2026-04-16

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." I am very pleased to introduce the Air Pollution (Amendment) Bill 2025 to the House. The Bill completed its passage through the Seanad with some constructive engagement. At its heart, this Bill is about safeguarding public health, protecting our environment and ensuring that Ireland's air quality remains among the best in Europe. However, notwithstanding our compliance with all existing EU air quality standards, air pollution is a silent killer, including in this country. It is a fact that about 1,700 premature deaths in Ireland each year are linked directly to poor air quality, largely from solid fuel burning. That is approximately ten times the number of fatalities on our roads each year. The personal cost to families is immeasurable. The economic costs are also stark. The Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, has estimated that between 2016 and 2019 treating just five air pollution-related conditions cost the State over €56 million. Furthermore, research now shows that long-term exposure to fine-particle matter is linked to many conditions, including depression and anxiety. This is why improving air quality is essential. Cleaner air means healthier, longer lives, fewer hospital admissions and lower costs to our health system. The importance of improving our air quality is clear. Indeed, it is highlighted in the programme for Government, which commits the Government to continuing efforts to raise air quality standards, especially in urban areas, ensuring healthier environments for all. In regard to the threats to our air quality, the two main sources of air pollution in Ireland are the burning of residential solid fuel and emissions from the transport sector. We are making progress through investment in public transport, active travel and retrofitting homes. However, we must also continue to reduce the impact of solid fuel on the quality of the air that we breathe. We are currently compliant with existing EU air quality standards and our national clean air strategy, and our programme for Government commits us to doing more as we acknowledge that any level of air pollution has a negative impact on our health and environment. In addition, new, more stringent air quality limits have been agreed at EU level that will apply from 2030. As set out in the second clean air strategy progress report, there are specific areas of the country at risk of exceeding the new limits specifically as a result of the pollution caused by the burning of residential solid fuel. Failing to meet new EU air quality standards will mean that we have failed the people living in those affected areas, not to mention the potential for infringement proceedings for non-compliance with EU law. One of the key tools to improve our air quality to date has been the solid fuel regulations of 2022, which focus on improving the standards of solid fuels placed on the market to ensure they emit lower levels of pollution, remembering that there is no such thing as a non-polluting solid fuel. The existing regulations require that a solid fuel must conform to the relevant requirements, depending on the type of solid fuel, including a maximum smoke emission rate, a minimum sulphur content and a maximum moisture content. There are also existing requirement on producers, retailers and transporters of solid fuel to ensure solid fuel meets certain technical standards or, in other words, is an approved fuel. The Air Pollution Act 1987 has served us well but its enforcement provisions need to be updated. The solid fuel regulations of 2022 were a huge step forward in reducing the impact of solid fuel on our health and environment, but experience has shown that local authorities lack sufficient powers to enforce them effectively to ensure that only compliant solid fuel is being made commercially available for sale. That is what this Bill is about. I wish to be clear on the new provisions being introduced under this Bill. First, it does not create any new restrictions on householders. That is really important to emphasise. I took this Bill through the Seanad and there was an attempt by others to suggest that it would be introducing all sorts of draconian laws that would impact negatively on homeowners. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Bill is not about punishing householders. It is about giving local authorities the powers they need to ensure that they can enforce the rules that apply to the production, transport and sale of solid fuel. It is about ensuring that householders can be confident that the fuels placed on the Irish market meet the proper standards. It is about creating a level playing field for compliant commercial operators. It is something that has been asked for by those in the retail sector. They want to have a fair and balanced approach to commercial activity. Second, it does not change turbary rights. The Bill does not change the current rules in respect of turf. People with turbary rights can continue to cut, gift or sell turf as before. The focus is only on the commercial sale and supply of solid fuels. The primary aim of the Bill is to strengthen the enforcement toolkit available to local authorities and provide greater regulatory clarity. Its main provisions include: the reintroduction of fixed payment notices, also known as on-the-spot fines, for breaches of the solid fuel regulations by commercial producers, retailers or transporters, ensuring quick and proportionate enforcement; the ability to serve compliance notices, requiring corrective action to be taken within a specified timeframe, encouraging compliance; seizure and forfeiture powers, and the ability to remove non-compliant material from a commercial or retail premises. This allows enforcement action to have an immediate impact on air quality and gives the consumer confidence that only compliant fuels are available for sale. Currently there are no powers within the 1987 Act to provide for the seizure and forfeiture of non-compliant materials relating to the commercial sale and supply of solid fuels and it is worth noting that such powers are available to enforcement personnel under the Waste Management Act 1996. Another important measure is the provision of enhanced solid fuel registers for producers, retailers and transporters, ensuring that only compliant operators can legally trade. The Bill provides greater clarity about the function, appointment and powers of a registration body and the processes for registration, removal, appeals and transparency of information regarding the register. The Bill also provides clearer processes for registration and removal from the register, including appeals mechanisms, to improve transparency and accountability. Finally, there is a provision in the Bill to allow bodies to share data, where appropriate, to support enforcement. This is to ensure clarity in relation to any GDPR concerns that might have existed. These measures will strengthen compliance and ensure consumers can trust that the fuels they purchase are less harmful and less polluting. I will now outline the provisions of the Bill section by section to clarify its content. The Bill comprises 23 sections. Section 1 gives the Act its formal name and allows different provisions to be commenced at different times by ministerial order. This is standard practice, giving flexibility so that complex parts, such as the new registers, can be rolled out in stages. Section 2 confirms that the principal Act being amended is the Air Pollution Act 1987. Section 3 repeals certain outdated provisions in the 1987 Act and in related environmental legislation from 2011 and 2015. The purpose is to remove redundant material so that the law is clearer and easier to apply. Section 4 expands the legal definition of "air pollution" so that it now also covers situations where emissions cause damage to property or create a nuisance. This makes the law more comprehensive and responsive to real-world impacts. Section 5 further updates and rationalises definitions across the 1987 Act. This is mainly a technical clean-up to ensure consistency with modern usage. Section 6 creates a mechanism for imposing additional ongoing fines where an offence continues over time, for example, if false information is repeatedly provided, or if records or labels are persistently missing. This prevents operators from sitting out the system without consequence. Section 7 reintroduces the system of on-the-spot fines for breaches of the solid fuel regulations by commercial operators. These will be set at €1,000 and are designed to provide a quick, proportionate enforcement tool without the need for lengthy court proceedings. Sections 8 to 10, inclusive, provide for the appointment of authorised officers by either the Minister or local authorities, and expand enforcement powers to include entering premises, with warrants expressly required for entry to private dwellings where the consent of the occupier to enter is not forthcoming; the ability to stop and detain vehicles, but only with An Garda Síochána or Revenue present; as well as serving compliance notices and inspecting fuels, documents and records. These sections also include safeguards such as applications for warrants, appeal processes, and indemnity for officers acting in good faith. Section 11 allows the Minister to establish registers of persons engaged in producing, selling, or transporting solid fuels. This section provides the legal backbone for the new system of registration and compliance monitoring. Sections 12 to 20, inclusive, are a restatement of some of the existing provisions of the current Act but also provide strengthened enforcement powers for local authorities, including the creation of clearer offences and penalties for smoke emissions that exceed legal limits, ignoring notices served by local authorities to limit emissions or failure by an operator to notify a local authority of an incident that creates air pollution. These sections also provide that air quality management plans prepared by local authorities are subject to ministerial direction, to ensure national consistency. Section 21 inserts a new Part VA in the Act of 1987. Part VA of the Act covers fuel regulations and registers and is replacing and updating the current Part IA of the existing Act. The main changes from the original are that Part VA now establishes clear offences and penalties for contravening those regulations; provides for the appointment, criteria and potential removal of registration bodies; and sets out rules for oversight. The Minister may issue directions or guidelines, and registration bodies must comply. Part VA includes provisions for funding, fees, obligations and offences where a registration body fails to meet its duties; sets out the process for applying to be registered, how applications are considered, grounds for refusal, and notification and appeal procedures; requires registration details to be published online, increasing transparency; provides for removal from the register in cases of non-compliance, with rights to make submissions and appeal; and provides a powerful tool to immediately remove non-compliant fuels from the market, helping to protect consumers and air quality. Authorised officers can seize fuels, containers or even vehicles if they are connected with an offence and there are provisions for a court-based process for determining whether seized items should be forfeited or returned, with an appeal mechanism. Section 22 allows for the sharing of information between local authorities, registration bodies, authorised persons, and other relevant entities, subject to data protection safeguards. This ensures enforcement is joined up and more efficient and effective. Section 23 provides for amendments to the First Schedule, which updates the list of pollutants covered by the legislation, bringing it into line with modern science and EU requirements. In summary, Part 1 of the Bill tidies up the legislative framework, commencement, definitions and repeals. Part 2 of the Bill strengthens enforcement and local authority powers; introduces a modern regulatory regime for solid fuel operators with registers, compliance notices and seizure powers; enables proper data-sharing; and updates pollutant definitions. In conclusion, this Bill is about ensuring that the fuels available on the Irish market meet required technical standards and are less polluting so that we reduce the impact of burning solid fuel on our health and our environment. It is about protecting lives and reducing the number of premature deaths associated with air pollution, while also reducing the burden on our health service and meeting our air quality commitments under both national and European law. It is about preserving Ireland’s reputation of having among the best air quality in Europe and avoiding the reputational and financial damage of non-compliance with imminent stricter air quality standards. I think it is fair to say that cleaner air is something we all want for our families, our communities and our future generations. This Bill provides the necessary tools to help achieve this. I look forward to Deputies’ contributions and welcome the opportunity to engage in productive discussions on the Bill on Committee Stage.

