Address to Seanad Éireann by Members of the European Parliament

An Cathaoirleach

I am delighted to welcome our colleagues from the European Parliament Midlands-North-West constituency, particularly in light of Ireland's Presidency of the EU. To be clear about the seats because I know people are very precious about seats in this House, the other House and any other elected body, the seats are allocated in alphabetical order and the speaking order will also be in alphabetical order to ensure impartiality. I welcome Ms Nina Carberry, MEP, Mr. Barry Cowen, MEP, Mr. Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan, MEP, Mr. Ciaran Mullooly, MEP and Ms Maria Walsh, MEP. They are most welcome to Seanad Éireann.

As we know, the EU plays an enormous role in the lives of everybody on this island but also the lives of everyone throughout the EU and around the world.

The decisions our MEPs are involved in making through their work in the European Parliament and the committees of the European Parliament affect the lives of people throughout this island and throughout the world. This is why it is important at this stage and throughout the year that we will be engaging with all our MEPs. We have already done this with our MEPs from Ireland South and we will be engaging with the MEPs from the Dublin area in the autumn to look at the priorities that Ireland has and that MEPs have, and at the issues the MEPs are promoting and championing. The engagement is a connection between our Parliament, the Oireachtas, the European Parliament and the people of Ireland

In this House we pay particular interest to Europe. We mark the national days of the parliaments throughout the European Union. The national day today is Italy, and marking its national day yesterday was Croatia. We do that in recognition of the strong historic links we have with those countries of the European Union and in looking to the future. While we glance back, we are also looking forward into the relationships we are creating and which we are creating through the MEPs' work.

We also do work here on scrutiny of the EU statutory instruments which are the EU laws that are added to by Government Departments and signed into Irish law. It is a huge volume of legislation. Our MEPs are at the starting point of that process and are involved in the middle of the process, while we are on the tail end of that process. It is important to have that link all the way through.

The purpose of this session is the ongoing engagement, and we will have this every year. We are delighted that you are able to take time out of your busy schedules to be here. We look forward to you all outlining the proposals and ideas we should have and champion in the Presidency of the European Union. As you know, each host country gets to select two of the items that are championed or discussed as part of the Presidency. In Ireland's case we have selected agriculture, of course, as something very important to the people you represent in the Midlands-North-West, and we have also chosen the Good Friday Agreement as the other element. It is under the framework of global peace but not in an historic context. It is not about looking at what we did 28 years ago but about what lessons we have to learn from others in implementing the Good Friday Agreement, what are the issues around radicalisation, the funding of paramilitary organisations or other areas such as gangs or criminal gangs, and how we challenge social media in relation to that radicalisation. This is a very unique idea from Ireland for what we should be discussing during the European Presidency. We look forward to the MEPs' views on that.

I thank our MEPs for being here and taking the time out. I welcome Ciarán Mullooly's wife, who is in the Gallery here to see him address the Seanad. I thank you all for taking the time. Our Leas-Chathaoirleach will be taking over and doing some of the chairing of this session as well. Each of the MEPs will speak for six minutes as an initial opening statement, which I believe is a lot more than you normally get in Europe. My Seanad colleagues are somewhat not as attentive to the bell when I ring it. Then we will have group spokespersons for five minutes and then other Senators will speak for two minutes. Obviously, we will have your contributions throughout this session. Again, I thank you all for being here. I will start, as I said, in alphabetical order with Ms Nina Carberry, MEP.

Ms Nina Carberry

Go raibh mile maith agaibh a Chathaoirligh, Senators and colleagues. It is a privilege to speak here as an MEP for the Midlands-North-West. As this House knows, the constituency covers 15 counties. I want to take my time today to focus on the main areas of my work. I currently sit on four committees in the European Parliament: the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, and the Committee on Culture and Education.

As Ireland's only representative on the budget committee, I will start with the next EU budget. The budget will run from 2028 to 2034. It is known as the multi-annual financial framework, MFF, but this comes at a uniquely challenging time. Never have there been so many demands on the EU budget, including Covid debt, defence, security, pressures on competitiveness, and at the same time Europe must still fund its traditional priorities. As my group's lead negotiator on the budgetary assessment of the next Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, this is our main focus. In recent weeks the budget committee backed a clear negotiating mandate. We backed the 10% overall increase from the Commission's original proposal. We also backed a €433 billion CAP envelope. The aim is to restore previous cuts. The ask is clear: restore the CAP to at least €433 billion. It must also keep rural development funding as a separate pillar, and that includes LEADER.

As funding is pushed towards ,defence we cannot overlook food security. Food security is central to this equation and is something I have been constant on throughout my mandate. This is why I have tabled safeguards to the Mercosur trade agreement, why I have highlighted inconsistency with the deal, and why I supported referring it to the European Court of Justice. The same consistency applies to the next Common Fisheries Policy, where I have also tabled amendments to protect funding for our coastal communities and the fishing sector.

The European Union is at its heart a peace project. We on this island understand that better than most. While there is uncertainty about the future direction of EU priorities, I have been clear that PEACEPLUS funding must be protected and it must be ring-fenced. I recently had Gina McIntyre in Brussels. Ms McIntyre is the head of the special EU programmes body, SEUPB, which distributes PEACEPLUS funding. It supports cross-Border education collaboration, it supports mental health workshops and it supports shared cross-community sports facilities. The Chair mentioned in his introduction the importance of the Good Friday Agreement and the importance of this funding.

That brings me to the relationship between the European Union and the UK. It is a privilege to be appointed as the trade committee lead spokesperson for relations with the UK. Ten years on from Brexit there is an important opportunity to reset the EU-UK relationship. That is especially true as Ireland prepares for the EU Presidency. Here again there is a clear objective. The European Parliament must be ready to conclude an agrifood deal with the UK. We hope to see that agreed, as well as a deal on energy trading and youth mobility in the upcoming July summit.

Another issue that is deeply personal to me and to many families across Ireland and Europe is dementia and Alzheimer's disease. The emotional, physical and financial pressure on families is immense. Unfortunately, that pressure will only grow. Recent research has found that one in three people born today will develop Alzheimer's disease or dementia in their lifetime. By 2050, the number of people living with dementia in Europe is expected to rise by 58%. This is where the EU can and must step in. I have constantly asked for a boost in research investment. I have requested that the Commission enact a European action plan for brain health. I am campaigning for investment in preventative healthcare and, in particular, physical activity. Later this year we will build on that momentum. At the invitation of the Parliament President, the FTD brothers will come to the European Parliament in Brussels. Many in this House know their story. They are running 33 marathons in 33 days to raise awareness of dementia. Their message of hope and determination is an inspiration to us all. I hope they get a great crowd tomorrow in support. I know they are coming to the Dáil so I hope everyone gets out and supports them.

Speaking of young people, Europe has unfinished business with the online world. We must do more to protect teenagers and children. Parents have genuine fears about the harm the online world can do. Again, this is where I am pressing for the European Union to act. I am working on tougher regulation of tech companies and I am pushing for faster action by the Commission on social media platforms. I am advocating for a ban on AI nudifiers to be implemented. I have pressed the Commission to prohibit infinite scrolling and addictive algorithm design, and to implement robust privacy-protecting age verification for social media. This is another area where Ireland can play a key role. I recently wrote to the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and Government Ministers to urge that online safety be prioritised during Ireland's EU Presidency. I am delighted that it will now stand as a central pillar.

I want to end on a positive note that also relates to young people. The European Union is full of opportunity. One of the most important roles to communicate is that Europe can open doors. It can open doors to Erasmus, it can open doors through the EU Solidarity Corps, and it can open doors through the DiscoverEU travel pass. Ireland's EU Presidency must communicate these opportunities clearly and widely. On that note I want to leave it there for now. Thank you very much, a Chathaoirligh.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Carberry. Anois, I invite Mr. Barry Cowen, MEP.

Mr. Barry Cowen

I thank the Chair and the Senators for the invitation to be here today and to meet and discuss the issues pertaining to what is an important moment associated with the Irish Presidency, which is almost upon us.

I begin with a point that may seem obvious, but which I think is worth making. The role of an MEP is different from that of a councillor, a TD or a Minister, and I have had the privilege of serving in all of those roles. As a councillor, you deal with the immediate concerns of your communities. As a TD, you are a national legislator and constituency representative. In the European Parliament, you are assigned files, committees and legislative responsibilities with specific remits. Success in Brussels is not measured by who shouts the loudest or who produces the sharpest social media clip; it is measured by whether you can influence legislation, forge alliances and deliver outcomes. When I sought election to the European Parliament, I did so with a purpose. I saw enormous challenges and opportunities facing Midlands-North-West with agriculture entering a period of major transition and the midlands moving away from traditional fossil fuel power generation. I also saw opportunities with renewable energy, offshore wind and strategic investment through a pro-enterprise economy.

Following my election to the Parliament, I secured places on three committees, which I believe reflect exactly those ambitions. On the agriculture committee, my priorities have been clear. The first priority, given its timeliness, was to retain Ireland's nitrates derogation. The recent extension was extremely welcome and reflected something important. When the Government, stakeholders, farmers and public representatives work together with evidence and a common approach, Ireland can and has delivered. The second priority is the next Common Agricultural Policy post 2027. I was honoured to be appointed as the lead negotiator of my group, Renew Europe, on this file, which means I am now deeply immersed in those negotiations. The Commission's initial proposal for a reduction of approximately 20% in CAP funding is not acceptable. However, it is not enough to bemoan that fact. It is incumbent on MEPs, particularly group leaders like me, to bring forward solutions. I believe I have already found two avenues to potentially fill that current shortfall. The €45 billion that came from the Mercosur concessions would see funds from the mid-term, as promised, front-loaded and fully ring-fenced for the Common Agricultural Policy. A further €48 billion can be secured through the wider partnership fund, which we can get into later. If we land both, the gap is essentially closed and there is scope to build further, for example to bring funding in line with inflation.

The next issue under agriculture is generational renewal, an issue I am hyper-focused on. The average age of an EU farmer at present is 57. The Commission's CAP proposal rightly includes increasing the allocation for young farmers within CAP from 3% to 6%, with our own Government commendably seeking and considering an 8% spend. We need to see a proper balance now between retirement and succession measures to create space for younger farmers. MEPs regularly talk about generational renewal, but it is now incumbent on us to build structures that make it possible, including significant reforms in the area of land mobility, access to finance and pathways into farming, including for female farmers.

When it comes to the international trade committee the first thing I must do is acknowledge that Ireland has benefited enormously from being one of the most open economies in Europe. In light of this, I think the Irish people understand that we cannot simply oppose every trade agreement. Equally, we cannot pursue agreements at any cost. Trade must be fair and that means ensuring reciprocity. If Irish farmers produce to world-leading standards, then imports entering our markets must respect similar standards. That is why I have consistently opposed elements of the Mercosur deal while at the same time working to strengthen safeguard mechanisms in the event that the deal should pass, and succeeded thereafter in strengthening monitoring arrangements from six-month to three-month intervals, lowering safeguard thresholds from 10% to 5% in relation to price and volume changes that may occur, while also ensuring that these thresholds would not be treated rigidly where evidence of sectoral damage exists.

The EU-US and EU-UK relationships have also been a central focus of mine, with Ireland holding uniquely close ties with both. In the case of the US, maintaining stability and avoiding escalation on tariffs has been essential for Irish exporters in sectors ranging from agrifood and whiskey to aviation and pharmaceuticals. On the UK, the renewed positive relationship we have seen between it and the EU has created important momentum and political agreement about issues such as SPS arrangements and regulatory alignment. However, trade policy cannot simply be defensive. Opportunities elsewhere are considerable. The current geopolitical situation necessitates us to diversify strategically and means concluding trade deals in a more diligent and timely manner than ever. The EU-India agreement, for example, will bring major opportunities for Irish spirits, medtech and other sectors. I was happy to play a part in a final trade deal with New Delhi that helped to get the likes of that over line. Deals concluded in recent times include Mexico and Australia and there are more in the offing. As part of the international trade committee, I look forward to playing my own part in securing those deals that are near conclusion.

I turn to housing. Housing fundamentally remains a national competence, and we should be honest about that. The Parliament's housing committee has identified two specific areas where Europe could have a meaningful impact in facilitating rather than obstructing housing. They include reforming EU state aid rules to allow far greater flexibility for approved housing bodies and increasing access for the European Investment Bank.

I beg the Cathaoirleach to give me just one minute to conclude.

An Cathaoirleach

I will give you 30 seconds.

Mr. Barry Cowen

As we prepare for the Presidency of the Council, our role will not be to arrive with a national wish list, but to act as an honest broker. That does not mean lacking ambition. We should aim to advance the EU budget, strengthen competitiveness, support food security, drive sensible trade policy and reinforce Europe's strategic resilience. Perhaps more importantly, we should continue to demonstrate that the dissenter can deliver.

This is the last paragraph, seriously.

An Cathaoirleach

We will bring you back in as well.

Mr. Barry Cowen

I have old scores to settle here.

We live at time of extremes on both the left and right, and they are becoming louder and, frankly, much bolder. Simple slogans travel quickly, unfortunately. Fear and anger travel quickly but governing and legislating are far more difficult than protesting. Compromise is much more difficult than outrage and delivery is harder than both. After 30 years or more in public life, I remain convinced of something simple: good politics is rarely loud politics. Good politics is serious, practical and evidence based. It is built on relationships, compromise and delivering results. That is the approach I have tried to bring and to grow throughout my career, and it is an approach I will continue to bring during Ireland's Presidency and beyond.

An Cathaoirleach

Go raibh maith agat. Anois, Luke 'Ming' Flanagan, MEP.

Mr. Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

Thank you very much. I wholeheartedly agree with Barry Cowen's final paragraph. It took me a while to learn it, but I have learned it.

I have focused on many different areas during my time in the European Parliament. However, my main focus is the agriculture committee, the fisheries committee and the consumer affairs committee. On the AGRI committee I am the co-ordinator for our group, which means I get to attend co-ordinators' meetings, and I get an opportunity to have items put on the agenda. It also means I get to speak before any other Irish member at the AGRI committee, and I get twice as long. It does not necessarily mean I speak more sense, but they give me more time. At the moment the big thing is the review of the Common Agricultural Policy. I have been lucky enough to be chosen by my group, as has Barry Cowen, as the lead negotiator. I will be in the same room as him when the negotiations are going on and that will be a positive. The more people we have from Ireland in the room, the better. I know we will be representing our groups, but we are Irish, and we have an eye on what is good for Ireland and that will be a positive.

