Gwdeithasbwynt. Fy na yw Francis Rouann, a fyddwn i'n fwyaf amgymru o gweithio'r wefbyn ar gyfer hynny, ond mae'n coorganizio bydd y Ff3EF ac y Ff3Eref yn ymwynghwng o'r ffyrdd yng Nghymru. Rwy'n fwyaf yw'n meddwl, yn ymwynghwng yma, yng Nghymru o'r Fyfyrdd yng Nghymru, ond rydych chi'n gwneud cyfnodol a'r ffyrdd yng nghymru o'r ffyrdd yng nghymru o'r 1billion o'r bwysig, i'r bwysig i'r erdwyddoedd i'r gweithio ar gyfer Covid-19. Mae'r bwysig yn y pethau am y ddweud genedlaeth EU, a hefyd yn cyfnod 150 miliwn yn oed o'r bwysig o'r bwysig i'r bwysig. A'r bwysig o'r bwysig i'r bwysig o'r bwysig i'r bwysig i'r bwysig i'r gweithio a'r bwysig i'r digwydd a'r bwysig o'r gweithio sy'n oed yn cael ei wneud. Felly mae'n bobl o'r ffocws. is strategic looking forward but it is also dealing with the recovery. So we're delighted this afternoon to be joined live from the Department of Public Expenditure Reform in Dublin by the European Commission for the Economy, Paolo Gentiloni who's currently on a visit to Ireland and some of you will have seen him on the television on the media over the last couple of days and also by the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Michael Maghrat. And in their joint address today, Commissioner Gentiloni and Minister Maghrat I will discuss how this new fund will foster a resilient and a fair recovery across the EU and support a transformation in Irish society. So we're grateful to both of them for taking the time out from their busy schedules and it is indeed a busy schedule during this visit and are delighted that in fact this is their second occasion this year in being involved in an IAEA function. So it's really very generous of them to do this and it's a great opportunity for you to hear their thoughts. So this is the first hybrid event the IAEA has run since the onset of the pandemic so if I feel a bit nervous it's because I've been told I'm a guinea pig but it's great to be able to begin the process of bringing back the type of event we knew pre-COVID and more importantly combining it online to get to much much larger audiences than was possible in the past. We're very grateful to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform for hosting this event for us. So we will begin with the address by Commissioner Gentiloni followed by Minister McGraw. They'll both speak for about 15 minutes and then we'll go into a Q&A session with the audience. You'll be able to join the discussion using the Q&A function on Zoom which I'm sure you're all very familiar with now and you should see it on your screen. So please feel free to send your questions in throughout the session as they occur to you. You don't have to wait until things are done or the speeches are finished to send in questions and we will come to them once Minister McGraw has finished his presentation. Please when asking your questions make sure to identify both your name and your affiliation along with the question. So a reminder to all of you that today's presentation and the Q&A session is on the record and also to say that the IIEA welcomes your tweeting about the event using the handle at IIEA. So let me turn first to formally introduce Commissioner Gentiloni. He has been European Commissioner for the Economy since December 2019. Before that he had a distinguished political career in Italy serving as Prime Minister from 2016 to 2018, Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation from 2014 to 2016, Minister of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Chambers of Deputies from 2013 to 2014 and Minister for Communications from 2006 to 2008. Prior to his political career he worked as a journalist and anyone who heard him speak on RTE yesterday morning will have seen his excellent journalistic skills in action on that occasion. So he's also a graduate in political science from Sapienza University in Rome. So Commissioner if I could ask you to go to the podium and deliver your address. Thank you. Thank you. Well thank you very much Frances and thank you Michael for your hospitality and for having me here today. This is my first bilateral visit to a member state since the start of the pandemic and it's important the fact that we can finally have these meetings because this also shows that we are moving in the right direction and hopefully by the next time I come to Dublin I will be able to meet all of you in person. More than 70% of adults in the EU are now fully vaccinated in Ireland, that figure is impressive, more than 90%. And Europe's successful vaccination campaign is underpinning a strong economic rebound. Growth is accelerating in Ireland and in the EU with the expansion in 2021 as whole likely to exceed our already robust forecast. By the way this morning OECD published a there more recent forecast and their expectation for the euro area is of a 5.3% growth which is slightly higher than our previous forecast but we share this optimism. And I stress the fact that these figures are comparable with the one of the United States. A few months ago we were in a very very different situation. Of course we have to build on this positive momentum and our aim is to put our economies on a more sustained and sustainable growth path. So not just a rebound which could be already there practically sooner or later in different member states but a stable and sustainable growth. And this is where the next generation EU and the recovery resilience facility enters with their importance. Next generation EU is an unprecedented response and as you said Frances it is mobilising up to 800 billion euros in grants and loans in current price. And this is a unique opportunity for all Europe to build back better as we say and to drive forward the green and digital transitions. The first disbursement of these funds to EU member states started over the summer and will continue in the coming months and years. We have so far disbursed approximately 50 billion euros in pre-financing money raised by issuing common bonds which have been heavily oversubscribed every time. And this is in itself a tremendous success that we will continue in the next weeks and months also with the emission of green bonds. With around one billion euros in grants, Ireland's recovery and resilience plan is of course relatively small but it is no less ambitious for that. Ireland plan includes a set of important reforms an investment that we are confident will contribute to effectively addressing a significant subset of the economic and social challenges outlined in the country specific recommendations Ireland in recent years. Which is one of the fundamental criteria for the commission assessment of the plans. The plans includes reforms in the area of social and affordable housing, health, pensions and the business environment. And it introduces measures that are expected to partially address challenges in the areas of antimony laundering and aggressive tax planning. The plan includes investments to stimulate research and innovation, promote private investment as well as targeted measure to develop skills and support employment. Most importantly, I think Ireland plan devotes 42% of the total allocation to measures to support climate objectives while 32% of its total allocation is for measures that support the digital transition. So it's very much concentrated in those priorities the strategic priorities that at European level we think could give an added value to our economies because of course the amount of money is crucial but how do we use this money? Do we use it in strategic priorities? I think also to fill gaps that we have in our competitiveness, I think it's very important. Irish businesses tend to benefit from this plan both directly and indirectly. Directly through measures to promote private investment and funding for research and innovation or programs to invest in firms digital transformation as well as reforms to reduce barriers to doing business. And indirectly through investments and reforms that will more broadly improve the business climate for example when it comes to the upskillings and risk killings of workers. We should also not forget the importance of the spillover effects that this coordinated growth and transformation effort all over the single market will bring about. The European Commission has given its green light to the iron plan which is fully aligned with our common priorities. It's now time to implement the ambitious measures contained in the plan. As I believe you say and we say the same in my country a good start is half of the work. So our priority over the coming months and years will be to make sure that these plans are implemented in full especially in the countries that are receiving larger amount of money but in each and every member states. Before I wrap up a few words now on EU fiscal policy Europe's response to the economic shock caused by COVID-19 could scarcely have been more different to what happened during the previous crisis which hit Ireland so hard. This time an unprecedented shock was met with a swift strong and coordinated common response from the EU institutions. And actually I think that both the EU institutions and national governments could be proud of this reaction. There was a well balanced and also this was new complementarity between fiscal and monetary policies that was absent unfortunately a decade ago. Now we must avoid repeating the mistake of a decade ago when support was withdrawn too soon and too abruptly. Of course we must have more targeted more selective support but we must calibrate very carefully the transition from emergency support to more targeted measures. We also need to ensure that our fiscal rules and our economic governance framework are fit for purpose in the post pandemic world. With public debt levels having risen markedly and investment needs having continued to increase especially those related to the green transition. As confirmed last week by President von der Leyen in the coming weeks we will reopen the public consultation on our fiscal rules and governance framework. Taking into account the input we will receive and the discussion we will hold with the member states over the next couple of months. We will then assess how to move forward. Thank you and Gure Moog Agwit. Thank you. Thank you very much. I don't know how the pronunciation was. Gure Moogat, it was lovely. It was really good. Thank you. So the next time you're here we'll explain to small lat na hibra, which is your half the battle as the work that starts well. So thank you very much for that. I think it is good to remind ourselves actually of the fact that we did learn from what happened 10 years ago, a decade ago, and we've actually done so much better at this time. And I think that the learning from that experience has been very