Dáil debates

Tuesday, 8 December 2020

Ceisteanna (Atógáil) - Questions (Resumed) - Ceisteanna ar Sonraíodh Uain Dóibh - Priority Questions

Trade Agreements

6:30 pm

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

32. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he has completed an assessment on the potential impact on the Irish agrifood sector of the EU-Mercosur trade deal. [41597/20]

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the Minister was on this side of the House, he joined our party in supporting a resolution that called for the then Government to reject the EU-Mercosur trade agreement. He did so for all the right reasons. The programme for Government rowed back on that and committed to a review of the deal. Anyone who has examined the agreement from an environmental or Irish agricultural viewpoint knows that it could be devastating. Will the Minister update the House on his Department's work on the deal in the interests of Irish farmers?

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for his question on the assessment of the potential impact on the agrifood sector of the EU-Mercosur deal. As was stated at the time of last year's EU-Mercosur political agreement, Ireland was disappointed with the inclusion of a 99,000-tonne tariff-rate quota for beef from Mercosur countries. If ratified, this quota would be phased in under the agreement in six equal tranches over five years. Of the quota, 55% is for fresh high-quality beef, with the remainder being frozen.

The former Taoiseach and current Tánaiste, Deputy Varadkar, announced at the time that a whole-of-government review of the agreement's economic and sustainability impacts on Ireland would be undertaken. This research is being led by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, which has overall responsibility for trade policy, with specialist input and assistance from my Department. Implement Consulting Group was requested to carry out this work and the report is due to be completed shortly. It will help to inform Ireland's approach to the ratification process, which is expected to commence in the first half of 2021 during the Portuguese EU Presidency.

Notwithstanding the review, I am concerned about the impacts that such a trade deal could have on our livestock sector. There are potential positives, but we should be concerned about the possibility of beef produced less efficiently coming into the EU. The EU needs to look on the trade agreement in that light. There must be equivalence between reductions within the EU and what we expect of imports entering the Union. This is particularly the case from the points of view of sustainability and the environment. The 99,000 tonnes of beef that are referred to in the deal should be considered in that regard. The tariff-rate quota's potential impact on European beef production, and Irish beef production in particular, is concerning.

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed by the Minister's response. He did not accept the exact same speech when it was read to him by his Fine Gael predecessor when he was in opposition. Last week, we learned that 11,088 sq. km of forest had been destroyed in Brazil between the start of August 2019 and the end of July 2020 to make way for beef ranches. That beef is being produced at a very low cost because of the mechanism Brazil uses and it is being exported to the EU. Substantial quantities of Brazilian beef are already being sold in EU markets. The Mercosur deal will simply allow a further 100,000 tonnes of it to be imported tariff-free. This will be devastating and run counter to every assertion about the environment.

The Minister suggested that there were some benefits to Ireland from the deal. I would love it if he outlined what they were. How could a report of any description tell him that they would outweigh the deal's devastating impact, particularly in the context of Brexit?

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The concern about the Mercosur agreement relates to its beef aspect and the 99,000 tonnes of tariff-rate quota. Wider trade agreements have a benefit for Ireland, including our agrifood industry. We export 90% of all of our agricultural produce. As such, being able to trade internationally is important.

The part of the Mercosur agreement that I am concerned about is the tariff-rate quota of 99,000 tonnes, particularly in terms of how it is produced in Mercosur countries. There must be an equivalence of standards with those we apply to the sustainability of our produce, especially in terms of the carbon footprint.

Completing the review of the impacts is an appropriate way of considering this issue and informing us as we proceed. As I have outlined clearly at all times, however, the 99,000-tonne quota is something that I remain concerned about. It will be the matter on which I approach this deal as Minister.

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister knows what the outcome of the report will be, namely, that the deal will be a bad one for Ireland. He also knows what the deal's benefits are. They accrue to the German car manufacturing sector. That is why the Irish Government will not stand up and say that the deal needs to be rejected. I believe the Government's position is that environmental concerns primarily will lead to such a public outcry that the EU will eventually have to abandon the deal. The Government will ensure that the deal is rejected without ever having to stand up for the Irish people and Irish farmers. I find that a cowardly approach. The Minister should stand up on behalf of the Government and say that this deal and deals like it are not in the interests of consumers, the environment or food production in the long term and should be rejected. The signal we are sending by refusing to reject this outright tells countries such as Brazil that they can continue destroying the environment in the name of food production. That is shameful and I call on the Minister to change tack in a way his predecessor would not.

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy will find that I am consistent in outlining my concerns about the 99,000-tonne beef aspect. I have also pointed out to him the wider value of trade to Irish agrifood. The approach from his party is anti-trade in general. It is opposed to many of our free trade agreements, for example, the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, which has been positive for the agrifood-----

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So was Fianna Fáil when it was in opposition.

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No, we were not.

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, it was.

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Certainly not.

Photo of Matt CarthyMatt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Fianna Fáil Senators sat-----

Photo of Seán Ó FearghaílSeán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister without interruption.

Photo of Charlie McConalogueCharlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have always been consistent on the positive aspects of trade while also being clear on any issue of concern. I have been clear about my concerns regarding the beef aspect of the Mercosur deal.

It is appropriate we deal in logic and apply appropriate process to how we consider everything as a Government. That is why there is an impact assessment, which the Deputy is asking me about today. Yet, however, he is prejudging and looking to jump ahead of that. I believe the appropriate thing is to wait for that to be completed to inform our view. Notwithstanding that, I have outlined the concern I have about the beef aspect of the Mercosur deal, in particular.