Ciaran MULLOOLY

Policy topics Ciaran MULLOOLY is active on

What Ciaran MULLOOLY has said (80)

• 2026-07-16 “(11:38:39 - 11:42:40): Thank you, chair. And I'd like to welcome my fellow countryman, Minister Chambers, to the Reggie Committee. I do so on behalf of the Renew Europe Group. I'd like to wish you well for the presidency. You have a busy six months ahead of you. I suppose, you know, the backdrop to your arrival, minister, is the new structure at the NRPPs. You've already heard from colleagues about our concerns. So I'm going to try and keep our questions straightforward to you. But it's on behalf of every member's desk. It's not a question for an Irish person. It's for our chair. Will we have the regional assemblies and the local authorities at the table when it comes to the final conclusion of NRPPs? Will we have that say? That's what our members want right across this region. Because, otherwise, there's a feeling in this chamber and in our committee on a regular basis that what we're actually seeing is renationalization of funds, that the funds have been sent from Brussels back to Dublin and that you and your colleagues around the cabinet table will make the decisions for the regions of Ireland in the future. And I think members across the board here are opposed to that. Peace Plus has been mentioned on the ongoing work that's been done there, there's a lack of clarity, I suppose, going forward and a lack of stability for many of those involved in the Peace Plus program. Minister, when I speak to them, they're not sure about their contracts for next year, which is difficult for anybody in a position of employment, but it has implications for the development of the regions as well and the border regions. I would be hoping that you will deal with that situation. Our regional assemblies are also looking at a changing time in terms of the classification of regions. And it's not just Ireland that says we have a two-speed economy in many respects in different areas. We have regions such as the Northwest of Ireland where the city of Galway is progressing very well from an economic perspective, and therefore, the classification of the region changes is no longer seen as lagging. But as you well know, many parts of rural Mayo and Sligo and Lisbon and Roscommon are way, way behind and therefore are not receiving the level of funding they should do as a result of that. I would ask you to have a look at the regional disparities across Europe, not just in one area. I'd like to speak to you, I suppose, particularly about the Just Transition Fund that has been mentioned because when we received the MFF proposals from the commission last year, to say there was a disappointment with regard to the absence of an EU JTF going forward is an understatement, particularly for me personally. I think the lack of a proposal was a particular disappointment. The parliament has made its opinion crystal clear on this multiple times since. As recently as yesterday, we voted to include in the European Social Fund in the next MFF a ring-fenced allocation for this crucial EU just transition in line with the objectives of the original regulation to be made available for regions most affected by decarbonization. So my question to you, minister, is given this vote by member states across the board and MEPs from member states across the board yesterday and the broad majority in plenary last September, will you commit to working to ensure real EU added value when it comes to just transition support, not just via the national plans involved? In other words, will you put your hand up and say, let's ring-fence the funding where it is necessary to do so? And finally, one question, suppose, the overall question. We're seeing the vice minister, as you know, for the future of the EU budget play out in front of us at the moment. And you know quite well, many member states have made no secret of their desire to cut the budget by as much as 400,000,000,000, a fifth of what was originally proposed by the commission. So I ask you today, what cohesion budget's already squeezed in the original commission proposal? How are you going to use this Irish presidency to ensure that our regions continue to get this vital lifeline? It is fine coming in, as you have said today, that you will endeavor to ensure that the funding will continue to be made adequately available for the regions. But how are you going to tackle that issue in the difficult scenario we have in terms of the stated intentions of other member states? Thank you very much.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(10:06:50 - 10:13:22): Thank you, chair, and thank you to our panel, for your comments this morning. It's been most informative to see what's going on across Europe with regard to the European Union Just Transition Fund. Chair, I want to compliment yourself for your initial comments because you showed your own deep knowledge of the situation when you spoke at the beginning about the need for care for us to be careful that the transformation was not too fast. And that was your focus this morning, and you're quite right. That was a specific problem with regard to my constituency of Ireland where, due to a legal matter, the closure of power stations was expedited, and we did not have a period to prepare for just transition. In effect, there was no just transition. I'm more than familiar with what has happened in Poland. In the course of my work on a NINI file in this house, I traveled to the Silesian region and looked at the power stations, visited the power stations, went down under, met the workers, and talked to them about the problem. I know there is a relationship with the employers and the workers, an agreement which has been in place. But there's also a great deal of insecurity in that region. And I know why your comments, mayor, what your comments are based on today with regard to the future of young people in particular. Mister Coffey and I are known to each other. In a previous life, I worked in his position at Woodlawnford County Council, so I've been on the ground as well. So I'll begin with my positive comments with regard to the Just Transition Fund in Ireland. The project, insofar as it worked in the area of sustainable tourism, has been relatively successful. Mister Coffey pointed out the area of employment, the creation of those 170 full-time, 380 part-time, and the projection with regard to the indirect employment levels in the area as well. And that is indeed welcome. I'm familiar with some of the projects because I worked on them myself, and I'm very proud of the work I did with them. I'm delighted to see them opening, and I'm glad to see employment being created. The problem here is not enough. As Mister Crawford pointed out, in the entire area, 170 full-time jobs. In my hometown, 1,100 jobs were once created, and that's just one town in the region. So it's just not sufficient. The result of it today, I'm afraid, is a failure to provide employment for local people. In Ireland, we have a new phenomenon in rural towns around the country. When you travel across the country from the Midlands region in particular, you come across car parks where there were never car parks before, chair. And what I mean is these are areas along the public roads close to small villages where young people who were traditionally employed in that region previously now assemble in the morning, park their car, and get into a bus or a minibus and travel two hours away to the city of Dublin or to a major population center. They cannot be employed locally anymore. And you, mayor and you, chair, will know this yourself. This is regrettable. It has severe implications for depopulation and demographics in our region. This is not sustainable for people to get up at 4 AM or 5 AM in the morning and travel such a distance and return at 9 PM at night. It is not sustainable from a family perspective, and that is the biggest problem with regard to just transition. Employment figures in Poland and in Ireland have not gone up dramatically, but this displacement of employment, that's what's going on here. And it's a major issue, and it is ultimately the failure of the biggest failure of the Just Transition scheme is to deal with this. Article 1.1 was to look at SMEs and micro enterprise and otherwise. From my perspective, it has failed to deal with significant projects in that area for a number of reasons. The time limitations were part of it. But the regional assemblies and people like PUBL in Ireland, the government departments involved in Folch Ireland, have a responsibility now to evaluate how we can do better in the future because I believe there is a future for this. I believe going forward, we must ensure that there is a future fund to support this issue. I share the disappointment that there's been no reference to EU Just Transition Fund within the MFF. But I take a, I've moved on from that issue, and I've spoken to Executive Vice President Fito and others, and I've tried to at least make the case that we should most certainly ring-fence funding in another area for regions of just transition. And I think there is a belief out there that this can be done. In the last couple of days, through our work on the Reggie Committee, I've included some amendments so that, alongside my colleagues here, we can find a new place within the funds. I've targeted the European Social Fund as it happens. ERDF is there. There are many other areas. I think there is an important emphasis on us as a committee to ensure we can ring-fence this funding coming from Europe for these regions going forward. And that is most important. I said a couple of questions to the panel, and I suppose it's important from the point of view from a Polish perspective. You still have a period of just transition to proceed. Your last power station is not due to close until 2047, I think, this Alesia, the region I went to. So you still have some time. So where, if there is no Just Transition Fund in your region in 2028, 2029, 2030, where will the funds come from to retrain, reskill, or create employment in those regions? Where will those funds come from? And to Mister Crawford, I put the question, I suppose, within the context of your employment. There are six or seven people working in the area of activation or projects. I understand in an Irish context, they are to be made redundant at Christmas of this year, which in itself is an indictment of the scheme, that we can have a situation where the people involved in the Just Transition Fund who are supposed to be protecting people and helping people who lost their jobs, these people themselves are losing their jobs. This is crazy. Where is the foresight with regard to ensuring this scheme is successful? We're laying off the people who are supposed to be looking after people who are being laid off. It's appalling. The Irish government, particularly as it holds the presidency, must address this issue. And I'm wondering, Mister Crawford, has any thoughts in regard to how the role of that activator could be expanded to take in the greater employment and social needs of the community. Thank you very much.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(09:31:48 - 09:36:17): Thank you, chair. I want to thank you, for the invitation, firstly, to speak, this morning on behalf of our special housing committee. And, indeed, I also thank the representatives of the commission, Jiris Varak, the head of the unit in social policies in DG Empel for the presentation to be given today of the strategy. I it's a you know, really is an obvious link between the these 2 committees. I think it's an important get together. It's a natural link between housing and social inclusion policy, And I would welcome closer cooperation between our Empel and housing teams as we go forward in the coming months after the summer break. Colleagues, I think, firstly, this morning, I want to speak about the council recommendation, which, of course, is at the heart of why we're here today. The recommendation which was presented on the May 6 2026 alongside the 1st ever EU antipoverty strategy, a very important moment for the parliament. Colleagues will recall, you know, the the scale of this challenge. 92700000 people, that's 20.9 percent of the EU population, are at risk of poverty or social inclusion in 2025, and around 1,000,000 homeless right across our union. Scale of the emergency facing us is indeed colossal. From our perspective as a housing committee, colleagues will know that the parliament adopted, the resolution of the 03/10/2026 on the housing crisis under the rapporteur mister Borje Gimenez Lares of the EPP. And colleagues will know, you know, we have discussed the scale of the affordability problem that has motivated, our work. House prices in the EU have risen by more than 60% and rents by more than 20% over the course of the past decade, and it is affecting all Europeans without exception. The resolution itself records that around 1,300,000 people are homeless and sleeping rough or in emergency accommodation at any given night in the EU. Almost 400,000 of them, shockingly, are children. And the resolution explicitly invokes principle 19 of the European pillar of social rights on adequate shelter and services for the homeless. As an Irish member of this committee, I'm more than familiar with the scale of the problem. Our small country with a population of less than 6,000,000 people has over 16,000 people on the homeless register, And shockingly, 5,000 of them are children, something we're not very proud of and something that should, in itself, motivate the Irish presidency in the coming months, I hope. Colleagues, the resolution calls for the European affordable housing plan to be aligned with the European pillar of social rights and to help tackle social inequalities and indeed eradicate poverty in the EU alongside the important work of promoting social, economic, and indeed territorial cohesion. Now our committee has worked on this matter for many, many months, and we welcome the recommendations emphasis on housing led approaches. We were we we welcome that key focus on eviction prevention and expanding social and affordable housing supply, which complement the parliament's own resolution. And, you know, we want to signal that has a nonbinding instrument. Its impact will depend on the implementation by member states at the end of the day. As you quite said, quite rightly, chair, in your introduction, much of these matters are competency of the member states. So it is down to the member states who act in these areas. But many open questions remain for us to deal with, notably on the definitions on the comparable data available on homelessness. So, chair, I want to say that you will find the housing committee more than cooperative and more than willing to work with you in the coming months. There is a willingness there among all of our colleagues across all sides of the parliament to work closely with EMPL as this file moves forward in the council. And, indeed, I note on your next point in the agenda today, my colleague from Ireland, the Irish minister coming in, the minister, dealing with rural and community affairs and social, matters. It is a rather important matter, for the Irish. They will have the baton in their hands now for the coming 6 months. Regrettably, I'm going to another committee myself to, deal with a matter of legislation in a few moments, but I'll be watching carefully what our colleague, the minister, has to say. So once again, thank you, for the invitation, and, I look forward to this morning's debate. