibition? That is my position. I do not believe we should have a legislative prohibition on nuclear technology and I do not think that serves policy debate well. In fact, it shuts down policy debate. Different people will have different views. That is my view and I am entitled to it. The programme for Government is clear on renewables. That has been the path we have been pursuing as a country. We are making good progress on that and need to make more progress. Here is where we get to the evidence piece. I am not an expert on energy. In fact, I think we could do with more expert voices on energy in the debate. However, I am told that the development of traditional nuclear power plants can take many years and require the creation of an entire new regulatory system that does not exist in Ireland, and that there can be issues around construction, procurement, safe demolition and disposal of waste. I am not saying that I have fully bought into this idea but debating and considering ideas around energy security is not a bad thing. I am told by the Department of communications and energy that nuclear power might not practically be part of our national electricity production in this decade or, indeed, the next decade. I say that just to put these opinions on the table. I believe the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, is leading on developing an evidence base - that is helpful - for a pathway to decarbonise the Irish electricity system after 2030 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The SEAI is considering a number of technologies, including small modular nuclear reactors, as part of that consideration of an evidence base. We need all the evidence and information. The first question is whether we want a primary legislative prohibition of that. There is some merit in debating that.

The Tánaiste's comments are welcome and the fact that we are having this debate is a healthy thing. Input from all sides of the House would be welcome, and that is why I am proud to bring this forward. We need to discuss dealing with our future demand. We know we are looking at a 45% increase in energy need in Ireland up to 2034. That cannot be delivered by renewables alone. We will be heavily depending on carbon energy to do that. We need to face the fact that Ireland could be fined €3.5 billion to €8 billion of public money annually by the European Commission if we fail to meet our decarbonisation targets. This is the great conundrum. We have a population that has grown by 1 million since 2006 and is expected to grow another 1 million in the same period of time in the future. We will have a 45% increase in energy demand.

From data centres.

We have a strong economy at full employment. We need to grab the bull by the horns and plan ahead because if you fail to plan ahead, it is much like politics, in that you could end up like the Labour Party - out of government for over a decade and irrelevant.

Good man, James.

I was trying to pay tribute to Deputy O'Connor for being constructive but----

Did we get under Deputy O'Connor's skin?

What did the Tánaiste say about debates in this Chamber?

Nobody in this House is irrelevant and we should all play a constructive role in debating. There are different views on this issue. Everyone brings their view. I said we did not have enough experts. My constituency colleague, Deputy Whitmore, may be much more expert on this, given her professional background, than I am. We should be hearing one another's ideas. That is the point I am making. We do not serve the people well when we shut down debates around issues as crucial as energy security and reduce those debates just to what we can do in the short term and the here and now. It is important to help people in the here and now, but people also want to know where we will get to. I have given my view on the primary prohibition in legislation. I do not think that serves the debate well. I welcome the Deputy's legislation on facilitating that discussion on why that prohibition is there and if it needs to change. I note that the International Energy Agency, IEA, looked at some of this and published in December 2025 an independent expert assessment of our energy system with a specific focus on the role of the power sector to 2035. It is called Powering Ireland's Energy Future. It said Ireland had an opportunity to be a global leader in integrating variable renewable energies, particularly wind, into our energy system. It did not consider nuclear technology as feasible for inclusion in the Irish energy system in the timeframe out to 2035. However, let us have the debate. The Deputy's legislation is a constructive part of that.