Louis O'Hara (Galway East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

77. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the engagements she has had in relation to the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [21739/26]

Peter Cleere (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

90. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade for an update on recent developments regarding Mercosur; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [22524/26]

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

119. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade for a report on any engagements or meetings she has had in respect of the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement since January 2026. [22879/26]

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

132. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the measures she is taking to ensure the Mercosur trade deal is not provisionally implemented before a case is heard in the Court of Justice of the European Union; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [11691/26]

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

144. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if she has raised any objection with the European Commission in respect of the decision to provisionally apply the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement. [22877/26]

John McGuinness (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Newsome Drennan will introduce Question No. 77 on behalf of Deputy O'Hara.

Natasha Newsome Drennan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On Monday, the EU told Mercosur countries that the trade deal would be provisionally applied from 1 May. What engagements has the Minister had regarding the EU-Mercosur trade agreement? Has she told the Commissioner that forcing through this trade deal is not acceptable?

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 77, 90, 119, 132 and 144 together.

In the 2025 programme for Government, the Government very clearly committed to working with like-minded EU countries to respond to the very real concerns of Irish farmers and to defend our interests as regards the Mercosur trade deal. On 9 January 2026, EU member states voted on the EU-Mercosur agreement. This vote was carried by a qualified majority. Ireland voted clearly and unambiguously against the approval of the agreement. I and other Government Ministers, along with officials, have engaged extensively at EU level to voice our concerns about the agreement. This engagement was sustained over time and took place across multiple forums and in both formal and informal settings, with fellow EU member states and the European Commission. These included European Council meetings; sectoral Council meetings, including the Foreign Affairs Council for trade ministers; bilateral engagements in EU member state capitals; numerous phone calls at ministerial level; working party meetings; and ongoing direct dialogue with the European Commission.

Along with my Government colleagues, I have consistently emphasised Ireland’s requirements for credible, legally binding commitments on matters relating to trade and sustainable development, including climate, biodiversity and deforestation protections, as well as clear protections and assurances with regard to incomes of farmers in Ireland. As a result of this engagement and efforts made by Ireland and like-minded member states in the Council of the EU, it is important to state that hard-won improvements have been made to the overall agreement package, including a new legal Act to operationalise bilateral safeguards to protect sensitive products; a financial safety net for farmers; strengthened sanitary and phytosanitary, SPS, controls, along with a 50% increase in audits and checks; and commitments on the alignment of production and SPS standards, notably on pesticides and animal welfare. The Commission also committed on 7 January to enhance the availability of CAP funding to farmers and rural communities under the proposed new multi-annual financial framework, MFF.

The Government takes note of the decision of the European Parliament to refer the deal to the European Court. The Government also takes note of the statement of the European Commission President, as the Deputy has said, that the Commission will apply the EU-Mercosur trade agreement on a provisional basis. Speaking after the European Council meeting in January, President von der Leyen indicated that a decision on provisional application of the agreement would not be needed until at least one Mercosur country had completed its ratification procedures. In late February, Argentina and Uruguay both secured parliamentary approval in their respective parliaments. Brazil and Paraguay have now followed suit with their own internal ratification procedures. While the Council of the EU voted in January to grant authority to the Commission to apply the agreement on a provisional basis, which it is entitled to do and is legally allowed to do under the treaties, Ireland made it very clear that it did not support that vote. It is important to note that President von der Leyen emphasised the "provisional" aspect of this announcement on application. In line with the EU treaties, the agreement can only be fully concluded once the European Parliament has given its consent. Obviously, it cannot consent, and it has said it will not consent until that legal process is concluded.

Along with my Government colleagues, I will continue to engage with the European Commission and other EU member states in the time ahead to ensure the full implementation of the commitments obtained from the Commission to address our concerns with the agreement, including the safeguard provisions we fought for and which many MEPs made clear were necessary to support and protect the interests of our own farmers. It is important to stress that we have just had conversations about the need to diversify and to focus on other markets. We are an open trading economy and we have always supported trade agreements. However, we have to make sure when it comes to our sensitive industries and our most important sectors, like the agrifood sector, that our farmers are not penalised because of the standards we have set ourselves at a European level. These are the very clear reasons we voted against the Mercosur trade deal and had significant concerns with the deal. We wanted to find a way forward, but it was not possible at that time. We have been very clear in our objection to the Mercosur deal in its current format. That has not changed, even with its implementation on a provisional basis.