real. And it's just not to say so. I think it's very substantial. So I'd like next to welcome Minister Michael McGrath, who is the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform and his TD for Cork South Central. He was first elected to the Doyle air in 2007 and has been re-elected in every election since then. And to those of you familiar with Irish politics will know that that's no mean achievement. In his time in the Doyle, he has served as opposition finance spokesperson and on a number of Iraq's committees. As Minister since 2020, he oversees close to 90 billion of government spending, which will of course be related to the spending coming from the EU. The implementation of the national development plan and also the programme for public service reform. So it's a very broad mandate that he covers out in this role. So Minister, over to you to address us. Thank you. Francis, thank you very much for the kind introduction. Commissioner Gentiloni, you're very welcome. And I am genuinely very pleased to take part in this event this afternoon and to welcome you all virtually at least to the Whitaker room here in Merion Street. And I do want to thank the IIEA and the commission representation in Dublin and indeed the staff in my own department for all of the work that they have put in to make this event here today a reality. And I am particularly pleased to welcome Commissioner Gentiloni to Dublin and here to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to discuss Ireland's national recovery and resilience plan. TK Whitaker, whose portrait hangs in the wall here in this room, was of course a pioneer of economic development at a time of great economic challenge for Ireland. And we are all still inspired by him. The last 18 months have seen Ireland, Europe and the world face an extraordinary challenge, namely the COVID-19 pandemic. And requiring an extraordinary response at a national as well as an international level. At a national level, the 2020 program for government set out the ambition and the actions required to meet this challenge and to repair the damage that had been inflicted by the pandemic. And in many ways, the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for enabling future change and allowing Ireland to build back society and the economy in a manner that is sustainable. As our successful vaccination programme allows us progressively to reopen the economy, the government's economic recovery plan has set out how we will support the full resumption of economic activity and to help people to get back to work. And we are making very substantial progress in that regard. Allied with the national development plan and building on the extensive supports the government has put in place since the start of the pandemic, the economic recovery plan sets out a new phase of supports, investment and policies for a new stage of economic recovery and renewal. In recognition of the extraordinary impact of the pandemic, the full range of tools at the government's disposal have been used and indeed continue to be used, including income supports, grants, reliefs, taxation measures and loan guarantees so as to protect workers and their incomes and support businesses through the pandemic and beyond. Meanwhile, at a European level, the 800 billion euro next generation EU recovery package represents an unprecedented response by the European Union to the global pandemic. It represents Europe's shared response to the public health and economic and social crisis caused by COVID. Next generation EU is an ambitious and common recovery package that will complement and support each member state's own national response to the crisis. At the heart of next generation EU lies the recovery and resilience facility, the aim of which is to address the economic and social impact of the pandemic and make European economies and societies more sustainable, more resilient and better prepared for the challenges and opportunities of the green and digital transitions. Ireland will receive approximately 915 million euro in grants from the recovery and resilience facility and these grants will be used to support investments between now and mid 2026. If further set of grants will be allocated to each member state in 2023, take into account economic developments between now and then. Ireland's plan has been developed by the government in close cooperation with the commission taking into account the RRF prioritisation of green and digital transition as the commissioner has alluded to and the challenges identified as part of the European semester process. I would like to thank the commissioner and the commission services for their excellent cooperation in developing Ireland's plan. I was very pleased to meet commission president Ursula van der Leyen when she travelled to Dublin in July to present the commission's positive assessment of Ireland's plan to the Tishok. I was also pleased to join my colleague Pascal Donohue who I know the commissioner knows very well at the recent meeting of ecofin when Ireland's plan was discussed and I was delighted that our plan received approval by the council. The overall objective of Ireland's national recovery and resilience plan is to contribute to a sustainable, equitable, green and digital recovery in a manner that complements and supports the government's broader recovery effort. The plan is aligned with domestic policies such as the economic recovery plan and the national development plan which is currently under review which will see very significant investment in our public capital programme in the years ahead. Consistent with the NORP the priorities for the NDP include reform, sustainability, regional development, innovation skills and climate action. Ireland's plan is based on 25 investment projects and reform measures spanning three core priority areas addressing green and digital transition along with social and economic recovery and job creation. Each priority contains a set of impactful and reinforcing investments and reforms. Let me turn first to advancing the green transition. The next number of years are critical if Ireland is to address the climate and biodiversity crisis that threatens the safe future of our planet. Ireland's ambition is to more than have carbon emissions over the course of this decade. This will be very challenging and will require fundamental changes in so many aspects of Irish life but the measures contained in this plan and other key domestic plans like the national development plan and the climate action plan will help us rise to this challenge. Reflecting our strong national commitment to addressing the climate and biodiversity crisis the NORP sees a significant allocation being made to supporting investments addressing the green transition. As detailed in our programme for government we are committed to a 51% in overall greenhouse gas emissions from 2021 to 2030 compared to 2018 levels and to carbon neutrality by 2050 at the latest. Ireland recognises the importance of front loading these required investments as many of the changes started in the 2021 to 25 period will only lead to reductions later on in the decade. Ireland is lagging behind however compared to other EU member states and tackling decarbonisation. In fact Ireland is expected to miss its target for cumulative emissions for the period 2013 to 2020 by approximately 5%. This means that proposals and funding are required to substantially reverse recent trends and improve efforts to decarbonise. Our plans will also be crucial for achieving progress towards environmental objectives in line with the European Green Deal. As part of our commitments in the programme for government we will support the European Green Deal which provides a roadmap for Europe to take advantage of the opportunities by moving to a low carbon future. The NRRP represents a first step to significantly reform and direct relevant funding towards decarbonisation projects such as retrofitting, ecosystem resilience and regeneration, climate mitigation and adaptation and green data systems. The measures contained in our plan and in other key domestic plans will help us to rise to this challenge. Reflecting the importance of the digital transition for Ireland and Europe in the coming decade support for Irish businesses and our citizens to adapt to and indeed to reap the benefits from digitalisation will be central to our national recovery and resilience plan. That is why accelerating and expanding digital reforms and transformation is one of the three priorities in our plan. Our ambition is to provide a better experience for citizens and businesses interacting with government and it's important to continue and accelerate the reform agenda through improvements and the way government systems operate. Achieving this requires digital transformation of government, redesigning and rebuilding government processes and services if necessary across organisations and using digitalisation and data to provide an integrated experience for our citizens, businesses and our policy makers. Having a user centred focus on the design and delivery of public services underpinned by exemplary identity and data infrastructures would be a key driver of reforms. The benefits of the digital transformation of public services to both individuals and businesses are well established. These range from efficiency, transparency, trust and accessibility through to funds being released for expenditure on improving existing and future services. Realising the potential of digital also requires promoting awareness of the possibilities of digital and strengthening digital skills within organisations and across sectors. Through this approach we will scale innovation to enable system-wide transformation and reform. Policies and interventions that advance the digital transformation can also be catalysts for wider recovery, growth and increased competitiveness. Having invested in underlying infrastructure such as the national broadband plan we need to drive adoption and maximise return on that investment while also driving the reform agenda. For the past number of years Ireland has striven to improve digital connectivity across urban and rural settings to integrate digital services as part of the reform and the transformation of the public service and to promote the benefits of digital transformation across Irish businesses. The digitalisation of our public service is particularly key given the challenges presented by COVID with the need for remote working, remote transfer of confidential information and a reduction in gatherings and face-to-face consultations. Digital interactions are also less time consuming for people and reduce the administrative burden on both the public sector and companies which