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• 2026-07-16 “(11:12:05 - 11:14:16): Thank thank you, Chira. And I do want to make a short point, but an important one. A compliment, mister Schroder and what he said about the Frappolus project is incredible. I I need to know more about it. I'll I will learn more about it. But, very, very importantly, the second witness, miss Hooks has made a reference and a a statement in her presentation. EU funding is cast as too cumbersome. And, you know, she said we must make sure this perception doesn't it's just a perception. It's not just a perception, chair. I want the message to go to our friend from the commission, miss Nussmuller. EU funding in the context of just transition has been seen as problematic at every level, not just among the community groups, the voluntary sectors, but the local authorities and the regional assemblies. The level of audit, the level of complication has been difficult from day one. There was a lack of clarity with regard to state aid rule and and rules insofar as they applied to just transition, which effectively disqualified a lot of people. So when you say just transition worked, it didn't work for a significant number of people in the community and voluntary sector because state aid rules are a lack of clarity at state aid rule coming from Brussels as well as the member states disqualified groups. And I explained how it happened. The level of matching funding was adjusted based on an interpretation of state aid rules. And because community groups are in the voluntary sector could not afford this money, they couldn't have come forward with their contribution and the projects collapsed. So I don't think we should we should not leave this rule feeling that this this e g EUJDF worked. It may work for some people, but I can tell you, not just in the community involuntary sector. I'm aware of local authorities, regional assemblies who have said to me, it is too cumbersome. Do you think in Brussels, we have a dozen staff to prepare the level of of material that's required for this? So we must learn from this going forward, whether it's in e ERDF or ESF. We must prepare ourselves to simplify this project going forward and the funding for it going forward. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• 2026-07-14 “(17:50:34 - 17:51:49): Thank you, chair. And, I wish good luck to the, co repertoires on this mammoth task in front of them, with 6,000 amendments. I've tabled 65 amendments on a wide range of issues, but primarily to stop the next MFF becoming a centralized blank check for national governments. 1 of the main criticisms I've heard on the file was the centralized nature of the fund. Therefore, I've put a strong emphasis on the engagement of local authorities and regional assemblies from the preparation stage to the evaluation of the plans. Furthermore, the consultation of farming and rural stakeholders, fisheries groups, and civil society is a key element of my additions. So my amendments are also strengthened support for rural, for the island districts, mountainous, and border areas with a particular focus on transport connectivity, local infrastructure, and cross border cooperation. I think it's about ensuring at the end of the day that regions like the Midlands Northwest are not left behind in the new and the next EU budget. I've also highlighted the importance of promoting gender equality, addressing the challenges faced by persons with disability, and the continuation of the crucial work carried out by the EU Just Transition Fund leader and indeed PEACE plus. It must go on.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-14 “Thank you, Madam Chair. I mean, if we're looking at competitiveness and fairness, let's look at the facts. Today, our farmers are being asked to produce more with less less cap funding, higher input costs and growing competition from imports that are not required to meet the same standards as our producers. That's neither competitive nor fair. At the same time, the Commission continues to rush to conclude new trade agreements that concede yet more of the EU's internal agricultural market, placing further pressure on our farmers. So that is why I will be submitting amendments to protect a ring fence cap budget, strengthen support for generational renewal, defend active farmers Regardless of age, and ensure that imported products meet production, animal welfare and food safety standards that are equivalent.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2026-07-14 “No problem. That's why I will be submitting amendments to protect our ring fenced Cat budget, strengthen support for generational renewal, and defend active farmers regardless of age, and ensure that imported products meet production, animal welfare and food safety standards that are in fact equivalent to those required of EU farmers. My amendments also call for a European Strategic Fertilizer reserve. The return of Cbam revenues to to agriculture at this time of crisis. Stronger protection for farmers in the supply chain and independent verification of milk testing used to determine farmers payments. Thank you chair.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-07-14 “Thank you, chair, and you're welcome, Minister, I wish you well. You have busy, busy days ahead. And you know the concerns within the farming community and rural community about dropping incomes. You've seen the farmers on the streets of Ireland since we had 2000. Out to protest against Mercosur on the 10th of January on negotiations. I'll be there with you on the organic production and labelling one. Hopefully before Christmas we will get it done. We've looked for agreement, particularly in the area of labelling, to ensure we have unambiguous, large and legible labelling on country of origin. Would you agree with me that that is necessary for all food, not just organics on cap? Can I ask you, do you accept or reject proposals that would make active farmers ineligible for cap payments simply because they have reached the state pension age? Would you will your government use that flexibility you have in the next cap to increase Ireland's national exchequer contribution above the current minimum, and choose the maximum support level for Irish farmers, particularly in the context of generational renewal. And on that Mercosur issue, we now know that despite the efforts to implement the Mercosur deal provisionally. Brazilian beef is not safe. It's not on the safe list. On the 3rd of September, there's another deadline. Would you agree with Patrick Wall, the former chairman of the European Food Authority, that it's not possible, scientifically or practically for the Brazilian industry to meet that deadline now?”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · EU policy on country of origin food labelling · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2026-07-13 “(17:14:52 - 17:15:58): Thank you, chair. Chair, whatever about the margin of profit that's going on here with fertilizers and the companies involved, today's presentation highlighted one important fact. And the regions that had strategic stockpiles in place did not experience the same level of price increases as those without them, and that's a lesson I think we have to learn here. We've already recognized the importance of strategic reserves when it comes to things like oil and energy. Fertilizer is not just another input. I believe it's essential to food production and, therefore, ultimately to food security. So recent years have shown how quickly geopolitical events can disrupt and supply chains and drive prices beyond the reach of farmers. So I believe a European strategic fertilizer reserve would strengthen resilience and stabilize the markets during times of crisis and help safeguard food production across the union. So if we're really serious about food production and food security, then we must also be serious about securing the inputs that make food production possible. So I ask our panel, would they be in favor of a proper strategic reserve being built up?”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-07-13 “(18:19:23 - 18:20:37): Thank you, chair. I mean, let's be straight and let's be fair about the CBAM situation. At this stage, more than 10 member states with very different stocking rates and very different farming enterprises have called for it to be scrapped or suspended. So it's not just 1 country it's an issue in. Over the past number of years, every major crisis has exposed 1 uncomfortable truth in this building. When the costs rise, it is the farmer who's left carrying the burden. Whether it was COVID 19 or the war in Ukraine, soaring energy prices, fertilizer costs, who's protesting our side, who's hit? Farmers have paid more for their inputs, but have a little ability to recover these costs through the supply chain. So it's not a resilient food chain in the 1st instance. It's a it's a weak 1. So, I mean, I asked the panel, would you support the creation of an EU fertilizer refund or rebate mechanism to return exceptional input cost increases to farmers due to CBEM if it's not suspended? And secondly, do you agree the recent political and market crisis have steadily weakened the farmers' position in the food supply chain? And if so, what concrete measures do you believe are needed to restore our farmers' bargaining power and ensure that extraordinary increases in production costs costs can be fairly recovered. Thank you.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• 2026-07-13 “(16:16:13 - 16:17:21): Thank you, chair. Trade agreements cannot be assessed in isolation. We must examine the cumulative impact on European farmers on established markets for EU projects, and I'm trying to explain why. Geographical or logistical reasons, UK is Ireland's most important beef market. Our exports to the UK were worth approximately 1,600,000,000 and accounted for almost half our total beef exports. Yet the UK Australia agreement is progressively increasing duty free access already for Australian beef, sheep meat, sugar, butter, and cheese. So this creates a real risk that lower cost imports will displace Irish and European projects from UK supermarket shelves, maybe not today or tomorrow, but in the future. So before granting Australia further access to the EU market, will the commission assess the combined impact of the EU Australia and UK Australia agreements on Irish beef exports, farm gate prices, and market share? And European farmers share, they cannot must not be expected to pay twice through increased imports into the EU and by losing valuable export markets into the United Kingdom. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• 2026-07-09 “Madam president. Commissioner, this planned reform of common fisheries policy is not just a test for fisheries. In my mind, it is a test for fairness and trust in Europe. As a result of Brexit, Irish fishermen last quarter and boats were decommissioned. And then last December, when Ireland needed help, the long established Hague preferences. That safeguard meant to protect us in a quota crisis was blocked by a minority group of other member states. Now we hear reports of fisheries flexibility for Iceland ahead of their referendum on 29th August. Now let us be straight. Ireland is not against Iceland. We support sustainable fishing, science and a strong North Atlantic. But do not tell Irish fishermen that rules are fixed and then go and bend them for somebody else. Any deal must be open, fair and not at Ireland's expense. Commissioner. This matter matters for all future accession. Europe cannot attract countries in with flexibility. Then leave existing member states frozen into unfairness.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-07-07 “(12:08:23 - 12:09:24): Tischuk, one of your priorities for Ireland's presidency is to strengthen Europe's competitiveness while protecting balanced regional development. As you begin today to steer the negotiations on the new long-term EU budget, will you commit that Ireland will not support a deal which sidelines cohesion and rural development funds in favor of narrowly defined competitiveness spending? And can you spell out one concrete safeguard you will defend to protect our peripheral and island regions like the Midlands Northwest of Ireland? Your values, your shared values, we will test them in the coming months, Taoiseach. We look for human dignity when it comes to housing in particular. You know the focus. You know the crisis upon us with 15,000 people homeless in Ireland and 5,000 children. You knew, you know, we need to work harder on this. And if there is to be a right to stay, Tischuk, in the regions of Ireland, then we need a common agricultural policy which gives all of our farmers a livelihood going forward, the small farmers and the large ones. That must be your legacy, Taoiseach, from this presidency. Thank you very much”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-06 “(21:30:04 - 21:31:13): Thank you, chair. This proposal is about getting the balance right. Europe does not have to choose between protecting the environment and supporting the farmers who produce our food. I say we must achieve both. For too long, well intentioned legislation has often resulted in excessive bureaucracy, putting burdens on farmers without delivering better outcomes for nature. I regularly meet Irish potato growers who've highlighted how essential crop protection products have been withdrawn before practical and effective alternatives are available. Whatever our views on these decisions, it's not fair nor reasonable to expect an industry to continue operating when vital tools are removed. I say we should continue to uphold the highest standards in food safety, environment protection, and animal welfare while removing duplication, embracing innovation such as biopesticides and digital systems, and ensuring that imported food is produced to the same standards required of all European farmers. Our farmers are not their problem. They are surely part of the solution. They deserve to be trusted, supported, and recognized for feeding Europe while caring for the environment. Thank you.”