I thank the Minister of State for his speech. We support the intent and objectives of this Bill. Cleaner air is something that every one of us wants for our families and communities, and for future generations. We agree that local authorities do need stronger powers. We all know that the main sources of air pollution are solid fuel burning and transport emissions. While air pollution is often framed as an urban issue, it is very much a rural problem too. Across my own county, families depend on solid fuel for their heating. The open fire and the range are not just appliances, they are part of our culture also. While I fully support the aim of the Bill to ensure that the fuels being sold are cleaner and safer, we must also recognise the cost pressures that people are under. Not every household can afford more expensive, higher standard fuels. We cannot create a cliff edge where people already struggling to heat their homes are pushed into deeper hardship. We must have a just transition to renewables. Cleaner air cannot come at the cost of those who can least afford it. As is the hallmark of recent years, there has been a plethora of new rules and set targets without outlining the pathway to get there. Many ordinary people have seen cliff edges that see them punished because they cannot afford to access an alternative. The local authorities need to be resourced to enforce the new rules. There needs to be a just transition for solid fuel homes and local retailers, more protection from the carbon tax for many rural and elderly homes that have no choice but to continue using solid fuels, for whom it is unrealistic to expect them to transition over. With the approach we have seen, it is not surprising that illegal smoky fuel imports have increased, which has to be dealt with. Behind the technical language and all the amendments, people have been left behind, people on solid fuels. Energy poverty is spiralling. We need an all-Ireland strategy on it or we will never get to grips with air pollution. It is a public health crisis. Over 1,600 premature deaths, as was mentioned by the Minister of State, occur every year in Ireland due to air pollution. It must be addressed but balanced with the fact that energy poverty harms people too - older people, rural households and low-income families. A record 320,000 households are in arrears on energy bills. As substantial as that is, it obscures the scale of the problem and it does not capture the hundreds of thousands of families on hardship pay-as-you-go meters who regularly get cut off for one, two or three days at a time. Nor does it capture the 750,000 households reliant on home heating oil who cannot afford to fill their tank because the price of home-heating oil has doubled over the past five or six weeks and the supports have not been there to address that. Importantly it does not capture the households the length and breadth of the country that have no other option than to use solid fuels but have been hit by price hikes since the introduction of the carbon tax. In the past week in particular, we have seen the Government, Labour and Social Democrats cosying up to each other, holding hands and dancing around the carbon tax bonfire but without more accessible grants, it is a double tax. It is a wealth transfer sometimes for people in wealthier households. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael have left these households behind. There is a crossover between those who live in energy poverty and those who are reliant on solid fuels. The very people who most need the SEAI retrofitting supports are the ones who cannot afford them. At the climate committee yesterday morning, we heard about the two-year waiting list for the warmer homes scheme. One third of grants for electric vehicles are given to people who buy cars that are worth €55,000 or more. Is that acceptable? Does someone who can afford a car costing that much really need a grant of €5,000? We have been warning about this for years. The Government's failure to support solid fuel homes is putting people at risk. It cannot talk about a just transition when designing schemes for the well-off. It cannot criminalise people for heating their homes when the alternatives are not there. We need to make retrofitting work for everyone not just the well-off. We need targeted supports for rural houses and solid-fuel homes, and we have been calling for that for years. Phasing it out without providing alternatives is madness. Measures on air pollution that target solid fuels have to be accompanied by affordable schemes and targeted supports. For too long, local authorities have been asking for a task force to enforce environmental regulations. They simply have not been provided with the tools or the resources and then the Government blames them for the regulations not being upheld. This Bill finally gives them the ability to issue on-the-spot signs, the ability to seize non-compliant fuels and clearer authority to tackle illegal trade. They are positive and will protect honest law-abiding fuel merchants who register properly, meet the standards and sell clean, compliant products. They should not be undercut by those who ignore the rules and sell cheaper, dirtier fuels. Local authorities which are already stretched very thin also need personnel. If the Government is serious about enforcement, it needs to fund and staff local authorities as otherwise we will be setting the councils up to fail, just like announcing all the new SNA posts and then not filling them. I am glad the Bill does not interfere with turbary rights. We also need an all-island strategy. The Border of this island is once again exposed as unnecessary and harmful. We need to think beyond county lines, beyond the Border and take a united-Ireland approach. Air pollution does not stop at Newry or Aughnacloy, as we have long said. We need co-ordinated regulations, co-ordinated enforcement, co-ordinated public awareness and an all-island strategy. My colleagues in the North are already advancing policy in this area. Linking up with them is not just sensible; it is obvious and essential. We support the intent of the Bill and we support cleaner air. I would like to make one point and we may come back to this on Committee Stage. The original 1987 Act states that owners of non-domestic houses shall use the best practicable means to limit or if possible, prevent air pollution. Given that the consequences of allowing pollutants from non-domestic operators are so serious, perhaps we could look to tighten that up. If a prosecution is taking place, does it not give a polluter, who is allowing microparticles to go into the air, too much leeway by just referring to "the best practicable means"? Should we look at moving to more of a strict liability situation in improving the Bill? We support stronger enforcement but it must be fair and must be affordable. Local authorities need to be properly resourced. Rural communities must be protected. The strategy must be all-island in nature. Cleaner air cannot come at the expense of those who can least afford it. We must have a just transition. This Bill is a step forward to it. We look forward to working with the Minister and the Department in advancing it as quickly as possible.

