 Thank you very much for your invitation to be here today to the Institute and to congratulate you on your series of lectures and meetings and contributions that you've been receiving in the last while and in the last number of years in relation to this very important subject. Indeed, we're indebted to the Institute for the Intensive Programme of Work on Climate Change in recent years and I am happy to endorse and support that work by sharing some thoughts on the Climate Policy Challenge with you. I'm sure I'll have some questions afterwards, so more on that later, but I believe that 2012 will be a pivotal year in climate policy development. And while that might be considered brave in a process that has had many twists and turns, I see it less as a dramatic shift and more as a reorientation from a limited, short to medium term view to a more complete and coherent approach to an effective global response to climate change. Following the Durban Climate Conference just a few months ago, an unprecedented opportunity now exists for the parties to the 1992 UN Convention to work towards having global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Against the background of that opportunity, there are a number of reasons to be positive. Firstly, the agreement reached at the recent Durban Conference has moved the international community beyond the Kyoto Protocol while maintaining its overall architecture. Enhanced international action on a robust basis from 2020 is now a real prospect. So this represents a significant stimulus to the international climate policy agenda. A new chapter focused on a strong global agreement to enable us, the parties to the international process, to set a definite and determined course towards meeting the ultimate objective of the Convention and avoiding the unthinkable consequences of dangerous climate change. A long-range view is already in focus at EU level, most notably in the ongoing discussions on the development of a roadmap to a low-carabin competitive economy in 2050. Nationally, this reorientation is also evident. We are engaged in an intensive and transparent process to advance our thinking and our response to the challenge of climate change in the short, medium and long term. Our future will be different. There is no doubt about that. And the difference will present both challenges and indeed opportunities. Our objective is to manage the necessary and inevitable change through effective transition to a low-carbon future and to emerge as a progressive, climate-resilient country with a competitive economy that is sustainable in environmental and economic terms. Developments at an international level are likely to dominate attention in 2012. Work on developing the Durban platform and enhanced action is already underway and we expect to see clear progress within the year. It is essential for the process to move on quickly and in reality 2012 is a short transition phase in which the comprehensive round of negotiations triggered by the Bali Action Plan must be concluded so that a sharp new focus around the Durban platform can begin in 2013. That leaves just three years to reach agreement in 2015 on a new binding agreement that will apply to all parties of the convention and come into effect from 2020. By understanding standards, that's a massive challenge to the process and a true test of the commitment and determination of all parties. From my perspective, one of the key features of the agreement reached in Durban is the acknowledgement that all parties must take on a binding role in reducing global emissions. Not since the convention was agreed at the Rio Art Summit 20 years ago have we seen such clear unity of purpose around the ultimate objective of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a safe level. Irrespective of the background to current and historic greenhouse gas emissions, and I respect the importance of addressing that background, developed countries simply cannot deliver the ultimate objective on their own. The fundamental principle of the convention on common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities provides an established nucleus for the more complete and coherent response in which I referred earlier, and which we both welcome and support. In addition to responding to the scientific advice from the IPCC, the agreement which we will work to achieve in 2015 must address fully the issues of climate justice, covering key issues such as equity and the right to development, and underpin a path to an inclusive, equitable, low-carbon and climate resilient future. Financial support for adaptation and mitigation action in the developing countries will be central to achieving these objectives. An important step in this regard was the decision at Durban to give operational effect to the climate, the Green Climate Fund. The challenge now facing parties is the resourcing of that new fund. Of course, the substantive next step in global mitigation cannot be reached until 2020, and an important aspect of the outcome of Durban was the recognition that the mitigation pledges to date are not consistent with keeping the increase in global average temperature to no more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. In response to this gap, the Durban outcome includes the decision to launch a work plan on enhancing ambition with a view to ensuring the highest possible mitigation efforts by all parties. The anticipated fifth assessment report from the intergovernmental panel on climate change will be a key input to this effort to raise the level of mitigation ambition sooner rather than later. In response to the decision on the Durban platform, the EU agreed to enter a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol. It is unfortunate that a number of key countries who are parties to the convention, including the United States, Japan, and the Canada and the Russian Federation, are not in a position to join the EU and other parties signing up to the second commitment period. EU influence and leadership, which was central to the decision on the second commitment period, ensures the continued operation of the protocol and avoids a gap in the international response to climate change at the end of the current commitment period in December 2012. Further details of the arrangements to mobilize the second commitment period will be developed over the course of this year, and key issues for our decision include the actual length of the commitment period, the