In the previous CAP programming period from 2020 to 2027, CAP had its own stand-alone and separate regulation. In the current communication proposal, the NRPP will encompass CAP, along with other sectoral regulation for the period from 2028 to 2034. While CAP will have its own regulation, it will be under the umbrella of the NRPP. This is important to discuss. This matters because the CAP will be negotiated by AGRI MEPs who have knowledge and an interest in the subject, whether that is for good or bad. The NRPP will be a joint committee procedure, with MEPs for BUDG, REGI and AGRI, which are the budget committee, the regional development committee and the AGRI committee. They are involved with their own competing interests. I ensured that I would get to be shadow on both of them because that is important and I managed to get that. In my opinion, this joint structure will ultimately lead to a lack of accountability.

Who will ultimately be responsible and accountable for the final text of the agreement? There was considerable disquiet with the initial proposal from the Commission when it was released, as many key provisions related to CAP were in the overarching NRPP regulation which meant, as I said, that agriculture would not have sole competence on these important issues. After a substantial push-back from MEPs across the board, the vast majority of agriculture items have now moved back to the CAP regulation. There are lots of things that are important for me in CAP, but the three big ones are the budget, which has been spoken about, the dissolution of the two pillar structure and the end of the entitlement system.

On the budget, we are looking at cuts in excess of 20%. I understand what Mr. Cowen said in relation to finding other funds, but I am worried that we might be just moving stuff from one pocket to the other. We will see. Ireland will be in an influential position to secure the maximum for CAP. We are here to talk about Ireland's position in having the Presidency. As Mr. Cowen said, we are MEPs and we do not really have any influence on the Council. There is an opportunity there for Ireland but I am not going to condemn Ireland if we do not get a bigger budget. I think there is not a chance in hell that the budget will go up much because the frugal states, who I am delighted Ireland did not meet with, do not want to increase it. They do not seem to understand, and I did not understand it when I got elected as a Eurosceptic but I have since learned, that whatever we put into the EU, while we might not get the exact same amount back out, we get access to one hell of a good club. I would like to see the budget increased but, unfortunately, I do not think it will be. I will fight for it and I will agree with it if it happens.

I am against the abolition of the two pillar structure, but this is probably a done deal. The end of entitlements is a good thing. Payments based on agricultural activity from 25 years ago are not a good basis on which to go forward. There is talk about taking money from pensioners but I do not think that is fair. There is talk about not respecting part-time farmers but there are people on the agriculture committee who are part-time farmers. There are people in other jobs who are part-time farmers and, as far as I am concerned, it enhances them as parliamentarians.

Fisheries is an area that I cover as a member of the fisheries committee. Even though our small-scale fishers make up 87.5% of the Irish fleet, we had no dedicated small producer organisations to represent them until 2021 and 2023, through the Irish Islands Marine Resource Organisation, IIMRO, and the National Inshore Fishermans Association, NIFA. I work with them in the European Parliament, listen to them and listen to what is happening with them. The main problem they have is access to funds to develop marketing plans, to promote what they are doing and to help them move on with new ways of fuelling their boats to move away from carbon. They need more support. I work in Europe and I know that many of their problems, and it is the same with farming, emanate in Europe, but most of the issues they have with regard to access to funding could be solved here. We could do it ourselves.

The final issue I will talk about is defective concrete. I will briefly mention the ongoing infringement procedure against Ireland related to the construction products regulation, CPR, and market surveillance. Last month, the Commission issued a pre-closure letter detailing a list of alleged achievements that the Irish Government has managed to convince the Commission on in relation to market surveillance. However, I and anyone who has been involved with the defective blocks campaign, should be highly sceptical of these achievements. I would genuinely love if it was true that the structures are now in place to prevent anything remotely similar from happening again because the devastation these families are experiencing is something they should never have had to endure. The Commission stated in its letter that as regards the time before 2020, the Irish authorities have informed the Commission that the market surveillance function operated mainly on a reactive basis. The market surveillance authorities would suggest that in the period prior to 2020 Ireland may indeed have failed to fulfil its market surveillance obligations under the CPR. Great news, you would think, that it was not just the bare minimum, reactive market surveillance, but as late as April of this year, Donegal County Council confirmed that market surveillance inspection and testing are generally carried out on a reactive basis only. We have asked the Commission to keep this infringement procedure open until the building standards regulatory authority is legally established and operational, the recommended staffing level of 500 professionals is reached, and the enforcement model moves from a reactive "because this is the law" and complaint-based model to a proactive, independent testing regime. I will continue to advocate to keep this infringement procedure open, to hold the Government to account and to ensure it does not happen again.

I am proud to be Irish but I have to say that on the three issues I mentioned, I would be more worried about the damage Ireland could do, with the influence it has in the Presidency, than about what the Presidency can do for us. I wish I did not have to say it but that is what is in front of me as evidence.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Is mór an onóir dom a bheith anseo inniu. Gabhaim buíochas ó chroí leis an Teach as an gcuireadh seo. It is a great honour to be invited here today. I am going to speak personally for a few moments, touch on some of the themes I think are relevant in terms of our Presidency and will turn to specifics in the questions.

I am thrilled to be here with two sisters from my family of six today. Three of our family emigrated. My late sister emigrated to the United States back in the 1960s. I was aged just one at the time. My brother went to New York. He went to Nelly's on Fordham Road and to all of those places that the Wolfe Tones sang about. He came back to work in Bord na Móna and worked in the midlands for a number of years. He passed away before the closure of Bord na Móna, which has been referred to already today as a seismic event that very much changed the nature of the midlands. This has been a beautiful day. Anybody who knows anything about the bogs will know that in its heyday our people would have been on the bog working 20 or 22 hours today, bringing home £1,600 for one week's work. When I say this in Brussels they look at me as if I had ten heads. It will never happen again in the midlands of Ireland. It has been a seismic change and although we have tried, through the European Union just transition fund, to address this, we really have not resolved the issue of finding sustainable, long-term employment in the midlands.

When you drive from other parts of the country to Dublin today, you pass what I call unofficial car parks. These are car parks at junctions and churches where workers meet at 5 a.m. to get into a van or larger bus and drive to Dublin. It is true to say that unemployment has not risen. Workers just drive to Dublin nowadays and our communities suffer as a result. Their quality of life and that of their families is affected by this. The issues of unemployment and emigration, from my perspective, are as alive and as important today as they ever were. During the Presidency I am hoping that we will address this. In the last couple of weeks, the European Commission Executive Vice-President for Cohesion and Reforms, Mr. Raffaele Fitto, was here talking about something coming in the autumn, which we are going to hear about time and time again, an initiative called the right to stay. The right to stay from a European perspective is a combination of the economic and political decisions that allow people to remain working in their community by their choice. We are a long way from that in this country at the moment. I look forward to an initiative on that.

I have been an MEP for 717 days. Like many entering public office, I came with great expectations. The reality, I can say honestly, has often been very different but the European Parliament cannot be judged over a short period of time. From time to time, we must step back and ask ourselves where we are now compared to where we were. For most people, progress is measured not just in reports or speeches but by income, living standards, opportunity and security. When Ireland joined the European project in 1973 it was a very different country. Today we have unquestionably improved our standard of living and expanded opportunity. Yet, in this city tonight, 4,000 children will be homeless and sleeping in hotel rooms. This is a shameful situation and something that the EU and our Government must address at the highest level. In the last 24 hours we have looked at possibilities for doing so in this city. Our housing committee visited apartments on Richmond Road yesterday. Thanks to a combination of Irish funding and funding from the European Investment Bank, 23 families have now found a home. These are the types of initiatives I hope we will focus on again during the Presidency, going forward.

The European Union itself has grown enormously since Ireland joined. It has largely grown for the better. Our European family is larger and more capable of contributing positively to humanity. However, I must return to another issue.

It saddens me profoundly that the collective strength of the European Union, with its immense population, its economic growth and its global influence, has failed so dramatically to protect innocent lives in the Middle East. Over 70,000 Palestinians and more than 2,000 Israelis have lost their lives. Europe should and must do more to stop the killing. In the next six months, we are in the hot seat. I pray that our Presidency can bring a more meaningful contribution and more meaningful measures forward to move us. One of my first actions as a newly elected MEP was to raise this issue directly with President von der Leyen in Strasbourg in 2024. Article 2 is clear. Respect for human rights and democratic principles constitutes an essential element of the agreement. My position now as then is straightforward. If Europe expects human rights standards from countries seeking partnerships, trade and preferential access, those standards must be applied consistently. Yet, almost 800 days on, Europe still struggles to find the unity of purpose required to act decisively. History will judge this period harshly, me included, sitting in the European Parliament.

On the issue of agriculture, I agree with the sentiments of my colleagues today. I agree we must restore our CAP budget to €433 million. I agree we must not rob Peter to pay Paul. However, at the end of the day, this issue is directly related to the theme I spoke of at the beginning - the right to stay. If we cannot restore the single farm payment, or come up with a generational renewal policy that works for those leaving as well as those arriving, then we will see our parishes and communities once again decimated going forward. There are many other issues. I hope to return to them during questions later.

Ms Maria Walsh

I am delighted to be with Senators and colleagues today and to follow on from my all my colleagues across Midlands-North-West. It is really important to stress, as no doubt Senators know, that about 70% to 80% of the EU legislation we work on impacts the communities and sectors here. This type of conversation is required on an ongoing basis. There was mention of our relationship with Northern Ireland. We just recently had the Northern Irish scrutiny committee come out. Diplomacy and democracy start with conversations. I look forward to a good question and answer session shortly.

Similar to my party colleague, Nina Carberry, I also sit on four committees on behalf of the constituency of Midlands-North-West. I am a full member of the committees on agriculture and gender equality. I am a substitute member of the committees on regional development and justice and home affairs. Along with many MEPs across the political groups, I cofounded an intergroup on mental health, looking at that across all the 20 committees that the European Parliament works on and serves to. I am also on the EU delegation to the United States.

Ultimately, our role is to represent the 1.8 million constituents across one of the most diverse and wide-spanning constituencies in our European Union. It is on their behalf that I speak to the House today to talk about some of the challenges and opportunities ahead. Like many, I am a green cert holder. I have a masters in agriculture extension and innovation, and have a real grá for rural living as well as farming. That is a core part of the work I do on the agricultural committee. I know how central the EU is to the lives and livelihoods of our Irish farmers, regardless of the type of farming they do. Right now, one of the most significant negotiations under way, as colleagues referred to, is the future of the Common Agricultural Policy, taking us from 2028 to 2034. To echo colleagues - it is always the worst when you are the last to speak - Ireland's Presidency will coincide with a critical juncture and phase of these negotiations. The decisions taken over the next six months will shape the future of EU farming, particularly Irish farming, for many years to come. We have two shadow rapporteurs here. The file writer for the Common Agricultural Policy is part of the EPP group, where Fine Gael sits. He is Norbert Lins, a German MEP. He is a very workable person who has come to Ireland and will continue to do so up until the final negotiations.

My focus throughout these negotiations, as the file writer for the generational renewal report, is to look at not just young farmers but also the cradle to grave of farming. That is incredibly important when we look at generational renewal. Designing Parliament's policy on how we attract and retain the next generation of farmers across Europe is incredibly important. In my first draft report, published this month, which I am happy to share with anybody who wishes to see it, my number one priority is ensuring that at least 8% to 10% of the future CAP budget for young farmers is binding and not merely aspirational, as currently proposed by the Commission and being talked about in some of the EU councils. My work also focuses on land mobility, targeted help for women in agriculture, and expanding mental health services through farm relief services, on which Commissioner Hansen is certainly vocal. I also focus on pension schemes run by member states, where we can lean into best practices across other member states. On entitlements, I agree with my colleague, Luke Ming Flanagan MEP. I also focus on agri-environment schemes, entrepreneurship, innovation and agritech. It is widespread. As I close out this chapter on agriculture, I think we also have to collectively work together on the retention of LEADER programmes, specifically for Midlands-North-West representatives. If you have not spoken to any LEADER companies, large or small, they will be on to you. It is critical that we retain and grow our LEADER companies.

I will highlight my work on gender equality. For me, making not just Ireland but Europe a safer and fairer place for women is another key mission that drives my work in Brussels and in the constituency. I see first-hand new forms of gender-based violence and intimidation that are emerging online and spewing into offline life. Earlier this year I was part of a cohort that travelled to the United Nations, where we met the Secretary-General of the UN to discuss how to strengthen protections against gender-based violence and ensure women can participate fully and safely in public life. Of course, gender equality stretches far beyond the online world. We know this. It is also about equal pay, better healthcare providers, political participation and entrepreneurship. I will flag that 40% of our entrepreneurs in Europe are women, yet access to venture capital and angel funding is less than 3%. The big buzzword in Europe right now is "competitiveness". If we are going to remove 51% of our population from that competitiveness, we are doing a disservice. I have a lot more to say but I see the gavel waving.

I will touch briefly on security and defence, specifically on preparedness. I have sat in rooms in Brussels where Ireland has been openly described as the weakest flank on security and defence. Whether we like it or not, these perceptions have consequences. As we go into the Presidency, I would like us to have a real, honest conversation with citizens around what preparedness looks like both online and in the physical space, when we look at defence and security. For the first time, certainly in my lifetime, at 38 years of age, we have war on multiple standpoints across the world and in our European Union. We cannot forget that. We have to be adults at the table when we are having those conversations. Go raibh míle maith agaibh. I look forward to Senators' questions.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank all our MEPs for their contributions and for sticking more or less to the time. For the next round, we will have group spokespersons from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Independent Group, Sinn Féin, the Cross-Party Group and the Civil Engagement Group. Senator O'Loughlin has the first five-minute slot.

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

Our MEPs are incredibly welcome to the Seanad Chamber this afternoon. I am listening to the breadth of the work they have all undertaken, some in similar areas and some in more niche areas. We thank them for the work they are doing on behalf of the 1.8 million people who live within the region they represent. I listened to Ms Carberry talking about dementia. I met the FTD Brothers this morning in Kildare. They are just incredible; Jordan and Cian and their dad, Greg. They were able to turn a really difficult personal story into one of hope. It resonated with what Mr. Cowen said in relation to the extremes that we see, the hatred that is in evidence within the political world and outside it, with racism and different elements that really show an awful lot of negativity.

What I learned this morning from the brothers was that shared sense of compassion, understanding and respect for one another for wherever any of us are at. I really felt that there was a very strong message there for us. I know we are looking forward to meeting them in Government Buildings tomorrow as well.