I support the intentions and objectives of the Bill. Clean air was one of the first issues I brought up under Questions on Policy or Legislation so it is extremely important. As my colleague An Teachta Daly said, air does not know any borders. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, as a strong united-Irelander, knows that too. It is absolutely pivotal to our health and our well-being. It is something that many of us might not think about on a day-to-day basis but it is absolutely essential to our way of life. Air pollution has a serious impact on public health and the environment. Indeed, it is the biggest environmental risk to our health. The European Environment Agency estimates that over 1,600 premature deaths occur annually in Ireland due to air pollution from causes, including respiratory illness, stroke and cardiovascular disease. That is ten times the number of people who died on our roads last year. It really is a huge figure. It is a public health emergency and I really welcome this Bill because those numbers are staggering. These deaths are also impacting on our healthcare services which cannot afford any more strain. These conditions require treatment that costs healthcare providers around €56 million. Polluting our air makes no sense for our health or our pockets. The pollutants of most concern to us are to be found in the burning of solid fuels for home heating, such as coal, turf and wet wood. Even though bans have been in place in Ireland for these smoky fuels for many years and the 1987 Act restricts the distribution and sale of smoky fuels, there has been little or no enforcement. The local authorities are responsible for enforcement and have been hindered in their ability to enforce the law due to some deficiencies in the 1987 Act. Under-resourcing and the erosion of power within local authorities under consecutive Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael governments means that local authorities find it increasingly difficult to do their job in all these sectors. It is all very well to amend older Acts to empower local authorities but if they are not resourced properly, how can we expect them to properly carry out their job? This is something that comes up time and again at the climate committee. We really have to look at proper funding for local authorities. We need resourcing of the local authorities as they are currently underequipped to enforce environmental regulations. I also welcome that this Bill will not interfere with turbary rights or impose new restrictions on households. It will protect those who register and sell their fuels properly, who meet standards, and who sell clean and compliant products, which is very welcome. Those who act properly within the confines of the laws should not be undercut by those who ignore the rules and sell cheaper, dirty fuel. Having said that, it is important to recognise that there are communities where families depend on solid fuel for their heating. Not every household can afford to buy more expensive, higher standard fuel. In 2022, some 54% of households were using solid fuels to heat their home with 16% using them as their primary source of heating. People have had to turn to these sources of fuel because of the rise in the price of home heating oil which is only set to get worse as we have discussed at length in this Chamber. Sinn Féin has repeatedly called for investment in renewables. However, what is the point in investing in renewable energy if it will only be used to facilitate the insatiable energy demands of data centres? I know this is about local authorities but we cannot turn a blind eye to this. Now is the time to invest in renewable energy to ensure lower electricity prices for households and to shield them from a volatile market. We must be sure that this energy is not directly funnelled into expanding data centre capacity. Sinn Féin has been consistent about this. I have been consistent about it at the climate committee as well. We cannot keep up with the demand for data centres. We cannot keep building more data centres and giving them half the price of electricity that everyone else gets and that ordinary households pay. We are not just running to stand still; we are running and we are still going backwards. We have to move on that. We have always stated our opposition to the likes of the carbon tax, for example, until proper alternatives are available for people. That is also something I have always spoken about. Carbon taxes can work only where there is an alternative. If people can afford clean energy, I have no problem with their being taxed for using dirty energy but the alternative simply is not there. I have said before that when the CFCs were in our aerosols, the Government and the EU did not put a tax on aerosols or on the CFCs that were in the aerosols; they banned them. We have to make sure we have clean energy because the carbon tax, while there is no alternative, simply will not work. We are only punishing those who are worse off when they have no alternatives at their disposal. That same logic that we applied when we were protecting the ozone layer must be applied here. We need support measures and affordability schemes alongside this legislation to help those people make that transition and not penalise them for circumstances beyond their control. Tens of thousands of homes across rural Ireland are not connected to the gas network. Even in my constituency, right next to Dublin, Maynooth and Leixlip have gas but Prosperous and Clane do not. They do not have affordable alternatives. They cannot simply switch energy at the stroke of a pen. We already have 320,000 households and counting in energy arrears across the State, a number which will only increase with Trump's illegal war and Israel's illegal war on Iran. Therefore, while it is important we keep reducing our air pollution for our own health and well-being as well as the State's coffers, it is important we do not punish those who are already to the pin of their collar for simply trying to keep warm.

We in the Labour Party welcome this Bill. It can be a small step towards an important aim, which is tackling air pollution and improving the quality of the air we all breathe in every city, village or rural area across our country. We all have a right to clean air. I pay tribute to groups like Irish Doctors for the Environment, which play an important role in fighting for this right across our country and educating us all on both the physical and the mental health effects of air pollution, and we can reduce them. The effects of air pollution are well documented. The EPA in its Air Quality in Ireland 2024 report found that around 1,700 premature deaths occur in Ireland each year because of poor air quality. The ESRI estimated in 2023 that between 2016 and 2019, a four-year period, acute healthcare costs for treating five conditions associated with air pollution, including asthma, cardiovascular conditions and things like that, amounted to €56 million. The costs of air pollution, therefore, in terms of both money and lives, are known. What is also well documented are the drivers of air pollution, in particular the role that the burning of solid fuels plays in driving down air quality in our towns and rural areas. The EPA has identified nitrogen dioxide and fine particulate matter as the two pollutants most responsible for poor air quality in Ireland. The burning of solid fuels in homes is the primary source of one of these, PM2.5. That means there can be no excuse for burying our head in the sand and denying the clear link between solid fuels and air pollution and, in turn, no excuse for failing to recognise the link between air pollution and its effect on the health of our citizens. What is more, this is an area that international actors have moved on in recent times. In October 2024 the EU introduced its new ambient air quality directive, with much stricter pollution limits due to come into force in 2030. In doing so, Europe was aiming to gradually align its regulations with the WHO's more stringent air quality guidelines, which were published in 2021. The limit for fine particulate matter, PM2.5, would be cut by more than half between 2026 and 2030. The aim is to reduce premature deaths linked to pollution in Europe by 55% by 2030. We know how important it is to meet our EU and international obligations, whether it is in this area of air pollution or on broader questions of climate and emissions. The consequences of failing to meet them are something we have discussed in this House many times. Just as we need to reduce our carbon emissions to meet those binding EU targets, it is vital that we tackle air pollution to meet our newly agreed EU targets by 2030. That will be a challenge. Our air quality in Ireland is generally good, and we meet all the current EU requirements, but we fall well short of the WHO guidelines. The EPA itself has raised its concern that we will really struggle to meet the new 2030 EU limits. If there is cause for hope, however, it is that we know that this is an area where good regulation by central government can make a real difference. I can remember back to the Dublin smog of the 1980s, when I was a kid, and how that seemingly intractable problem was fixed by Government action. After campaigning by communities across the city, smoky coal was banned in the capital and we saw an immediate, dramatic improvement in air quality. That resulted in roughly 350 fewer needless deaths every year. I did not grow up in a PD household - far from it - but Mary Harney was always respected in our house because of the stand she took on smoky coal in Dublin back in 1990. Thousands of lives have been saved. It was our Labour Minister, Alan Kelly, who extended the ban on smoky coal nationwide in 2015, a ban which came into effect in 2018. The health benefits of these things are overwhelming. That progress has, thankfully, continued. The national air pollution control programme report in 2024 shows fine particulate matter, PM2.5, dropping 33% from the 2005 baseline to 2021. Regulation has worked in this area but, again, we can and we must go further. The clean air strategy committed to reaching the WHO's various targets. The Irish Heart Foundation estimates that there would be almost a thousand fewer premature deaths annually from air pollution if we could reach the WHO targets. That is definitely something worth pushing for. It is, therefore, welcome to see a Government taking this issue on and giving it the attention it deserves. This Bill is, of course, far from a silver bullet but ahead of the new EU regulations in 2030, local authorities and the EPA have identified gaps in the existing legislation, and the Government has moved to plug them, and that is certainly to be welcomed. By strengthening enforcement with reintroduced on-the-spot fines and the introduction of compliance notice, seizure and forfeiture powers, and clarifying regulatory processes through the registers being introduced, we will give meaningful powers, we hope, to local authorities. These powers will be used to tackle what is a real driver of air pollution in this country, which is the sale and supply of non-compliant solid fuels. The EPA has warned us of the catastrophic environmental damage that large-scale illegal peat extraction is doing across this country. Some 300,000 tonnes of peat is being illegally extracted on a commercial basis annually, nearly all of which is being exported, and it is worth about €40 million per year. This is - the Minister referred to this earlier - completely separate from anyone's personal turbary rights, which, of course, we support, but the illegal extraction and commercial sale of thousands of tonnes of turf is decimating vital ecosystems and biodiversity. It is destroying the country's natural carbon sinks, precious boglands that absorb greenhouse gases and are important in the fight against climate change. While I note that this Bill does not apply to illegal extraction, I hope the new enforcement powers under this Bill relating to the sale and supply of non-conforming solid fuels will have a material effect on the enforcement against this illegal trade in peat. We should note the Bill is backed by the industry's representative body, Solid Fuel Merchants Ireland. It recognises how unfair it is if some sellers try to get around the laws that are there for everyone's good and undercut their law-abiding competitors by importing substandard fuels from Northern Ireland or elsewhere. In its words: Honest, tax-compliant fuel merchants across the country have made major investments in cleaner fuels .... But they continue to be undercut by smuggled, high-sulphur products that evade carbon tax and harm our health. This legislation, if backed by real enforcement, can change that. This Bill will not revolutionise our air quality on its own but it is a welcome step in the right direction. It needs to be accompanied with resourcing for local authorities and the EPA to carry out these new enforcement and regulatory powers. Unfortunately, this is an area that has been neglected before, and if we are to have any hope that the measures we are discussing today will have a tangible impact, local authorities need to be backed to succeed on them. This is certainly something we learned from our discussion at the climate committee on this matter a number of months ago. A 2023 report by the EPA on the enforcement performance of local authorities stated that air and noise enforcement had the lowest level of dedicated resources, with only 10% of staff assigned to this area in 2022. In the context of the five national enforcement priorities for air and noise, only 61% of local authorities achieved the required standard for enforcement of the solid fuel regulations in 2022. These powers need to go along with the resourcing needed to make them effective. I would question the time it has taken to get this Bill here in view of the fact the general scheme was published in August 2024 and the Bill was published in July of 2025. It is disappointing that it only reached the Seanad in November and is only coming to this House now, almost two years after the general scheme was published. I understand that pre-legislative scrutiny was waived and that there was no open public consultation prior to the Bill being published. It seems that there was plenty of time to do those kind of things and to look closely at the Bill. It does not seem to have needed to be rushed in order to get to this point. The legislation is important. It is important that we get it right and have full and informed debate on all of these things. As with any debate on enforcement legislation, it is important that we pause and make clear that enforcement can only be part of the picture. Eliminating smuggled, non-compliant fuels from our supply chains is an important step. If we want to have any hope of reaching our targets on air pollution, however, we need to have carrots to go along with the sticks. That means taking the energy revolution seriously and turbocharging retrofitting and the roll-out of renewable heating systems. It also means protecting people from fuel poverty by targeting households on the lowest incomes for retrofitting grants and programmes and, as others have said, providing a just transition. It further means - in this week of all weeks - finally recognising that we need to invest as a matter of urgency in making this country the renewable energy superpower it can be. Ireland has a target of installing 400,000 heat pumps by 2030. The previous target was to install 45,000 by the end of 2025. The numbers being installed are nowhere near that. We need to reform the SEAI's grant scheme and aim for a rural energy revolution. The carbon tax plays an important part in financing just transition. That is why I was disappointed at the backsliding in respect of it this week. There are plenty of other measures this Government could have brought in to protect hauliers, farmers and everyone else who has to use oil and gas to get around the place. It could have used direct subsidies, direct payments and excise duty cuts. The Labour Party has supported all of those. Backsliding on the carbon tax sets a dangerous precedent, and the Government has made a rod for its own back when it comes to the budget in October. We all know that the carbon tax increase was set for May because that is when people are least likely to be filling up their home heating tanks and things like that. Investing properly in clean energy infrastructure both on the macro level and through individual household supports will not just help us reach our climate targets, it will help to tackle fuel poverty, safeguard our energy security and, pertinently for this debate, improve our air quality and save lives in doing so. We also need to recognise the other activities that can affect our air quality. Maybe it is the long shadow of the smog of the 1970s and 1980s, but we tend to think of air pollution in terms of billowing clouds of smoke from small houses or businesses. Of course, any additional activity that puts pressure on our energy grid consumption inevitably contributes to air pollution. As capacity is put under pressure on the grid, clean energy sources are displaced by fossil fuel sources. As An Taisce has pointed out, the rapid expansion in the number of data centres in Ireland is having direct and indirect effects, increasing both the cost of electricity supply and total resultant air pollution. The latter would not have happened in an alternative scenario in which no new data centres would have been allowed. If we are serious about air quality and clean energy in general, we need a moratorium on the building new data centres until we can be sure they will not strain the grid, inflate household bills or derail climate targets. The Labour Party has long called for this. The new private wires legislation going through pre-legislative scrutiny at the moment is only going to serve to expand the number of data centres around the country, which are likely to be fuelled by gas because of the lack of renewable energy sources at present. The cost of all of this will appear on to the energy bills of ordinary households and PAYE workers who are ultimately the people who are going to be paying for all of this. This Bill is a small step towards a goal that will be difficult to reach without more ambition. We welcome the measures in the Bill and we recognise the importance of tackling air pollution. It will have real effects on the health of many of our citizens. However, if we are serious - as we should be - about reaching the goals set out by the EU, we need to see more ambition than just what is in this Bill, but as I said, the Labour Party welcomes it.