emission reduction targets to be adopted by the parties concerned. And the EU position and that of its member states, including Ireland, will be underpinned by internal EU policy and commitments. From a national perspective, there were important decisions at the Durban Conference on Agriculture, and the inventory sector known as Land Use Change and Forestry, or LULU-CF. After an intensive effort, we welcomed the fact that agriculture is now firmly on the agenda for the first time in the 20-year history of the process. Within the EU, we are hopeful that a decision at the next conference will lead to a comprehensive international work program on agriculture, covering both mitigation and adaptation. New international rules for forestry, carbon accounting, in the case of the pre-1990 forests, were also agreed in Durban. That decision is a positive development for Ireland, and welcome progress on one of the more technically complex issues in the international negotiations. To conclude on the Durban Conference, there's a lot of work ahead, and progress in 2012 will be critical. But overall, we can be positive that the outcome delivered a clear platform for working towards a multilateral, legally binding global deal within a definite timeframe. In delivering that platform, parties have paved the way for enhancing mitigation ambition and maintain the architecture of the Kyoto Protocol while moving beyond some of its limitations. These are valuable outcomes in terms of the process. The EU will press for the negotiations and the substance to follow quickly. We must not let the momentum generated by the Durban outcome slip. Turning now to the European level, the EU's commitment to an effective long-term global response to climate change is evident in the Climate and Energy package adopted in December 2008, and the ongoing discussions based on the communication from the European Commission around the title of roadmap for moving to a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050. Ireland has consistently supported EU ambition and leadership on climate policy, both in relation to framing the internal European agenda and to the positive influence which the EU seeks to bring to the wider international process under the UN Convention. As I've said a number of times previously, I want and I expect proactive Irish support to continue. Two immediate areas of EU policy development are in prospect, ongoing debate with the Council on the 2050 roadmap communication, and the anticipated proposal from the Commission on land use, land use, change and forestry. Both initiatives open up the issue of the EU considering a step-up in its mitigation ambition for the period of 2020 on internal EU grounds aimed at ensuring both continued EU leadership in the international response to climate change and the competitiveness of European business in a changing global economy. The 2050 roadmap communication is a key response to the resource efficiency pillar of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The communication clearly shows that the most cost-efficient EU pathway to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050 requires a 25% emission reduction target for 2020 to be achieved on foot of internal measures alone. That is the opening scene for the next phase of the EU climate policy development and the benchmark to which we must prepare to respond from a compliance perspective, but also as a barometer to ensure that we maintain progress with the vanguard on transition to a successful low-carbon future. The longer-term perspective of the 2050 roadmap communication and its twin focus on transition and competitiveness are in line with an increasingly evident international focus on the emerging global green economy. The policy direction signaled in these initiatives point clearly to the need to look beyond compliance. Transition presents both challenges and opportunities. A balanced overall policy position will be a key to a successful outcome. Turning briefly to land-use change and forestry, it remains something of a climate policy gap at an international level and within the EU. In view of our greenhouse gas emission profile, proposals to address that gap are a policy priority for Ireland. Whether they arise at the EU level or indeed in a wider international arena. While important progress was made at the Durban Conference on Agriculture and on the pre-1990 forestry elements of Lulu CF, a great deal of work remains to be done in order to develop a complete understanding of the role and responsibilities of the agriculture sector under the broad climate policy agenda and the impact of the diverse elements that constitute the Lulu CF inventory sector. On foot of the outcome of the Durban Conference, the EU was preparing to engage intensively in an exchange of views in agriculture that is expected to culminate in a decision at the next conference of the parties in Doha at the end of the year. In parallel within the EU, within the EU, I expect that the council to receive the anticipated internal EU policy proposal from the commission on Lulu CF shortly. All in all, 2012 will be an important year for climate policy development in relation to agriculture and Lulu CF. How these issues progress will have a significant and direct relevance to the national climate policy development process. I believe that a long-term vision to 2050 and the steps that must be taken now to achieve that vision provide the context in which national policy will have to be progressed in the post-2012 period. It is clear to me that the largely compliance-based policy pursued to date will not provide an adequate response. So where does the pursuit of new opportunities fit in a compliance-based agenda? It doesn't. Transition to a competitive low-carbon future is a much broader agenda and long-term planning will be the key to its achievement, as well as laying a solid foundation for effective engagement by Ireland in the global economy of tomorrow. Against that background, I believe it was important to look at where we stood in terms of current policy and more importantly, where and how we saw ourselves as a society and an economy in a low-carbon world. The policy review, which I published last November, represented a timely stocktake of our current position and our existing obligations and is intended to provide the basis for a wide-ranging debate on the future direction of climate policy in Ireland. Following on from that review, I have asked the Secretary to