Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. I dtús báire ba mhaith lion Seachtain na Gaeilge shona a ghuí ar gach duine. Gabhaim buíochas leis na Teachtaí ar fad as ucht a gceisteanna. Is iomaí ábhar ata luaite acu agus déanfaidh mé mo dhícheall iad ar fad a fhreagairt. B'fhéidir go dtosóidh mé leis na ceisteanna maidir leis an gCreat Airgeadais Il-bhliantúil, an MFF, given the fact that this is what the European Council and the overall discussion today is about. I will start by wishing everyone here a happy Seachtain na Gaeilge. I will try to answer all the questions in the best way I possibly can.

Regarding the MFF, a lot of the discussion has been in respect of the CAP. Deputy Harkin is right in stating that there is a unified position on the CAP proposals. There are some in Europe who feel that a smaller EU should mean a smaller budget. With the UK leaving, we are looking at a hole worth between €65 billion and €70 billion. However, as Deputy Richmond rightly pointed out, while it may be a smaller EU now, we hope that it will get larger again. There have been discussions on the enlargement process and opening up the accession negotiations for North Macedonia and Albania. We have new and competing priorities as well as more traditional priorities such as the CAP. We have consistently said that we are willing to pay more, but that is not at the expense of traditional policies like the CAP. I refer also to the Cohesion Fund, from which we have benefited hugely in the past, and other policies including those relating to Horizon, Erasmus and climate action, which is a priority for most Members here.

We know how much the CAP benefits Irish farmers. It provides employment for 180,000 people, which represents approximately 7.7% of our overall workforce, and contributes in the region of 7.5% of our GNI. That has an extremely important knock-on effect, providing safe, easily accessible and cheap food, protecting our environment and protecting our rural towns, villages and local economies. This is why we have consistently stated - we did so as recently as a week and a half ago when an extraordinary meeting took place to try to reach an agreement on the MFF - that we would not be accepting the current proposals. A new negotiating box was presented which suggested further changes in the form of an increase of 2% for Pillar 1 and a reduction of 8% in respect of Pillar 2. There was further flexibility between both pillars, but this would result in a loss of hundreds of millions of euro for Irish farmers. This is something we simply cannot accept.

There have been suggestions from some Deputies that while the CAP budget is decreasing we will spend more funding on security and defence. The overall suggested figure for security and defence is 1.3% of the overall budget. The overall suggested figure for the CAP is 30% of the overall budget. While it is not enough, it is still a significant amount. We must ensure that this figure increases even more.

Regarding EU values, it has been suggested that the new MFF should include conditionality mechanisms to be applied where member states are in breach of the rule of law. This would apply to all member states in the same way. This is something we fully support. This mechanism would be new to the MFF. I hope it would take into account a lot of the concerns that member states have had around some of the countries that have been mentioned here, such as Poland and Hungary. The General Affairs Council, which met last week and which I attended, did not go into detail on the rule of law. However, we will be having further discussions when the General Affairs Council meets again in two weeks. The rule of law will be on the agenda and I will be raising some of the concerns Deputies have raised here. We have had several hearings on Poland through the Article 7 process. While we have seen progress in certain areas, we have also seen regression in certain areas. New mechanisms, separate to the MFF, have been proposed by the European Council. These will not duplicate the Article 7 process. We hope these will enable progress in certain areas. I share Deputes' grave concerns on some of the new issues which have been raised, particularly regarding the LGBT community. This is not something that we should be accepting within the European Union and it is certainly something I will be raising with my colleagues.

Regarding the coronavirus and Ministers with responsibility for health, my understanding is that there is will be a meeting of the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council configuration, EPSCO, tomorrow. I am not sure whether Ministers are travelling or whether it will be carried out by means of videoconferencing. I know that Finance Ministers spoke about this issue in a teleconference yesterday and the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, has met many of his European colleagues to discuss how we can protect all of our citizens. Any of the advice we are taking is being replicated in other member states, particularly when it comes to travel. A Deputy asked how we can advise against travelling to certain regions but not offer advice to those who are coming from those regions. We can only offer advice to our own citizens. We can only give our own view, based on medical evidence, of the best thing to do. Telling individuals not to travel to certain regions has not been welcomed by the countries concerned but we felt it was the right thing to do to protect public health. This was not discussed at the European Council meeting we are discussing today, but I expect that it will be a topic of discussion at the European Council at the end of March.

Regarding Brexit and the overall discussions, I have been in the Chamber since Mr. Michel Barnier and the UK Government gave their presentations today. However, I very much welcome the confirmation by the UK and Mr. Barnier that they will uphold and adhere to everything that was agreed in the Irish protocol. That is extremely important from our point of view. I have also been informed that an oversight committee will be put in place to oversee the implementation of the protocol. This body will not change what has already been agreed in any way. It concerns the implementation of the protocol. It is due to meet on 30 March. There will be representatives from Ireland, Northern Ireland, the UK and the EU. We will receive regular updates. Regarding updates on overall progress, Mr. Barnier met the General Affairs Council a week and a half ago. He will continue to update us regularly in the same manner. I do not think a timeline has been set, but he will continuously update us as he sees fit. Regarding the possibility of reneging on the protocol, given the fact that this is international law we expect the UK to fulfil its obligations and it has made that commitment today. We will certainly be keeping an eye on that.

There were questions on timelines for the MFF. Many people would have liked to reach an agreement at the previous Council meeting. Such an agreement is probably some way off at this stage. The matter is not on the agenda for the March European Council meeting, although I thought it might be. That might change depending on the level of engagement between President Charles Michel and the member states. The sooner we can get it implemented the better. It needs to go before the European Parliament, which cannot amend or change what is put before it but can reject it. Given the fact that the Parliament's preferred overall figure was 1.3% of GNI and the current proposals are at 1.074%, there will be difficult conversations between the Parliament and the Council. The sooner we have those conversations the better.

I was asked if we have a bottom line on the CAP. The Taoiseach has clearly stated that we cannot accept the proposals that have been put forward. We cannot accept paying more if our farmers are going to get less. That is not going to change.

See this speech in context