  EU policy on pesticides
• 2026-06-29 “(15:35:49 - 15:37:02): Thank you, chair. I welcome many elements of MEP Lynn's report, and I, indeed, I will table amendments to strengthen the new common agricultural policy. But 1 fundamental question remains unanswered. Where is the money? I do not support pocket to pocket proposals that simply transfer existing funding from 1 budget heading to another and then present it as restoring the cap budget. That's not new money. It will not secure the situation. I welcome his emphasis on generation renewal. And I want to go a bit further as the Irish prepare to take over the presidency of Europe and deal with the budget, I believe we should commit 5% of the cap budget matched by member states to genuinely bring forward generation renewal that would support young farmers in practical ways. And in our context alone in Ireland, based on the commission's current proposal, that will present an investment of approximately 816,000,000 over the programming period. Work it out, €16,000,000 per year from a country whose Department of Finance projected we'd have a government's surplus of 9,200,000,000 next year. There is a challenge to the new president of Europe, Michal Martin. Get on with the process. And if we really support farmers, invest in young farmers now.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-29 “(17:45:34 - 17:46:40): Thank you, chair. The energy crisis and the ongoing instability in the in The Middle East have really exposed just how vulnerable Europe's fertilizer supply has become. We've seen shortages and then price increase after price increase. Yes. Europe already recognizes oil as a strategic resource. Every member state maintains strategic petroleum reserves because energy security is essential. Well, I believe food security is every bit as important at this stage. Without fertilizers, farmers cannot produce the crops that feed our citizens. Fertilizer is not simply another agricultural input. It is a strategic resource that underpins Europe's food security. So for that reason, I call on the commission to assess the establishment of a European strategic fertilizer reserve comparable in principle to the strategic petroleum reserves maintained by members. And such a reserve would ensure continuity of supplies during periods of geopolitical disruption, market shortages, and extreme price volatility. This is not going to be the last 1 before this house. Instead of throwing money at us every time, maybe we should put a plan in place for the future. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(16:34:03 - 16:34:59): Thank you, chair. This report is welcome, and it now highlights the need for a fair and an accurate implementation of the recommendations, particularly at member state level. And I believe the simplification should strengthen and not weaken the information available to families and to students and pupils, including the nutritional value of the food. And I believe most importantly, the country of origin must be clearly identified, particularly those in prepacked lunches and processed foods. I really also believe it's also important to ensure that the CMO continues to strengthen the position of the farmer producer in the supply chain to ensure that there's fair competition, and this will always include the farmer going forward. There are positive measures here. As I say, my focus will now be on the member states implementation of measures so that they are fair to everybody, particularly those in the milk industry. Thank you.”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• 2026-06-29 “(17:45:34 - 17:46:40): Thank you, chair. The energy crisis and the ongoing instability in the in The Middle East have really exposed just how vulnerable Europe's fertilizer supply has become. We've seen shortages and then price increase after price increase. Yes. Europe already recognizes oil as a strategic resource. Every member state maintains strategic petroleum reserves because energy security is essential. Well, I believe food security is every bit as important at this stage. Without fertilizers, farmers cannot produce the crops that feed our citizens. Fertilizer is not simply another agricultural input. It is a strategic resource that underpins Europe's food security. So for that reason, I call on the commission to assess the establishment of a European strategic fertilizer reserve comparable in principle to the strategic petroleum reserves maintained by members. And such a reserve would ensure continuity of supplies during periods of geopolitical disruption, market shortages, and extreme price volatility. This is not going to be the last 1 before this house. Instead of throwing money at us every time, maybe we should put a plan in place for the future. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• 2026-06-29 “(15:35:49 - 15:37:02): Thank you, chair. I welcome many elements of MEP Lynn's report, and I, indeed, I will table amendments to strengthen the new common agricultural policy. But 1 fundamental question remains unanswered. Where is the money? I do not support pocket to pocket proposals that simply transfer existing funding from 1 budget heading to another and then present it as restoring the cap budget. That's not new money. It will not secure the situation. I welcome his emphasis on generational renewal. And I want to go a bit further as the Irish prepare to take over the presidency of Europe and deal with the budget, I believe we should commit 5% of the cap budget matched by member states to genuinely bring forward generation renewal that would support young farmers in practical ways. And in our context alone in Ireland, based on the commission's current proposal, that will present an investment of approximately 816,000,000 over the programming period. Work it out, €16,000,000 per year from a country whose Department of Finance projected we'd have a government's surplus of 9,200,000,000 next year. There is a challenge to the new president of Europe, Michal Martin. Get on with the process. And if we really support farmers, invest in young farmers now.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-25 “Thank you chair. In Ireland, over 120,000 farm families are deeply concerned about the direction and indeed the future of of the new Common Agricultural policy. They're watching this debate. And this week I welcomed representatives of Irish farming organisations here to Brussels, where they came to express their own concerns about this proposal, the dismissal of our two pillar strategy, and of course, the reduction in the budget is first and foremost on their on their mind. We worked it out. If there is to be a reduction of something like €2,400 per farm per year, it will make their business just unsustainable. So cutting that budget will only put further pressure on farm incomes and undermine the long term viability. But the funding model in Ireland, farmers fear that Cap funding could indeed, in the future, be absorbed into a broader national funding envelope and divert it to agricultural priorities. So, you know, my question is, what guarantees can we get that the commission can provide the Cap funding and it will remain fully ring fenced for agriculture, ensuring that money intended for farmers cannot be diverted elsewhere. I listen to the speakers, and I'm curious about how what proposals and some of their comments can help in the overall situation if we're against capping, and if we're not going to follow the lead of the commission. Where will the money come from to support important issues such as generational renewal, supporting our farmers and supporting young farmers coming into the industry for the first time? And Mr. Verney, I commented in particular in relation to the access of farmers going forward to the risk and emergency. I'm actually interested to know what, in practical sense, how a farmer, rather than a member state, would have, would go about doing that. That's one question I have as well. Thank you very much.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2026-06-24 “Third, I believe we must fix gaps in income supports by replacing these cliff edges with more gradual tapered systems. I believe we cannot separate energy policy from housing policy if our goal is indeed affordability. We need joined up thinking that combines retrofits, increased supply and smarter supports to protect households from both cold winters and high bills. Our last speaker, I believe, also hit the nail on the head when he appealed to us to ensure that our local authorities, our local agencies, our local, regional and regional authorities are involved in this process. I 100% also support him that we should look towards renovation as a priority. I've said this many times at this committee, and indeed that we should build on what we have in terms of our existing local climate plans. There are people listening to us here today who are in arrears with their electricity bill, and they're asking us to dig deep to support them. And one thing I've found in this committee is that it is a complicated. Complicated task to try and reduce energy bills, particularly in Ireland with the highest electricity bills in Europe. But I believe our measures are supported by our own report are a step in the right direction. We must, at the end of the day, try and cut through the red tape and assist our citizens. Thank you.”
  Energy performance of buildings
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you chair. Colleagues, as we sit here today in the middle of a record breaking heat wave, it's easy to forget that only months ago, many people were struggling to heat their homes. Today, they struggle to cool them. As my colleague just confirmed a few moments ago. In Ireland, X-ray data published in April shows that in 2020, for around 14% of households could not afford to heat their homes or pay their energy bills in full, with just over 1 in 10 households in 2015 spending more than 10% of their disposable income on energy and over 30% of households experiencing some form of energy affordability challenge. The depth of the problem is indeed clear, and this is before the latest energy shock with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz pushing prices to some of their highest levels in years. So what has been the response? Well, unfortunately, too often one off measures that underestimate the scale of the problem without a structured long term plan are put forward. Income supports like a fuel allowance do play an important part, but because they are means tested, many households just above the threshold face a cliff edge with little or no support. Colleagues, we cannot control international energy markets, but we can control how we respond. First, while progress has been made on retrofitting, I believe we must target these investments better so that they reach the households that need them most. And that is how we deliver permanent reductions in energy bills. Second, I believe we must remove barriers that constrain housing supply and drive up costs, including planning and state aid constraints that discourage investment.”
  EU housing policy
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you chair. Colleagues, as we sit here today in the middle of a record breaking heat wave, it's easy to forget that only months ago, many people were struggling to heat their homes. Today, they struggle to cool them. As my colleague just confirmed a few moments ago. In Ireland, X-ray data published in April shows that in 2020, for around 14% of households could not afford to heat their homes or pay their energy bills in full, with just over 1 in 10 households in 2015 spending more than 10% of their disposable income on energy and over 30% of households experiencing some form of energy affordability challenge. The depth of the problem is indeed clear, and this is before the latest energy shock with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz pushing prices to some of their highest levels in years. So what has been the response? Well, unfortunately, too often one off measures that underestimate the scale of the problem without a structured long term plan are put forward. Income supports like a fuel allowance do play an important part, but because they are means tested, many households just above the threshold face a cliff edge with little or no support. Colleagues, we cannot control international energy markets, but we can control how we respond. First, while progress has been made on retrofitting, I believe we must target these investments better so that they reach the households that need them most. And that is how we deliver permanent reductions in energy bills. Second, I believe we must remove barriers that constrain housing supply and drive up costs, including planning and state aid constraints that discourage investment.”
  EU housing policy
• 2026-06-24 “Third, I believe we must fix gaps in income supports by replacing these cliff edges with more gradual tapered systems. I believe we cannot separate energy policy from housing policy if our goal is indeed affordability. We need joined up thinking that combines retrofits, increased supply and smarter supports to protect households from both cold winters and high bills. Our last speaker, I believe, also hit the nail on the head when he appealed to us to ensure that our local authorities, our local agencies, our local, regional and regional authorities are involved in this process. I 100% also support him that we should look towards renovation as a priority. I've said this many times at this committee, and indeed that we should build on what we have in terms of our existing local climate plans. There are people listening to us here today who are in arrears with their electricity bill, and they're asking us to dig deep to support them. And one thing I've found in this committee is that it is a complicated. Complicated task to try and reduce energy bills, particularly in Ireland with the highest electricity bills in Europe. But I believe our measures are supported by our own report are a step in the right direction. We must, at the end of the day, try and cut through the red tape and assist our citizens. Thank you.”