I will start by welcoming the Bill. Given that it amends the Air Pollution Act 1987, it is somewhat overdue in terms of updating a lot of the terminology. I have looked through it. While I welcome the Bill, its contents and the idea behind it, I want to start with a criticism. This is a criticism that I frequently make of legislation, particularly updating or amending legislation of this sort. When we look at the table of contents of this Bill, it amends the 1987 Act. Every section refers to things like,"Amendment of section 15 of the principal Act". I understand how that works, but when this becomes law, a layperson will not be able to read it because it makes no sense in isolation. A person would have to find the 1987 Act, look to see what section 15 says, see which particular part it amends and then apply the amendment themselves. We do this all the time, and what we are doing is creating greater distance between citizens and their ability to understand what the law says. There is no need to do it either. When we have amending or consolidating legislation, what we should be doing is taking section 15 of the 1987 Act, repealing it and completely restating it in its totality in the amending Act. That way it is all there for everybody to see and everybody can be clear on what is involved. With air pollution, there is not a huge amount of change in the legislation in that over the number of years, but if we look at things like taxation Acts finance Acts, social welfare Acts, road traffic Acts, there have been multiple amending pieces of legislation. This means that if a person wants to look up what the law says in a particular area, it is absolutely illegible. I am a lawyer. I read legislation, and I have been doing this for a while. This is difficult for me to penetrate. If it is difficult for me, it will be even more difficult for people who are not doing this all the time. It is incumbent on the House to say that we want to pass legislation that people can access. When they cannot, it is a waste of everybody's time. Worse than that, it is isolating ordinary citizens from an ability to see what we are doing. That said, I have gone through the Bill and I welcome the provisions it contains. Air pollution is hugely important. It is the biggest environmental risk to human health, certainly in Europe. The number of unnecessary deaths that result from environmental and air pollution is enormous. This is hidden because people's actual cause of death is often not ascribed to air pollution. However, we know there is a growth in rates of asthma, particularly in kids. We know that there has been a growth in numbers of respiratory conditions. We know from statistics that there is a growth in deaths as a result of poor air quality and air pollution. It is appropriate that we should be doing whatever we can to address that. That is why I welcome, for example, the reform of section 4 from the 1987 Act to expand the definition, for example, of "air pollution" to make it clear that it covers myriad things that were not necessarily even envisaged when the legislation was passed in 1987. Such is the vintage of that particular legislation, it predates many of the things that are causing air pollution now. Deputy Ahern mentioned data centres. I do not know if this problem is necessarily a justification for a moratorium on data centres. I understand where he is coming from in terms of a policy perspective, but I think there are much more proximate issues that are addressed in this that are very important. In particular, the enforcement measures in this Bill are very helpful from the point of view of empowering the State to take action where needed. That is the most important thing in this Bill. The fact is that there are scenarios we are allowing to slip through the cracks now. We need to plug those cracks in order to ensure that air quality issues are not going undressed because of a lack of legislative footing to do so. The revision of the 1987 Act is most important in that regard. Putting in place the things that we need to do to stop all of those threats to all of us in terms of air pollution is hugely important, and in line with the 2023 clean air strategy for Ireland. Providing those updates is really important. However, I also agree with what has been said by other speakers in this debate about providing resources to implement clean air and not just providing the systems and structures to allow us to prosecute those who are causing problems in the context of air pollution. That is important, but if we really want to tackle this issue, there is a general environmental aspect that goes beyond air pollution. Water pollution is another issue, although I know it is not part of this Bill. If we are serious about addressing those issues, we must also be serious about resourcing the agencies that carry out enforcement at the local level. We must ensure that they can carry out their duties and that they have the resources to carry out investigations and to put in place the remedies that need to be put in place. We should also be looking at putting in place schemes or systems to allow those industries or systems that are likely to fall foul of the air pollution legislation to do the best they can or to do more to ensure that citizens are kept safe from bad air quality. That goes beyond what is in this amendment Bill but a Government policy decision needs to be made so that those industries that create air pollutants are incentivised to do what they need to do and to act responsibly even before they meet the thresholds that result in criminal or administrative liability. Those companies should be incentivised to do something more to ensure they are reducing air pollution from their industries. They should also be aided in putting in place systems that might reduce their absolute contribution to diminishing air quality. I think this was referred to as a carrot and a stick earlier in the debate. I absolutely support that idea. This Bill is more about the stick. That is fair enough because the stick has to be strong enough to bring prosecutions to bear, where appropriate. That is hugely important. I said that there are wider issues here and that air pollution is the biggest environmental threat to human health in Europe. However, there are greater environmental threats. Water quality is one. While it may not be specifically addressed by this Bill, the reality is that we benefit from a nitrates derogation in this country, which puts a greater obligation on us to ensure improved water quality. If we continue the way we are going, we are not going to do that. I recognise the need for that derogation but I also recognise the fact that there is much more we can do to improve water quality, whether in our inland waterways, in what is discharged into the sea or in the water around our coasts. That is also true of air pollution. There is always more we can do to ensure that we are reducing the number of toxins we are putting into the atmosphere and, perhaps more importantly, the number of toxins we are allowing industry to put into the air, whether as a byproduct of generating electricity or of generating other products. There are a range of issues that are already affecting human health. This Bill will go some way towards addressing those and ensuring that the 2023 clean air strategy can be implemented in a way that benefits the population. The modernisation of the recognition of the legal framework for enforcing air pollution standards is really important. That is what the Bill does. I know the reality is that most citizens will never read this legislation and that it will be dealt with by enforcement officers within State agencies and by people working in compliance within industries generating electricity or producing products. I know that but I still think this is an example of how we repeatedly pass legislation in this House that is not accessible to ordinary citizens. It should be possible for a citizen to read this legislation. In fairness, that is possible with the 1987 Act. For example, section 6 of that Act refers to "Industrial plant and existing industrial plant". You know what that means. Section 7 of this Act is about amending section 12A of the principal Act. I just do not think that means anything to people outside of the industry and those dealing with compliance and enforcement of the Act. In the scheme of things, would we not be much better off letting citizens know what the Bill and the Act actually do to make their air cleaner and safer to breathe? Would we not be better off bringing them into the conversation about what is happening rather than creating legislative and legal jargon that isolates them from the process? I support the Bill and what it does. It is very important to modernise the framework for air pollution regulation but there are better ways to draft it. However, I support the substance of the Bill and welcome the Bill as it continues its passage through the Houses.