Many of the MEPs focused on the whole area of agriculture and the CAP. Without a shadow of a doubt, that has to be the first priority. As part of the European affairs committee, we have had several meetings with the president of the IFA, Francie Gorman; Liam MacHale, who does an incredible job in Brussels representing the IFA; and, of course, Damian McDonald. The real concern about the proposed reduction of 20% there is very tangible. We cannot accept that for a number of different reasons. We have to do everything we can to support not only our farmers and their livelihood but also the rural communities within which they live. Many of us represent rural communities, and if it were not for the farmers who are spending their money within those rural communities, a lot of the smaller businesses we have would not survive. We in Fianna Fáil are incredibly proud of the role Mr. Cowen has taken as lead negotiator with the Renew group. I am delighted to hear that Mr. Flanagan is taking that role as well. I have no doubt that, wearing the green jersey, we will have such a strong input in that regard. The generational renewal in farming and supporting the female farmers are hugely important as well.

If I may bring up something related to agriculture, namely, the equine industry, I know that two of the MEPs have particular experience in that. The scale of that industry cannot be overstated. It brings about €2.4 billion into the Irish economy and supports about 30,000 jobs. Counties such as mine, Kildare, have become internationally recognised equestrian centres. There is a huge issue about proposed EU transport regulations that could place huge additional pressure particularly on breeding horses right across Europe. When we have an industry that brings so much money into the country, when it provides so much employment and has an international recognition, we have to do everything we can to protect that. While animal welfare is hugely important, we have to do everything we can not to undermine one of Ireland's most important rural industries.

If I may mention the peacekeeping element for Europe, I was really glad to hear the Taoiseach speak last week about how Europe must come together to challenge Israel. While there is an agreement at Government level that we would proceed with the occupied territories Bill, and that is incredibly welcome, it is really important that all of Europe come together to send a very strong message to Israel, and indeed to any country that would promote war and would have such aggression against its near neighbours. Stronger pressure has to be placed on the Israeli Government regarding civilian casualties, access to humanitarian aid and adherence to international law. Supporting peace and security must mean being willing to call out actions that undermine the protection of innocent civilians.

I am interested to hear the MEPs' views on those aspects.

Senator Joe O'Reilly

I join Senator O'Loughlin in welcoming our MEPs to the Chamber. I am particularly personally proud that when I was Leas-Chathaoirleach of the Seanad I initiated this process and chaired initial meetings with the MEPs here, working alongside our Cathaoirleach at that time. It was a great initiative and it is clearly bearing fruit and today is another example of that. I want to say very unpatronisingly and genuinely that we are extremely well served by all five of them representing our region. They are doing that with a high level of competence and commitment and we can be very proud of that. That is so important to us. I do not know how these things are measured but according to all stated metrics, about 70% of the decisions that impact our lives daily here in Ireland have their genesis or origin in Europe. That makes the quality and the commitment of the people we have in the European Parliament paramount. That is why the MEPs' performances today are reassuring.

Like Senator O'Loughlin, I start with the Common Agricultural Policy. We have 80,000 livestock, beef and sheep, farmers in this country on low incomes, and any threat to the CAP is a threat to their actual existence and their families' existence. I also take the point, well made by a number of the MEPs, about the need for retention and for succession opportunity. First, how realistic is it that they can hold the line on the CAP? It is good that we have two lead negotiators here, but how realistic is that? Second, could they be specific about a farm retirement scheme? I have always been a great advocate of that. I noticed that when the pension did exist some years ago in Ireland, it was an enormous success. I would be grateful if they would elaborate on the potential for that. How would that specifically come about? How could Europe be a focus there?

Ms Carberry and others referred to the peace process funding. That is important. I would just like specifics on that. Do they think it is threatened? If it is, what can be done to stop that?

We had a new phenomenon in recent times in Ireland, and that is job losses. We had not had that for a number of years. That is within Meta, obviously. AI is a threat, so I would like the MEPs to comment in their responses on how we can get postgraduate education in artificial intelligence and master's degrees in artificial intelligence going, how we can maximise the opportunity of artificial intelligence and how we can create the jobs from it to replace the jobs it will undo. I think that would be of extraordinary interest to all of us to hear about.

Mr. Mullooly earlier was autobiographical and I will be autobiographical too. I am not embarrassed to say that I lived in the Ireland before the EU. I have lived longer, I hasten to add, in the Ireland post the EU, lest there be any ambiguity. I have lived a long time but I did live a lot of my early teenage years before the EU and I know that the EU has been transformative for women and for livelihoods and that the Single Market has had an enormous impact on jobs. For that reason, jobs in AI are critical, but jobs in alternative energy and green energy are critical too. My question or my challenge to the MEPs, or my comment here, is that we need a greater visible lead for Europe in the creation of jobs in the green energy sector and in the creation of jobs in the AI sector. In other words, we need, as society changes, to change and roll with that.

I notice that my time is going but I will just say that today is a great day's work. I am very proud of how all this, this interaction between our MEPs and the Seanad, has involved. It is an important interaction and I hope it will continue. I look forward to the MEPs responses and look forward to our meeting regularly over the coming few years - three years, we hope.

An Cathaoirleach

As luck would have it, Ms Sanna Lepola and Mr. Jesús Gómez are here. Ms Lepola is the director general for parliamentary democracy partnerships for the European Parliament, and Mr. Gómez is a director. They are visiting here today in advance of our Presidency, so it is most appropriate that they would be here for our debate with our Members of the European Parliament. Thank you for being here.

Senator Sharon Keogan

I thank the MEPs for coming before us. I want to direct my remarks in particular to those representatives here who are members of the Government parties and those who sit with the EPP and Renew groups because those groups form a central part of the governing coalition at EU level.

Last week in this Chamber we debated the Canada trade deal, known as CETA, and its worrying provisions, especially the inclusion of investor-state dispute mechanisms that allow cases between foreign firms and the Irish Government be arbitrated by bodies outside our national courts. That raises serious questions about sovereignty. Not long before that we debated the application of the EU migration pact, which likewise has implications for our sovereign control over migration policy, infrastructure and resources. I do not want to rehearse all the details of those debates again but what strikes me is the pattern. Again and again, the EU moves forward with legislation packages and trade agreements that are not in Ireland's national interest. To their credit, Irish MEPs sometimes diverge from those European political groups when it comes to the final vote. We saw that dynamic clearly in the more recent legislation, although I note that in the case of CETA in 2017, Irish MEPs largely followed their party group lines in support of the agreement, even as concerns were raised domestically. Regardless, even when divergence does occur, we still end up here, in this House, dealing with the consequences of decisions that have already effectively been made.

I want to ask a more fundamental question. What action do the MEPs present take before the vote? What have they done in the group meetings, in the committee stages, and in the negotiations that take place long before anything reaches the plenary floor, particularly for the Mercosur trade deal and the migration pact? I ask because we all know that the vote is not the decisive moment. The real shaping of these measures happens months and even years in advance. If that is the case and the direction of travel within these groups consistently produces outcomes that are misaligned with Ireland's national interest, then I think it is fair to ask why remain within those structures without fundamentally changing their course?

I will turn to the Mercosur deal. I ask each of the MEPs, very directly, what is their position? Do they believe this deal should be rejected outright or do they believe it can somehow be salvaged through amendments and safeguards? I want to be clear about my own position. It seems to me that the deal is in its nature damaging to Ireland's economy, particularly to our agricultural sector. It is simply not feasible that Irish cattle farmers could fairly compete with South American mega-ranches. We were told that safeguards and monitoring mechanisms will address these issues but I find that difficult to accept. Many of the countries involved in the agreement face serious governance and enforcement challenges. Many of these countries tied to or involved directly in the deal have serious issues of corruption and some struggle to maintain state control over their own territories. To imagine that a provision or legal safeguard signed into a deal will suddenly make it workable seems absurd to me.

We see a similar issue, albeit at a smaller scale, with the updated EU-Mexico trade agreement. It is often presented as a more balanced deal and I accept that it is not Mercosur, but it is still part of a wider trend of a cumulative opening of EU markets to agricultural imports from outside the Union. Even if each individual agreement is relatively modest, the combined effect is not. It increases competitive pressure on Irish producers particularly in sectors like beef and dairy, which are already under strain.

I also want to raise the Commission's ongoing push to move away from unanimity voting and national vetoes in the Council. This is not a technical adjustment; it is a fundamental change to how sovereignty functions within the Union. I ask the MEPs present for their views on that. Do they support the removal of vetoes in areas that clearly touch on the national competence and economic interest?

Finally, on a broader point and directed particularly to the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael representatives, what is their position on Ireland's absence from the recent meeting of the so-called "frugal" or net-contributor member states? At a time when budgetary pressures, fiscal rules and allocation of resources are being actively discussed, is it not a dereliction of duty for Ireland not to be present at the table?

My concern is not with any one measure in isolation but a broader trajectory. It is a trajectory where, step by step, decisions are taken that reshape our economy, our sovereignty and our policy space, often without sufficient alignment to Ireland's long-term interest.

Senator Pauline Tully

Cuirim fáilte roimh na Feisirí Eorpacha go dtí an Seanad inniu. Is deis é seo chun scrúdú a dhéanamh ar na naisc idir Rialtas na hÉireann agus an tAontas Eorpach agus breathnú ar na naisc idir muintir na hÉireann agus an Aontas Eorpach.

I will begin my comments by addressing Irish unity. I will start by saying Ireland's Presidency of the European Union is a historic opportunity to focus on Irish unity. It cannot be allowed to be just six months of chairing meetings and putting on a show for Europe. It must be seen as a unique opportunity to be ambitious and bold and to proudly represent Irish interests. It has been ten years since Brexit, when the North of Ireland was dragged out of the EU against its will and it created a democratic deficit that remains unresolved. I would like to hear from each of the MEPs present about how they have engaged on the issue of Irish unity during their time in Europe so far and what they have done to push for the continuation of the PEACEPLUS programme, given that there is a potential funding gap beyond 2027. I know Ms Carberry mentioned it. I wonder whether this gap can be filled to ensure there is continued funding.

The EU was born out of a mission for peace and represents itself as a peace project, yet it has been so inconsistent in calling out violations of international law. Mr. Mullooly mentioned how over 72,000 people have been killed in Gaza. There is genocide going on there, not to mention the West Bank, Lebanon and so forth. We saw our own citizens and citizens from other countries last week being treated extremely poorly when they were abducted from international waters, yet the EU is doing nothing about it. This is a breach and a violation of international law. Will the MEPs speak to their own speaking and voting record on this issue? Have they advocated for EU recognition of the State of Palestine?

Regarding neutrality, Irish people are very proud of our neutrality. This feels threatened, not only by the talk from Government parties on ending the triple lock, but also by the moves in Europe to increase spending on militarisation. It is more important now than ever before to ensure our neutrality is both protected and respected by an increasingly militarised EU. Everyone agrees that we need to see increased investment in the Defence Forces and that there have been decades of neglect and underinvestment. However, we must not let the Government use this as a smokescreen to undermine our neutrality itself.

Last week in Strasbourg, Sinn Féin MEPs highlighted an exhibition that endorsed an EU army. There was a uniformed mannequin dressed as a soldier with an EU flag on the uniform. The exhibition was promoting the use of EU funds for propping up the military industry. What are the MEPs' views, and the views of the groups they are part of, on the increased militarisation of Europe and the increased spending on arms, which could and should be spent on other issues such as housing, food security or environmental issues? There are many other more important issues that money should be spent on.

In relation to the next CAP, which Mr. Flanagan mentioned, what is the interpretation of an active farmer and will the MEPs oppose any payment cuts to farmers in receipt of pensions or to farm income? Regarding the nature restoration law, I feel there is a need for a separate fund to implement the law. Farmers do have concerns about it and how it is going to impact their holding, depending on what their neighbouring holding is doing. Funding for nature restoration needs to be independent of CAP funding. Do the MEPs agree with that?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I remind all Members that we are here to hear from the MEPs from Midlands-North-West on their work in Europe and European matters of relevance, especially with Ireland taking over the Presidency of the EU. I would be grateful if people would confine their remarks to that category. That is what the heading is today. That is for all Members.

Senator Nessa Cosgrove

Cuirim fáilte roimh na feisirí Eorpacha go dtí an Teach inniu. I was not sure how this worked as a question and answer session. I was not sure how to do this. I am going to base my whole questioning around workers' rights. I am the Labour Party spokesperson for workers' rights, for rural and community development and for the Gaeltacht. I am going to base all my questioning around that. I am delighted the MEPs are here because we do not see them enough. We do not get the opportunity to meet enough so it is fantastic that they are here.

I want to ask about the EU Inc. and the opportunity we have during the Presidency to look at our labour laws. We would love to see a harmonisation of labour laws right across the EU, which I do not think is going to happen, but we are lagging behind. Ireland has some of the weakest workers' rights in Europe. We have seen an action plan on the implementation of the EU minimum wage directive and the Government has been dragging its heels on this but we have to have the right to collectively bargain. People want to see a social Europe. It makes sense and is a reasonable idea to have a trading bloc but not if it is to the detriment of our country, that is, if Ireland is going to be a country with shelf companies because we have weak labour laws here. I would love to hear the MEPs' views on that, particularly on collective labour laws.

Moving on from that, I want to talk about CETA. This arbitration Bill is coming before us in the House tomorrow and we have debated it here twice now. Since I have been elected, this has probably been the one piece of legislation I am most concerned about. There is no need to have it ratified; it is operating as it is. There is absolutely no reason to have a parallel court system, when we have a very mature court system ourselves. I would also like to hear the MEPs' views on that. We should not be made do something and I believe France, Italy and Belgium have a similar stance. However, it is not getting enough talk. I know it has been spoken about but I do not think it is getting enough airwaves and it is very concerning that we are not hearing more about it.

I would also like to hear the MEPs' views on why the Claremorris to Collooney line under the western rail corridor, WRC, has not been included in TEN-T. Again, this is coming from the perspective of rural development and good jobs, and how we are working towards that. I would love to know how projects get included in that and why that part of the WRC was not included.

Turning to Border counties, I live in Sligo and I am a representative in Sligo-Leitrim. What are the MEPs' moves around unity and how have they engaged on this? As Senator Tully said, the North did not want to leave Europe and was dragged out. What are the MEPs and their party groupings doing to ensure this is not just left to these talks with no actual, concrete plan put in place? Since 2022, the Irish language has been recognised as a working language in Europe. Where would they see their role in promoting the working use of the Irish language? There has been a huge resurgence and interest in Gaeilge here, thanks to a lot of cultural references such as Kneecap and other things. There has been a surge in interest in Irish and I wonder where the MEPs sit on that. As they represent an area where we have islands and a Gaeltacht within our region, where is their role in that? As for CAP, I come from community work, and have met Mr. Mullooly and other MEPs at LEADER conferences. There is real concern among LEADER projects that their money is not going to be ring-fenced any more. What are the MEPs' roles within that?