can help support business as economies recover from the effects of COVID. Moreover, given the scale of case management that occurs across public facing parts of the government sector automating these components will significantly boost productivity reducing backlogs and freeing up resources for other priorities. Our digital transition would be one of the key enablers for our reform agenda. It will allow greater interoperability of public services within and between organisations nationally as well as across the EU as appropriate. It will improve the quality of service enable the sharing of information in an efficient manner within the public sector and with citizens and business thereby enhancing our public administration. Our NRRP has a strong focus on supporting people's return to work and preparing for the challenges of the future. This is reflected in our third priority social and economic recovery and job creation. Further education and training in Ireland has long played a critical role in labour market activation and in upskilling and re-skilling our people. The requirements on the FET sector are particularly acute given the enormous impact of COVID on the social and economic fabric of Ireland. In particular, certain sectors and occupations have been impacted greatly such as hospitality services and indeed retail. Additional skills challenges relating to climate, Brexit and automation also exist. Recognising these challenges we have strengthened the mandate and the governance of this sector through the establishment of the department of further and higher education, research, innovation and science. This department will drive the reforms required to ensure Ireland is equipped to upskill and re-skill the workforce and to provide skills for growing sectors such as green and digital. We've introduced investments in further education aimed at upskilling, re-skilling, retraining and providing experience to individuals to enable them to avail of the new employment opportunities that are arising. Additional government investment in vocational and further education was first announced in July of last year in the stimulus package to help people to re-skill and if necessary to change career. This was further supported with additional further education and training places announced in the budget in last October. This priority area in Ireland's plan will focus on new work placements in response to the COVID pandemic in order to keep those who are unemployed close to the labour market. It will also focus on equipping or workforce with the necessary future skills that will be required to boost innovation and productivity in our SME sector as well as the provision of skills in support of climate action. This commitment to reforming the focus of FET to meet the future employment that Ireland strives to advance in climate action and digitisation will ensure there is strong alignment between the development of physical capital and our human capital. Ireland recognises the critical role that next generation EU and the recovery and resilience facility will play in helping to repair the immediate economic and social damage brought by the pandemic. But more than that they will enable us to move beyond the pandemic and rebuild the European economy. For Ireland as a successful open and global economy at the heart of the EU this is fundamental to our future interests. I would like again to thank the commissioner and his team for their outstanding cooperation in developing our plan and now we move to the next phase which is one of implementation and this phase will be led by myself and my own department and close cooperation with Minister Donohue and the Department of Finance and I look forward to continuing no doubt with good cooperation with the commissioner and his team during those critical phase. Thank you very much. Thank you minister. It's a huge agenda and it's great to see the word alignment being used so often because very often commissioner we've had policies in Ireland which have been very good enough themselves but actually they haven't aligned across the base and one of the things of having a national development plan is we're more aware of the need and the importance of actually doing that so I think this is a real great strength. So I've got to just remind the audience that if you have questions to please send them in through the function on Zoom and we'll come to them as we go forward but I'm going to start with the question actually to you minister for a moment and you'll know why I'm asking it because it's very current and as you'd expect we always like to deal with the current. In the past 24 hours we've seen some significant developments in relation to the future of Ireland's corporate tax strategy. Early yesterday the American Chamber of Commerce which represents key multinationals in Ireland came out with the view that well they really changed their position in relation to 12.5% and really urged Ireland to be part of the global tax deal and not as they had done earlier to stick to what they had wanted previously and the issue there I think is around giving certainty to multinationals and I think one of the things that a lot of Irish people don't realise is just how important certainty in policy making has been in Ireland over 50 years so of course we're slow to change but when we change we want to give certainty and let everybody know where we're going it's a very important part of our strategy and then of course last evening that the shock speaking from New York sent a message which indicated that Ireland wouldn't necessarily be sticking to its position in relation to the 12.5% and that it was engaging very actively in discussions with the OECD and I know minister you're very much engaged in that process as well with minister Dunhoo so my question really to you is what impact do you see the Tishock statements as having on the timeline for discussions of these issues for example would you see a decisive change being indicated ahead of the OECD meetings in October or do you think it will be in tandem with them do you have a sense of the timeline that Ireland will want to pursue because for us and the commissioner will appreciate this it has been a major part of our policy I did my PhD in this area 40 years ago so I've been around a long time and this has been very strong plank and it's been very consistent I mean very unusual globally in the extent to which we've had consistent policy so I was just wondering minister if you might be able to give us some indication of your thoughts at this stage if you have them on relation to the developments of the last 24 hours thank you Francis for the question and it is the unavoidable issue that is the subject of much public commentary and I think that the t-shirt's answer to the question that he was asked reflects the fact that there is a process that is well underway and I think Ireland has adopted through the leadership of minister Pascal Dunew a very considered and a very measured approach to the entire process we have made it clear that we want to be part of an overall agreement and of course there are are two pillars to all of this and pillar one is one that Ireland is actively supporting which is the reallocation of taxing rights of multinationals based on where the substantive economic activity is taking place and signing up to that will come at a cost to Ireland and it is a cost that we have quantified as you know which will materialise over the next number of years if that comes to fruition pillar two is the one where we continue to have significant concerns about the minimum effective global rate of corporate tax and for us the key question is we need absolute certainty as to what we are being asked to sign up to and these discussions are continuing and we are now entering into a critical number of weeks and minister Dunew has briefed the party leaders and myself on the detail of what is happening in the background and so he's representing our interests as you would expect him to do we will ultimately make a judgement call when we have all of the facts and all of the information as to what exactly is going to emerge from this process and there are lots of moving parts of course not just on this side of the Atlantic and the European Union but also in the United States and we are monitoring all of that closely and of course the Tishuk is currently in New York as well so I think the next number of weeks will be critical as the OECD moves towards from its perspective trying to reach an agreement in the early part of October and then the further meetings at G20 level and so on later in October so at this point Ireland cannot commit to signing up because it is not entirely clear what exactly or we are being asked to sign up to and we do have to protect our national interests and you have rightly I think underlined the strategic importance of certainty and we currently have a policy which has been there now for a very long time in many respects that has been the bedrock of Ireland's foreign direct investment policy which has been hugely successful though of course tax is only one factor it's not the only factor and if we're being asked to sign up to an alternative then we need to know exactly what it is and we're not quite at that point yet because if we're being asked to leave behind one chapter of really successful period of certainty and stability we need to know what we're getting into and we're not quite at that point yet and hopefully in the weeks ahead there will be full clarity on what that package is Minister, just to clarify that is that around the I mean we understand the numbers because we can all work out 12.5% and 15% and we know those numbers well is it around the base is that really where the concerns are the uncertainty that you're concerned about at the moment so that there are lots of detailed technical discussions that sit underneath in many respects the headline issues that have been debated publicly and those include of course the calculation of the base because while Ireland has a very low headline rate in relative terms that is applied to a very broad base and many other countries have a higher rate but a much narrower base and of course the detail of how all of that is going to work through in a final plan will be really important and so Ireland is being represented in in all of those technical discussions as you would expect so for us the need for as much clarity and certainty as possible is absolutely vital before we make a final decision because you know the 12.5% rate and the environment in which it has been protected has been instrumental in the success we have had in foreign direct investment and we are determined to protect that success You don't want to come in to