Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

On post-European Council statements last week, I used some of my time to discuss the Mercosur deal from a number of perspectives, but not particularly that relating to Irish beef. I will begin now with those general points. The first relates to trade agreements generally and the need to proof them against climate change and the undermining of workers' rights. Free trade agreements include the investor-state dispute settlement, ISDS, which we have debated on many occasions. It is a system which threatens public budgets and the environment. At the heart of ISDS is a mechanism for foreign investors to sue national governments. Recent examples include two oil firms which used ISDS to avoid paying tax in Vietnam and a similar case in Croatia. There was also an example in France where a company was able to weaken a climate change law by threatening an ISDS suit. ISDS is biased in favour of the interests of investors at the expense of the public interest because the public cannot sue the companies involved on human rights grounds.

I would like to mention another aspect of Mercosur to which I drew attention last week. Recently, representatives of over 350 civil society organisations sent a letter to the EU asking it to halt the negotiations on the basis of the deteriorating human rights and environmental conditions in Brazil. In April, 600 scientists and representatives of more than 300 indigenous groups called on the EU to support human rights and sustainable development in light of increased human rights violations and threats to indigenous peoples and their lands in ecologically valuable areas. Civil society in Brazil is under severe threat because of President Bolsonaro's campaign of ending any form of activism. Under a plan he is implementing, the Brazilian Government has the power to supervise and monitor the activities and actions of international agencies and non-governmental organisations in Brazil that are drawing attention to these matters. It is telling that the Brazilian foreign affairs and environment ministers are global warming deniers and the Brazilian department of climate change has been abolished.

We debated climate change last week. Is there any realisation that massive numbers of cattle in Brazil need grazing land? Some of this land is being provided by taking lands belonging to indigenous people and removing forests that are valuable from a biodiversity perspective. At the same time, Irish farmers are being asked to grow more trees. The irony is just in the middle of it. It is totally illogical because we are not being loyal to what we have been saying about climate change recently.

It is incredible that it has taken almost 20 years to get to this point. It is still not right. Twenty years ago, there was little or no discussion about climate change. This is the first area that must be re-examined because of what we now realise. The second area is human rights and labour rights, which should be central to trade agreements. A new business and human rights committee has finally been set up with a chairperson and a meeting is planned. Will that committee have a role in examining the Mercosur deal from a labour rights perspective? That is what the committee is supposed to be doing.

We know what is involved in this deal. The EU is Mercosur's largest trade and investment partner and second largest business, trade and goods partner. The EU is the biggest foreign investor in the area. Mercosur is a major investor in Europe. In the middle of all of this, a trade war is taking place between the US and China. Venezuela was suspended from Mercosur in 2017. We can see that there is a political aspect to this as well.

We are all very concerned about food safety. We do not know enough about what is being fed to cattle in Mercosur countries. The details we have are very disturbing. We know it is going to be challenging for Ireland and for agriculture here. The Irish beef sector is dominated by big farmers. We are conscious of how cattle are fed. It is good to see movement among small farmers, who are becoming more proactive in taking on the big farmers in terms of the kind of meat they are producing. It is possible that there are opportunities here. There is space for the smaller farmers.

The Mercosur deal has been seen as a landmark decision and a truly historic moment. We know that tariffs for the Mercosur countries have been eliminated. There will be increased access to the EU market for agricultural goods from those countries. There will be an improved export environment for the EU. There is a perception that agriculture is the trade-off to facilitate the gains being made elsewhere.

If the forthcoming Argentinian elections bring change, it is possible that Argentina will not stay in Mercosur. The opposition leader, Alberto Fernández, has said that there is nothing to celebrate in the agreement, but lots of things to worry about. As we know, there are concerns throughout Europe.

Many advocates of trade deals use all the usual clichés in pointing to the liberal economic agenda, referring to trickle-down economics and suggesting that growth equates to prosperity. We know trade deals like this one prioritise the interests of large multinational companies above all else. That is essentially what this deal is doing. It is disappointing that it has taken a trade deal that affects agriculture in this country to bring about a reasonable conversation on the merits of trade deals. This issue had gone off the agenda.

It has been suggested that the German car industry is at the centre of this. There is a belief that this deal is a back door for EU cars to get into South American countries. Much more scrutiny is needed in this regard. The number of people working in the lobbying industry in Brussels is 30,000 and counting. According to one critic, it is like an invasion from the corporates there. We know how much influence this €1 billion industry is having on legislation. We need to be aware of all the lobbying that is going on and of whose interests are being looked after and whose services are being paid for.

See this speech in context