Sharon Keogan: Mercosur and EU deals threaten Irish sovereignty

Colleagues, I want to thank the MEPs for coming before us today. I want to direct my remarks in particular to those representatives here who are members of the government parties and also those who sit with the EPP and Renew groups because these groups form a central part of the governing coalition at the EU level. Last week in this chamber we were debating the Canada Trade Day, or 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 were debating 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 of 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, and again and again, and Irish MPs, and to your credit, sometimes diverge from those European political groups when it comes to that final vote. We saw that dynamic clearly in the more recent legislation, although I note that in the case of the CETA in 2017, Irish MEPs largely followed their party group lines in support of the agreement, even as concerns were raised domestically. But regardless, even when diversions do occur, we still end up here, in this House, dealing with the consequences of decisions that have already effectively been made. So I want to ask a more fundamental question. What action do you take before the vote? What have you 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 Mercosur and the Migration Pact? Because we all know that the vote is not the decisive moment. The real shaping of these measures happens months, even years in advance. If that is the case, if the direction of travel within these groups consistently produces outcomes that are misaligned with Ireland's national interests, then I think it is a fair question to ask, why remain within those structures without fundamentally changing their course? I want to turn to the Mercosur deal, and I would ask each of you very directly, what is your position? Do you believe this deal should be rejected outright, or do you 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 are 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 or involved directly in the deal have serious issues with corruption, and some struggle to maintain state control over their own territories. So 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 in 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 is still part of a wider trend—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 would ask you for your views on that directly. Do you 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 Finne Gael representatives, what is your 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 derelict of duty for Ireland not to be present at the table? Colleagues, my concern is not with any one measure in isolation, but it is a broader trajectory—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 interests. Go raibh maith agat.