discuss anything of this matter of commission would you like to make any remarks in relation to the development since you arrived well very briefly because of course I had the opportunity in this couple of days of discussing the issue with Michael McGrath with the ministers stakeholders and especially with Pascal Donahue who of course as president of the Eurogroup I am working with working with very frequently only two points first we consider this the possibility of a global agreement on taxation as a very important step forward for the global community it was not so near only six months ago I think we should be very honest on this something happened the new US administration to be to put it very bluntly took the initiative and gave to the process a new boost this process in itself I think is a positive one reallocation of taxing rights and creating a global framework for minimal taxation this gives stability and predictability to the system all over the world second point of course I perfectly understand and now I know very well the challenges that this particularly the so-called pillar two creates for Ireland the difficulty of the decision to the be taken and the importance of taking this decision having all the details then we call details something that are not always details so having clarity of what we are talking about so I fully understand the what between the Irish government and the OECD is going on to try to clarify these so-called details and then we will have as European Union the task to transpose this OECD agreement not a different thing but this OECD agreement in the EU legislation and this will be our task but we need of course the agreement of all member states and this is the reason why also we are very interested on this process respecting the importance of the process as Pascal always repeat we are in the process we are not yet in the agreement and this is what is the situation is I hope that in the next period we can have a new step forward but this is to the Irish government to decide and not to the commission of course I just think it was an interesting development for Ireland that the multinationals really have now looked to get certainty and I think that actually I think is almost a helpful probably from an Ireland's perspective because that voice had been very strong on the other side for a very long period so I think that development is I think is helpful to getting sort of onboarding these ideas and commissioner there's a question into you from Kevin Calnan who's the general secretary of Forza which is one of our big unions and he asked the following would commissioner Gentiloni agree that the review of EU economic governance mentioned by president van der Leyen last week will need to result in more flexibility for countries like Ireland to permit borrowing at favorable conditions for investment in the infrastructure and public services necessary to achieve social cohesion and for measures that will support competitiveness allowing the economy to reach its potential well to put it shortly my answer is yes to make it a little bit more articulate I would say that this is will be for sure one of the main work stream in this discussion of the of our fiscal rules de facto we began this discussion already 10 days ago in an informal meeting of finance minister in Slovenia with a paper presented by Gunther Wolff the director of the break think tank on special treatment in our fiscal rules of green investments it's clear I think that we can't repeat what happened with the previous crisis what happened with the previous crisis is that gradually member states reduce the level of their net investment and at the end of the decade in 2017 2018 the level of public investment was zero on average if we take this and all the commitment that we have in the transitions and Michael was referring before to the green transition what this means well here of course we need mostly private investment but also a substantial amount of public investment are we able to give to this kind of public investment a more easy way from a fiscal point of view with our fiscal rules I think that this is quite possible and the first discussion that we had among finance minister was rather encouraging so yes this is a problem that we should face and we have some new tools for example the taxonomies that we sorry for the name the taxonomies that we adopted for next generation EU plans to define what is a green investment for example and also for the digital these taxonomies will be very useful if we decide to give a sort of facilitate way to green or digital investments so yes it will be one of the issue that we will discuss in the next months Minister did you want to make any remark on that in relation to that I think one of the real learnings from the last crisis is the need to protect capital investment and you know as as the commissioner has alluded to right across Europe one of the real victims of the crisis was public capital investment in Ireland it fell by about 60% from peak to trough and when you take out the necessary spend on maintenance then that meant you had very little net new investment in infrastructure and thankfully we are now in a very different environment because of the accommodative policies of the European Central Bank and the very supportive policies of the other European institutions and I think that the the rethinking of the fiscal rules in the next period ahead should reflect that investment in infrastructure productive investment in infrastructure is a priority and has to be accommodated within the fiscal rules framework and I think that that is the point that Kevin is making there and he alludes of course to to public services as well but from my perspective as the minister in charge of the national development plan you know I don't want to see future ministers being a situation where they are at you know at the mercy of the economic cycle whereby capital projects just have to be stalled or are completely stopped because that impacts on our ability to recover we need a good strong commitment to steady state investment in infrastructure so in the next three weeks we will unveil the new national development plan in Ireland which will lay out the plan out to 2030 and the cabinet agreed in July to the overall financial envelope for that which is 165 billion euro so next year for example we will invest 11 billion euro in the public capital programme and only a short few years ago that was 4 billion euro so we've seen the scale of the increase and now the challenge is to make sure we get value for money that we have the capacity within the system to deliver on that infrastructure and to try to unlock some of the bottlenecks that have arisen and there's a lot of heat in that market at this time as you know not least because of the impact on the economy for 18 months and there's a lot of pent-up demand for construction activities so there are challenges but for me preserving the public capital investment programme and protecting it and enshrining it in the new fiscal rules framework that will hopefully emerge out of the pandemic is really important So Minister how do you see Ireland approaching the upcoming debate on the fiscal rules? I don't know whether you saw that the view expressed in the letter sign by eight finance ministers who were looking to draw a distinction a deactivation if you like of the general escape clause and reform of the stability and growth path that these should not be linked Do you think that that's an issue that Ireland would for Ireland? So I think from our perspective we came into the Covid crisis in good health in terms of the public finances we were broadly balanced and that gave us the capacity then to borrow on the way that we have done to support people's incomes to support businesses and to try to help our economy to absorb the enormous shock so the general escape clause and the support of the ECB the commission and all of the other international bodies I think has been really important in that regard I think you need a certain level of flexibility within the rules I think if you have rules that are overly rigid and don't take account of domestic national circumstances I think that can be problematic if they're overly prescriptive I think that there's a need I think to bring that element into the rules that takes account of countries specific circumstances while certainly working towards for example the medium term objective in relation to a budget deficit and the need to consistently make progress towards that and I think the commission will have a very important role in improving national plans into the future when it comes to how you get to that path I mean I'm just there's a question in from Dan O'Brien from the IIEA to the commissioner asking whether he sees the traditional positions of each of the member states on the fiscal rules as being largely unchanged or do you think that mostly the northern countries who've been hostile to deficit financing are kind of shifting the position do you think there's a more unity across Europe across the countries who've been to some extent in different places on this issue well for sure there was more unity during the emergency period the pandemic and this unity allowed us to propose as commission and then allows the governments to decide on this what we are discussing here the next generation EU and other initiatives I think we should recognize this and also be proud of this the reaction was fast, strong you were referring before to the general escape clause and I remember very well how difficult but fast was the decision to introduce to use it was had never been used before this general escape clause and it was introduced I think in March the 16th or 17th so exactly at the beginning of the pandemic in 2020 then this different position are rooted of course in different countries we can't imagine that the fact that we showed solidarity also in the interest of the single market not only in the interest of solidarity has cancelled these differences they are still there but I also see a window of opportunity if we address this problem not with a backward looking attitude so we are not reopening the debate that we had in the previous 10 years we are trying to address two main new problems first the enormous task of transformation of our economies in the digital and in the climate transition and second we have to manage an extraordinary high level of debt that was created by the pandemic I think that there is a consensus on the fact that these two big big problem have to be faced and this is the premise to put the discussion if possible in a different perspective from the previous differences it will not be easy it also depends on several political circumstances