I welcome this Bill and the opportunity to discuss it and the subject of air pollution with the Minister of State this afternoon. I am glad to see that the Government is strengthening the enforcement of air pollution law and that authorised officers will now have enhanced powers of inspection, sampling and intervention. The introduction of fixed payment notices and compliance notices for more efficient enforcement is a positive change. I am very pleased to see the establishment of fuel registration systems and, I hope, tighter oversight of the fuel supply chain. I also welcome the move to update our definition of air pollution to align it with EU law. These changes are essential and very welcome. This Bill should lead to the fuel market being more tightly controlled and to illegal and high-pollution fuels becoming harder to sell. In turn, this should lead to air quality improvements if, and only if, enforcement is effective. The issue of air pollution sits across many sectors and many Departments so it is important that our approach to it is cross-departmental and that it links climate action, transport, housing, energy and agriculture. This Bill is a positive step but, with its primary focus being on solid fuels and supply chain regulation, we risk ignoring the significant pollution that comes from transport emissions and agricultural activity. That is why a cross-departmental approach is so essential. I ask that further consideration be given to that point when the Government is looking at future legislation on air quality and pollution. Earlier this year, I had the honour of hosting the Climate and Health Alliance in the audiovisual room, where it launched its policy paper, Clean Air - Healthier Ireland. What struck me most about that paper was not simply the quality of the research, which, as I am sure the Minister of State is aware, was exceptional, but also the clarity of the message. Air pollution is not an abstract environmental issue. It is a public health emergency and it is already having a real and measurable impact on people's lives, particularly the lives of those who are most vulnerable. The Climate and Health Alliance is a group of health professionals, researchers and advocates who see the consequences of poor air quality every day. They reminded us that air pollution contributes to respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, cancer and adverse pregnancy outcomes. As a result, investment in cleaner air not only has a positive impact on the nation's health, but also reduces demand on already stretched health services and supports longer and healthier lives. The group also highlighted how air pollution worsens existing inequalities, with children, older people and low-income communities bearing a disproportionate burden. This is not only a health and environmental issue; it is also a social justice issue. It is worth stating clearly that cleaner air is one of the fastest health wins available to us. Unlike some policy areas, where benefits take decades to materialise, improving air quality delivers immediate and tangible results including fewer hospital admissions, fewer asthma attacks, fewer missed school days and fewer families dealing with preventable illness. Despite all of this, air pollution is often overlooked and there is very little public awareness of the true health impacts of polluted air. Many people in Ireland assume that air pollution is not a problem here because we do not have too much heavy industry. While we do meet EU limits in respect of air pollutants, Ireland did not meet the most recent World Health Organization air quality guidelines, which are considered to be much more in line with what is actually a safe level of exposure to air pollution. The WHO air quality guidelines represent the most robust evidence on the levels required to protect health. Ireland should really be looking forward and moving towards these standards. I ask the Minister to look at that. In 2021, during the term of the previous Dáil, I introduced the Protection of Children’s Health (Idling of Mechanically Propelled Vehicles in Vicinity of Schools) Bill or, put simply, the no idling Bill. The legislation was based on the very simple idea that children should not have to breathe in toxic exhaust fumes at the school gate. The Bill sought to ban the unnecessary idling of cars within 100 m of schools across the country. Emissions from cars, particularly when idling, increase the levels of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter in places where children spend a significant portion of their lives. Particulate matter has been linked to suppressed lung growth in children and the development of asthma, heart disease and even type 2 diabetes later on in life. An idling engine can produce as much pollution as a car in motion and, in some cases, more. The Asthma Society of Ireland has repeatedly highlighted that children are more vulnerable to air pollution than adults not only because of their developing lungs, but also because of their height, which places them closer to exhaust pipes. One in five children in Ireland experiences asthma at some point and poor air quality is a significant contributing factor. The EPA has estimated that approximately 1,300 premature deaths in Ireland are caused or are attributable to air pollution. That is a shocking figure. As we all know, enforcement is limited without public awareness and education. I do not think people idle their cars out of badness. They just do not think about it. As a parent, I did it as well. You are cold in the car. You are driving between different school car parks for pick-ups, and you are just sitting there. It is just more that people do not think about it. They do not think about the consequences and it not just for health. It is not practical to sit and idle your car because it costs a fortune, particularly nowadays. People do not realise that switching off their engine for even short periods can reduce emissions, save fuel and improve air quality for everybody around them. I ask that the Minister of State look at public awareness in relation to this. I introduced this Bill in 2021. I hoped at the time that I would get support because Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and, indeed, the Green Party had all stated that they supported a ban on idling outside schools, so I was quite confused as to why no one picked it up. It is a good piece of legislation. It is a practical piece of legislation. It is still in the system if the Minister of State wants to progress it. There are a number of benefits with this particular Bill. It is simple. It is manageable. The people who asked me to do this were usually primary school children because they recognise its importance. They are the ones who are walking past car exhaust fumes and breathing this in. They know it is not healthy; they know instinctively it is not good for them. The parents who walk with them and the school community also know. This Bill has serious merits and I would appreciate it if the Minister of State would consider looking at it and working with me on it. It would be important progress. It is the same with any of these Bills; it is not a panacea but it is an important step towards doing something not only for public health and the environment but also as a show of support to school children and a sign that we are listening to them. While this overarching Bill we are discussing is a major step in the right direction, air quality will only improve if legislation and enforcement is backed up by proper resources to ensure that compliance is met. While enforcement powers are strengthened in this Bill, their effectiveness will depend heavily on the capacity and the resourcing of local authorities. Without sufficient funding, staffing and monitoring infrastructure, there is a risk that these new powers may not be fully utilised in practice. Clean air should not be a privilege; it should be a given. While I really welcome this Bill and while it is a strong step forward on enhancement and regulatory clarity, there is a lot more work to be done in the area. I hope the Minister of State will work towards introducing further and broader measures to fully address the air quality challenges we face in Ireland.