the National Economic and Social Council to undertake an independent piece of analysis on the policies and measures that are needed to close the gap to our existing targets and a more long-term focus piece of work on developing a 2050 vision for Ireland. I've also engaged with ministerial colleagues to work towards the whole of government response to the very significant challenge of reducing our national greenhouse gas emissions and I believe that there is a real awareness and willingness across departments to make progress on the climate policy area. Those of you who were here last Friday, for example, for the energy policy session, would have heard clear confirmation of cross-departmental engagement in the presentation by my colleague Minister Rabbit. Today, I am launching the promised public consultation on national climate policy and legislation. This is the third and final element of the government's immediate response to the review that they published last November. I am determined to progress policy on the basis that respects both transparency and inclusiveness. I hope this open consultation will stimulate serious and constructive engagement across all sectors and stakeholders. Consultation will open from today to the end of April, giving a full two months for all interests to submit their views and I hope they will do so. We are fortunate to have an active and well-informed group of stakeholders in this country and the consultation has been designed to encourage a rich round of engagement by all concerned. Ultimately, we will need a range of policies and measures to meet our EU and wider international obligations and to pursue our national priorities and transition to a low-carbon economy. It would be good to let a response comprise of well- taught views from a wide range of interest feed into that process. Anticipating the public consultation, the institute has already made a valuable contribution with its recent publication entitled Why Legislate, Designing a Climate Law for Ireland. I want to thank the institute for this initiative and I look forward to your influential input over the course of the consultation and beyond as the overall policy development process matures. In addition to the importance of the overall policy development process, I see the results of the consultation as valuable input to the analysis being undertaken by NESC and the deliberations of the relevant Interruptors' Joint Committee who I see playing an important role in debating some of the key issues arising from the process as it moves ahead. While I hesitate to use the phrase due to its usually negative connotations, it's appropriate here, what we need is an Irish solution to an Irish problem. We need policy that is both grounded in reality and reflective of our ambitions. Policies and measures must respond to Ireland's national circumstances as reflected in our greenhouse gas profile and the structure of the economy. And that's not to say that we can't learn from policy and legislative response in other countries, particularly within the EU. However, rather than simply slavishly caught on pace from everywhere else, we must tailor and shape an approach to the best response to the particular challenges that we face. It's worth reflecting briefly on some of the facts. Our greenhouse gas emissions profile is somewhat unusual in a European context due to a number of factors. Very high level of agricultural emissions, mainly associated with rumen and livestock, a relatively low proportion of emissions falling within the EU emissions trading scheme and a low population density coupled with a tendency for dispersed settlement that encourages car ownership. In 2010, provisional estimates show that the agriculture transport and energy sectors account over 71% of total national greenhouse gas emissions. When we exclude emissions covered by the EU emissions trading scheme, agriculture and transport alone made up about 69% of remaining emissions with a further 17% from the residential sector. This non-ETS sector, as it is known, is where Ireland has a target of achieving a 20% reduction on 205 emissions by 2020. There are also intermediary targets for each of the years from 2013 to 2019, meaning that Ireland has de facto annual targets for each year to 2020. So the challenge is significant in series. And we must be dealt with in a manner that has regard to our specific national circumstances. Reflecting on these facts points very clearly to the need for an inclusive and transparent national debate focused on a progressive but realistic way forward for Ireland. And the challenge is greater than mitigation or adaptation, but there are key elements in mapping out a wider socioeconomic response to what would be a very difficult but very exciting future. Last month I published a road map of the planned steps envisaged in developing national policy and associated legislation in line with the commitment in the program for government. I've heard some commentary that it doesn't move quickly enough, but the issues are of such importance to our future economic and social well-being that it will not be rushed. Kneed jerk reactions without proper and well-considered consultation have no place in this process and deliver a little other than a damaging divisiveness. I believe that the process that I've set in train will prove that good progress can be made by all of us working together towards a progressive consensus. I hope that the next step in that process, the outcome of the public consultation, will provide a catalyst for a significant step forward to a policy position that is fit for purpose for meeting our 2020 commitments and initiating a national journey, an effective transition over the longer term. Our immediate economic difficulties should not dilute our ambition to join the leaders of today who are working to shape the framework of a safe and successful future. As I said at the beginning, 2012 will be a pivotal year, both intensive and exciting in climate policy development. Rather than any dramatic impending deadly, this shift in focus or shifting gear, if you like, to a more long-term view is very much in evidence. This year is one where we should, at all levels, lift our eyes from the sharp to the longer term horizon and adopt policies and instruments focused on achieving our aspirations of a safe world with secure resources to support the well-being and ensure the prosperity of generations after we have exited the stage. Thank you very much.