of course we have a window of opportunity between the German elections and the French elections for example to table some proposals we will see I am optimistic because if you are in politics you need to be optimistic and you are Italian and Italians are optimistic and Italians are optimistic but also Irish are optimistic I think we are well matched on that difficulty when we are on the sports field but otherwise we are pretty good on it just that issue of how the I guess the commission how if you like collectively your response and how the commission manages that I mean you mentioned in your speech and the minister touched on it as well the sort of reform objectives that are contained in the next generation EU and the issue of that they need to be adhered to insofar as the funding is going I am just wondering how strong the commission feels about this reform agenda and the extent to which it would restrict funding if they didn't follow what they set out as their objectives in their recovery and resilience programmes well in general I think the awareness should be of the extraordinary opportunity that we have which is not only an opportunity of going out of the emergency it is a paradox but I am quite convinced of the fact that the long time that was necessary to take the decision because we propose this next generation EU in May 2020 the commission and then the first money is arriving arrived in July 2021 so after 14 months a long period okay but this very fact paradoxically is a good one because it is clear that this money is not for emergency emergency was faced by national governments also thanks to the decision taken by the ECB and by the european institution now this money should be used for this extraordinary opportunity to make our economies more sustainable inclusive and competitive it's now or never I don't think that our generation will have another opportunity well not my generation but maybe also Michael generation will not have such an important opportunity to make this progress we were mentioning before the figures of growth if we look to the perspective of growth of Europe China and US they they've never been with less distance that that now in the last 20 years so we have an opportunity to go out of this situation that we called low for long low growth low interest rates low inflation and non-sufficient competitiveness and sustainability in Europe the opportunity is now and it is based not only on investments investments are important but in several countries and mostly also in countries that are receiving larger part of this funding reforms are I would say even more important than investment the commission has for the first time not only a power of regulation of influence but also power of money fire power we should use it as well as possible I think that's why I always think the minister is very lucky that he has public sector reform in his title as well as public expenditure because I think there's a sense in which if you don't have if you don't link reform to expenditure I think the evidence globally is very little happens I've just a quick sort of question to both of you this is since you're both admitted to being optimist a moment ago so when 2026 comes around and the last funds from the next generation EU have been dispersed both to Ireland and the EU and indeed we're looking forward to 2030 and beyond what would you think from just a you know at a very very high level you would see as success looking like for this project in terms of Europe where do you think we would we would like to be and maybe minister would ask in relation to Ireland and commissioner you might say if you were is just in relation to the European Union overall now what's this going to look like because as you rightly point out it is a very different step so maybe minister you will start with Ireland well from from our perspective it's part of an overall mix of policies that we expect will lead us in the direction where we want to go and that is to first of all secure economic recovery after a devastating shock imposed by by covid and we should bear in mind that this plan is about achieving recovery after covid so I think in Ireland we've made a very good start we're seeing the number of people on the emergency pandemic unemployment payment fall very significantly we now have a very ambitious pathways to work programme that will enable us to help the remaining people to find work and also to help people currently in the workforce to change their employment because there will be new opportunities emerging and some sectors are going to experience long-term change where there may be less opportunity in some areas more opportunity in other areas and we see enormous opportunity in the green transition for example in retrofitting both our public sector building stock our residential stock and also in digitalisation and when you look at the success we're having in terms of FDI then I think you can certainly see a synergy and an overlap there so for me it is about Ireland's national recovery and resilience plan helping us to implement our national economic plan in Ireland which aims that by 2023 we will have surpassed the pre-COVID level of employment we also have to get our public finances back into safe territory that means reducing the deficit gradually over the next number of years that won't be easy for me it means the unwinding saying no it does indeed involved saying no and it means in the short term you know putting train the unwinding of the exceptional COVID related spending because that's what helps to get us back towards safe territory and then on the climate action side you know Ireland's national recovery and resilience plan funded here by the European Union will play a really important role in driving the change across enterprises across transport across energy policy we're going to provide direct grants to businesses now through this EU funding to help them to make the transition so when I look at our own recovery plan the EU funded recovery and resilience plan the national development plan the climate action plan it is all about getting us to a point where our economy is on a sustainable footing public finances are back in safe territory and undoubtedly this plan will help us to achieve all of that so commissioner a few words I know you've a plan to catch the ministers to be the far side of town although you'd never guess anything you'd like to see in terms of what you think the EU you know what will this look like if you were to say this was really successful what would what would be your well I don't want to design a no you're not design but what would you look like a utopia you know no but it's what does the what does this feel like from an EU my point is we are not only working for a rebound what does this mean I think an added value from this common money added value in mostly three or four dimension the first is the climate transition we can use this money and the fact that we are concentrating almost 40% of this money on the green transition to strengthen our position of leaders at global level of this climate transition of course this will not solve the the the green challenge because we know that only 7% of emissions are coming from the EU but we also know from these hearings of these years that if we take the lead other countries could take this example so first strengthen our all our efforts on how we move how we deal with our housing heating etc etc etc second our digital competitiveness efficiency digital divide but also global competitiveness we are lagging behind from this point of view and we have several projects cross border projects unifying forces among member states to create the critical mass to be competitive in the digital arena and thirdly to have this lesson learned also of the necessity during this crisis to have social inclusiveness good functioning of health care systems so this kind of Europe leading the green transition more competitive on the digital future and with a stronger social dimension is possible with this kind of common investments if they are targeted and if they are linked to reform if this works we will have higher growth and numbers will show us if it has worked if it is not only rebound we will look at this from numbers and we will know that these numbers have behind a more sustainable and inclusive growth I think it is really an issue that the sort of it's not just a question of the macro it is the numbers the macro numbers but it is the economic development that takes place below the macro numbers it's what behind it that really matters well ladies and gentlemen who are watching online I think we've had a very interesting discussion of the the next generation EU I think it's it's a really important collective recovery fund I think it is to me of what strikes me is that in a few years time we would hope that that sense of being more European in some of these efforts would be felt more strongly and I think what it has shown though is that the EU can work together to address a common crisis I don't think we've wasted this crisis at all arguably some of us may have wasted a little bit of the last crisis but we deal with the crisis and then support the long-term long-term objectives for the European Union and I want to thank you minister and commissioner for your time today and could I just say to those of you who are watching in if you have friends or colleagues who are not able to attend online today that you can let them know that the webinar will be accessible on the IIEA's YouTube channel and the audio of the events will be uploaded on the IIEA's Soundslide Spotify Google Podcast and Apple Podcast accounts so you have no excuse for not seeing it or hearing it if you haven't so thank you all very much for this afternoon and thank you both again commissioner and minister thank you friends thank you very much


What's your name everybody Matt here for late in sports cars are up in one box of 2022 Donner's optic football retail This is for Mike M. Good luck Mike So Hunter just got this I think it's a graphic novel I Don't remember what it's called, but it's basically there's one sort of like all the Ninja Turtles die except the one Really? He's like yeah, so he's like it's the last something I think I mean, there's a different word other than something Crystal Lave rated rookie stars K Von Tibido Mario Davis stars Jalani Woods rated rookie Eddie Jackson stars Christian Watson rated rookie Mom, where's that downtown? White hot rookies silver Brian Robinson Fred Warner and Arlee She moved on Kenny pick it rookie light it up Malik Willis rated rookie Evan Neal rated rookie stars with sign rated rookie Drew Brees stars Lante Taylor stars Brandon cooks bills Jones Jr. Drew Smith retro Grady Jarrett silver and Troy Anderson rated rookie. This is Rising Suns Aiden Hutchinson rookie insert All right last pack I say a spiller on the back that'll do a fear box Mike appreciate it. We'll get these right out to you