When preparing for today, I read a document that is for secondary school teachers to use with students to educate them. Just as my colleague, Deputy Whitmore, said, it is about education. The students who will use this programme will learn all about how air pollution happens and what needs to be done to mitigate it. It was a fascinating read but I will come to that in a second. I am a TD for Dublin South-Central. I am sure Members know that because I have probably mentioned it about 3,000 times since I have been in the Dáil. It is a city constituency, and cities have a particular challenge when it comes to air pollution because of the density of population living in them, cars, businesses and all of the different things that contribute to it. It is very difficult then to mitigate it when it is such a built-up urban area. However, there are things being done in the constituency by people trying to mitigate it, and I will come to them. The area I represented on Dublin City Council when I was a councillor was the south-west inner city. That part of the constituency has the lowest amount of green space per square metre per person in the entire country. It is so urban, so built up and so concrete. There is not enough green space and the need for something to be done in that regard was one of the biggest things that came to my door as a councillor and, indeed, that still comes to it as a TD. The document I mentioned earlier was fabulous, and I have it here. It talks about what air pollution actually does and the fact that it is a public health issue. When we see the detrimental effects of air pollution on the human body, it is quite frightening. The document states it causes headaches and forms of anxiety and it impacts on the central nervous system. It causes irritation to the eyes, nose and throat as well as breathing problems. Problems with asthma increase and it causes chronic bronchitis, lung cancer, reduced lung function, infections and cardiovascular disease. It impacts on the liver, spleen and blood. I do not know why I was surprised by this but it also impacts on the reproductive system. It is obviously part of the body but I was quite surprised to read that. If you are living in a very densely populated area that is polluted, it makes sense. I have to agree with Deputy Whitmore. I was not a TD when she brought that legislation forward. I have a number of children and I spent quite a lot of time going to schools, doing collections and going sport and all of the different things they go to. I remember the idling of cars and being half-choked. When I had a lot of kids, I brought them all in the back of the car because we did not have those cool cargo bikes. They did not really exist then. My eldest is now 22 years of age and people did not really like cyclists going around with a trailer on the back, which we saw used in other parts of Europe. When they got older, we went around on bikes. When you cycle with children in the city, you realise how polluted it is. You see how difficult it is through the eyes and lungs of your children, so I was very thankful to see Deputy Whitmore's Bill. I thought it was great. Being naive, because I was not involved in politics like I am now, I thought it would be in by that September but, of course, I heard today that she introduced the Bill in 2021 and it has still not been passed. I echo her plea to pass that because there are still mammies and daddies going around on bikes. Deputy Ahern is here and I know that he is a cyclist and has small children. It is really important to cycle around and to bring your children to various places. It is also important for the schools in a city constituency, which are built on a kind of postage stamp space and do not have a lot of green spaces. I am talking about my constituency but I know it happens in other parts of the country too. There are organisations that are really trying their best to offset the detrimental impacts air pollution has on their environment. I want to namecheck them because it is really important. These are people who spend their Saturday afternoons, their evenings and their Sundays doing things for the rest of us in the city. They are trying to increase biodiversity. They are trying to increase the number of trees, for example. In Dublin 8, in particular, the number of trees is shockingly low. Anyone who drives through Dublin 8 on their way to Leinster House will know that it does not have a huge number of trees. I am not talking about Phoenix Park; I am talking about the city part of the constituency. One of the groups is the Trees for Tenters, which I am part of. We look at how we can increase the number of trees in the area, and not just any old trees but native trees. There is Blooming Crumlin in Dublin 12. It handed out trees recently to people in the area. It means that people now have a tree in their garden. They are the appropriate size for a city garden. We do not all have acres to plant big trees. This is really helping the air quality in the city. There are also clean-up groups. I know we are talking about air pollution but part of the difficulty with air pollution is the amount of rubbish that is often left about the city and it is having a detrimental effect on people. There are environmental groups like Inchicore Environmental Group and the Liberties Litter Pickers. I could probably spend the rest of my time talking about all the different groups but these groups spend their time trying to offset the lack of green space and the air pollution that is in our area in Dublin 8, Dublin 10, Dublin 12 and parts of Dublin 20. This Bill is very welcome and while it is great to have legislative measures, if they are not enforced, they are not really any use. When this Bill is passed, whenever that will be, I ask that the measures in it are enforced. I also plead that Deputy Whitmore's Bill is progressed to the next stage.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Air Pollution (Amendment) Bill 2025. This is legislation we have been promised for a fair couple of years and attempts to respond to a very real public health challenge that often does not get as much attention as it should. It also updates a framework that we have not kept pace with in terms of the scale of the problem across the country. The EPA air quality in Ireland 2023 report reminds us that air pollution, according to those figures, causes an estimated 1,700 premature deaths every year, needless and preventable deaths as others in the Chamber have outlined. Our legislation is a little bit archaic at this stage. The Bill strengthens the Air Pollution Act 1987 and modernises, on paper, enforcement in line with the commitments set out in the 2023 national clean air strategy. It gives local authorities new powers for fixed payment and compliance notices, enhanced authority to regulate the sale and distribution of solid fuels and the ability to seize non-compliant products. All of that is positive on paper. As an Opposition TD who wants to be constructive rather than overtly critical, though, I also want to point out that the road to hell is paved with good intentions in so many pieces of legislation. We can have all of the strong wording we like, but if we want the Bill to deliver cleaner air and healthier communities and society, we must ensure the enforcement system is fit for purpose. The evidence shows that, right now, the capacity is uneven, in some cases less than optimal, and under real strain. The best example is in my constituency, where the EPA's 2022 local authority environmental enforcement performance report, published in 2023, reported on various local authorities. Regarding my home area of South Dublin County Council, the EPA found that while the council ticked a lot of the boxes and met the required standards in many areas, it also identified specific weaknesses that were directly related to the Bill, including a reliance on an archaic and ageing compliant management system, backlogs of open environmental cases and the need for improvements in the enforcement of solid fuel regulations. The regulations bit I get. The staffing and training levels are different issues. They will show whether the Bill will work in practice. I understand there are five litter wardens in south Dublin trying to police the area. Such work is pointless without staff. The Bill is not related to litter wardens, but it is related to enforcement. South Dublin is not alone, in fairness. The EPA has showed a pattern of staffing capacity constraints across multiple local authorities. That is why the Bill needs to be strengthened. I mentioned staffing and training. IT systems and inspection capacity are also necessary. Without all of these things, the Bill will be a paper tiger. In that context, I want to emphasise the need to revisit the level of fines and what constitutes an effective deterrent. The Bill is good on emphasising proportionate penalties and one can understand that at one level. However, our State has a history of non-compliance on a range of issues. We have to ensure that the fines are meaningful enough to deter illegal fuel sales. If penalties are lower than the profit margins associated with selling non-compliant fuels, it is pointless legislation. Enforcement data from the EPA shows that repeat non-compliance is an ongoing challenge, so agencies have to get real teeth. Enforcement is only one side of the equation. As my colleagues referenced, the other angle is affordability and practical support for our hard-pressed systems. The SEAI national heat study in 2022 pointed out that many households, in particular lower income households, relied on solid fuels because they had a lack of affordable alternatives. This is why retrofitting for public housing is so important. If we strengthen enforcement without strengthening the supports, all we are doing is placing a further burden on those least able to absorb it. The Bill should be accompanied by a comprehensive package of measures that, in fairness, are already directly relevant to the latest fuel crisis. We are dealing with an emergency situation right now. We had a debate on the motion of confidence where the Government was, rightly, accused of not responding quickly enough and not doing enough. In the medium term, we need proper strategies in place to help people reduce their fuel bills and move on to alternatives. We need expanded retrofitting and heating system supports, targeted in particular at those at risk of fuel poverty. The warmer homes scheme national retrofit programme is important. The SEAI progress report shows, unfortunately, that demand exceeds capacity and waiting times are way too long. If we want households to move away from smokey fuels, we must make cleaner alternatives accessible. We also need supports for businesses impacted by the Bill. We need public information campaigns that talk about the damage caused by air pollution. On weather apps, I have often seen that the air quality in some rural areas is worse than in Dublin because of the burning of certain types of smokey fuel. We need to show how that has a direct impact on people's health. The EPA's annual air quality reports highlight the need for greater public awareness, especially in areas where pollution spikes in the winter. We should also consider establishing an enforcement support unit. Other countries have a hybrid model whereby local authorities carry out the day-to-day enforcement and a national inspectorate supports investigations and ensures consistency in enforcement and compliance. This might be valuable for councils like south Dublin where the EPA audits have identified the capacity challenges I mentioned. We should have better annual public reporting by local authorities of inspection fines, compliance rates and enforcement outcomes to compare by local authority on an annualised basis. While the Bill is a welcome and necessary step in tackling pollution from mainly solid fuels, we cannot ignore the fact that air quality in Ireland is not just damaged by home heating alone. The air quality in Ireland 2023 report points out that alongside solid fuel burning, transport emissions and industrial activity are major contributors of harmful pollutants like nitrogen dioxide and fine particulates. Vehicle emissions, in particular from diesel cars, vans and heavy duty vehicles, are well known as a source of urban air pollution. Localised hotspots in urban areas need to be diminished near busy roads. I am thinking of the M50, N4, and N7, which fall outside the scope of the Bill. If we are serious about clean air, we need complementary legislation that addresses the issues. Low-emission zones, stronger standards overall and better investment in electric vehicles and public transport alternatives are broad issues. While not related to the Bill, smaller industrial and commercial sites are another area. The big-ticket companies are addressed, but some smaller sites fall through the cracks. We need to strengthen oversight and improve monitoring technology. While the Bill strengthens enforcement on solid fuels, we have to have parallel action on transport and industry. I do not have time to go into the massive investment required in electric vehicles and giving people the ability to charge electric vehicles outside of their homes or adjacent to them using a domestic tariff. The more electric vehicles are on the road, the less pollution we would have. It is an absolute no-brainer. It is also a no-brainer in terms of rising fuel costs if we can get homegrown renewable energy stored properly and converted to green hydrogen in some cases. I welcome the Bill. It is just one Bill but important legislation. Complementary legislation is essential to protect public health and meet our obligations. In summary, if we want to succeed, we have to match enforcement powers with enforcement capacity. We have to match the regulations with support for households and businesses. The legislation has to be strong enough to do that. We need complementary supports. In general terms, I welcome the Bill.