Finally, on the occupied territories Bill, am I right in referring to 27 foreign ministers? Mr. Cowen made a statement recently saying he is very much in favour of banning goods and services from an EU perspective with Israel? I might come back to him about that. What is holding it up and why is it not happening? Israel is a rogue and a terrorist state. Why are there not full EU sanctions on any trade on goods and services between the EU and Israel?

Senator Alice-Mary Higgins

It is a crucial time for Europe. We are seeing not just worrying decisions about Europe's future but also much of Europe's past being eroded at present.

I took part in the Future of Europe process; I was one of the four parliamentarians from Ireland. When I spoke to the 800 citizens from across Europe, they spoke about European values. In a real sense, when they talked about them they meant the fundamental rights and the increase in environmental standards, employment standards and equality standards. That is what they were proud of. However, we have heard more and more of a conversation from the institutions since then about power; one that was very much shifting away from those values. I am very worried about the omnibus legislation we are seeing across a range of areas which, as far as I can see, is setting fire to many of the best things about Europe. I would love the MEPs' comments on this.

People do not expect it but we are seeing the roll-back in environmental areas and on corporate accountability. I engaged with, as I am sure did many of the MEPs, the corporate due diligence legislation. It took years to negotiate but was undone in an omnibus packet very quickly. There is a concern that the digital omnibus will undermine GDPR rights, as well as concerns regarding the environmental area. I believe there are six or seven or eight more omnibuses due, which is very worrying. I would love the MEPs' comments on that as a general approach and what specific actions they are taking within the system in challenging how that is being done.

I am concerned about the multi-annual financial framework. We are now seeing a huge shift away from social cohesion and environmental funding, which are important. We know in Ireland that social cohesion funding means actually building peace. There has been a re-routing of that into defence, with one of the clear examples being things like the lack of dedicated funding for nature restoration and the Natura programmes and LIFE programme, which all benefit many farms within the regions the MEPs represent. Those small subsidies have been very important, as they are what makes nature restoration happen. However, they have now been lumped into a competitiveness fund, where they are up against drones and everything else. Are the MEPs championing and pushing for dedicated funding in this area, and for this to be ring-fenced?

At present, and in general within the budget, how do we ensure we do not see a routing of everything towards defence without safeguards? For example, our finance committee put forward a very strong report on this, which showed that much of the money going into arms, including into the underwriting of loans, could be used for cluster bombs. There is an area or gap regarding defence and oversight - and we know it is not even covered by the AI Act - that relates to military technologies and defence. That is an area we need to tackle collectively and, of course, it has come to the forefront when we look at what has been happening.

I would like to touch on two key trade areas I think are very important. One is the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement. There are direct actions Ireland could be taking like the proper passing of the occupied territories Bill - that is clear - as well as action regarding the facilitation of Israeli bonds, arms and so forth. However, at that EU level, I was very disappointed to see a vote against a debate on the new death penalty; a death penalty which treats Palestinians differently, literally in a life and death way. A debate on that was blocked.

I am also concerned about the EU-Morocco deal, where we see a replication of some very poor decision-making and a measure which, again, could end up rewarding settlers in illegally occupied territories, rather than citizens. It is replicating some of the terrible mistakes that have been made regarding Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories. There are crucial decisions being made at this time, and I would like to know what MEPs are doing to unpack those pieces, and not just the sloganeering on simplification, when we know it is deregulation. There may be measures of simplification but we need to hear the unpacking of that and competitiveness, when the comparative advantage Europe had was its standards and the opportunity for industries to respond to the real world, where climate change is real, where there is diversity and where society matters.

I would love if the MEPs could unpack what the learning should be, even from austerity, when we come back on the competitiveness. We lost a decade to austerity and that is where the competitiveness was lost.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I welcome to the Distinguished Visitors Gallery guests of the Ceann Comhairle, Deputy Verona Murphy. You are very welcome and I hope you enjoy your visit.

After the first session, I am now going to give five minutes to each of the MEPs to respond. We will start with Ms Carberry.

Ms Nina Carberry

We covered a lot of topics there so I will try to get through as many as I can. The FTD brothers were mentioned. They are an inspiration but they also mobilise people in a positive way through physical activity. It gives hope that people can be brought together in a positive rather than negative way, which is hugely important. It is good to think down the line and about how we can prepare ourselves for dementia and Alzheimer's and the crisis. People are getting older and we need to plan. The more money we can put into research into brain health and preventative healthcare, the stronger the position we will be in to tackle that. We could also have preventative measures for those who are their 40s and 50s, whether that is looking out for high blood pressure or having our sight or hearing checked, as these are all triggers down the line. That would be an important step for those of us in our 40s and 50s.

Many Senators mentioned the importance of CAP. I have been engaging with a lot of farming organisations and it is very clear to me that if the proposed cut proceeds, it will devastate rural Ireland. That is very clear to us. It is a huge priority in our forthcoming EU Presidency that we fight back. We have to do whatever we can to save rural Ireland because it is under threat. I will keep trying in that regard on the budget committee. It is important, as Mr. Flanagan said, that it goes across committees, and we are working together on that.

When the national and regional partnership plans, NRPPs, come back to the governments, it will be complicated for the Departments. There is a lot of merging of funds here. We are talking about CAP and cohesion funding, which is where the PEACEPLUS funding is located. Senator O'Reilly asked me how we protect PEACEPLUS funding and make sure we have it ring-fenced following that merging of funds. We could have a situation where four Departments are looking after this big pot of money. I would not like to see schemes or direct payments to farmers being delayed because another Department is delaying the approval. We need to think about that in the coming weeks and months.

Senator O'Loughlin mentioned the equine sector and how important it is. I agree with her wholeheartedly. The regulation coming through the Parliament is not really budging. There are 3,000 amendments to the live animal exports regulation. It is very much a one-size-fits-all approach and we have found out, through a lot of monitoring groups and looking at the regulation, that only 40% of the previous regulation was implemented, meaning 60% of it has not been implemented or enforced properly. We need to look back at what we had and see whether we cannot enforce it more. We need an approach that is not one size fits all as the equine sector would otherwise be disproportionately affected. Obviously, we have horses going for slaughter and they need protection but the sport horse sector, which the Senator referred to, does not need that hard level of regulation.

A few Senators mentioned the occupied territories Bill, which we heard a lot of discussion about yesterday. I am absolutely supportive of the legislation and I am being very clear in my voting in the Parliament in my EPP group. Maria Walsh and I have stood out in voting to make sure there is a suspension of the trade agreement with Israel. We have made it very clear that UNRWA should be protected. To be honest, not everyone in the Parliament thinks UNRWA funding should be protected. We are working collectively as Irish MEPs on that.

Senator Tully mentioned PEACEPLUS funding and the importance of cross-Border projects. They are hugely significant. I mentioned I had an event recently at which we heard about the grassroots approach to this. PEACEPLUS funding does not get much airtime because it is a good news story. We need to be louder on it during our Presidency. I would love to see an event happening on the Border to promote what we have. It is something a lot of countries will learn a lot from.

I will try to move on quickly. The Mercosur agreement was mentioned a lot. I took a very clear position on Mercosur in my campaign. I was not happy with traceability and standards, especially regarding Brazil, and I was glad to see movement from the Commission on that. I made very clear that unless standards and traceability improve-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I have to cut across Ms Carberry because I am trying to get all the other speakers in.

Ms Nina Carberry

-----we cannot support it. With anything to do with trade, it is hugely important that we safeguard our agriculture sector. I am sorry I ran out of time.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Not at all, you are fine.

Ms Nina Carberry

I hope I can address the other points when I am finishing up.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Perfect. I call Mr. Cowen.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Like Ms Carberry, I will do my best to try to respond, even briefly, to many of the points that have been made. I thank Senators for the contributions and input.

On CAP funding and the 20% drop that is inevitable in the context of the commitment that has been made to defence and security, which we cannot disregard either, Europe has been successful when it is unified. It was unified on Brexit. It was unified on Covid vaccination programmes, in its response to the war in Ukraine and Europe's overdependence on Russian gas and in the means by which Horizon funding was provided to help with and address the issues caused by those. Efforts to disunite Europe succeed in undermining it. From our perspective, there are eastern bloc countries that, whether we like it or not, are more interested in tanks than tractors. You have to respect and appreciate that. We have a role, in a unified Europe, to ensure we play our part, even as a militarily neutral country, in assisting in defence, whether that is in relation to our waters, our cables or our cybersecurity. The Government, fortunately, is committed to that, as are the other member states. That does not take away from the fact no defence and security policy would be complete without pro rata provision for food security. That is the argument we hope will win the day insofar as we cannot have one without the other. As shadow rapporteurs, we have a duty to make proposals to initially bridge that gap and seek more funding thereafter due to inflation. We think we can win the support of colleagues in doing that.

On animal transport, Senator O'Loughlin rightly alluded to the fact that Ms Carberry and I joined forces on amendments to separate sport horses from the norm, although that is not to say there is not a responsibility to ensure that, as an island nation, we are protected in relation to the time of travel and so forth. There are 3,000 amendments proposed on the proposal. It is in quicksand at present and we do not see it going too far. That is not to say we will not be mindful, if and when it is resurrected, to ensure that industries such as the sport horses sector, especially by virtue of the impact it makes in this nation over others, are recognised and appreciated.

On generational renewal and Senator Joe O'Reilly’s point, it is commendable that the Commission, in its proposal, has gone from 3% to 6% of the overall spend. As I said, the Government is committed to a figure of 8%, which is commendable. We hope that will become a reality. I believe it should be accompanied by exit or voluntary retirement packages, side by side. A lot of work was done by the Government in preparation for that. I would have no difficulty with that being a conditional commitment within CAP for member states in order to avail of increased payments to younger farmers. Starter help and assistance to them, with accessibility to land, finance and so forth, could be dependent on a scheme for exit, and not one that aligns with the proposal that is there to throw pensioners off a cliff in relation to their entitlements. That will not be the case.

The role LEADER plays has been mentioned. The proposal in the Commission's draft at present is for it to be outside the CAP envelope. We are arguing strongly for it to go back in. We are arguing strongly that it be measured by traditional means and metrics rather than cohesion metrics, which would show the improvements that have been made and lessen the availability of funding.

It is something this Government should underpin and commit to in order to work with us to reassure us that, irrespective of what form the CAP takes after it has been agreed, it will contain similar commitments to LEADER programmes, local development companies and so forth because of the role they play, especially in rural communities.

In relation to trade and the Mercosur deal, Senators asked specifically about Government parties. The Government made a commitment not to support it and it did not support it. Some Senators will say it was late in the day when that was finalised. That was because of the Government's efforts to ensure there was better conditionality, safeguards and safety nets in place to address the issues. That was my job too, and I alluded to that earlier. I do not think we would have had the sort of strengthening of the conditions and conditionality associated with the agreement without that commitment. It would have been a lot easier to shout and roar from the sidelines and give out about the agreement, but I had a responsibility and duty to deal with the reality that it could well be passed without our vote, which has happened. There is a case being taken, and people will say it is looking at every aspect of the agreement, but it is not. It is merely looking at the separation of the political and trade sections of the committees in question. There is, unfortunately, precedent in Singapore where the separation was catered for, and I expect that to be the case here. There are much better safeguards and provisions in place now than there were 12 months ago, when people were saying we could not and would not vote for the Mercosur agreement and we should have been early in saying that. We respected and honoured the commitment made in the programme for Government and went so far as to ensure those improvements were made to make it a lot easier if those concerns become a reality. If we get to see it again, if we have more time, I will do that too. We are pro-trade, as I said-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The MEPs will have a chance to come back in.

Ms Maria Walsh

We are on a roll now.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I am just trying to get everybody in. Before I call Mr. Flanagan, I welcome the Ballinlough Community Development Council Active Retirement Group from Granlahan and Ballinlough, led by Ríona Burke. According to Senator Scahill, the group's host, they need to be let off their homework for the rest of the week. The group is very welcome.

Mr. Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan

There were many questions and I could do with 50 minutes to answer them, but I will settle for five.

In relation to the Mercosur agreement, I find the whole Mercosur issue interesting from a political point of view. One of the biggest criticisms levelled at politicians is that we do not follow through on our promises. When Ursula von der Leyen proposed putting together this Commission, she could not have been clearer that she was going to go down the road of supporting Mercosur. I am not saying all European Commission Presidents tell everyone what to do, but when it comes to this Commission, we have Ursula von der Leyen and a whole load of puppets, unfortunately. I do not like saying that but it is the reality. I have never seen such an iron fist. It comes down through the committees and the groups seem to be paralysed and unable to disagree with anything. I have a serious problem with that. The problem here, however, is that we were told by that individual that she was going down that road and, guess what, she went down that road.

I oppose the Mercosur deal for many reasons, one of which is that the amount of extra beef that could end up coming into this country has been seriously underplayed. Currently, these countries can bring beef into this country with massive tariffs of 35% or 50% and they can still make a profit. It will not be just a case that the extra quota will be the only thing that is coming in. If it is profitable to bring in beef at those high percentages, I predict that there will be extra brought in on top of that. I hope I am wrong. Whatever about the standards, I have never in my life had anyone come up to me in my town and ask if there is any chance I could get them some Mercosur beef. No one has asked me that. I do not know where the demand is coming from; it is certainly not from me. I disagree with the Mercosur deal.

On the removal of unanimity, it would be lunacy for Ireland to go down that road because we would lose a massive amount of the power we have.

The genocide in Palestine was mentioned. As I said earlier, I got elected as a Eurosceptic. I have seen massive positives. I was listened to. I saw a situation where the European Union forced Ireland to give more money to people who were on smaller payments and I thought to myself, "You know what, there are a lot of positives here." However, bar Ursula von der Leyen burning down the European Parliament, I do not think she could have done any more harm. She had an organisation that was meant to be a symbol of hope, fairness, caring about the environment and caring about whether someone was going to not only shoot children but have bets as to what part of the body they would shoot, and she has not done nearly enough to condemn this. She has irreparably damaged the European Union. You could say that is terrible and we will never recover from it - poor old us - but what about the people who are dead and will never recover from it?