  Energy performance of buildings
• 2026-03-18 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 7.5.2026 Written question 1. Mercosur countries have been authorised to export beef to the EU for a number of years. The Commission carries out audits of the official control and certification systems underpinning the guarantees provided by Mercosur countries in the certificate for bovine meat required by the EU. Between 2023 and 2025, a total of nine relevant audits were carried out in Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. The corresponding audit reports are available at the Commission website [1] , with one still being finalised [2] . The Commission plans to carry out four audits for beef in Mercosur countries in 2026 [3] . 2. Published audit reports contain information about the number of states/regions and establishments visited within each country, though names are not disclosed. Commission audits are system audits and not audits of individual establishments, and establishments are visited to evaluate the performance of the competent authorities. The audit’s objective is to assess and verify the effectiveness and compliance of the authorities’ official control and certification systems in order to support the guarantees provided in the certificate required by the EU. 3. Findings vary according to the scope of the audit and the countries’ official control and certification systems and are detailed in the individual reports. The main findings and conclusions lead to recommendations to the competent authorities which are also published in the report. In response to the Commission’s recommendations, the competent authorities present an action plan. The Commission assesses the action plan and follows up on its implementation as necessary, either administratively or during a subsequent audit. Action plans are published alongside the audit reports. [1] http://ec.europa.eu/food/audits-analysis/audit_reports/index.cfm. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/625/oj. [3] For details on the audits carried out and programmed see the annex.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2026-02-11 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 19.5.2026 Written question Promotion funding is intrinsically linked to the promotion of EU-origin. The general objective of the information provision and promotion measures under the EU promotion policy for agricultural products is to enhance the competitiveness of the EU agricultural sector (Article 2 Regulation (EU) 1144/2014 [1] ). Only EU-produced products are eligible for this funding. Products that are produced outside of the EU are not eligible. The information provision and promotion measures aim to increase consumers’ awareness of the merits of the EU agricultural products and production methods, and of its quality schemes; increase the competitiveness and consumption of EU agricultural products, raise their profile both inside and outside the EU and increase their market share. Furthermore, implementing Regulation [2] (EU) 2015/1831 establishes strict requirements for the mention of European origin in all information and promotional materials (Article 2). As in other sectors, origin is determined in accordance with the established non-preferential rules of origin. The indication of the country of origin of agricultural and food products is laid down in EU law, as reflected in Regulation (EU) 1308/2013, and further specified in relevant secondary legislation. As stipulated in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 1144/2014, Member State authorities are responsible for the proper implementation of so called simple programmes (submitted by one or more organisations in a single Member State), including their monitoring and control. [1] Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on information provision and promotion measures concerning agricultural products implemented in the internal market and in third countries and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008. [2] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1831 of 7 October 2015 laying down rules for application of Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on information provision and promotion measures concerning agricultural products implemented in the internal market and in the third countries.”
  Export of EU agri-food products · EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing
• 2026-02-02 “P-000417/2026 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission EU food safety standards apply to all products placed on the EU market, regardless of their origin and regardless of the existence of a free trade agreement with the trade partner. The Commission is dedicated to strictly enforcing these standards to ensure that imported food meets EU requirements. In accordance with the Communication on ‘A Vision for Agriculture and Food 1 ’, the Commission will notably increase the number of audits in third countries by 50% and works closely with the Member States to further strengthen border controls. During a recent Commission audit in Brazil, the Brazilian competent authority informed the auditors about beef consignments containing products from female cattle treated with oestradiol. The Commission promptly shared all necessary information with the Member States so that, if needed, they can take appropriate action both at borders and within their markets. The Brazilian competent authority has confirmed the delisting of the concerned establishment for EU export, and the suspension of the activity of the concerned certification body. The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) system operated effectively. Member State authorities issued appropriate notifications upon detecting non-compliant products, enabling coordinated precautionary measures across the EU. The Commission oversees this system and continues to track actions taken by the Member States. 1 COM/2025/75 final.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• 2025-08-29 “E-003336/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission Market surveillance regarding the performance of construction products based on harmonised European standards under the framework of the Construction Products Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 1 falls in principle under the responsibility of the national authorities. National authorities are under an obligation of sincere cooperation towards the EU organs and the authorities of other Member States under Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union. These national authorities have the possibility via the Commission’s Information and Communication System for Market Surveillance to upload information on investigated products. There has been no upload identifying any flawed products covered by the two standards in question between 2020 and 2024. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02011R0305-20241117.”
  EU competences on consumer protection and product standards
• 2025-08-28 “E-003327/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission In July 2024, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice 1 to Ireland, in which it laid out the reasons for its claim that Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Construction Products Regulation 2 , by not providing for market surveillance of construction products before they are placed on the market. Ireland replied in September 2024 to the letter of formal notice. Since then, the Irish authorities keep reporting on their market surveillance activities and the resources devoted to them. The Commission services keep assessing the relevant facts and information received to date, to determine whether Ireland now fulfils its market surveillance duties under EU law, in particular for products within the range of the masonry blocks in question. Based on this, the Commission will take a decision on the way forward. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/implementing-eu-law/search-infringementdecisions/?lang_code=fi&langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&infringementType=REG&ac tiveCase=true&dg=GROW&memberState=IE&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202403110.”
  EU restrictions on unfair commercial practices
• 2025-07-16 “E-002929/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. According to the relevant legislation 1 , it is the responsibility of the competent authority in the Member State to issue, review and withdraw accreditation of paying agencies. On 10 September 2024, the competent authority has put OPEKEPE’s accreditation under probation 2 . The Greek authorities have recently informed the Commission about their intention to integrate OPEKEPE into the Independent Authority for Public Revenue (AADE). They are currently preparing the legal base paving the way for such a transition and have requested an extension of the probation period for the accreditation of OPEKEPE. The Commission has agreed to such an extension and continues to closely monitor the implementation of the remedial action plan, which the Greek authorities are amending to take into account the planned changes. 2. The Commission’s past audits identified serious deficiencies in the management and control system of the OPEKEPE. On the one hand, these findings led to the decision to put OPEKEPE’s accreditation on probation, while an action plan was put in place to remedy the deficiencies. On the other hand, the findings led to multiple conformity procedures launched by the Commission over the past years, resulting in financial corrections imposed upon Greece. In relation to the ongoing investigation by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) into the work of the Paying Agency, the Commission cannot comment as EPPO is an independent body and its work is covered by the confidentiality of criminal investigations. 1 Article 8(1) of the Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council. 2 Article 2(3) of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/128.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2025-07-09 “P-002803/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The reorganisation of the Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, including the discontinuation of the social economy unit, aims at enhancing efficiency, while incorporating social economy into broader industrial and Single Market policies. Social economy actors remain fully integrated into the policies pursued by the Executive Vice-President for Prosperity and Industrial Strategy, including industrial strategy, public procurement review and specific programmes such as the Enterprise Europe Network 1 , Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs 2 and the European Cluster Collaboration Platform 3 . Under the political leadership of the Executive Vice-President for Social Rights and Skills, Quality Jobs and Preparedness, the Commission is firmly committed to fostering social economy development, notably through the implementation of the Social Economy Action Plan 4 , and to ensuring that social economy actors can meaningfully contribute to the prosperity and resilience of the Single Market. The 2023 Council Recommendation on developing social economy framework conditions 5 urges Member States to adopt or update comprehensive strategies promoting social economy, or to align existing policy initiatives with this goal. The European Social Fund Plus 6 and the Technical Support Instrument 7 are crucial in driving the transition towards coherent national social economy strategies. The Commission remains fully committed to advancing the social economy agenda and is preparing a mid-term review of the Social Economy Action Plan to support its continued integration across relevant EU and national policies. 1 https://een.ec.europa.eu. 2 https://www.erasmus-entrepreneurs.eu. 3 https://transition-pathways.europa.eu/networks-and-platforms/european-cluster-collaboration-platform-eccptools-and-resources-innovation. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021DC0778. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:C_202301344. 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02021R1057-20241224. 7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32021R0240.”
  EU industrial funding · EU policy on social criteria in public funding
• 2025-04-09 “E-001438/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission In 2022 and 2023, the Commission’s Joint Research Centre provided technical information to assist Member States with the mapping of peatland and wetland as part of a project entitled ‘Satellite based mapping and monitoring of European peatland and wetland for LULUCF 1 and agriculture’ (SEPLA). This notwithstanding, defining the territorial scope of the Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition Standard for the protection of wetland and peatland (GAEC 2) within the context of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans lies primarily with the Member States. The Commission services assess whether the scope proposed by the Member States aligns with the standard’s core objective, as set out in Article 109(2)(a)(i) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 2 . It is for the Member States to carry out the relevant mapping and to decide to publish the scientific data, methodology and potential resulting restrictions imposed on farming activity underpinning its chosen approach. 1 Land use, land-use change and forestry Regulation - https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/land-use-sector_en. 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj.”
  Agriculture (green) · Soil protection policy
• 2025-04-02 “E-001362/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission Legal protection of biotechnological inventions in the EU is governed by Directive 98/44/EC 1 ‘Biotech Directive’. According to the provisions of the Directive, biological material which is isolated from its natural environment or produced by means of technical processes may be patentable if it also meets the general patentability requirements, such as novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability. However, the Directive excludes animal varieties and animals produced solely by essentially biological processes from patentability. In this context, an ‘essentially biological process’ is defined as a process that consists entirely of natural phenomena such as crossing or selection (e.g. conventional breeding methods). Accordingly, animals and their offsprings resulting from conventional breeding methods, without the application of a technical process such as genetic modification, would generally not constitute a patentable invention within the meaning of the Directive. Patentable biotechnological inventions relating to animals include, for instance, modifications of animal genome aiming to tackle hereditary diseases or enabling animals to survive environmental changes. Where a patented invention (e.g. a modified gene) is incorporated into an animal, the protection extends to any material in which the patented genetic information is contained and continues to perform its function. This principle also applies to the offspring of such animals, provided that the patented invention remains present. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1998/44/oj/eng”
  GMOs
• 2025-01-22 “P-000286/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission In September 2021, the Commission started an infringement procedure 1 for Italy to comply with judgments of cases C-212/99 2 and C-119/04 3 of the Court of Justice of the EU, to ensure that it reconstructs careers of former lettori in line with Italian Law No 63 of 5 March 2004. The Court stated in these judgments that Law 63/2004 provides for an adequate framework for the reconstruction of lettori’s careers by applying the parameter of the part-time tenured researcher and that the application of this parameter does not appear to preclude the career of a former assistant from being reconstructed on more advantageous terms. Such reconstruction, in the Commission’s view, does not necessarily cover the reconstruction of careers in an uninterrupted manner. Neither of the judgments precludes the splitting of a career: they require the retention of the acquired rights from the date of the original recruitment, but they do not require that this is continued after the extinction of the category of lettori by Law No 236 of 21 June 1995. Italy has the primary responsibility to monitor the application of EU law as interpreted by the Court in its judgments and to take the necessary steps to ensure uniform application across all Italian universities. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission continues monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. In July 2023, the Commission decided to refer Italy to the Court of Justice of the EU for maintaining discrimination of foreign lecturers. Case C-519/23 is currently pending at the Court of Justice of the EU. Redress in individual cases is to be sought before the competent national courts. 1 INFR(2021)4055, https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?lang_code=en&langCode=EN 2 Judgment of 26 June 2001, Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic., C-212/99, EU:C:2001:357. 3 Judgment of 18 July 2006, Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic, C-119/04, EU:C:2006:489.”