It is interesting that this Bill is being discussed in the Dáil in the middle of a fuel crisis for so many people. The Bill will focus on air pollution while many family businesses and small business will struggle simply to keep their houses warm in this fuel crisis. I received an email from a constituent during the week. She is a carer. She called in to see one of her clients, an elderly gentleman. He was sitting in front of his electric oven to keep warm because he had run out of oil and sticks to be able to heat the house. That is an incredible image. Pensioners who worked all their lives in this country are now forced, due to the lack of affordable fuel, to sit in front of an electric oven to keep warm. In many ways, it puts this discussion into perspective. There is a slow-motion leadership challenge happening within Fianna Fáil.

Cop on.

While Fianna Fáil wallows in never-ending dysfunction, older people in this country struggle to keep warm. The country cannot wait for Fianna Fáil to get its act together. I agree with many of the Fianna Fáil backbenchers, in that Micheál Martin has to go. All of these decisions the Government is involved in have significant consequences. Some of those consequences are unexpected. I agree that we must become a country with far cleaner air. No one wants to see individuals lose their lives prematurely due to poor air quality or people developing diseases of the lung, etc., as a result of poor air quality. This legislation does not exist in a vacuum, however. It must exist in the real world in which people live and are struggling. The baseline is that we have 320,000 Irish households currently in fuel poverty. The issue we are hearing on the doorsteps and in our constituency offices is that people are struggling to keep the lights on, their houses warm and their businesses going. The unaffordability of fuels is the biggest issue people are experiencing. In reality, fuel poverty and the lack of fuel also cause deaths in our country. It is estimated that approximately 2,800 people die in our country per year as a result of a lack of fuel. That is a very serious issue. In a scenario where fuel is getting harder to secure, reducing access to other fuels leads to poverty, people being unable to heat their homes, and deaths. That is not being understood enough by the Government. There are people around the country, especially in regional and rural Ireland and older families who do not have the technology to use sustainable energy, who are dependent on turf. They cannot come about turf, however, because the local fella up the road who used to cut half an acre of bog cannot sell it to them any more as a result of Government law. One of the big problems is that the Government’s attitude to energy is Dublin centric. The fact the Government was not willing to give a real relief on kerosene - home heating oil - which is the basis of home heating in most of regional and rural Ireland, shows the disconnect of Ministers in this Government. They do not see beyond the M50 when developing policies. This is quite a hardcore Bill, with €500,000 in fines and search and seizure powers to be provided in certain situations. At the other end of the scale, we have individuals who, for want of turf, sticks and coal, cannot heat their homes. My difficulty with this Government is its reliance on the stick rather than the carrot to change people’s behaviours. The shocking level of taxation put on fuel, for example, is a stick to move people out of fossil fuels but many people simply do not have an alternative. Behaviours are not changed when there are no alternatives. This simply enforces a punitive tax on people that they cannot afford to pay. There is a massive cost barrier in switching from coal, turf or sticks. These people do not desire to pollute or create unhealthy breathing air for individuals, but they have no option because they have no other fuel source. The Government must use the carrot. This approach is harder. Competency is needed for the Government to be able to deliver it, and competency is in short measure in this Government for sure. Alternatives need to be offered to people. We heard about cars idling, for example. I will attend a public meeting tonight in Castleknock Lawn Tennis Club at 7.30 p.m. If the Minister is around, he might like to attend. It is not too far from him.

What is it about?