Senator Higgins mentioned the omnibus regulations that are seeking to roll back an awful lot of positive things the European Union has done. The phrase "simplification" was mentioned. Simplification is a word that people seem to have amnesia about in the European Parliament. Phil Hogan, in the most recent CAP reform, introduced it under one heading - "Simplification". I like the consensus idea in the European Parliament where we all work together, but there is one downside to it. When someone messes up, no one actually says "You made a mistake the last time and what price will you pay for it?" Phil Hogan said he was bringing in simplification. What is this CAP about? It is about simplification. Obviously, simplification did not happen the last time and even in discussions and debates in the Parliament, everyone seems to have forgotten that Phil Hogan spoke about simplification. Simplification will never happen if we want sophisticated, targeted policies that help everyone, whether in relation to the environment or people.

All Senators have complicated jobs but I will them something that makes life a bit simpler for them. They have a damn good wage at the end of the day. If we pay people properly to do environmental work, they will put up with something that is not actually that complicated and they will deal with those complications. We have evidence of that. I will finish on this. I could have said an awful lot and I am sorry for leaving out other areas. We have evidence that if people are paid well enough, they will do the right thing environmentally. We had Natura 2000 payments of €242 per hectare. In today's money, that is almost €600 per hectare. Far from farmers rejecting having to do that Natura 2000 work, when their lands were initially designated they had so much money coming to them that their neighbours who were not designated complained about it. That proves that if we fund this work, people will do it. The problem is not that people do not want to do something to save us from the crisis we are heading down the road towards; it is that we are refusing to pay them to do it. Pay them and fund it. That will deal with the problem.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I agree with Luke Flanagan on that last point. When we arrived in the European Parliament two years ago, the vote on nature restoration had just been taken. At the time, there were blatant promises made that there would be funding. We and our colleagues were told that. When we went into the chamber on the first day to speak to the Commissioner he confirmed there was no funding. The vote was taken in circumstances where people were not given the truthful situation.

The Mercosur agreement, as mentioned, has taken many years to reach this stage, and I make no apology for the role I played in scrutinising it, or indeed for that of my colleague Deputy Fitzmaurice in the other House. I am proud to have worked with a cross-European coalition on this. People ask what did we do. We worked with Polish, Italian, French, Irish and Spanish MEPs from across political groups, and our objective was clear, namely, to use the proper procedures of the Parliament to seek legal clarity on whether the agreement complied with EU treaties or not. I did not care who did it before. This was the first time the South American countries were before us and I wanted to see the treaty examined by a court. Some criticism was made in Ireland but, on Brazilian beef, many of us raised concerns on public health and food safety grounds. Recent developments have shown that these concerns were legitimate. We were right. The Commission has taken Brazilian meat off the safe list. It has told Brazil to get its act together by 3 September, but we want to see it get its act together now. Why should we sit by in a calm and relaxed way while Brazilian beef comes in, especially in pre-packed meals in our schools, with a question mark over it? That is not scaremongering. I absolutely refute any suggestion-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is that true?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

-----that other people-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is Mr. Mullooly saying beef is going into schools? That is dangerous.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Last Thursday, and Mr. Cowen knows this because I told him already, I met the Commissioner for food safety.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Dangerous.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I met the Commissioner for food safety. This is the situation. The Commissioner stands over the audits that are in place on European countries. The Commissioner said to me: "The issue of pre-packed meals coming from the UK is a major problem." Those are his words.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Into Irish schools?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Into Irish schools.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Did he tell Mr. Mullooly that? Did Mr. Mullooly fact-check that?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

And nursing homes and hospitals.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Mr. Mullooly might fact-check that.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I can go further in terms of that.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Be honest.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

The Commissioner made it very clear that he does not have the same control of audit over the UK because of Brexit. That is the simple situation. There is what he describes as an estimated audit going on in the UK. He hopes it will improve. He said to me in the context of a negotiation with the UK, which we are involved in at the moment on a range of issues, that he hopes the audits will improve but he cannot put his hand on his heart and look over that situation so I make no apologies. That is why I contacted the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI, when I came back last week and I asked it to directly follow up on this. If the FSAI does not do it, I will go further. I will ask parents and schools to investigate this matter with the schools authorities themselves to get to the bottom of this because that is how strongly I feel about this matter. It is the health and safety of our children that we are talking about as well as everyone else's.

Funding is an issue for various problem areas in agriculture. LEADER and other areas were mentioned. In terms of the overall situation, people must realise what has gone on in terms of the budget this year. At European level, defence has become the order of the day. Under the proposed MFF that we are debating and considering all of the time, the plans are to allocate €131 billion to defence, security and space. That is a fivefold increase compared with the current budget situation and the consequence is clear. CAP is becoming the poor relation in the EU budget. For Ireland, the proposed CAP allocation will fall from €10.7 billion in 2021 to 2027 to €8.16 billion. That represents a reduction of €2.5 billion in cash terms and a 20% to 40% reduction when compared with the current allocation. This matters because Ireland is already a net contributor to the EU budget. Crucially, approximately 75% of the EU funding Ireland receives comes back through CAP. Therefore, any cut to the allocation has a double impact. It means less direct support for Irish farmers and rural communities while worsening Ireland's net position with the EU budget. In practical terms, if billions of euros less comes back to Ireland through CAP then Ireland's net contribution rises in real terms or it has to. The Government's position must be clear. Ireland cannot accept a future EU budget where defence spending increases dramatically while food production, farm incomes and rural viability are weakened. There is a trend because during the mid-term review in the Parliament Cohesion Funds disappeared for defence looking at bridges and roads on the Ukraine-Polish border. This was the start. It is continuing in the MFF and will continue unless we oppose it left, right and centre.

Finally, I worked for LEADER for three years. I get it and know of LEADER's concerns. I agree that we have to ensure that the funding is secure but we also have to ensure that we do not rob Peter to pay Paul taking money from another budget and, therefore, leaving the Irish Government to reduce the budget for the LEADER companies.

Ms Maria Walsh

Similar to my colleagues, some of the questions that were asked are outside the scope of my remit, as I see it, but colleagues might feel different. I will try to stick within the time and on topic in terms of the work that we can do.

Senator Joe O'Reilly asked how realistic is it to hold the line on CAP. All of us work within the agriculture committee indirectly or directly and we can all confirm that what we have now is the ring-fencing of the basic farm payment and where the MFF will go in the next weeks and months during our Presidency is incredibly crucial. Regardless of where we sit politically, I hope that, collectively, there is agreement that if there are shortcomings that the Exchequer will need to feed into agri-schemes or pension schemes, which the Senator mentioned. I did a lot of work on this, particularly around the generation renewal file, to make sure that the first draft contained some element of pensions. Other member states do it really well and have done for decades. In Finland and regions in Germany, strong pension schemes are held by local authorities or municipal areas. There is no reason we cannot learn from that example. I have spoken to older farmers who accepted the retirement scheme 20 years ago. They had to stand outside the farm gate which meant the knowledge transfer was lost. I do not want us to go there because we need that knowledge. The Senator's second question was on AI. We cannot get everything from AI, certain books or TikTok, despite what other politicians might feel. That knowledge transfer is needed from people who have grown up on farms and a pension scheme has to be considered in that context. The age threshold for farmers age should increase from 35 to 40 or 45 to reflect reality. I know of a lot of young farmers are part of that lost generation who are trying to take on a farm or access to land or funding at a critical time when they might be starting a family, re-educating themselves or starting a new career and they are trying to grow installation aid yet do not have the funding to do that. Within this space, there is a lot of best practice that we can feed into but the pension scheme will have to be run by the member state.

I want to respond to Senator Keogan's comment on the migration pact because it was used almost as a negative. Since 2019, I have been a member of the EU Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. If we did not have the pact that had been negotiated, and worked on, for ten years prior, the Senator would be saying something very different. A firm and fair humanitarian-based pact is definitely required. I will allude to the other points that were raised about humanitarian crises outside of Ireland and Europe. We need a system that allows us to support people in the best possible way and that can only be done when we are at the table with like-minded people. Across the 27 member states, certainly from the amendments I tabled and the conversations that I have had with representatives of other countries, then on the western side of Europe, where we are privileged to sit in comparison with Greece and Italy, we have to learn and understand that the migration pact is a positive.

Senator Cosgrove made a point about workers' rights. From the standpoint of Fine Gael, Ms Regina Doherty, MEP is a member of the EU committee that deals with employment law. During my previous mandate, I was a member of that committee and worked on pay transparency. I do not want Ireland to water that down or delay that. We have heard some whispers of that and I hope that we can find some tangible work there. Pay transparency is critical if we are going to remove or reduce the 14% gender pay gap experienced by women, which, in turn, affects their pensions. There is no reason any company, large or small, cannot feed into better pay transparency for women and people in general.

Another Senator mentioned the PEACEPLUS programme. Ms Carberry, MEP is a member of the EU Committee on Budgets or BUDG. There is also the EU Committee on Regional Development. Both BUDG and REGI feed into the programme by tabling amendments. As I said in my opening statement, we recently met Northern Irish representatives to discuss the programme.

The western rail corridor was also flagged. Based on evidence, national government support is required. There is an ability to apply in the next round of MFF through the Connecting Europe facility but it has to be done through the Department of Transport.

Finally, there has been a lot of talk about trade deals but nobody has mentioned that €1 billion is spent each year on trade with African countries. A number of regimes are questionable in terms of breaking of human law. I hope that this House and certainly us, as MEPs, would look to the relationships we have in Africa because they are a good source of support but we need to also support them.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

We move to the two-minute slots. I call Seanadóir Flaherty.

Senator Joe Flaherty

I welcome all of the MEPs. In particular, I welcome my former neighbour, Mr. Mullooly, MEP. He is a native of County Longford and he is following a long tradition in this House. The MEP could see the house of the late Paddy Belton across the fields from where he grew up. Mr. Belton was a Fianna Fáil Deputy in the First Dáil, an eminently intelligent man. Subsequently, he became a member of the Fine Gael Party but we cannot account for that. I am also delighted to welcome him and to see that the MEP's sisters, Rose and Eithne, his wife, Angela, and members of his team, Pat O'Rourke and Brid Reilly, were here today. Most of them have now left the Chamber.

I do not think it was because they did not want to wait for me. I think it was because they were bogged down with European speak.

I only have one request. In the aftermath of Ireland moving forward on the occupied territories Bill yesterday, there is an onus on MEPs. We can achieve very little as a country. We are small, but we have a powerful voice and we have been the foremost country in Europe on Palestine. We led from the start. We were the first European country to recognise Palestine as a state. We have defended the United Nations Relief Works Agency, UNRWA, and its funding and we have been a strong voice. Every legitimate government agency in the Middle East will attest that Ireland has led the way. There is a huge onus on MEPs. Mr. Mullooly said he spoke to President von der Leyen, but he needs to bring the same commitment to this cause. This is the defining cause of our age. It is one thing to talk to President von der Leyen, but the MEPs need to engage with their groups. We are coming into the Irish EU Presidency and it would be great if we could get mid-way through that Presidency and see Europe respond as a single voice to everything that is happening in the Middle East.

I will also talk about the issue of school lunches. I am sure the MEPs are aware there are at least four significant school lunch companies in County Longford, which can all attest to where their food comes from. We spend more than €350 million-----

Senator Gareth Scahill

They have confirmed that.

Senator Joe Flaherty

------on school lunches. Parents are worried. Scaremongering has no place in the EU Parliament and no place in this House. We have more than 200 full-time and part-time jobs related to school lunches in Longford.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Prepaid UK is what I said.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

The Senator without interruption.

Senator Joe Flaherty

No, he tarred all those companies with the same brush and it was deeply unfair.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I have to be strict about time because there are a lot of speakers and we have limited time, so I apologise.

Senator Manus Boyle

I welcome all the MEPs and thank them for the courtesy they showed me the few times I was in Brussels and for what they have done for the Irish fishing industry. It is good to have a group that comes together and facilitates meetings.

I will stick to my brief, which is fishing. How can we get more pressure put on the PECH committee, seeing as we do not have any full-time member?

Can we come together as a group, with the MEPs' political groups to see whether we can get reform of the Common Fisheries Policy? It is 40 years old and is not working for Ireland.

Will Europe enforce tariffs against the third countries that are overfishing? Something has to be done. We need to get these people in line. Why is Europe taking the cuts when these other countries can fish away and do what they like?

Will the MEPs come together as a group and push for the Hague preferences to be reinstated for Ireland? We had the Hague preferences for many years and were thrown under the bus last year. It is totally wrong. A total of 8,000 tonnes might not be a lot to some people, but it is a lot to the people in Donegal, Castletownbere, Dunmore East and all around the country. It is what will keep them afloat. That wee bit makes a wile lot.

Can the MEPs come together to do something about the super companies that are operating in Europe? We call them "The Dutch five". They seem to be running the whole show. They have boats flagged in every country and we cannot lay a hand on them. Something has to be done about it.

I thank the MEPs again for what they are doing and ask them to keep going with it. We are coming from a low base, but we have made a lot of headway.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly

I commend Mr. Flanagan, Sinn Féin and Mr. Mullooly on the work they did in helping to secure a referral of the EU-Mercosur agreement to the Court of Justice of the European Union, CJEU. I also commend Mr. Mullooly on his appointment as a full voting member to the agriculture committee. With four Irish MEPs holding voting rights on that committee, we expect big things and a strong position for the next CAP reform. I ask them to prioritise generational renewal, protect family farms and ensure young farmers can afford to enter the sector.

The agriculture sector needs support, but I am equally concerned - I am on the Oireachtas fisheries committee, like Senator Boyle - about the fisheries sector. It is being systematically dismantled. We control roughly 12% of EU waters, yet receive 3% to 4% of the quota allocation. Irish fishermen watch bluefin tuna swim through our water while being restricted to a catch and release system with virtually no quota. The EU-Norway deal is another disgrace. Norway gains access to the blue whiting worth more than €21 million while Ireland is left with quotas that are not economically viable to fish.

The EU has also shown far too little leadership on Palestine. We hear statements condemning Israel's actions; yet commercially and politically, it continues business as usual. Why has the EU-Israel Association Agreement not been suspended, when the human rights clause has clearly been breached? The contrast between the EU response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and its response to Israel's actions in Gaza is impossible to ignore. Economic interests are being prioritised over human life. The MEPs might have some insight into this.

I was deeply disappointed that MEPs support an amendment to recognise transgender women as women, while simultaneously rejecting or abstaining on the amendment that only biological women can get pregnant. Do they believe it is possible for men to get pregnant?

I am happy to hear Ms Walsh talk about gender equality.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Go raibh maith agat.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly

Women have faced violence, harassment and discrimination, precisely because we are female. Yet now, women who defend sex-based rights-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Go raibh maith agat, a Sheanadóir.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly

-----are mocked, shouted down and branded hateful. Irish people believe in dignity and respect for everyone, but they also want fairness in sport-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

A Sheanadóir, please.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly

-----to safeguard sexes of bathrooms and changing rooms-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Everyone else is trying to keep to the timeframe.