  Jurisdiction conflicts between EU and national courts
• 2024-12-03 “E-002738/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission In July 2024, the Commission opened an infringement procedure 1 against Ireland for not carrying out market surveillance as required by the Construction Products Regulation (EU) 305/2011 2 . The Commission is assessing Ireland’s reply to the letter of formal notice. The Product Liability Directive 85/374/EEC 3 lays down rules on producers’ liability for damages caused by defective products. Victims can claim compensation for damage to, or destruction of, their property. The Directive also covers construction materials used in buildings. To obtain compensation, victims must prove defectiveness of the product and the consequent damage caused, without having to prove fault or negligence from the producer. Compensation for the defective product itself is excluded from the Directive. The Directive specifies that the damage caused by the product must be compensated in full. Where a producer is established outside the EU or cannot be identified, importers or suppliers can be held liable on its behalf. Consumers who bought defective construction materials from professional sellers also have rights under the Sale of Goods Directive 4 , including the right to rescind the sales contract. Sellers are liable for the lack of conformity that becomes apparent during a period of two years from delivery. Member States can provide for longer liability periods in national law 5 . Member States have a primary responsibility to monitor and enforce the application of the relevant legal provisions. The Commission will continue to monitor the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. National market surveillance authorities are responsible for checking manufacturers’ compliance with their obligations under Regulation (EU) 305/2011. 1 INFR(2024)4003: https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&page=1&size=10 &order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate&refId=INFR(2024)4003&activeCase=true 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02011R0305-20241117 3 Directive (EU) 2024/2853 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on liability for defective products and repealing Council Directive 85/374/EEC. 4 Directive (EU) 2019/771 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on certain aspects concerning contracts for the sale of goods. The Directive applies to sales contracts concluded from 1 June 2022 and similar rules applied under Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees. to contracts conclude before that date. 5 For example, in Ireland national law goes beyond the minimum requirements of the Directive and provides a general six-year limitation period for contract claims.”
  EU restrictions on unfair commercial practices · EU competences on consumer protection and product standards
• 2024-12-03 “E-002737/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has been made aware of concerns about pollution of Newport Bay/Clew Bay through written question E-000547/2024. 1. The Commission is following up on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-444/21 1 in which Ireland was found to have failed to legally designate several Special Areas of Conservation and to adopt conservation objectives and measures for numerous sites, in breach of the Habitats Directive 2 . This judgment covers the Clew Bay, for which conservation measures are yet awaited. Once communicated, their conformity with EU law will be duly assessed. 2. For agglomerations below 1 000 population equivalents (p.e.) like Newport (815) 3 , limited obligations apply from end 2027 under Article 18 of the revised Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 4 , notably where a risk is identified for the environment or public health. Ireland has submitted with considerable delay its third River Basin Management Plans under the Water Framework Directive 5 : the Commission will raise any implementation issues with the Irish authorities once it will have completed its ongoing assessment. 3.The Irish European Regional Development Fund 6 programmes do not include any funding for the specific objective ‘promoting access to water and sustainable water management’. The Irish Recovery and Resilience Plan 7 supports the upgrade of ten small treatment plants, but the Newport plant was not selected by Uisce Éireann for funding. 1 Commission v Ireland (Protection des zones spéciales de conservation) Case C-444/21 of 29 June 2023: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62021CJ0444 2 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. 3 https://www.citypopulation.de/en/ireland/towns/mayo/29332__newport/ 4 Directive (EU) 2024/3019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 concerning urban wastewater treatment (recast), OJ L, 2024/3019, 12.12.2024. 5 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1–73. 6 The objectives and scope of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) are laid down in Regulation (EU) No 2021/1058 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 on the European Regional Development Fund and on the Cohesion Fund, OJ L 231, 30.6.2021. 7 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/irelands-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-03 “E-002735/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware that a majority of EU foresters and farmers already live up to the highest standards of environmental sustainability and are therefore well-placed to meet the requirements of the Regulation on deforestation-free products (EUDR) 1 . Deforestation and forest degradation in the EU have been minimal in recent decades as national laws for forest protection are generally complied with. The EUDR sets strict geolocation and customs control requirements, applying the same rules for all products placed on the EU market, irrespectively if they come from the EU or partner countries. The Commission’s legislative proposal for the EUDR was based on an Impact Assessment 2 which estimated that overall expected benefits of this Regulation outweigh the costs of compliance for companies. The Commission is finalising the methodology for the classification of low-risk and high-risk countries (Article 29(3) of the EUDR), whose guiding principles have already been published 3 . The Commission is committed to making the proposal for risk classification available as soon as possible but no later than six months before the EUDR enters into application 4 . Operators and traders supplying products from countries with low-deforestation rates will benefit from simplified due diligence (Article 13) and a lower threshold for mandatory checks carried out by competent authorities (Article 16(10)). Regulation (EU) 2024/3234 5 postponing the date of application of the EUDR provides stakeholders with more time to prepare. During the additional 12 months of phasing in, the Commission will explore further clarifications and simplifications. 1 Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation and repealing Regulation (EU) No 995/2010, OJ L 150, 9.6.2023, p. 206–247. 2 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-regulation-deforestation-free-products_en 3 Communication from the Commission on the Strategic Framework for International Cooperation Engagement in the context of Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation. 4 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/CM-5486-2024-INIT/xx/pdf 5 Regulation (EU) 2024/3234 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 as regards provisions relating to the date of application, OJ L, 2024/3234, 23.12.2024, p. 1.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-03 “E-002736/2024 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission represents the EU in coastal States consultations with Norway, the Faroe Islands, and others, in line with the EU position approved by the Council and in coordination with Member States. The focus is on sustainable, equitable mackerel stock management. The Commission urges collective quotas aligned with scientific advice, addressing the stock's critical state caused by excessive unilateral quotas. The Commission is also exploring options to reinforce its sustainability tools, for instance, by clarifying the scope of application of Regulation 1026/2012 1 for the conservation of fish stocks in relation to countries allowing non-sustainable fishing, which is subject to an ongoing ordinary legislative procedure. The total quota of Ireland for 2025 including transfers from the North Sea TAC (total allowable catches) amounts to 39 914 tonnes, agreed in line with the advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea for a 22% decrease. Ireland’s quota has decreased proportionately less than that of other Member States by virtue of the Council decision to grant Ireland a preferential treatment on mackerel (so-called Hague preferences) 2 . Ireland was a main beneficiary of the EU support through the Brexit Adjustment Reserve until the end of 2023. Currently, Ireland’s fishers and coastal communities may benefit from the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) to modernise the fishing fleet, diversify income sources, and enable a sustainable blue economy in the affected communities. 1 Commission proposal of 13 September 2024 to amend Regulation (EU) No 1026/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on certain measures for the purpose of the conservation of fish stocks in relation to countries allowing non-sustainable fishing OJ L 316 COM(2024) 407 final. 2 Annex VII to Council Resolution of 3 November 1976 (‘The Hague Resolution’).”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2024-10-30 “P-002325/2024 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission requested a Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) 1 , an independent report published on 29 March 2021 that analyses in detail the economic, social, environmental and human rights impacts of the agreement with the Mercosur. According to the report, the agreement will have a positive impact on the economies of both the EU and the Mercosur countries, raising wages and contributing to a reduction in inequalities. At the same time, the impact on sensitive agri-food sectors in the EU would be limited. Moreover, the Commission has recently carried out an assessment on the cumulative impact of upcoming trade agreements 2 , which produces results consistent with the Mercosur SIA. It projects a reduction of EU beef production and price of 0.9% and 2.4% respectively due to the implementation of the ten free trade agreements covered by the study. These two studies deliver results at EU level. On the other hand, the Irish government requested an independent Economic and Sustainability Impact Assessment for Ireland of the EU-Mercosur Trade agreement, which includes the assessment of an impact of the agreement on Irish beef producers 3 . That study finds that small additional beef quantities are expected to come from the Mercosur due to the agreement, but the amount will be limited and is manageable. For the Irish beef sector, an upper end estimate of the impact on production is a 0.08% reduction in output. 1 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/analysis-and-assessment/sustainability-impact-assessments_en 2 https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC135540 3 https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/1c8a6-economic-and-sustainability-impact-assessment-for-ireland-of-the-eumercosur-trade-agreement/”
  Trade relations with Mercosur · Import of agri-food products in the EU
• “All products must show the country of origin, not just the logo. And I feel strongly that we must have absolute lack of confusion on this pact in Ireland means nothing on the front of a package, unless the country of origin is clearly identified for the production of the food and the origin of the food, we have to move towards that situation. And a key issue in this regulation today is the treatment of imports from third countries. European farmers, both organic and conventional, must comply fully with EU standards, so it's essential that imported products meet the same standards. This brings us to the distinction between equivalence and full compliance. Under the previous system, third country products could be accepted as organic if their standards were considered equivalent to EU rules, but equivalence does not necessarily mean the same rules apply to the production of the food involved, as my colleague has just raised. We ask the question of the Commission today are they satisfied with the system of equivalence truly delivers? Is the reciprocity. There are the same standards being followed. How will we know?”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• “That is why just transition as a fund plays an important role within cohesion. It is not about idealism, but about ensuring the plan and the change is achievable and fair. The commission's mid-term review earlier this year recognised this reality by expanding the scope of the fund and ensuring that, under certain conditions, just transition projects are entitled to another year to spend funds. This is good. The Regional Development Committee of this Parliament has gone further, proposing practical reforms to make just transition work even better. So, first and foremost, Commissioner, the Committee of the regions, the Regional Development Committee has made a strong call for a just transition to fund with adequate resources and firmly based on shared management and partnership principles. So, as you will be aware, the proposal from the Commission on the future MFF did not contain any proposal for a second fund. Colleagues, in order to bring citizens with us, in order to ensure no one is left behind, we must send a clear and unequivocal message. Today we need a second fund for just transition. We need it and anything less is unacceptable. We must continue the work we have started. We have also put forward a concrete proposal for the creation of special economic zones in the regions hardest hit by closures. Crucially, these zones will not be a quick fix. They will remain in place until such a time as the majority of jobs last locally are actually replaced in the local area. That is the key to this Commissioner.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the Court of Auditors for their presentation. Although when one listens to us closely, there are words and phrases which are already causing concern in this committee this afternoon, it will be complex. They tell us there are no clear links between funding and results in some areas, and they've highlighted the weakness in impact indicators. Colleagues, this regulation will have a direct impact on farmers, particularly because a substantial part of the EU budget is devoted to the Common Agricultural Policy. Farmers are already subject to extensive rules, inspections and targets under the Cap payments, including on animal welfare, environmental standards and indeed land management. They're already doing their part, and they've already they're already carrying out a significant administrative burden. So I ask, can we assure EU and Irish farmers that this proposal will not lead to more inspections, more audits, or indeed more red tape? We all support transparency and public accountability in how our EU funds are spent, but this must not translate into additional administrative work for farmers or indeed for member states responsible for administering these programmes. So the key mission here must be to true, must be to remain on simplification. That goal cannot be secondary. It must remain our priority. Thank you.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you, chair. And thank you to our experts for coming to us this afternoon with a comprehensive outline of the of the circumstances and the and for information which which shows how complex the situation is across Europe. I have a couple of questions, Mr. Coleman, but in fairness to our panel, I should ask our panel members 1 or 2 questions as well. I think as Mr. Urgo referred at the end, the number of of derelict houses or houses which are out of use due to a lack of maintenance, I think it was slightly caught my attention. I wonder if you could give me be more specific, why or if any measures have been taken to try and deal with that situation? Mr. Coleman, Woman. I suppose the question is based on on the success of the Land Development Agency's approach to delivering housing. I am wondering, do you believe there is scope for a more structured cooperation between the public housing delivery bodies across the EU to share good practices and models? Could the LDA model be adapted or exported to other member States facing similar urban land and affordability measures? And is there a role for the EU investment bank and measures like that? Also, I'm wondering if, um, cutting down to the matter of the sums and all of this and coming back to the try and keep it simple.”
