Sharon Keogan challenges MEPs on EU-India mobility, DSA, and rights
Sharon Keogan addressed EU-India trade and mobility negotiations, a recent EU resolution on abortion and trans recognition, and the Digital Services Act. She challenged MEPs over demographic impacts, national competence on abortion and sex-based categories, and safeguards against algorithmic suppression of lawful Irish political dissent.
EU-India trade and mobility
Sharon Keogan cited official figures that Ireland's Indian population rose from 59,600 to 70,000 in a single year and said it is on track to become the largest foreign national group in the state. She asked whether MEPs, naming Mr Kelly and Mr Keller because of their committee roles, raised concerns about the demographic impact on infrastructure and social services and whether they support labour mobility being written into trade packages.
Abortion rights and trans recognition
She criticised a proposed resolution to enshrine abortion as an EU fundamental right as potentially embedding abortion access within EU-level rights architecture despite assurances in Lisbon, Nice and previous referenda that abortion would remain a national competence. On the recognition of trans women as women, she asked what legal assessments have been carried out on implications for member states whose equality, healthcare, sports and education frameworks rely on sex-based categories and whether EU-level enforcement would breach the principle of subsidiarity.
Digital Services Act and platform oversight
Keogan warned that Ireland hosts the European headquarters of major platforms now under Commission oversight and noted that political content has been labelled systemic risk or disinformation across Europe, with elections cancelled. She cited the US House Judiciary Committee's characterisation of such actions as electoral interference and asked what safeguards exist to ensure lawful Irish political dissent - including criticism of migration policy - is not algorithmically suppressed under DSA compliance pressure, and whether MEPs assessed sovereignty implications of shifting tech supervision from Dublin to Brussels.
Direct questions to MEPs and accountability
Throughout the address she put direct, yes-or-no questions to MEPs about labour mobility in trade deals, the demographic and infrastructure consequences of mobility concessions, legal assessments on trans recognition, and the sovereignty effects of centralising tech supervision, pressing for clear accountability from elected representatives.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Thank you Caheerlach and thank you to all of you for coming in here this afternoon. But time is short so I'll jump right in. First on the EU, India trade and mobility negotiations. Ireland's Indian population rose from 59,600 to 70,000 in a single year. And it is on track to become the largest foreign national group in the state. This is happening while governments claim migration is being tightened. So I ask our MEPs, Mr Kelly and Mr Keller in particular because you sit on the ITRC and the ECON committees. Did any of you raise concerns about the demographic impact on our infrastructure and social services of these mobility concessions in the EU India deal? And do you support labour mobility being written into trade packages? Yes, yes or no. Because you cannot tell the Irish people migration is being restricted while supporting expanded inflows in Brussels. Second on the recent resolution to respectively enshrine abortion as an EU fundamental right and to emphasise the full recognition of trans women as women. On the former, Irish voters were repeatedly assured in Lisbon, Nice and previous referenda that abortion would remain a national competence. Yet the proposed initiative would embed abortion access within EU level rights architecture. So I ask, do you accept that this contradicts what Irish voters were told? On the latter, the recognition of trans women as women. Can you explain what legal assessments have been carried out on the implications for member states whose equality, healthcare, sports, education and other frameworks rely on sex-based categories? And do you accept that enforcing recognition at EU level may breach the principle of subsidiarity overriding national competence on how sex and gender are defined in law? You cannot promise one thing during referenda and deliver the opposite when in Brussels. Third on the Digital Services Act. Ireland hosts the European HQ of all major platforms now under Commission's oversight. Across Europe, we have seen political content branded as systemic risk or disinformation. And we have seen elections cancelled. I spoke about this issue last week. And it should be noted that this is something which has been called electoral interference by the US House Judiciary Committee. So what safeguards exist to ensure that lawful Irish political dissent, including criticism of migration policy and other uncomfortable issues, is not algorithmically suppressed under DSA compliance pressure? And did our MEPs assess the sovereignty implications of shifting tech supervision from Dublin to Brussels? Thank you very much.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