Rarely is this such a thing as just numbers. Too often people look at statistics and just see the magnitude of the numbers, not the meaning that those numbers convey. What I want to explain is how a simple graph can show far more than just the raw numbers for carbon emissions, and what this tells us about why changing that trend is so hard. If there's one thing that really annoys me about public debates today, when different interest groups shout numbers at one another, it's when the meaning or context of a number is lost in its usage. Numbers are not meaningless from the scientific units they're expressed in to the series of data which they form part of. They express far more than just a magnitude. Too often that deeper meaning is lost, and with it the more informed message that the data is able to give. The purpose of this is not to quote you the awful figures on carbon emissions from fossil fuels, it's to tell you the detail, or the reality, that it's too often left unstated when quoting those numbers, and how the data show that. Sorry to butt in with a quick advert, but if you'd like to see more content like this then you really should consider liking this video, subscribing to my YouTube channel, perhaps leaving a comment below, and following me on social media. In today's digital analytics popularity contest, all that button pressing means something in this messed up world, and if we're going to challenge that then we have to do our bit to whack the algorithms, supporting the kind of content we want to see by clicking on it. To begin, take some data. You want some data on carbon emissions? Whose data? The source matters. Problem is, the data carries with it the baggage or limitations of the group who collated it. International agencies may ignore certain effects, such as when the UN climate change agencies exclude the impact of carbon emissions by the military, or it may use certain data sources because that's what's politically expected of them, such as when governments and UN agencies use the data produced by the lobby group, the International Energy Agency. A few years ago I used data collected by the US Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, part of the US Department of Energy. They were accessed as part of Trump's destruction of US climate research. Luckily a new source has come along which takes this and other data and combines it into a coherent data set, which saves me the hassle of doing the same exercise. The Global Carbon Project is a collaboration of academics who want to find and curate the best data on carbon emissions. They publish their data regularly as part of academic studies. Their data set includes measurements from the latest release inventories, recent data on fossil fuel consumption to turn that into emissions estimates, and they use historical data to project back to the starting industrial revolution tracking the use of coal. Pretty much all data is imperfect. There are always issues about the accuracy of collection and how that may be skewed by the methods chosen, all the restrictions and how that takes place. Generally though, for all the known problems about collecting data, often imperfect data is all we have, and those imperfections have to be part of the debate about how we make decisions using it. This graph shows the global carbon emissions from fossil fuels, in millions of tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, listed in the Global Climate Project's data set. The data stretches back to 1750, and the beginning of the large-scale use of coal in the industrial processes. Even so, I'm starting these graphs at 1840, as the earliest data is so small as to be practically invisible. This allows you to see the rest of the data more easily. Data ideally represents reality. The best data is empirical. It should measure real-world things using demonstrated, reliable and verifiable methods. By measuring phenomena, we can use that numeric information to mathematically demonstrate, with a known certainty, what is happening and what are the causal factors. Carbon emissions grow exponentially. That means the rate of increase is increasing with time. We can see this in the graph shown earlier as the line curves gradually upwards as the rate of change increases. To know how fast that trend is changing, an exponential curve can be plotted through the data to accurately estimate the rate of change, as is shown here. Well, it doesn't fit. The problem is the data on carbon emissions are complex information. Yes, the thing being measured, carbon emissions, is simple, but the human system that is working to generate those emissions is far more complex. The effects of that complexity are buried in the way the data changes over time, which means it doesn't submit to a simple analysis. Now turn that problem on its head. If the rate of change is changing because of the underlying complexity of the human system, if that variation itself can be measured, it will tell us far more about the human system than just the rate of carbon emissions. It can tell us what is driving the change in trend in emissions, and from that we might find what is more likely to reduce this trend in the future. Reality is complicated. One single trend won't fit neatly through the graph. That's because the trend is not constant. Instead the graph must be broken down into smaller sections where, for a time, the trend is roughly constant. Then the trend can be accurately measured from the data each time it changes. What we have to do is break the whole curve into sections, then suddenly match a curve into that small section of the data. From 1751 to 1914, growth is 3.1%. From 1912 to 1920, that falls to 2%. Then from 1945 to 1980, it jumps to 4.5%. Then from 1976 to 2002, it slumps to 1.4%. Then from 2000 to 2012, it jumps to 2.8%. And finally, in the last decade, it falls to 1.5% again. Compared to the previous graph, it's possible to see how much better each small curve fits through the carbon emissions data. What this shows is that the rate of change in carbon emissions changes according to a definable, time-limited phase. These phases don't have neat boundaries because that change isn't sudden from one year to the next. Of course, for those who study energy and economics, the dates where the trend changes leaves little doubt as to the likely cause. This graph labels the different sections of the observable cause of these changes. Very simply, when the global economy fails, carbon emissions fall, and when the global economy is boosted, carbon emissions rise. The world must cut carbon emissions as quickly as possible. Full stop. The basis of current policy is to replace fossil fuel and energy with renewable or nuclear energy, creating the energy the world requires without carbon emissions. The problem is, this has a questionable efficacy. As outlined in recent research, adding renewable energy to the global economy isn't really reducing carbon emissions noticeably. At best, renewable energy meets the annual growth in energy demand, meaning that the level of emissions stays the same. This brings us to the deeper message within the data about those dangerous exponentials. In the 270 years from 1750 to 2020, roughly 1,696 billion tons of carbon dioxide have been emitted from the use of fossil fuels. It took 220 years to emit the first quarter. It took 22 years to emit the second quarter. It took 16 years to emit the third quarter. And it took 14 years to emit the last quarter. In fact, since 1750, half of all the carbon dioxide emitted from fossil fuel use has taken place since 1992, when the world agreed a treaty that pledged action to curb emissions. The fact is, the scale of new, non-fossil fuel capacity required to reduce emissions is so much greater than what is actually being built. Practically, under the current policy, the time taken to achieve the required transformation of the world economy is far longer than we have available. Simply changing energy sources is insufficient. We must directly cut energy use significantly at the same time. This is the affluent elephant in the room. If the only time the global economy reduces emissions significantly is during a recession, or a pandemic, then what we need to engineer is the same kind of collapse in consumption, but without the negative social consequences those past recessions created. That, of course, is not on any mainstream agenda, not even the leading environmental groups. This same trend of impacts rising when the economy grows and falling when it collapses is seen across many of environmental issues too. Recession is good for the environment and therein lies the deeper truth in the data. The fact that global governance systems can only consider options which reinforce economic growth and will veto any option contrary to that condemns the global community to failure. We will not be able to solve global ecological issues where the kinds of action which work are deemed unacceptable because they deleteriously affect the abstract economic interests of a tiny proportion of the global population. As said in the previous post, given 10% of the world's population are responsible for 50% of the emissions, there is no way to cut carbon quickly enough without that 10% significantly cutting their physical consumption. The results of this analysis reinforce that message. It shows that, historically, it is the pursuit of economic policies which benefit this globally affluent minority which lead to the largest increases in carbon dioxide emissions, but the rate of emissions falls when this globalised economy contracts. Only when this minority accept that they must shrink the economy to contract the ecological demands of the modern lifestyle will we solve these critical problems. The maintenance of a high-consuming lifestyle for a minority is not compatible with the maintenance of a liveable earth for all. The impacts of dangerous exponentials that even some in the finance world now seem to accept might be unsustainable are an issue that the environment movement has failed to address. Yes, some may euphemistically talk of degrowth or circular economies, but they fail to acknowledge how the data which describe our most pressing ecological problems is ripped through with a message critical of affluence, the dominant consumer culture, and the global minority who enjoy it. Only by explaining and openly discussing how the data described this phenomenon, irrespective of the short-term political consequences, will we be able to tackle the obstacles to real, effective change.