Senator Sarah O'Reilly

-----and to protect children from irreversible medical procedures.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I have to get in a large number of speakers so I am sorry, I have to keep everyone to their two-minute slot.

Senator Alison Comyn

I thank the MEPs for attending. They do tremendous work in Europe on behalf of all their communities in the Midlands-North-West constituency. I love the diversity, that we all came from different backgrounds. Mr. Mullooly and I left the fourth estate and moved to the first estate, as it is called. Some would say we leapt from the frying pan into the fire. I hope he is enjoying his role as much as I am.

Mr. Mullooly left in 2021. I have been working all week to make sure RTÉ is providing value for money to its viewers. It is State-funded. Did he understand, when he accepted his voluntary redundancy from RTÉ back in June 2021, that his midlands correspondent role would likely only be vacant for 13 months? Did he believe RTÉ was permanently abolishing-----

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I am sorry, Senator Comyn.

Senator Alison Comyn

-----the midlands correspondent position when he accepted his redundancy package?

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

We have to stick to Ireland questions and the European Parliament.

Senator Alison Comyn

It is very relevant to what we have been debating over the past few weeks. Will he disclose the exact value of the redundancy package he received? We understand it was an RTÉ decision, but it had a huge bearing on the fact that position was filled. It was not done away with and only 13 months later it was filled. I would be grateful for his comments on that.

Senator Gareth Scahill

The MEPs are all very welcome. Europe often speaks about balanced regional development. The Midlands-North-West constituency still faces major deficits in transport, connectivity and economic investment. Addressing those challenges requires every level of government to work together properly. This is why the relationship between our MEPs, the European Committee of the Regions and our regional assemblies is important. REGI exists to represent local authorities and regional voices in Europe. It gives councillors and regional assemblies a direct channel to EU policymakers and funding priorities. MEPs should work closely with these bodies to strengthen the voice of our local authorities, not try to replace them or do the work of councillors. I welcome Mr. Cowen's clarification about that earlier.

Councillors are elected to deal with local delivery and local priorities. The role of our MEPs should be to use their influence in Europe to secure investment, shape EU policy and build partnerships that help regions like ours to finally get the infrastructure we deserve. Beyond commentary and publicity, how are the MEPs using their positions in Europe to work with the European Committee of the Regions and our regional assemblies to deliver the infrastructure investment our wider region needs?

Across Europe at the moment, we are seeing a clear rise in populist politics. It is often driven by fear, frustration and division in our communities. At a time public trust in institutions is already fragile, misinformation and disinformation can spread quickly and have a real consequence.

What responsibility do the MEPs believe they have, politically and morally, to ensure accuracy in their own public statements and to challenge misinformation in a way that does not contribute to fear, hostility and division within our communities?

Senator Paraic Brady

The MEPs are very welcome. As a small rural farmer from north Longford, I totally agree with the sentiments Mr. Mullooly expressed earlier. We have to protect the farming community at all costs. Food security has to be number one when it comes to the next CAP. That is certain. The responsibility for defining an "active farmer" should continue to rest with the member state and, therefore, it should continue to rest with Ireland. We should define "active farmer" ourselves. I would not like us to lose that. We have a lot of people who are not actively farming but are still in receipt of huge CAP payments. We must target supports for active and productive farming.

I want to ask all our MEPs about the safeguards. Some of them voted against the safeguards and others voted for them. Could they clarify why they voted against the safeguards? Any safeguard that protects Irish farming is something that every farmer needs to know about.

I would like to clarify one issue regarding school meals. We have huge businesses in Longford, as Senator Flaherty said. I have visited these businesses and know at first hand that the meat that goes into our school meals comes from local produce. Local farmers are delivering into local abattoirs that are supplying these businesses. I ask Mr. Mullooly to withdraw what he said in this House. He worked in RTÉ but has not clarified the statements he made in the European Parliament to the effect that there were tanks on the streets of Dublin during a peaceful protest. I ask him to withdraw that statement. That was very damaging to this country on a world stage. My brother in America rang and asked me what the hell was going on that there were tanks on the streets of Dublin. As Trump said in America, false information can be damaging at all times. Mr. Mullooly knows that was false. I ask him to withdraw his comments in this House today. I ask him to get up and confirm it was false information. People need to see the smoke from the trees.

Senator Linda Nelson Murray

I thank the MEPs for coming. My focus is on small businesses and always has been. I would like when we take over the European Presidency that we have a focus on Irish business. When it comes to insurance, for example, we have not had a new entrant into the Irish market for 11 years to provide public liability insurance. I would like to know what the MEPs can do on that issue to help small businesses.

The issue of counterfeit and fake branded goods entering the Irish market is becoming a major consumer safety problem, particularly for children's toys. I appreciate that there was a new toy safety regulation in 2025. That was enacted in January but there is a four-year waiting period before it is fully enacted. We have thousands of parts coming into Ireland that are not safe for children. That is something that needs to be looked at. The Irish toy market is worth between €300 million and €600 million per year. It looks as if approximately 10% of the goods that are coming in are counterfeit goods, which is bad for Irish business.

I would also like to mention hot school meals. I wrote a 48-page report on them. I visited suppliers the length and breadth of the country and schools. The Joint Committee on Education and Youth had numerous witnesses and stakeholders in to discuss the issue and never once did I hear that there was Brazilian beef in hot school meals. Some €300 million is spent on hot school meals in Ireland. That goes to companies. A total of 3,200 primary schools and 500,000 students avail of the programme. How dare Mr. Mullooly sit there and say that the hot school meals programme is using Brazilian beef? How dare he scaremonger? The Society of St. Vincent de Paul last year had 112,000 requests for food assistance. There is a massive problem with child food poverty in Ireland. What Mr. Mullooly has just done is scare parents, principals and teachers by talking about Brazilian beef in hot school meals. Like my two colleagues, I want him to withdraw that comment. I hope he does not get any coverage out of it because it is simply not true. Until he can come to the Upper House and prove it is, dún do bhéal.

Senator Mark Duffy

I welcome the MEPs from Midlands-North-West. I put on record my support for the suspension of the Israel trade deal with the EU. It has been mentioned by many Senators. This is the mechanism that Ireland should use in supporting all MEPs. Do they all support that suspension? It is the most pragmatic approach to take in a European context. That is the best move forward. There has been progress on the occupied territories Bill here, but at European level, we can have an impact on what is a devastating humanitarian crisis that was totally avoidable.

I sit on the Oireachtas joint committees on transport and climate, energy and environment. As was mentioned previously, the western rail corridor is one of the key infrastructural projects that can reignite the west coast, connecting many counties. Like Senator Cosgrove, I would like to see it continue on to Sligo. What can we do as a State to engage in unlocking funding in Europe to ensure we can have nation-building projects such as the western rail corridor connecting Sligo all the way down the western seaboard?

A number of national road projects are also at different stages. I would like to see what can be done to ensure we use every financial asset within Europe to ensure their delivery. The region the MEPs represent is one of the worst for transport infrastructure. It is unique because it is sparsely populated without the large cities there are in other regions. Transport and connectivity are challenges. We need to see this as an opportunity. We must ensure we have investment and delivery.

What are the MEPs' thoughts on Ireland's influence at a bureaucratic level in Brussels? It has been reported that it is waning and declining. That again is a big problem because we have baked in representation at a political level but we need to have influence across all spheres of civic and political life in Brussels to make sure that Irish voices, opinions and positions are cutting through at every level. I would welcome the thoughts of the MEPs. I thank them for being here.

An Cathaoirleach

I am conscious of time and know we are running over time. I will ask the Leader to propose an extension of time, but I will ask the remaining speakers to limit themselves to one minute each. I will then bring in the MEPs again. If Members want to take a sos, we can do so. We are scheduled to go until 4.30 p.m. We can keep going, depending on what Members would prefer.

Senator P. J. Murphy

I thank our MEPs for being present. I thank them for all the work they do on our behalf. I was delighted Ms Walsh mentioned the farm retirement scheme. She absolutely hit the nail on the head regarding the flaws in the previous farm retirement scheme. My grandfather availed of that scheme. While it helped to transition the use of land from generation to generation, it was filled with flaws in requiring the retiring farmer to step away. We need to achieve two priorities from any new farm retirement scheme. The first is the transfer of knowledge from the retiring farmer to the farmer who is taking over. The second relates to the fact that our land is a limited resource and we only have a small amount of it. We need to ensure that the land we have is being used by the people most fit to use it. Land is currently being minded by armchair farmers. We need to get that land into the hands of young farmers. The MEPs are conscious of that.

Like my colleagues, I ask MEP Mullooly to withdraw his shocking statements. He has stained an industry with his statement today.

We have all listened to his populism and his nonsense over the past number of months about the fuel protests and Mercosur. He should not stain this House with his nonsense. He should have respect for this House and withdraw his statements.

Senator Martin Conway

I welcome our MEPs, particularly Mr. Flanagan, who served here for a couple of years, and Mr. Cowen, who I served with in these Houses for many years before he went to Brussels. I commend them on the great work they are doing in Brussels on behalf of the people of Ireland.

As a former Chair of the Seanad EU scrutiny committee, which the Cathaoirleach currently chairs, I hope this engagement is the start of a process that will evolve, mature and develop over the years. Unfortunately, the distance between Brussels and Ireland still exists. We need to bridge that democratic deficit and to do it urgently. When there is a deficit, a vacuum exists.

I am conscious of the Cathaoirleach and of time. There are a number of comments I would have liked to have made but I will ask one question that affects my constituency, Clare, and the MEPs' constituents as well relating to the proposed electric vehicle rental fleet mandate that is coming in in 2030. I want a commitment from the MEPs that Ireland will be exempt from that. If it is not, the entire rental fleet market will close. When people fly into Shannon Airport, Knock and other places, they will not be able to rent a car because there are not enough charging points to facilitate electric cars. If all rental cars are electric, it is just not going to work.

Senator Rónán Mullen

I welcome the MEPs and thank them for being with us. Many parents across Europe are concerned about the problems caused by their children having excessive, and excessively early, exposure to screen time, particularly the challenge posed by young people's access to social media. Many countries are taking their own initiative on this matter. Energy has been focused on the specific issue of whether tech companies should be prevented from opening social media accounts for young people. There is widespread misunderstanding of this issue. Some people think what is being posited is a ban on young people accessing social media. That is not what it is about; it is about whether young people should be able to open accounts because it is through accounts that tech companies challenge.

The Minister for communications said to us at a committee meeting today that European countries take different points of view. Some have a laissez-faire approach to restrictions on young people's access to media. What are the MEPs' views? Can the European Parliament take an initiative in this area? Will we hear the voice of Parliament? it is important that Ireland would legislate on its own for whatever we believe to be in the common good, but what happens in Europe matters.

I add to that the concern about the widespread availability of pornography and the impact that is having on young people. It seems bizarre that it is easier for a young person to access pornography online than to buy a pair of shoes, gamble or buy vapes, for which they would be required to use a credit card. Young people are being damaged by their exposure to pornography and it seems Europe is not acting strongly enough to protect them in this area. I would be grateful for our guests' thoughts and views on that.

An Cathaoirleach

The Acting Leader has a proposal. We have gone a small bit over time. We were supposed to finish at 4.30 p.m.. If it is all right with Members, we will extend it by a small bit.

Senator Garret Ahearn

I propose, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders or the Order of Business for today, that No. 2 will conclude at 5 p.m., if not previously concluded, and No. 3 will be taken immediately thereafter.

An Cathaoirleach

Go raibh maith agat. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Before I call our Members back in for their final contributions on a wide range of questions and then ask the Acting Leader and the Leas-Chathaoirleach to make their concluding remarks, I welcome from the great state of Utah my good friend, the president of the Utah Senate, Senator Wayne Harper; Jeff Moss, director of the governor's office in economic development; his wife Kim; Franz, the director of the centre of international business and diplomacy; Anthony from the Utah House of Representatives, "the Lower House" as we would call it here - and Kira his wife; and Ryan, a professor of engineering and quantum, to put it correctly. All are here from Utah and I look forward to welcoming them back soon. I thank them, especially Kim and Kira, for putting up with all the meetings from us. Quite a lot of meetings they had over the past number of days. Especially to my friend Wayne, thank you for being here and for your friendship.

Anois, again in alphabetical order, just to be transparent and clear, I call Ms Carberry. She has five minutes to answer all those 50 questions.

Ms Nina Carberry

It is a lot of issues, again, to try to get through. I will start off with the fisheries. It is hugely important. I touched on it with the budget amendments I have made to the MFF. The CFP will hopefully be reviewed during the Irish Presidency. We have a unique opportunity. We were disproportionately affected when Brexit happened from a fisheries perspective. I am working closely with Senator Boyle and I know all the Irish MEPs are doing the best we can for the fisheries and making sure the Commission understands the migratory change in fish. It has not been reviewed in 50 years. We need to make sure a review happens and recognise the challenges we face with overfishing and third countries entering our waters legally. I look forward to working with Senator Boyle and will continue beating the drum on that.

Senator Scahill mentioned a lot of issues. How do we work for our regions? Working closely with REGI is important. Working on the ground with councillors is essential. I met with Séamus Boland, president of the European Economic and Social Committee. It is important to keep connecting with the Irish people we have and using them the best we can. The Senator talked about disinformation. Public representatives have a responsibility to make sure everything they say is factual. That is something I try to do every time I talk. I try to respect it as much as I can. A lot of populism and extremism is happening in the Parliament at the moment and the centrist party, EPP, along with Renew, Greens and Social Democrats, are trying to work towards that.

Active farming and part-time farming are hugely important. There will be lots of discussion but Ireland is well-represented on CAP and we will reinforce the importance of that. Trying to define it will not be an easy discussion either.

I would love to work with Senator Nelson Murray on public liability. I can try to look more into public liability insurance and making it more competitive across the European Union. On the toy safety regulation, there are counterfeit products, particularly from China. It is not adhering to the regulation and we need to be stricter in enforcing safety standards. That is an area we need to focus on.

Senator Conway mentioned the rental fleet. The regulations coming through are at an early stage in the Parliament. I would oppose strict targets that would unfairly and disproportionately affect our small companies and airports. That is something I will put amendments to in the coming weeks and months when it comes to the transport committee.