  EU policy on urban development
• “Thank you. Chair. Colleagues, when I travel around Europe to meet farmers, small business owners or fishing communities, they don't really care about budget headings. They Take care that Brussels delivers funds that reach the right people and the right places. They talk about whether their town will survive, or whether their children will have to leave because they don't have employment. And that is why today's opinion from the European Court of Auditors is so important. The Commission proposes merging funding for long standing policies such as cohesion and agriculture, and the Court of Auditors has raised serious concerns about this proposal. It is scary listening to the last five minutes here. Firstly, on centralisation, the proposal puts the powers in the hands of the national governments, greatly reducing the role played by regions and local communities. For a country like Ireland, where rural and regional development depends on strong local participation, this is deeply worrying. Cohesion policy was built on shared management and partnership, and I think it is fair to say, at least in my own country, balanced regional development is yet to be achieved with funding spent by the national government.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “We can't put up with this. This would be unfair to producers Contrary to the purpose of this policy and damaging to the confidence in our agri food sector. I will be bringing forward amendments to deal with these issues in the coming days. But before I finish, I want to say one thing as I speak this afternoon, farmers and food producers and contractors are blockading the city centre of the capital city of Dublin and protesting at ports and major arteries in 14 major Irish towns because of the fuel crisis. Last week, the farmers and food producers in Austria did this, protesting the day after tomorrow there in Helsinki. Chair, we have to pay urgent attention to this situation. We need to urge our member States to take urgent measures, and we must face our responsibility in this House in terms of coming forward with new initiatives, whether it be a new resilience plan to support these industries or indeed reprogramming cap payments. These are the food producers who are bringing forward the products we can promote. Chair, if we don't support them, there will be nothing to promote and I object to people referring to these protesters as dissidents. As one idiot said on radio this morning. These are ordinary, decent people, food producers. We need for food security. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “In contrast, in other parts of Ireland, Airbnbs are an important economic player. Noel, from Foxford in County Mayo, wrote to me in the last couple of weeks to point out that she rents her own self-contained flat in that part of Ireland. It makes an important contribution to tourism income in that part of the in that area. So all of our, all of our Airbnbs are not causing difficulties right across. As one of the presenters, the presentation said this afternoon, very clearly one fit does not fit all. Certainly one size does not fit all here. Therefore, I call ladies and gentlemen for a balanced approach to this situation. It is true there are good examples in Europe of where severe action has been taken. We must look carefully at the implications of that. We must ensure that really the winners are people, first time buyers and young couples who could not find a home. We must ensure they are our first priority. If it works in that area, we can learn from it. But we cannot say one size fits all. We must respect the property rights of homeowners as well. Thank you.”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals
• “Thank you. Chairman. Colleagues. I'm speaking on behalf of Charles Goerens, who is the shadow rapporteur. Unfortunately, he's not able to be here today. He'd like to thank the rapporteur for this draft opinion on the budget guidelines for 2026. And renew in general. Quite happy about the draft opinion. We need a solid budget for the cap. It's crucial for the agricultural sector and the development of our rural areas. We also approve the draft opinion, which recommends improving accessibility to crisis reserves, to increase the funding available for research and development, and to support trade agreements which respect the principle of reciprocity. We also like the part that focuses on generational renewal and the focus on young, young people and women. That's extremely important for us. There are emerging crises in several member states. Generation renewal is a huge challenge, and too few young people envisage their future as farmers or agricultural workers. We should change this and invest in a responsible and consistent manner. We will be tabling some additional amendments, particularly on the importance of preparing to increase the resilience of the farming sector in the face of the consequences of climate change and the epidemics of zoonoses. We'd also like to highlight the importance of preparing EU enlargement in order to ensure a harmonious transition. The stability of the farming sector and fair prices for European consumers. As part of trade agreements. We also call on the Commission to carry out a targeted revision of these policies in order to protect the agri food industry in Europe from unfair competition, and to compensate European farmers if necessary. Once again, we'd like to thank the rapporteur for this draft opinion and we look forward to working with him on this opinion. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “But this is only really half the story. It doesn't it doesn't really translate at all into a proportionate reduction in the administrative workload. Um, and you know, there are lots of examples of, of what we should be doing, uh, and how we should be following. I will raise this point with commissioner veto. He comes to Ireland next week. I've said this on umpteen occasions. We cannot have just kind of, you know, words. Words are cheap. Funding the MFF must back up this proposal with the with the cash, with the finance for these areas, for local and regional authorities. You're quite right. They must have a meaningful exchange with the Member States. We can't have the Member States dictating where cohesion funds are spent. All of it. What is the point of having cross-border cooperation? And we worked hard share, as you know, in this House, to ensure that we would support cross-border cooperation in real terms. Our colleagues in Renew, my colleague Sandro, for instance, and others worked very, very hard on practical measures to allow us to ensure that cross-border cooperation might not. Just saying we pass legislation here last year and supported measures and directives that allowed, for instance, people to benefit as a result of cross-border cooperation.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “On the downside, as I say, the affordability, affordability, housing and social housing situation has this improved? Homeless figures have surpassed 17,000 in my country at the moment and regrettably, that's an increase of almost 2000 since you were here last year. The figure also reflects the fact that 5300 children are homeless. So I think we need radical action by the member states. I think we need intensive, high volume projects. And that's why I ask the commissioner, when he was here, our housing commissioner, to look at something like the Green Village model, the Green City model proposed as a master plan for Ireland by the Ballymore Group, 20,000 zero carbon mixed tenure homes, alongside a project for university for 25,000 student university, a 5000 bed eco village. Multifaceted project. Um, sometimes we're not good at joining up projects, regrettably, in housing. And you will tell me there's 2 or 3 different agencies and 2 or 3 different groups involved. But we must do this. We have to approach it in a multifaceted way. So I'm interested in asking you when we will see progress and when we will likely to see action, I suppose to complete my, my, my contribution from invest in you in terms of that student project and student rental in the future. And when we're likely to see a joined up approach across the member states. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the rapporteur. And we're told that regenerative agriculture will enhance food production, protect soil health and strengthen biodiversity, while also increasing farm incomes. But how can this be achieved when the very structure designed to deliver it, our Common Agricultural Policy, is being continuously underfunded? The latest commission proposal would slash 83 billion from the cap. More for less simply does not work. And farming is aging. And while both the EU and national governments are well aware of this crisis, no serious proposals have been tabled to reverse this trend in income. Income is the key factor here. Yet policy is failing. So I ask, what concrete measures do you propose to make farming viable for young farmers? You refer in this paper to better land transfer conditions. But what does that mean in practice? And do you support the Commission's proposal to cut cap funding to farmers who reach the old age pension age? And while this income crisis deepens, the EU is advancing trade deals, as we know, as such as Mercosur, a deal that would permit vast imports of beef and other food produced under far lower environmental and animal welfare standards, competing directly with our Irish and our EU farmers taking the soil from under us.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the Commission and the rapporteur for the background to the to this file. Chair, the Commission says the amendments to regulation 18 848 are indeed required because of the court judgment, and I hope they will deliver real simplification for organic farmers across the European Union. Farmers who choose organic production already operate under strict rules, and what they need from us as legislators is clarity. Proportionality, and an administrative system that supports their work, rather than adding further complexity. But this discussion must also be viewed in the broader context of the European food system and the farmers who produce the food consumed every day, both organic and non-organic. Organic farming represents roughly 11% of EU agricultural land, while organic food consumption is estimated at around 8 to 10% of the total food market. So that means up to 90% of the food consumed by our citizens is non-organic, produced by conventional farmers who also made very high production standards. So while protecting the integrity of the organic label is essential, we must also ensure that food labelling across the entire market is clear, transparent and trustworthy. A message must go out of this room this morning that all food labelling must be unambiguous in its detail. We have to send the message to the food safety authorities at member state level and indeed at EU level, that there is no room for confusion in this situation, we must have clarity.”