Why do I eat roadkill deer? Now, that's a question that a lot of people have for me. First, I want to say that I don't call them roadkill deer. I call them deer that were hit by cars. Now, why? First, it's sustainable, it's abundant, it is free, and it's a resource that would otherwise go to waste. There are a lot of reasons why it makes sense and in this video, I'm gonna share why I choose to do it. Before I explain why, I want to make a few things clear. First off, why I don't call it roadkill deer and instead call them deer that were hit by cars? Well, the reason why is that the moment before that deer was hit, it was a deer walking through the woods. If I was hit by a car, I wouldn't be a roadkill human, I would still be a human when I was on the side of the road. And first and foremost, that deer is still a deer. Now, people's imagination runs wild when they think of roadkill deer. They see the transformation as something completely other, but the point is, is it still first and foremost a deer? Now, when media has reported on the fact that I've eaten deer that I've collected from the side of the road, they like to say things like, he scraped it up from the side of the road. And that's where the imagination has run totally wrong because of media, because of maybe seeing things in TV, or because of seeing really messy ones on the side of the road. But the messy ones, the ones that have been splattered, of course, you just simply don't mess with that. Often, deer that are hit are very minimally damaged and they're laying on the side of the road as you would see a body. When people do talk about eating animals that hit by cars, they're not talking about scraping things up. They're talking about perfectly good animals that were recently, very recently alive, and are still in really excellent condition to be able to harvest. To make sure we're really on the same page, I want to show you a couple of pictures. First, this is a picture of a doe that I harvested, and you can see the condition that it's in. No scraping, no splatting. It looks like it is in very good shape, and indeed it was. Now, here's a picture of the first deer that I ever harvested, and it was a fawn. You can see that it has ruptured in the intestines a little bit, but the rest of the body is still very intact and in very good shape. So now that you've seen a couple of those pictures, we can really be on the same page in understanding this and moving forward into why I actually do it, the benefits of doing it, and why I think it makes a lot of sense. First of all, the biggest reason for me is that it's a truly sustainable source of meat. In Wisconsin, where I am from, I was born there, raised there, and lived there until I was about 23 years old, close to 20,000 deer are killed by cars per year. It is an incredible amount. That's not even including all that are hit. That's just the ones that are killed. So there is a very, very large number of deer that are killed by cars. There's no shipping. There's no packaging. There's no farms with pesticides and herbicides and all of that. It is a resource that is sustainable to harvest, and for me, by harvesting a deer that's hit by a car, I don't have to go hunting for one myself. People who know me know that I am very much an advocate of not wasting things and of utilizing wasted resources. So a deer that's hit by a car is a perfect example of making good use of a resource that would otherwise waste. So it makes perfect sense to harvest these rather than them going to waste. In some municipalities, they're actually picked up and taken to the landfill. In some, they are dragged into the woods. And actually, in some, they're taken to, in Minnesota, there's a wolf research center where they're taken to. But a lot of the times, they are just completely wasted. So it's a way to utilize a wasted resource, and this to me is basic common sense. All right, the next reason why I harvest these deer is because it's free. This is non-monetized, no money needed, and I don't need to go to the grocery store and buy the food, buy the meat because it's right there and it's completely free. A lot of the times people do this when they're just driving down the road, already going somewhere, and they see it and they can pick it up. So it costs no money whatsoever. So that to me makes a lot of sense. You can save hundreds or thousands of dollars per year by harvesting these animals. One deer alone could be worth hundreds of dollars with the meat. So financially, it makes a lot of sense for myself and for a lot of people as well. Now, the next reason is because it's really easy. A lot of people think it's this really complicated thing, and before I ever did it, I was pretty clueless. I was trying to watch YouTube videos, I was trying to figure out how this works, but I realized it's actually really simple and really easy. I was amazed at really how easy the process is. The next reason is because it's not as uncommon as a lot of people would think. I would venture to say that millions of Americans eat animals that were hit by cars. I would actually go as far as to say it's a very American thing to do. It's a part of a lot of cities and counties systems.  So it's actually quite common. It's not something necessarily that a lot of people talk about because there is a social stigma. The reason you're watching this video right now might be because of the social stigma in the first place. So a lot less people talk about it than actually do it, but it's very common to eat animals that were hit by cars. And the reason that it's actually so common is because it's not dangerous. Like I said, it's not scraping up animals from the side of the road and it's not deer that are covered in maggots. Deer don't go from living beings to being hit to the next moment being covered in maggots. There is a time in between, a safe time to harvest, which is actually a pretty decent window of time depending on the weather, depending on the environment. The thing is it really comes down to one, using common sense. Unfortunately, we've lost our common sense when it comes to food. Our suggested sell-by dates and our expiration dates and our best before dates are a perfect example of that. Most people just look at those dates and they think the food is bad afterwards. They don't use their common sense or their senses, they just look at numbers on a package. Now, when I am harvesting a deer that's hit by a car, I'm using, first of all, common sense, which common sense isn't so common when it comes to these things anymore. But next, I'm using my basic senses. So I'm using my smell, I'm using my sight, I'm using my touch, and at the very end, I would use my taste as another sense. So these basic senses allow this to be done completely safely and it's not dangerous at all. That's one of the reasons that I do it. If it was dangerous, it would be a different story. And the very last reason that I'm gonna share today is simply that it's not gross. I've mentioned that multiple times already, but to prove that point and make you think about it a bit more, I would say that any of the deer that I've harvested, I could cook it up at your home for you. And if you eat meat, you would never know, you would never question it. It would just be like any other meat that you're eating, although way better than any of that factory farmed, pig, cow, chicken, fish that most people are eating. So that's another thing that I didn't mention is that this is really good quality meat. Deer, to me, are one of the best quality meat that are out there. They are raised on the land. They are eating good quality food, living a good life up until that moment. And that's one of the biggest things that I didn't even mention. It's really extremely good quality food to eat.  Now, I'm not gonna go through how to do it or how to harvest it, how to tell if it's good or not. Those are all details that are kind of a next level. That's for people who are really wanting to possibly do this, not just learn about why I do and understand that perspective. So if that's the case and you want to learn more, let me know in the comments and I will make a video that actually teaches how to tell if it's still good and then I can do another video that actually teaches how to do it. If there's a lot of interest, that is something that I will definitely do. I know that this conversation for many people is just completely out of this world. And still, even after everything that I've described, it would be considered gross or socially taboo for them or a hit to the ego to do something like this. And I just wanna say that that doesn't matter to me. I don't live a life based on labels. I think labels create a false sense of security and an ability to really detach from reality.  And to me, this is real. This is my real life. And this is the real life of millions of people, whether they actually talk about it or not. So this is something you can expect from me, to go to the gray areas, to not be black and white because the world is not a black and white place. So I hope that this video has shined a light on why I would do this, on why other people would do it. And really has gotten you thinking about your food, about your relationship to your food and where it comes from. And just a little bit more about another perspective in life. If you got a lot out of this video, make sure to subscribe. There are a lot more to come. And if this is something you want other people to see, make sure to share it, comment, and like it. On that note, I love you all very much. It's been wonderful sharing this perspective with you. And I'll see you again real soon.


The Chairman of the Independent National Electrical Commission, Ainek Makhmoudyakubu, has announced that sensitive electoral materials will in the meantime no longer be rooted through the Central Bank of Nigeria. He also specifically notes that, beginning from the Akiti State Gov. election, Ainek will not keep its sensitive materials with the CBN. According to him, the decision is to guarantee that electoral materials for the lined-up elections are not compromised. Several individuals and groups have raised serious concern about the sanctity of election materials kept with the CBN after the report that the CBN governor, Godwin Amifili, was indicating interest to contest for the country's presidential sit. And when that story hit the airwaves, it cost a lot of opera. Well, joining us to discuss this is Paul James. He is the Programme's Manager of Elections for Yaga Africa. And also joining us is Ibn Azar Wikina. He is the Founder of Policy Shapers. Thank you so much, gentlemen, for joining us to be a better set of people to have this conversation with. Thank you. Good evening. Great. Now, Paul James, it's very interesting that this is a conversation that, first and foremost, the basis for Wik disconversation even became a conversation is that the man who sits at the Apex Bank did not only just say he was going to run for an office, he went to court. And for this, it violates so many rules and laws as it has to do with the civil service or public service and, of course, the electoral act. But as we speak, he is still the central bank governor. And I think what I think is saying, we cannot route our sensitive materials through the CBN. Should that be the first thing that we should be thinking of in a case like this, or should we be pushing for the law to take its course as regards to the CBN governor? I think, for me, first and foremost, it's also about how to protect the sanctity of the institution of Ibn Azar because that's the condition that we know have suffered a lot of trust. It has a lot of trust deficit targets on it, and so it has also been trying all this just to see how it can redeem itself of that kind of notion from the vast majority of Nigerians. It is unfortunate that this is also happening to the body quality at this point in time, especially also