There was a mention of online safety and tackling platforms to make them more accountable. It is hugely important. We need to work with the Commissioner from a grassroots perspective. We need more education. We can make all the rules and regulations we want - and that is necessary - with our Digital Services Act, Digital Networks Act and Digital Fairness Act. These regulations are all worthwhile and we need to make them more robust but we need a grassroots approach as well. When it comes to education, It Takes A Village in Greystones is doing amazing work on getting the whole community involved and giving children tools to make sure they are protected online. That is working peer to peer. I look forward to having representatives of the initiative in the European Parliament and giving them an idea of what we can see rolled out throughout the EU.

It is a great project that we could see happening throughout the Irish Presidency and I will get behind it.

Going back to the Irish language, it is hugely important. Some of the meetings can happen in Irish. I really support that, and we have a huge opportunity now to advocate for the language. It is something that I am going to try to get better at as well.

One of the Members mentioned TEN-T. It is hugely important. There is a long process involved in TEN-T and getting on that network, but it is hugely important that we keep pushing. Island member states should not be at a disadvantage because we are not in land contact with Europe. That is something that I will be advocating for. We have seen a lot of TEN-T funding heading to the Dublin-Belfast railway line and Dublin and Cork ports. These are all things that have been funded by TEN-T but we need to see it expanded into the western rail corridor and this is something I would support too.

I have run out of time. I am only here to help and communicate and I am delighted to answer any of the Members' questions after we have finished.

Mr. Barry Cowen

I will try to run through some answers to the various questions. For those we cannot answer, we will definitely remain in close contact in the coming weeks to respond to them.

In relation to the issue of Irish school meals supposedly being compromised, I refute that. I disagree with it wholeheartedly. If Mr. Mullooly has evidence of that I ask that he lays it on the table. If he has not, he should withdraw it and let us move on.

The Common Fisheries Policy is under review at present and will be under the Irish Presidency. I expect that the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, will be conversing with Members and the stakeholders with the view to seeking to have that overhauled because, as was rightly said, it is very dated. It does not bear much resemblance to the industry today and the way the quota system has evolved over time with Brexit, the deal with Norway that was alluded to and so forth.

In relation to the issue of MEPs liaising with the Committee of the Regions, regional authorities and local councillors, notwithstanding the added bonus of my neighbour Séamus Boland being president of the Committee of the Regions presently, we have a very good working relationship. We are kept abreast of developments and of their input and asks with a view to ensuring that irrespective of what committee we individually sit on, we reflect their opinions and aspirations, and support policy and legislation that will help rather than hinder them in their efforts to grow their own communities and regions.

On the question on active farming and arriving at a successful definition that takes note and is cognisant of the diversification we have even in Ireland, there are certain parts of the country where food production is more intensive. However, we would like to see no further conditionality on sustainable food production but rewards for those who move with innovation, technology and new practices, and to augment that and build on the success we have had both in our own internal market and beyond Europe's shores in international trade, which I mentioned. That is notwithstanding the progress we have seen in relation to the 7% increase in our beef trade, the 20% increase in our food exports and new markets being opened all the time on foot of European agreements and then carried through by our Government in its efforts to reopen and present new markets.

I am also conscious of those farmers who are on less productive and less arable land, who are not full time and are not profitable but are supplementing their family's income. It is essential that is recognised because in the absence of those farmers we would see depopulation in rural areas, so we have to find a way of monetising that. We have to look at making sure that nature and carbon trading is not an aspiration but a reality.

The issue of nature restoration and the funding towards that was mentioned in this House previously. I know that the previous Government gave a commitment to divide the windfall taxes between the nature fund and the Ireland fund. We saw the augmentation and repurposing of the national development plan, provided for with the finances that I alluded to. I expect the same in relation to nature restoration and rewetting. We made commitments during the course of the last election that no farmer would be forced to engage in that practice bar they wanted to do so voluntarily. However, they have to be rewarded for doing it and there has to be an income benefit to them along the lines of the supplementary income that I mentioned. That is the sort of concept we want to engender and ensure is easily visible in the context of a new Common Agricultural Policy.

In relation to Gaza, first and foremost, Netanyahu, his people, government and army were more than entitled to repel Hamas's illegal incursion and drive it back to its own territory, but under no shape or form would we support or be in favour of what is against the international rule of law and all human rights as we know them, and in total violation of everything we stand for. Irrespective of what we think of the leadership and governance of Israel, I am sure there are plenty of good people there too whom Netanyahu does not act on behalf of.

I commend the Government on the leadership it has shown to many other states within Europe. We are in the minority in many cases in relation to this issue. I and my colleagues in Fianna Fáil did not vote for von der Leyen initially because of the lack of meaningful response in relation to this issue. Some will point to subsequent votes that have happened in the meantime. Those subsequent votes have added value to them in the context that if we get rid of her, we will get rid of the whole Commission, including Michael McGrath and the work he is doing in the whole area of justice and the responsibility he has in that regard. There has been some progress of late. It is moving in a far better direction than it was previously. I remain committed, as do my colleagues of all parties and none, to voice the concerns, worries and aspirations of the Irish people in relation to what they can see is just appalling and disgusting. I could not give Members the words that are needed to describe what I think of Netanyahu as a person and the way in which he carries out his duties supposedly in the name of his people, which I doubt very much would be the case if it were put to a democratic test.

Mr. Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I am delighted that fisheries was brought up. I will clarify my role on the fisheries committee. If an MEP is a member or substitute member of the committee, they can contribute amendments, participate and speak at any committee meeting they want. I am a substitute on the fisheries committee, but no MEP has spoken more often than me on that committee. Some people would like to use the role of substitute as an excuse to hide but that cannot happen because they can actually achieve just as much. It might not be as good for someone's ego but who the hell cares about our ego? As a substitute member, I am now the lead negotiator for our group on the sectoral regulation. That is good news. We will now have seven MEPs in the whole of the European Parliament who will discuss the sectoral regulation on fisheries, and we will have an Irish MEP present there. Whether I am a substitute or a full member is totally and utterly irrelevant as it turns out.

One of the big concerns that I have for fisheries is the fact that ring-fenced funding has gone down from €6 billion to €2 billion. When an MEP is on the agricultural or the PECH committees, it is a bit like going to mammy and she says that she will give you something and then going to daddy and he says that he will give it. However, when you get the two of them together, it is not quite that simple. We on the PECH committee are told not to worry and that we will be able to get extra money for that fund. On the agricultural committee, we are also told that we will be able to get extra money from that fund and not to worry, but if everyone gets extra money there will not be enough money. The reality is we are looking at cuts and we should not be. There is an opinion produced by the committee which is looking for €7 billion and we should be because it is very important.

The issue of the Irish language was touched upon. For a start, the best thing we can do for the Irish language is to guarantee that the people who already speak it can continue to live in their area. The areas we are talking about are areas that are dependent upon small-scale fishers and small-scale farming, but what have we done? We have cut funding to fisheries by 66%, funding to agriculture by 20% and in real terms funding to agriculture has been cut by 68% since 1991.

Were we to maintain that budget, the average payment for farmers this year in Ireland would be around €18,000. That would help an awful lot of people. It would not just help the farmers because I am not a farmer and have never been a farmer. It would not necessarily be a bad thing but I would have a London accent now if it was not for the Common Agricultural Policy because my father would have had to leave again. If it was not for that policy, all the people for whom he put in the windows, doors and fitted cupboards would not have had any money. The hairdressers in my town would not have had any money because my mother would not have been able to go there. An awful lot of money would have been lost.

To go back to the Irish language, without people we will not have an Irish language. We need to protect the industries they are most dependent on. As the shadow rapporteur on that sectoral file, I am placing in a number of amendments to help fishers. I am looking for a fair allocation of resources to coastal and island communities. I am looking for prioritisation of small-scale fishers who have a reduced impact on the marine environment. They represent 87% of fishers in Ireland. People might ask what I am going to do for larger fishers. While there are plenty of other MEPs there, the reality is that even if I was to put all my effort into getting us more quota, as an MEP I have virtually no control over it. What I try to have control over is that the quota we have is fairly distributed and those people are respected. I also have amendments on generational renewal and facilitating a just transition to low-impact fisheries.

We talk about populism. Everyone is capable of populism. Everyone has been guilty of it. We would not be human if we were not. I would say that people complaining about the old Common Agricultural Policy regulation was populism. Virtually none of them ever read it. They said that we need to get rid of it. They banged their drum. Now, what have they done? They have got rid of it. What have we got? We have got something worse. Under the old Common Agricultural Policy, we could have given more money to the environment. We were free to do it if we wanted to. Under the old Common Agricultural Policy, we had national plans - we still have national plans - where we could decide locally. We could have done everything that these people were demanding and had a better policy than the one that is currently coming in. Everyone is capable of populism; not just the people who are being accused of it. There are plenty of populists here. I have tried and will stick to trying not to be Mr. Populist because it does not gain anyone anything. I do not want reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. I want us to implement the one that we currently have and to implement Article 17. We have freedom to do this. Article 17 would support low-impact fishers and small-scale fishers, that is, 87% of fishers in Ireland. I guarantee Senators that the Irish language will do well out of that because fish and animals cannot speak. Biodiversity is very important but we are important too. We need people in these areas and to have that, we need money. There is money there; it is just going to the wrong places.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

On the previous issue, I agree with Senator Flanagan about the-----

Mr. Luke 'Ming' Flanagan

I am not a Senator yet.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I beg your pardon; I meant MEP Flanagan, who is a former Deputy. I agree with him in relation to where things are. Senator Manus Boyle has been out several times. I am a new MEP and people say to me that the origin of this is the Brexit deal. This is where we initially lost out despite promises at the time that we would be considered. I recall in my old job interviewing a European Commissioner and Ministers here and they said the welfare of fishermen in Ireland would be looked after. We lost 24%. That was from the horse's mouth. That is the origin of the deal. Correcting it is not going to be easy. It might be popular of me to say that there are going to be 100 ways of doing it but there is not. While efforts have been made, I was particularly disappointed last December that we did not do better in terms of the negotiations that were going on at that stage. It is a bit like CAP and Mercosur. In the European Commission, you have to form alliances and get people with you around the table. That did not happen last December in the fishery negotiations at that stage.

There was a question regarding the Israeli settlements (prohibition of importation of goods) Bill. The Government has justified the approach it has made on the basis of legal advice that it is going to be limited to goods and does not extend to services. I note the Oireachtas foreign affairs committee's pre-legislative scrutiny supported the inclusion of services. Yet this is now to be disregarded by the Government. What is the point of the foreign affairs committee carrying out this work if it is going to be ignored?

On clarifying my comments, I thank Senators O'Reilly and Flaherty for the kind comments and will reiterate my comments in relation to school meals. Last October or November, a consignment - albeit a small consignment - of beef came from Northern Ireland into this country. The consignment included illegal animal growth promoters called oestradiol. It is carcinogenic. It came from the UK. Last Thursday, I spoke to the Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi to ask him how this could happen. He explained how it happened on two occasions. First, it was through the UK. Second, it was through Antwerp. Three different consignments on three different boats were brought in through Antwerp. He said Antwerp was on top of it. It is frozen and in many cases, it is pre-packed. In the case of Antwerp, new safeguards are there and we are going to hope that they do the job. In the UK, he cannot put his hand on his heart and say that we have safeguards because they are not there.

Mr. Barry Cowen

There is an agreement between the UK and Ireland.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I asked him. There is an agreement that does not provide the same level of audit. If I could finish the point, that is the bottom line. Regarding school meals, they came up in that discussion in relation to who is using them. At no stage, I said it was Irish. I said UK-based frozen meat. That is what came in and was consumed in this country-----

Senator Paraic Brady

No school-----

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

----- by a family. Not in a school situation; in a family situation.

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Mullooly, without interruption.

Mr. Barry Cowen

That is not what Mr. Mullooly said.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

That is what I said last Thursday-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

That is not what he said an hour ago.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

----and that is what I am saying here again today. For the want of clarity on the issue-----

Senator Sharon Keogan

Let the man speak.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

For the want of clarity on the issue-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Mullooly has possession. I ask him to continue without anybody interrupting.

A Senator

Stop talking waffle.

An Cathaoirleach

Please, out of respect for our guests, I ask Members to let them finish their contributions.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

The facts are as follows; at the moment Brazilian beef is not safe on the European list.

Mr. Barry Cowen

It has been stopped.

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry, could I ask-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

There is no school impact.

An Cathaoirleach

Everybody gets their time.

Mr. Barry Cowen

It is pure scaremongering.

An Cathaoirleach

This part is for the MEPs to finalise their contributions to the questions that were asked.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I thank the Cathaoirleach. As a result of that, the Commissioner has said that he requires safeguards to be improved and checked with regards to Brazilian beef before 1 September or it will be off altogether. The focus that we have in the intermediate period is meat from the UK coming in here, including frozen and pre-packed. That includes pre-packed food coming into schools and hospitals in certain cases. I asked the Food Safety Authority of Ireland to investigate this. It has not been in a position to clarify-----

An Cathaoirleach

Hold on. Please. Sorry-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

There is no proof then.

Senator Paraic Brady

What is going on here today is detrimental. We have farmers in this country. That is detrimental. That is absolutely criminal. That is detrimental to our beef sector. Our beef farmers are suffering at this minute in time where beef has fallen every day by 27 cent per kilo and we have a MEP coming into this Chamber. That is detrimental. That is disgusting.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brady-----

Senator Paraic Brady

No way.

An Cathaoirleach

Everybody-----

Senator Joe O'Reilly

On a point of order-----

An Cathaoirleach

No, we have not changed the ruling.

Senator Joe O'Reilly

-----we need clarification for parents sending children to school. We do not want to instill fear. This matter needs clarity. On a point of order, this has to be sorted.

An Cathaoirleach

The question was asked. The guests with us are entitled to answer the questions in any way that they feel appropriate. I am not directing how they do it. Everybody has been given the opportunity to ask their questions. MEPs are entitled to give their contribution. I am going to give more time because there has been a number of interruptions.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I thank the Cathaoirleach. In case there is any doubt about it if the beef coming into a school is Irish beef, there is no issue regarding the health and safety of it. If the meat coming to the school is from the UK, I am asking questions, and the safety Commissioner is asking questions. We need it clarified. I am not prepared to wait until 3 September for this. I have told the Food Safety Authority this very clearly. I could not it make any clearer.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is Mr. Mullooly saying-----

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I have answered this question. I could not make any clearer. If the meat in the school is coming in-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

Mr. Mullooly is saying what he likes, as usual.

Senator Joe Flaherty

He effectively said that every school lunch is getting Brazilian beef.

Senator Paraic Brady

Withdraw that statement.