  Food labelling harmonisation at EU level
• “Thank you. Chair. I'd like to thank the panelists for their impactful interventions here today on this crucial issue. Colleagues, having spent over 25 years as a volunteer myself with Lions Clubs International, a charity working with the vulnerable and homeless, and indeed as a news correspondent for a national broadcaster in Ireland, I witnessed firsthand how housing challenges can devastate families and communities across rural and urban urban Ireland. Homelessness is a complex issue. It is not simple. At the heart of much of our homelessness is tragedy for families involved. There is no sometimes there is no straightforward solution, but it is up to us, the society, to do our best to support those involved. Today's panel brings together extraordinary expertise from across the housing spectrum. I would like to extend a special welcome to Professor Kenna, director of the center for Housing Law, Rights and Policy at University College in Galway.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you. Chair. The so-called safeguard provisions in the Mercosur trade agreement are not really worthy of the name. They're designed to act only after a collapse in beef prices has already taken place. By that point, the damage to EU farmers, to rural jobs and to the market confidence is already severe. It's a reactive safeguard. It's not a safeguard at all. What do we need and what our amendments to the Inter Committee will deliver, I hope, is a proactive preventative measure. A minimum price threshold that cannot be breached. If imports threaten to push EU beef prices below that line, then safeguard measures must trigger automatically and immediately. This is real protection for farmers. It's real stability. We must also insist on something fundamental to your preferential access must mean full equivalence with EU standards on animal welfare, food safety, traceability, antibiotic and hormone use and environmental rules. If equivalent equivalence cannot be proven, then preferential treatment should not apply. That should be the rule. Finally, we must protect the premium beef cuts that determine farm viability right across our union. These margins keep family farms alive and working, and without them, entire regions will face decline. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Power station. Closed it down. But they were not ready to transition to renewables. So in the car park of this power station today, they burn diesel oil in a peaker plant. This is crazy. It is nuts. So we must ensure member States are ready for this. Similarly, they now propose to take down power stations in my community and they have no major renewable project lined up. Instead, they say they will spend between 10 and 15 million taking away these power stations and the workers who have lost their jobs read reports in the newspapers that companies in India and elsewhere will buy some of the materials and the equipment from the old power stations and bring them to India. This type of report drives the people in the community absolutely berserk. They say what is where is where is the sense in this? Where is the organization? That is why, Commissioner, we need the commission to be centrally involved as we go forward. We need the Commission to take control of the Just Transition Fund and ensure it works for the people who lost their jobs. Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to Mr.. For the presentation to us this morning. Um you know I think his opening statement summed up why we should be focusing with regard to cross-border cooperation. You're right. Cohesion funds should be there to foster economic growth and job creation. And you're right in saying indirect should be connecting people with a cross-border approach. The difficulty is that the Commission's proposals for the 2028 2034 MFF are not quite providing the funding or the or indeed the vision for this type of activity. They're presented to us as simplification and in fact, in reality, as far as I can see, there are centralization of EU funding at national level. And that means it's a hollowing out of the impact of regional and local factors, really. Um, and, you know, people reading this proposal have said that already in the cross-border regions where they see program managers see their own role as radically altered and funding streams, which have benefits for communities across the EU and for all intents and purposes, have been withdrawn. As far as they can see, around 540 programs are to be replaced by 27 NRP plans going forward and one Interreg plan, with the commission estimating a 30% reduction in administrative costs.”
  Cohesion and rural funding · EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “I thank you, chair and colleagues, and thank you for the presentation this morning. Renew welcomes this practical approach and this practical proposal to protect, to restore and to maintain healthy soils across the European Union. I think this is exactly the kind of initiative we should support. It's practical, it's science based and grounded in the real experience of farmers and rural communities right across our union. Agriculture is already facing the effects of climate change. We know that flooding, drought and wind erosion, and we know that healthy soil performs better. It holds water better, supports stronger growth and gives greater resilience in difficult conditions. We've seen this on the ground. We should also remind ourselves that it can take a thousand years to create just one centimeter of soil, so that soil can disappear in one torrential rainstorm. This is why prevention is so important. So once soil is damaged, restoring it is neither quick nor indeed easy to do. What is especially positive about this mission is that it links research with practical action. It is not research for the shelf, it's research designed to deliver solutions that can work at the coalface of farming and make a real difference. So I'm pleased to say that I support this. And Ireland hosts a full mission aligned living lab to the Socrates project. It brings together the technological University of the Shannon with Ballyhara Development Clock, Jordan Community Farm looped together, and the Kraken Seeds Limited Company, all working together at the coalface of farming across Clare, Limerick and Tipperary. It's a very good example of how the European policy comes comes together with local communities and researchers to deliver practical results. Healthy soil is indeed the foundation of sustainable agriculture, food security and resilient rural areas. I wish you well in achieving the results. The goal of establishing 100 live labs in the EU, and I'll do my part to encourage more in my region. For that reason, renew is very pleased to support this proposal. Thank you.”
  Soil protection policy
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you, Commissioner. And let me say, firstly, I look forward to your visit to Dublin for the summit and the first housing summit, and I really look forward to to discussing the issues on the ground with you. Um, Commissioner, like many of our colleagues, I welcome this initiative, particularly the initiative to cut red tape and boost supply, reduce energy bills for households, and mobilising public and private investments to issues since December have been on my mind. How how is he really going to tackle? How is he really going to legislate with regard to the issue of short term rentals? And you've given us a bit more detail today. You're looking at the stress zones. You hands up! We can't touch the overall. We can't ban what? You're looking at specific categories. And I'm still wondering how you're going to legislate across member states to be able to do this. I welcome it because I think we we need a focus in in some areas and even in parts of the western seaboard of Ireland, as I've said many times in this committee where local people cannot buy homes, but people with the richest of this world can come in and buy a derelict properties and set up B&Bs under Booking.com or Airbnb, etc. it's most unfair. The other one that catches my eye is the is is action seven. Perhaps not so positive about this one. I was one of the people who asked you to go after the vulture funds Commissioner to to really try and be a bit more aggressive on this. I have to say, I don't see that in the suggestions and in the action plan. I see an awful lot of analysis and and greater transparency and peer learning, but I don't see anything with teeth to, to take them on.”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals
• “(11:09:38 – 11:12:23): Thank you, chair. I welcome the work of rapporteur Salvatore DeMeo on this important report on the future of the EU's agri food promotion policy. At a time of geopolitical instability, a rising production cost, growing trade uncertainty, and equivalent standards of non EU food products, the EU must back its farmers and food producers with a promotion policy that is ambitious and practical and market oriented. First, must recognize the value of EU promotion policy in opening markets, supporting exports, strengthening quality schemes, and building consumer confidence in European food production and its food products. Secondly, the budget obviously matters. The restoration of funding to €206,000,000 is welcome, but this funding must be used with greater flexibility and responsiveness. It makes no sense to return funding which remains unspent. There should be scope to redirect funding to alternative and appropriate marketing programs rather than simply returning money unused. Thirdly, we need greater flexibility in implementation. Promotion campaigns often require long term investment and relationship building in export markets. And the shadow repertoire, I've discussed this with agencies such as our own BoardBEA, who agree on this issue. Duration restrictions, including these rigid continuation rules, can undermine successful campaigns. So where justified operators should be allowed to maintain activity in key markets. I'm also concerned, chaired by amendments seeking to exclude meat, dairy, and other animal products from the EU promotional funding. Europe's livestock sector is central to rural economies, food security, quality production, and our agricultural heritage. Promotion policy should, at the end of the day, support sustainable production and informed consumer choice, not discriminate against legally produced European food sectors. Finally, the end of the day, as the Grape D'Or has said today, the labeling on the country of origin is critical in my opinion in terms of this, this file. We must have clear unambiguous information on the safety, the origin of country, whether it be EU or non EU, particularly at a time chair when we know from the commission that Brazil has been excluded from the EU's approved third country exporters list with a with effect from the 09/03/2026 because it failed to provide sufficient guarantees on antimicrobial and growth promoter use. Consumers at the end of the day need to have clear labeling. EU or non EU provides clarity on these issues. Thank you.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• “Mr. Rivlin, you come to Brussels with a great reputation as a builder who does a great job. But you also know the persona that goes with builders and developers. I think you're one of the first private developers that has come before this committee. And that persona, sometimes rightly or wrongly, is associated with making a margin and a higher margin and another, higher margin. So I have to put it to you this afternoon, that part of the problem, not just in Ireland but in Europe, is that builders and developers, maybe not you, but others who are hoarding land, who have land, thousands of acres of land, but are holding on to it and holding the market to a ransom, so to speak. I want you to address that, and I also. The problem is then, because how can private investors be encouraged to invest in affordable social housing if the cost is going up all the time and the cost of acquiring the units can be seen as too high in comparison with the investment, return, is not part of it your fault?”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you. Chair. I want to commend the rapporteur for his work on this file. We live in challenging times. Our farmers and our food producers face huge issues with regard to costs and new markets. So never before have the funds been used for the EU agri food promotion policy been more important. We need the budget of 205 million for 2026 to address these issues. And while I acknowledge the policy is doing well. There is still room for improvement. I want to see us achieve greater success, especially through better distribution of support for SMEs, which too often do not have the same access to these programs as larger organizations. And we must focus on informing consumers near and far that EU food is better for us and we must pay our put our country of origin and our products. We stand over the quality, the safety and traceability and the sustainability of what we produce. So why shouldn't we promote this message with confidence and be very clear, we're not here to promote products from places like Brazil or elsewhere within our EU budget. I'll be meeting Bord BIA in Ireland later this week to underline that fact. In general chair, we need. We must also not allow any EU agri food products to be excluded from access to promotional funding on the basis of what I describe as unscientific assumptions are that the consumption of certain foods represents a health issue.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• “All products must show the country of origin, not just the logo. And I feel strongly that we must have absolute lack of confusion on this pact in Ireland means nothing on the front of a package, unless the country of origin is clearly identified for the production of the food and the origin of the food, we have to move towards that situation. And a key issue in this regulation today is the treatment of imports from third countries. European farmers, both organic and conventional, must comply fully with EU standards, so it's essential that imported products meet the same standards. This brings us to the distinction between equivalence and full compliance. Under the previous system, third country products could be accepted as organic if their standards were considered equivalent to EU rules, but equivalence does not necessarily mean the same rules apply to the production of the food involved, as my colleague has just raised. We ask the question of the Commission today are they satisfied with the system of equivalence truly delivers? Is the reciprocity. There are the same standards being followed. How will we know?”