It is about fuel prices, the M50, traffic congestion and public transport, which are all reasonable and important issues. I am told a freedom of information, FOI, request was submitted to the Department of Transport. This was reported in The Sunday Times this year. The FOI asked whether more public transport capacity would be provided in the Department’s budget this year. That report said that there would be no extra capacity in public transport this year despite the level of funding going into it. A lot of people are travelling from the likes of Meath. Some 60,000 people are forced to use their cars because there is no rail line. It has been promised since 1994. It is going to happen in, maybe, 2036 if no judicial review or anything else happens. These people would give their right arms to be able to get out of the car and sit in a train rather than the four-hour, desperate commute they have. The carrot I mentioned is the provision of public transport, including extra bus capacity as well as train capacity, to get cars off the road in order to clean the air so that people can live healthier and longer lives. That is the frustration that exists among people. Deep retrofitting of homes is still inordinately expensive. It is incredibly expensive for those who live in a semi-detached or detached home, even with the grants provided. It is not available to most income classes at the moment. The provision of solar panels is still incredibly expensive. It costs between €7,000 and €12,000, depending on the level of rooftop solar panels and the type of battery you choose. We have never been as rich but we also have never had as much of a squeezed middle as we do now. Middle income families often fall off a social welfare cliff. They are given no supports. They are too rich for energy social welfare supports but too poor to be able to provide the alternative sources needed to get out of carbon fuels. I will mention something of interest to the Minister. This Government has competing objectives. One of them is the building of extra homes. Highly rated homes are obviously an objective in terms of reducing our energy policy, but they have a negative effect on the supply of homes. It costs an extra 12% to build an A-rated home compared with a normal home. We know there is a viability problem. Every time the price of a home increases, it becomes less viable to build, causing fewer builders to build and a reduction in supply. We know every time the price of a home increases, it also costs more to rent and makes it less accessible to people. While we might achieve the objective of fuel efficiency with A-rated homes, it costs us in the provision of homes on the other side. I still believe that the provision of homes is the most important issue facing the country. The Minister must have seen this report recently that outlined that people who were spending more in A-rating their homes were not necessarily reducing their energy consumption by the same amount. That is a significant problem. If we are spending big chunks of money on the deep retrofitting of homes but it is not leading to the practical, real-world reduction in the consumption of fuels, then that money is going to waste in reality. We are not meeting the objectives and we are paying the money on it. I would like to hear the Minister’s views on how we can square that circle in achieving those objectives. We want to see the reduction of pollution and particulates in the air as well as the amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere, but we want the Government to realise that there are other objectives that need to be achieved as well. One of the main objectives is fuel and energy affordability and security for families. That has been ignored, which is why we had the big crisis that led to the omnishambles last week on the streets of our country. That is one of the objectives that have been ignored. The other objective that we have to look at is the provision of proper public transport. Hundreds of thousands of people are living in commuter hell at the moment. They undertake two- or three-hour journeys in and out of Dublin on a daily basis just to be able to work. That objective is not being achieved either.

I welcome the chance to speak on the Bill. I also welcome Deputy Tóibín recognising that people need financial supports and that we need a stable government to bring them in in the next few months. It is great to see that.

Stable. Show me the stable government.

I would not be looking for a few seats to make the Irish people worse off at a time of geopolitical turmoil. What we need right now is people who are going to stand up and lead. I will give the Minister solutions. I welcome that he referred today to the progression of plug-in solar. Has the Department investigated the cost of a temporary free public transport scheme? What would the estimated cost be? A lot of people who are using public transport are on subsidies at the moment. At the moment, we need people to be able to commute and reduce their energy costs. This Bill is about air pollution but when we speak about plug-in solar and how it will help reduce the use of fossil fuels, I welcome that the Minister said that in 2022 someone had submitted that plug-in solar was unsafe. I am on the climate and energy committee. I have requested and will continue to request information on who deemed it unsafe. If I was betting man, I would say it was someone who installs solar systems on the top of roofs that said it was unsafe. I refer to giving people an easy option. People in apartment dwellings in my constituency want to reduce their bills. We need to make it possible for them to buy a system that is a lot cheaper than the installation of a permanent system on their roof and allow them to plug it into their house. The Germans did it. There are examples. There is no complex planning and no major installation. We could even get a demonstration and do it within an hour. The Germans have over 1 million of these systems installed. That is just through their official scheme. That is not mentioning how many people were using their own kits that they were buying from online suppliers. These new units cost as little as €500 for a basic set-up. It is ordinary people who I represent. It is renters. It will help with air pollution because we are giving them a renewable source. At this moment in time, it is a renewable source that will reduce their bills and benefit their pockets. Each system is small but, together, they are cutting down emissions and reducing pollution. It is estimated that they are preventing hundreds of thousands of tonnes of CO2 emissions in Germany. The installation of these systems is very simple. It does not require major infrastructure and it will give people immediate savings. I raised this yesterday. A lovely constituent of mine called me and said they would love to be able to avail of this. They have three children and they are struggling with their bills. That extra few bob in their pocket would help them right now. It is exactly the kind of policy we should be working for - low cost, high impact and quick. Regarding everything else, we are talking about housing, healthcare and the cost of living, and rightfully so, but the quiet thing that we have not been discussing but will be going into now is air pollution. I always talk about Dublin Bay and water pollution, so I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. When I was younger I had asthma. Thankfully, I grew out of it. From studies, I know air pollution is a huge cause of juvenile asthma. There is also a huge number of premature deaths. We are above EU levels, but there are areas that have bad air pollution. What other countries are doing is something that we should follow. We could look at the Japanese and the Germans. I would say the members of the energy committee are fed up with me citing Germany as a guide for how we should do it, but the reason I mention it is because the German Government follows practical and logical solutions, whether it be plug-in solar or the moss that is used on the outside of buildings and is brilliant for absorbing PM2.5 particles. The 3D printing that can be used for this moss can also be used for nature-based solutions for flood defence in Dublin Bay North. We can bring in these systems of artificial reefs that encourage marine life and biodiversity in the waters. We should be using these nature-based solutions. Their installation is low cost and they are low maintenance. We would be using nature's base that is already there and established. In Dún Laoghaire they are using oyster beds to combat water pollution, which is a brilliant idea. It is purifying the water. When we come the issue of air pollution, there are solutions we can use to retaliate against it. For local pollution in Dublin, we could look into bringing in alternatives, such as planting more trees. That is a very simple one. When I was researching for this speech, I came across a study in the UK on the use of trees in heavily polluted areas - areas with traffic lights. The study indicated trees can reduce air pollution in such areas by between 20% and 40%. There are high-density plants that are known for reducing the level of pollutants in the air. Members of this House are often contacted by constituents regarding issues they would like us to raise. One of the solutions that was mentioned to me was put in place in the Netherlands and France. The Minister might be laughing at me now but it is a very simple fix. It is a type of paint that can be used on roads and, in direct sunlight, it absorbs pollutants. I had not been aware of this previously. The person who rang me is doing a PhD in air pollution. I was blown away by the idea and looked into it further. There are a few videos on it. It has been shown to succeed. It is low cost. It is called photocatalytic road paint. Surfaces are treated with titanium dioxide, which breaks down air pollutants using sunlight. I was blown away when she rang me. It reduces nitrogen oxides, which are the main pollutant coming from traffic. It is a passive system with no maintenance once installed, just like nature-based solutions. It has been successfully used in other European cities. I will always come to the Minister with solutions. This is one that I would love him to look at. We could even paint the road ourselves. It would be nice to see a north Dublin road that is reducing pollutants. What we are trying to do is to use small areas of nature-based or scientific innovation, such as that paint, to benefit people and reduce air pollution. The data is clear. I will go back to the start - solid fuel burning. Deputy Gogarty mentioned it. For example, there is smokeless transport emissions. These are the main drivers. To reduce solid fuel burning, let us give them the option of plug-in solar. To reduce transport emissions, let us give them the option of reduced fare or free public transport during this economic crisis. Let us accelerate the transition into cleaner heating systems. Yesterday, the SEAI appeared before the climate and energy committee. I welcome that some Deputies have criticised the SEAI. However, the reality is that the SEAI and the grants it has made available have been studied by other European cities and countries as a result of the success rate and the high level of uptake. I would love for the initial cost of some of the schemes to be examined because there is not such a high uptake among those on lower incomes due to the cost. There are some contractors that will give you the work in lieu of the grant. We need to look into that if we are going to encourage people to participate, particularly those who are under economic strain. The findings of the research are clear. Real-time pollution alerts are being used in other European cities. We are very lucky that we do not have that level of pollution in Dublin city. Another constituent told me he recalls a time when it was not possible to see from one side of O'Connell Street to the other. That was not in my time. I wish to acknowledge a few groups that have been working with me since I have been in this House. They include the EPA, Dublin City Council and community groups, such as Tidy Towns, which are bringing in biodiversity products and encouraging it. Driving in today, I saw that one of the bus stops in Fairview, which is in my constituency, has a planter on top of it. I would love to see that rolled out more, with a few flowers and a bit of this. It would also reduce pollutants. It is a biodiversity spot. My message is clear. I would love the Minister to look into the 2022 analysis of plug-in solar and see who deemed it unsafe. It is definitely something that we need to look into. It is a quick fix. The people would benefit from it now.