regarding the CBN governor. We must also get it that as a Nigerian, he has the right to aspire for the highest position of the land. But, of course, he also need to understand that the position he holds and the institution he represents also, I mean, and also his own aspiration as a Nigerian are completely opposite, completely different, they are completely opposite. So as such, I anticipated that if he were a person of integrity, a person of high moral standard, given also the kind of questions or thoughts that this race that we shouldn't have had this opera, the way he knew he had the ambition to contest, he will have just stepped aside. But I think also on the part of, and I did what I thought was right at this point in time. But then also the big question to ask is must we also continue to go through this route? We need to begin to think about building confidence in our institutions and also learning from what we have seen in other democracies. We have places where we hear about sensitive or non-sensitive materials. People pick up election materials on election day. They move from their houses to polling, you need to go cast their votes. And so we also not also lose sight of, we shouldn't also forget the fact that elections are getting better. With the new electoral laws that we have now, voting will not going to be based on people that are even accredited. So if we have all of these sort of things in our, if we have this sort of strong legislation in our electoral laws, my sense is, I don't think we need to even be spending so much of money, one, going outside of the country to produce a sensitive materials, two, the logistics also involve a fact depositing them with the CVF before we start moving them to the state or the location where they will be used as the case may be. So I mean, I know this is what I thought is right, moving them straight to his office in Adua and then from there onward distribution to the local government. But I also think that is something they should explore going forward. But then if that question of integrity continue to hang in the air, especially about the CBN, then my own advice to them is to begin to explore other agencies of government that we think we can trust. Maybe the military, if they have facility that can hold our sensitive materials, 2023 is not far from now. So I need to begin to explore how to go about this problem so that it can inspire confidence in voters. These measures that the INFJ has taken last week, Saturday, I'm sure, will help to improve the standing of the commission, especially in terms of voters' confidence in the ability of INFJ to ensure a free and credible process in AKT State. Let me move to Ebenezer. Ebenezer, you obviously lead a group of people who are called policy shapers. And I want to ask the same question, but in a different way. How did we even get to a point where we are at a place where we're looking for where to safeguard our sensitive, electoral materials that originally would be safest in the central bank of Nigeria? Because I'm thinking now. The question I asked when Professor Moudiakou made that statement was, so where else are we going to safeguard these materials, being that the elections for AKT and our state are just around the corner? How did we even get here to even begin with? Well, I mean, I've heard so many questions of what the law says and what the law doesn't say, you know, in regards to if the central bank of Nigeria has the authority or has the right to contest the problem of it, while still being the central bank of Nigeria. You know, I think if you look at it from the moral perspective, I don't believe anyone that stays on the state, the central bank of Nigeria, in running or, I mean, in terms of knowing we need to run for public policies. And, you know, I think that just as Paul spoke said, we don't need to let American elections, we don't need to let much conversations around states. The fact that elections start very, very early because the elections, the elections are very coordinated, it's not to say that all of those communities that we see in our country, we don't get to see them. But again, this is what happens when we look for strong men, not strong institutions. I mean, if an institution that's strong enough, and if it happens that we stop someone within that position, I think there's room for that kind of flow.  I also think that where there are two things I'm thinking of, and I think the state is a huge case story, it's supposed to be a good chance to test these new thoughts back. I know there are two things I'm thinking of. First is logistics. We know that Nigeria has a challenge of election material, not getting to be positional, not getting to be electoral units and then to four or three of us together. So has that been a challenge because of the central bar? Or would this mean moving the sensitive materials to the end of the period in the state and eventually to the polling unit be a better solution? That's a thing left for us to speak. I'm also thinking of security, and I think all is right for the state to begin to think of ways to involve even the military. There's nothing wrong with that because we know where we are going to and we like to know there's very little trust in the material system. Anything we can do to make it go to the end of the vote, I think we should better do. And security, making sure that the logistics are on point, ensuring that things move very fast from the second-hand offices to the polling units will be a very important step to take. All right, we see that, you know, we are all applauding, you know, the fact that the electoral act as amended has given our election or the electoral process a boost of sorts and Nigerians have some level of hope. But then again, I'm looking at responsibilities being packed on INEC, responsibilities that should originally not be their problem, being heaped on INEC, being that there's been a lot of interreliction of duties or a loss of lawlessness in terms of how the electoral processes should run. And what does that do to the back of INEC, being that they already have their plate full? I mean, we have governments and leaders and legislators who choose, pick and choose what laws, you know, to obey. And then of course, at the end of the day, INEC has to somewhat shoulder some of these responsibilities that are not necessarily INECs in the first instance. How do we even, you know, unburden INEC going forward? It's not enough for us to say, well, oh, we're going to be electronically transmitting results. But what about the other loopholes that need to be plugged? Well, I think if that question is to me, there have been a lot of advocacy around on bundling INEC and I think it's gradually yielding fruits because there are conversations also around, for instance, starting an Electoral Offences Commission that will take up that responsibility or prosecution away from INEC. And also the part that remains to be seen is the part about handling election logistics. Don't forget INEC is also managing political, monitoring political parties, primaries and the likes. So me, I think it will be a greater achievement if we're able to unbundle INEC and especially take off the part around management of election logistics. We recall what happened in 2019. The eve of the election, before the election was postponed, we had some senior, some high ranking and net officials were even at the, were seen around the, the Air Force, for instance, trying to shift election materials on the eve of the election to some states across the country. And so that also, I mean, devised their attention instead of planning of preparing for the election that was to happen the day ahead and officials were busy going around. So I think it will be a big achievement, like I said, if that is, if we're able to achieve that. Within the premise of what we have currently, for instance, we are seeing improvement, especially around the election. That's why, may I hold your opinion that the idea of sensitive or not sensitive material, we should begin to think about how that will go off our election. For instance, if we think about the viable type of official system that has not been introduced. It has a dual capacity of checking your fingerprints, checking the facial recognition and also the permanent voter's card. This is also telling us that without the PBC, for instance, we should be able to vote. That is, if I'm able, if the current voter has an approach and a official and then the person is, the fingerprint is authentically verified, it should be able to bring up the voter's detail on the bi-moder, voter credentials device, especially the way it is properly coded or entered on the device. So if we have that, I think we should begin to get to the conversation of saying, taking off even the idea of a permanent voter's card from the elections, of taking about what we can use to identify voter, maybe any means of identification before the voter votes. But also within the existing framework also, I have talked earlier about how, I mean, think about what determines who's voting. It's going to be based on the number accredited. By that it means an individual how to come to the poll in a before the person is administered for the election. So it means that would eliminate the idea of even, I mean, anybody can take the sensitive materials in the poll in the election, it has to be the current voter before the person is allowed to vote. Okay, all right, quickly because we are out of time, but he's just in a few words. As young persons who are pushing for good governance, young persons who are saying enough is enough, we want the right things to be done. Should we also not be pushing for, I don't know, some form of the strengthening of the rule of law or the judiciary in terms of airing persons, people who are going against the electoral act or the laws of the land in terms of running for offices or remember that there was a drag within the House of National Assembly as to who should step down 30 days before the elections for public office holders. It's not enough for us to say let's all get our PVCs, but what about us pushing for proper good governance and also helping the judiciary to do its job? Quickly. Yeah, I apologize, I just had a part to say, but if I could just quickly jump in. I think it's a working progress, just as Paul said. I don't think we'll be able to get every form of reform at the same time. I mean, the electoral act is a huge victory and it's the first step in the right direction. And I think as we continue to work together, we need to advocate for the correct things to be done as we continue to advocate for the rule of law to meet the problem. I'm just excited to say that for the first time we've just been observing that we were scared to not give the NEC deadline. That's been going through, right? So we knew that people really can expect law and so if we continue to emphasize and if we continue to ask for the right things to be done, I'm sure we're going to get the right things. But I think it's the first step, we need to get the PVCs, because it's the only way to get the PVCs and then as we continue the process, we can continue to advocate for all that on the key issues. Well, I want to say thank you gentlemen. Paul James is of YAAGA and a business of Wikina is the founder of Policy Shapers. Thank you so much for being part of the conversation and keep doing the good work. Thank you very much. I'm good luck you two. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you all for staying with us. Well, we have our eyes on the Eagle Square where the ruling or progressive Congress is about to have its convention and of course the presidential primaries and every single person in this country is waiting to find out who emerges as the flag bearer. We'll bring you more reports in our subsequent news bulletins. I'm Mary Anna Cohn. Thank you for watching. Have a good evening.