Senator Joe Flaherty

Withdraw that remark.

Senator Paraic Brady

There is absolutely no evidence of that whatsoever.

Senator Aidan Davitt

On a point of order-----

An Cathaoirleach

Members, a question has been asked. A Member of the European Parliament is answering the question. He and any Member is entitled to answer the question any way they feel fit. That is the rule of the House. We have not changed the way the debate is structured.

Senator Paraic Brady

Hundreds of people working in the school lunches sector-----

Senator Aidan Davitt

As a father of young children, I want that man to withdraw that remark.

Senator Joe Flaherty

He needs to withdraw that remark. He has absolutely no evidence------

Senator Aidan Davitt

He did not address what you said.

An Cathaoirleach

The structure of the debate has been outlined and agreed by the House today.

Senator Joe Flaherty

We are not concerned with the structure of the debate. We are concerned that a scurrilous accusation has been made about school lunches. He does not want to stand over his remarks on Brazilian beef and he has no evidence to confirm that.

An Cathaoirleach

Members are aware, whether a Minister or anybody comes into this House and they are giving their answer, they are giving their answer. The structure-----

Senator Aidan Davitt

He is not standing over what he said.

An Cathaoirleach

Everybody, including Ministers and yourselves, are entitled to answer the questions put to them in the way they feel is appropriate. We have lost more time. I want to go onto our final contribution before the Acting Leader-----

Senator Paraic Brady

He still has 15 minutes to reply.

Senator Aidan Davitt

He has not addressed what he is saying.

An Cathaoirleach

I will give you one more minute. Mr. Mullooly, without interruption. Everyone is aware of all the questions being asked of the Members of the European Parliament. They are answering the questions as they see it.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I will try to wrap it up.

Senator Alison Comyn

He has not addressed at all the question I-----

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I am coming to the question, if I get an opportunity.

An Cathaoirleach

We will give one more minute and I want to-----

Senator Gareth Scahill

Give him two.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I have been in public life as a journalist and a politician for 37 years. My record stands as it stands for 37 years. I am honoured by my peers and others for my work in journalism and my honesty and truth. I do not have to answer questions relating to that. I make the statement for clarity. Irish beef is not a problem. Irish school meals made with Irish beef are not a problem. Beef coming from the UK without proper auditing is a problem.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is it going into schools or not?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Frozen meat from the UK going into schools and elsewhere is a problem.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Name them.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

It is continuing. On the other comments made, I am trying to answer a question-----

An Cathaoirleach

Mr. Mullooly, MEP without interruption please.

Senator Linda Nelson Murray

Can Mr. Mullooly prove that Brazilian beef is going into Irish schools via the hot school meals programme?

An Cathaoirleach

Sorry Senator but-----

Senator Linda Nelson Murray

I am so sorry, but the amount of businesses that will be affected by this-----

An Cathaoirleach

The questions have been asked and I am trying to-----

Senator Linda Nelson Murray

But he is not answering it, with the greatest of respect.

Senator Gareth Scahill

The question was on the initial remark. It is to withdraw it. That was the question.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I am not withdrawing anything. I told the House what I said about UK meat.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is it UK meat or Brazilian meat coming through the UK?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

Senator-----

Senator Aidan Davitt

He should know the difference between UK beef and Brazilian beef.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Is it UK meat or Brazilian beef coming through the UK?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

The problem is Brazilian beef coming through the UK. The Commissioner made it very clear.

An Cathaoirleach

Through the Chair.

Senator Aidan Davitt

I am the father of two kids getting school meals and I want to know should I not do the school meals any more.

An Cathaoirleach

Excuse me. I ask Mr. Mullooly to finalise his contribution because we have gone way over time on his contribution. I know there have been a number of interruptions. I want to get to Maria Walsh, MEP before I ask the Acting Leader and Leas-Chathaoirleach to come in.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I do apologise. To answer Senator Comyn, my settlement from RTÉ, for the record, was less than the amount due to the presenter of "The Late Late Show". I do not have to answer that question.

An Cathaoirleach

I know.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

That was my final settlement. I am answering it anyway. That was the question raised.

Regarding my comments in Brussels and in general, as I said for 35 years I have asked questions. I will continue to ask hard questions. no matter where I am.

Mr. Barry Cowen

Answer them.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

If Mr. Cowen is going to interrupt me-----

An Cathaoirleach

Without interruption, Senator.

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

-----say something parliamentary.

An Cathaoirleach

I ask that questions be directed through-----

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

I will finish with these words. "I've learned a hard lesson. ... I owe apologies, I was sloppy ...". Does Mr. Cowen recognise those words?

Mr. Barry Cowen

With the tanks?

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

They were the ones from Mr. Cowen's colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, when he managed to leave the Chamber even though six votes had been taken in his absence. Does he remember that? In terms of mistakes-----

(Interruptions).

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

That is farcical.

(Interruptions).

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

In terms of mistakes-----

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

On a point of order, the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, is not here to defend himself. That has to be withdrawn.

(Interruptions).

Mr. Ciaran Mullooly

The Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, when I make those comments-----

Mr. Barry Cowen

Usually you would be in attendance.

Senator Sharon Keogan

It is wonderful today that Mr. Mullooly is in the hot seat because it is normally me.

Senator Paraic Brady

On a point of order-----

An Cathaoirleach

No, there is no-----

Senator Joe O'Reilly

Hungry children going to school depend on these meals. That is why we need this clarity.

Senator Paraic Brady

On a point of order-----

An Cathaoirleach

No.

Senator Joe O'Reilly

This is actually not-----

An Cathaoirleach

I call on Ms Maria Walsh.

Senator Paraic Brady

I know we have to move on, but Mr. Mullooly did not rectify the question when I asked about the tanks on the streets of Dublin. Does he withdraw that here today?

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brady-----

Senator Paraic Brady

Were there tanks on the streets of Dublin?

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brady-----

Senator Paraic Brady

He knows well there were not tanks. Will he withdraw it or will he not? Will he answer the question? I want the question answered.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Brady, the next contribution is Ms Maria Walsh MEP.

Senator Joe Flaherty

Senator Comyn deserves a response to her questions. Ciaran Mullooly went from a taxpayer funded job. He subsequently was in two further taxpayer funded jobs and his currently in the EU subsidised by taxpayers-----

An Cathaoirleach

Can I just be clear, what we are debating here-----

Senator Joe Flaherty

The question needs to be answered. How much was his redundancy? Did he understand it as a redundancy payment or a set-up by RTÉ to facilitate it?

An Cathaoirleach

Just to be clear, this is an address to Seanad Éireann by Members of the European Parliament about Europe. What anybody did in a previous job is not the issue before us here today. I call on Ms Maria Walsh, MEP.

Senator Aidan Davitt

I want to know should I ask my kids school meals-----

An Cathaoirleach

Ms Maria Walsh, without interruption.

Ms Maria Walsh

I thank the Cathaoirleach. I will start where the debate finished. To answer Senator Brady's question, I am delighted. I was one of the MEPs to vote in favour of safeguards in the Mercosur trade deal. The debate we had and the misinformation that was shared would not be used in that case. I only have a few minutes and wanted to run through some points.

One point I did not highlight in my earlier interventions was the occupied territories Bill and the stance on the genocide that is happening by Netanyahu. I want to be really clear in my language that when we talk about Israel, it is Netanyahu and allies specifically and not the Jewish or Israeli people being referenced. There seems to misinformation online and offline in that regard. I have been very clear on the stopping of the Israel trade agreement. I am disappointed, in many cases, that services are not being included in the occupied territories Bill. I want to be clear on that.

The occupied territories Bill should not reference only Gaza. Goods and services are coming in and out of the EU from territories in Cyprus that were invaded by Türkiye and many other countries. I mentioned Africa earlier. If we are going to do this, we should do it properly and with good judicial and legal standing.

Senator Boyle's questions on fisheries were answered. It is important that Fine Gael is in the EPP group due to our strong relationship with Commissioner Kadis. We need to build on that. It is not a clear pathway. One could be the loudest in the room in the nosebleed seats and get nothing done or one could be in the Colosseum and try to get stuff done. Sometimes we forget about that in politics. We need to get back to that. Being in the EPP allows us to have those interventions and conversations.

I wanted to pick up on a real issue. I work really hard, along with my team, on gender equality. A question was asked about our trans community and the real issue with women's safety - and evidence is very clear - is that the overwhelming majority of violence against women happens in the home or is committed by someone known to the person. Some 35% of women, more than one in three, have experienced psychological, physical or sexual abuse from an intimate partner. Scapegoating or using other minority groups does absolutely nothing for women's safety. It is a distraction.

I will lean into Senator Mullen's point on pornography. From a European and Irish standpoint, access to porn is, on average about ten to 13 years. I think it is younger. The UK statistics show children younger than seven access pornography.

If we are taking in the realm of the increase of violence online and offline, it is right that we have to look at what Europe can do but we also look at what Ireland can do. We hold a number of tech companies accountable here, or not accountable enough in many cases. The roll-out of the verification tools by the end of the year was led by the EU Commission for this country and any other member state. It is probably the right step to take but we have to also have age-appropriate sexual education in schools. Consent-based conversations need to happen, sadly, at a younger age if children are accessing pornography at the average age of ten here.

Senator Sharon Keogan

No way.

Ms Maria Walsh

I am sorry; I thought the Chair was asking me to wrap up. If anybody has tuned in to the last nearly three hours of this debate, and a lot have, they have seen a lot of negativity about what the European Union is. That is a disgrace. My generation has benefited so greatly. We can live, work, love, study, travel anywhere across 27 member states. Our young people have access to interrailing. Our third level universities are the pinnacle of best practice when it comes to R&D and other investments into our education. We can also look at Erasmus. I refer to what Senator Scahill said. Any euro that gets spent by the Government from EU taxpayers has to be identified because we end up having nationalistic anti-European sentiment. Sadly, we are seeing that more and more. We cannot be ignorant of the fact that 83% of citizens are pro-European.

Our reputations are not permanent; they must be protected, strengthened and earned. We stand at a pivotal point. I hope what we have just seen in the previous intervention a few minutes ago and prior to that about misinformation are called out and that Members hold us accountable, as we hold them. We support councillors and the European Committee of the Regions in putting Ireland at the very core of being pro-European. We bucked the trend. We bucked it in 2024 and we need to continue to do it because, as we all know, equality is very hard fought but very quickly lost.

An Cathaoirleach

Before I call on the Acting Leader, I thank all our MEPs for their contribution and outlining the work they do. As this is broadcast on Oireachtas TV over the coming weeks I hope that the MEPs, having outlined all the committees they are working on, much of which is unknown and unacknowledged. I want to acknowledge it here today. We thank the MEPs for all the work they do on behalf of Ireland at all those committee meetings. There is not a lot of glory and medals won sitting in committee meetings for hours on end for projects that can take years to get across the line, and the small victories that nobody at home will hear about that they are achieving on our behalf. I thank them for that. I will ask the Acting Leader and the Leas-Chathaoirleach to make a few closing remarks.

Senator Garret Ahearn

On behalf of all Senators, I thank the MEPs for being here today. This was a really good initiative that was set up in the previous Seanad. It is very constructive. It is a great opportunity for us to understand what they are doing and it is a great opportunity for the MEPs to outline their priorities and what they are highlighting at a European level. There has always been a little bit of a disconnect. When someone gets elected to Europe, people often say they do not see them for four or five years. That is just the feeling on the ground. They do not know what is happening and they are a little bit disconnected from European politics. As many of the MEPs said, there are so many benefits from membership of the European Union. That is why a discussion like today's is so important in outlining those benefits.

A lot of the discussion has been about the EU Presidency. There is a huge opportunity for Ireland to prioritise issues for Ireland, whether it is CAP negotiations, fisheries or defence and security. We can play a leadership role in the continued support for Ukraine. There was a positive result in the Hungarian elections. We can continue to play a leadership role on the EU-Israel Association Agreement.

I smiled when Mr. Flanagan was talking about people who talk about the CAP but do not read the documentation. Mr. Mullooly talked about the occupied territories Bill. He clearly has not read it because it is stated about five times in the Bill that we had not availed of the recommendation from the Attorney General. It says so many times in the report - if he reads it - that the recommendation is really important in delivering a decision. We spent 30 hours at the foreign affairs committee meeting hundreds of representatives and formulated a position, but it was not based on the Attorney General's advice. We all agree that such advice is a critical part of making a decision on policy and whether it is implementable.

These sessions work really well when MEPs are here, but they only have credibility if all MEPs are here. It is important to recognise and thank them for that. We all have different views and perspectives but the MEPs are all here. It is important that I make the point on behalf of Senators - not every MEP may be aware of this - we conduct ourselves differently in this House. There are other parliaments in Europe and in the other House in this building where people conduct themselves differently and use opportunities to mislead people and to scaremonger. This is not a House where we do it. It is very disappointing. As has been said, people watching here today would be very worried about comments that were made. I find it extremely worrying that when people stand up here to highlight it, there is smiling on the other side. That is very disappointing. I ask people to reflect on that. We have a responsibility as public representatives to reflect on that. We can have our views but we should not smile at the concerns that people on this side are outlining. I thank the MEPs for the work they are doing. It is a tough job - as someone said before as an MEP. It is tough on families. We recognise that. We thank them for being here today.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

In my closing remarks, I sincerely thank Ms Nina Carberry, MEP, Mr. Barry Cowen, MEP, Mr. Luke ‘Ming’ Flanagan, MEP, Mr. Ciaran Mullooly, MEP and Ms Maria Walsh, MEP, for coming here today and for their contributions. We are five weeks away from the European Presidency on 1 July. It is important that we have this conversation. As Ireland's voice in the European Parliament, our MEPs play a vital role in shaping decisions that affect the everyday lives of Irish citizens. We are very grateful for the insight they have shared with us.

Today's discussion also highlights the practical impact of the European Union but also its deeper importance. The European Union stands for shared democratic values, respect for human dignity and the rule of law. It continues to be a cornerstone of peace, security and co-operation across the Continent at a time those principles are more important than ever. This engagement also underlines the importance of maintaining and strengthening the connection between this House and our representatives in the European Parliament. Today has helped to deepen our understanding of its relevance and the crucial role our MEPs play within it. The co-operation between Seanad Éireann and our MEPs is greatly valued. I hope we will continue to build on this relationship in the time ahead, in particular during the Presidency of the European Council. I thank all Senators for their contributions and participation. I again thank our MEPs for their time and their continued service to the people of Ireland. I wish them all the very best of luck for the future, especially as we go into the Presidency.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 27 May 2026