Natasha Newsome Drennan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are very real concerns for consumers and farmers regarding the risk this trade deal poses. We have seen the recall of Brazilian beef over the presence of banned cancer-linked drugs. God only knows how much more drug-riddled beef has been sold in Ireland and across the EU, because the levels of laboratory testing are an utter embarrassment. Does the Minister know the percentage of laboratory checks that are carried out? Would she like to hazard a guess? It is 1.7%. Is it the Minister's position that this is an acceptable amount of testing, especially considering all the recalls last year? To me, there is an air of secrecy about it all. Last year, 172 tonnes of beef came in from Brazil. When I asked where it went, the trade data did not even summarise the destination or the end user, so there is no record.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have been clear in our objection to this for the reasons the Deputy has outlined, and for many other reasons also. It is very clear that this Government, our farmers and consumers have real concerns about the type of product that may be entering into the EU. It is for that reason that we opposed this. As I have said, as a country we are in the economic position we are in because we are an open trading economy. This is not the position we would normally take. However, we had real and genuine concerns, as did our farmers, and that is why we voted against it. The position of the EU - this is the way it works - is that we cannot stop this from moving ahead if there is a qualified majority. The Taoiseach voted against this at the European Council meeting where President von der Leyen made it clear that she wanted to move ahead with the temporary or provisional implementation. We made our position clear at that time, as we have done throughout all of this engagement and process. However, we were not successful and the vote itself passed for the reasons I have outlined.

At European level, we have pushed- as have our MEPs, particularly Fine Gael MEPs and Government MEPs - to make sure there are more safeguards in place to try to respond to some of the concerns the Deputy has raised and farmers have rightly raised.

I will go into more detail about those mentioned. We have key commitments, including enhanced monitoring. The Commission will follow market trends closely. It will be able to identify any risks ahead of time, allowing more space to react. There will be full transparency. The Commission sends a monitoring report to the Council and the European Parliament every six months to assess the impacts of imports. Swift action to launch an investigation is progressing. In most cases, the Commission will launch an investigation within five days if there is more than a 5% increase in annual imports of a product or if import prices are at least 5% lower than prices of the same or competing EU products. Clarity on possible measures can consist of a temporary suspension of the schedule of tariff reductions of the product concerned, whether it is beef or any other product, or a reduction of the tariff preference back to the MFN or base rate, whichever is the lowest level.

On top of that, we have a new unity safety net for crisis measures. Essentially, this is a fund with a total capacity of €6.3 billion. This effectively doubles the current agricultural reserve. This reinforced support will help to safeguard our farmers, particularly at times of market diversification, market disturbances and growing geopolitical uncertainties, of which we know there are many. In practice, the European Commission will monitor market developments closely once the agreement is being gradually implemented, particularly with regard to the agricultural sector. We are very specific and focused with regard to the agricultural sector. On 7 January, the Commission also committed to enhancing the availability of the CAP as well, which I think is absolutely essential to fund our farmers and our rural communities under the proposed new multi-annual financial framework, MFF. As the Deputy will know, with the upcoming Presidency, Ireland will be playing a significant role in progressing the multi-annual financial framework, or budget, for the EU, and the CAP and support for our farmers and our rural communities will be an absolute priority for us.

Natasha Newsome Drennan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Commission clearly holds the Dáil in low esteem. It has consistently failed to reply to concerns raised by me through the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food. We have written to the Commission on a number of occasions since November, which was the first time, then in January and then again as recently as yesterday. We have been seeking answers and clarity, and silence is all we have been met with. The European Parliament voted to refer this deal to the European Court of Justice because of concerns around its legality. This was a democratic vote from representatives of the people of the EU. The Commission has opted to ignore elected representatives here in Ireland and across the EU and pushed on with the deal regardless. Is the Minister not concerned at the blatant disregard for the democratic process?

I am a suckler farmer. These are the farmers who are going to be selling weanlings. Their product will not get to the shelves for another year, so they are the ones who are going to be caught. I have asked for the Commission to write back to us but it is just ignoring us. To me, this smells something rotten. Nobody seems to be answering the questions.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I cannot respond in respect of who the Deputy might have engaged with. I do not know who the Deputy has engaged with. There are certainly many different channels available, even through Sinn Féin’s own MEPs, at European level where questions can be asked and responded to.

Natasha Newsome Drennan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was trade and agriculture.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

While there has been a practice in terms of the Parliament voting for and consenting to a treaty, the EU treaties do not require European Parliament consent before the application of a trade agreement. Whether that has been the case in the past, the decision was taken in this instance, given the size of the deal itself, to move forward with a provisional application of the trade agreement. Again, under the EU treaties, the Council of the EU can decide to apply an international agreement provisionally before it is concluded and enters into force. The decision taken by the Parliament to send it to the court or to put it through a legal process has, in effect, delayed the Parliament’s ability to be able to vote on it. The decision was taken by the Commission to implement this provisionally because we do not know the length of time it will take before it comes back to the Parliament.

When this was put to the European Council, our Taoiseach and this Government voted against it. I cannot be any clearer in saying that. We have been clear from the outset that we were not happy with the measure put in place, albeit I believe it is much better and stronger because of the influence of Government MEPs at a European level. We have, however, been consistent in saying it has not gone far enough. Notwithstanding that, because the Mercosur countries have implemented this in their own countries and their own parliaments, the EU treaties do allow for the Commission to move forward with the provisional application, and that is what it is doing now.

Natasha Newsome Drennan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have huge issues with the fact that it does not come back to us.

Helen McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can check that.