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• “Commissioner madam van der Leyen, last July you came into this Parliament and offered us a budget that left farmers with 20% less in their income. We rejected it outright. Last weekend you realised we were serious. You changed. You changed. You tried to pretend it was something else. But today you came in with a pig in a poke. Do you know what that is? You are offering us an opportunity to buy something. We do not know what it is. You told us today you were going to have rural targets in future. There will be 10% more. We need specifics. In fact, we need our old pillar two back. Commissioner, we need our pillar two for EU Leader Fund. And for all those other key issues in cohesion funds, we need specific funding ring fenced for our Member States. You started the process of just transition across Europe. You funded the workers who lost their jobs for the first 4 or 5 years. You cannot walk away now. You cannot say it's a matter for the member states. These are your policies in the first instance that left hundreds of people out of work. They rely on this funding. I say to you, we will not buy this pig in the poke. Start again. Come up with another plan. Thank you.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “All products must show the country of origin, not just the logo. And I feel strongly that we must have absolute lack of confusion on this pact in Ireland means nothing on the front of a package, unless the country of origin is clearly identified for the production of the food and the origin of the food, we have to move towards that situation. And a key issue in this regulation today is the treatment of imports from third countries. European farmers, both organic and conventional, must comply fully with EU standards, so it's essential that imported products meet the same standards. This brings us to the distinction between equivalence and full compliance. Under the previous system, third country products could be accepted as organic if their standards were considered equivalent to EU rules, but equivalence does not necessarily mean the same rules apply to the production of the food involved, as my colleague has just raised. We ask the question of the Commission today are they satisfied with the system of equivalence truly delivers? Is the reciprocity. There are the same standards being followed. How will we know?”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to Jahili of the European Economic and Social Committee for the work that's been done on this. I welcome your opinion on a number of aspects of the proposed post 2027 cap. And indeed, like yourself, I fully support the principle that the Common Agricultural Policy was, is, and must remain a policy focused on food production and food security. We all want the two pillar system back. How many times do we have to say it around this room, around this building, before somebody's going to listen to us? Because at the end of the day, this is the foundation of the cap and it must remain so going forward. A couple of questions on a very detailed paper on convergence and discursivity. While I understand the case for reducing cap payments at the higher end, we've heard it before. I would welcome clarification on the proposed minimum threshold of €5,000, alongside the maximum ceiling of €100,000. Is this approach based on Turn production, or on the amount of land owned or farmed by the farmer involved. And one wonders, at a time when the agricultural policy is under pressure and when we are trying to protect the family farm model across the European Union. I believe this must be implemented in a way that's fair and reflects different farming systems and does not undermine viable family farms, regardless of their size. And above all, the guiding principle must be that support goes first to those who need it most. Thank you.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• “In this context, I'd urge the ECB to recognise this as a housing as a crisis, not just in language, but in actions as urgent as any other crisis we're currently facing. Now, while I understand this is not a decision that can be made by the ECB, I would like to ask for your opinion on the possibility, as we have done in the past, for defence spending, of actually breaking the Stability and Growth pact for housing spending. Activating the national escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact would, in my opinion, allow member States the flexibility to deviate from spending targets without endangering fiscal sustainability. This would be a clear signal to all that it is time for action to deal with this crisis. I also grateful to my colleagues who have been watching your your presentation this morning. I want to ask you one question with regard to investor behavior in in Europe, and that is with regard to the investment funds and the big companies investing in apartments. We have had the Irish authorities here telling us that no apartments have been built in Dublin at the moment. Why? Why are there no investors? That's my question. Thank you.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “Chair. Thank you very much. I welcome this review, and I thank the group behind it for bringing it to today. Yesterday afternoon, I attended a meeting in the in this building with representatives of 103 regions, the committees of the regions. And the issue was raised repeatedly by the members and indeed by the executives of the regional authorities about their frustration with the administrative work, the detailed administrative work, and the lack of simplicity. The need for simplicity was raised. However, I took it up with the regional authorities myself that I felt there was an issue for them to answer with regard to the absorption rates of some of the cohesion funds, and particularly the fund of recent times, a smaller fund, the EU Just Transition Fund. I raised the point that even the president of the Commission, Mrs. von der Leyen, agreed with me recently that the absorption rate for just transition was very poor in the recent past. The regional authorities made a specific point that they felt the higher absorption rate was directly related to the higher rate of error. I would like your opinion on this issue. If this is agreed opinion, is it the case? Is it the case that they are right that a higher absorption rate is directly related to a higher level of error? Or is it the case that we must see a new approach to this issue at local authority, regional level and community level? Chair, you must remember many people in the community groups do not have the expertise at all and are frustrated in dealing with these funds. They will come to the table without professional expertise. They need our help and our assistance. But I agree we must not have errors. Thank you.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to both of our speakers for for an enlightening and concise summary of what's going on in amidst all the fog. Your presentation underlines, I think, a very uncomfortable truth for us in this room. The Commission's proposals risk just widening the gap between ambition and reality. In terms of EU agricultural policy, the cap cannot be expected to carry ever more responsibilities with an even tighter budget. People watching in this morning are waiting for the answer. Where are we going to make up the 24% loss in our single farm payment? That's a basic question. Where is it going to come from? And it seems to me the answers are far from far from clear. If the 20 2834 MFF does not provide sufficient resources, then the burden will simply be pushed on to member states, to higher co-financing expectations and more uneven implementation. I agree with my colleague here beside me. Maybe we should hear from member states how much money will they bring to the table in their NRP? Then we will know some member states will bring none a common policy. How can we have a common policy in those circumstances? So I think the overall the co-funding expectations are very important, and I think it would weaken the common nature of the Common Agricultural policy itself. So the time of growing uncertainty and volatility and pressure on farm incomes. I think this is exactly the wrong direction. A Europe cannot say agriculture is strategic at the end of the day. I asked one question of the panel is it not just renationalisation? That's what's going on here. Of the fund. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you. Chair. I hadn't intended to to comment on this particular item, but the phrase the principle of the right to stay is thrown around this building like confetti at a wedding. And I often think sometimes we really don't understand the economic and political decisions that are or are needed to make any sense to us. Earlier this afternoon, you welcomed John Joe Fitzgerald, a hill farmer, a sheep farmer from County Kerry who comes here looking for solutions and listens to this debate and wonders, I suppose, if we're in tune, because he says initiatives like this and this type of move we're involved in must focus on environmental and eco schemes that are practical, accessible and are suited to extensive farming systems while avoiding excessive bureaucracy and administrative burdens. And I agree with him. He asked for Cap policies that encourage generational renewal through positive incentives rather than penalties or exclusions of of older farmers who continue to play a vital role in maintaining a cultural activity and supporting family systems. At the end of the day, farmers want the reduction of unnecessary bureaucracy and opposition to coupled payment systems that are increased complexity, compliance burdens and market distortion. That's what farmers want.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the panel for their contribution this morning. Generational renewal, I suppose it's a posh way of saying handing over a farm. But as my colleague Benoit has just said a few moments ago, handing over what is it, handing over a fixed income? Is it handing over an income that a family can live on? Is it handing over a livelihood? And the Cap proposals suggest that in the present circumstances, it's not because with the reductions proposed of 20%, up to as far as 25% even, it's taking away that income and taking away the stability that is needed. And that surely is the greatest obstacle. I have two questions for the panel. We've heard a lot about bulk payments and upfront payments for young farmers coming in. I'm wondering, in your opinion, if there is anything the EU can do to address the significant age imbalance within the agricultural sector and accelerate generational renewal without those payments? What happens if they're not there? And do you believe the Commission's proposals regarding paid holiday sick leave, maternity and parental leave will help address the severe under-representation of young women in farming? Thank you. Chair.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “We passed directives which ensure that a fire service on one side of a border, on one state can cross the border in a case of a of a major emergency. It's simple a measure, but it needs funding and needs support going forward. I regret that's not there at the moment. I agree, of course, what you say in terms of the need for cooperation with our immediate neighbours. Perhaps those of us not in the EU anymore. The United Kingdom was the one you mentioned and you're quite right from an. As an Irish MEP, I am acutely aware of the difficulties posed by Brexit and our ongoing relationship. And I say you're quite right. We need to sit down and have tangible relationships and fix fixed understandings with our partners in the UK to ensure that we can make a practical difference on either side of the border in those situations. And so, as I say, chair, we have we have lots of fine talk from our commissioner when it comes to cross-border cooperation, the importance of the regions. But it must be followed up now by specific measures with regard to giving us the MFF funding to make it make sense. Thank you very much.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Mr. president, Commissioner, it is one of the greatest crises of your lifetime and mine. Over the past eight years, average house prices around the EU have risen by nearly half, while rents have climbed by nearly a fifth in many households. Costs of the housing every month make up 40% of the expenditure. Now it is just not possible to go on. Many citizens are unable to find proper accommodation and end up commuting for hours and hours on end. Worse, again, we see students sleeping in their cars. I have seen this. So we have to act and act quickly. I brought almost 50 targeted amendments to this committee and I am very pleased that most have been taken on board. I am looking for a Reform commissioner of VAT legislation to allow member states to introduce a super reduced VAT on residential construction materials. I want to see us allowing fast track or modular apprenticeships to scale up the workforce in this badly needed area. And I am asking member states to support young couples by allowing for multiple dwellings to be built on family owned land in rural areas. These are pragmatic solutions. We have to remember what this is about. It is about Karina O'Grady from Galway City who lost her home in the crash. It wasn't her fault. Now she lives in a house. She's a mother of seven. All of them living at home. The oldest is 29. The eldest is 29 years old. It is a new generation of homeless people. And we have to stop this. We have to stop it now. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you chair. First of all, I'd like to thank Doctor Colom and Doctor Martinez for their excellent presentations. Um, I think we need, ladies and gentlemen, a, a balanced approach to this situation notwithstanding what we've heard this afternoon about the variants across Europe. Short term rentals have exploded in recent years. According to Eurostat, in 2024 guests spent nearly 855 million nights in short term rental accommodations in the EU. This represents almost a 20% increase compared to 2023. So therefore, we must focus on what is going on. In my own country of Ireland, two thirds of all Airbnb listings are for entire properties and are concentrated in tourist hotspots across the West Coast in large cities such as Dublin and Galway, according to 2025 figures. This particular challenge in many years have come here to the Parliament from parts of County Galway and County Kerry. Brendan O'Brien, from County Kerry Gaeltacht, told me about the the problems they're causing because young people cannot find a home to live in these communities. These are places designated for Irish speaking communities. There are tourist hotspots being overrun by short term rentals, making it increasingly difficult for locals to afford homes.”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals
• “So number one, they don't get a home. And number two, we lose the language of our country. This is borne out by figures colleagues. Over 106,000 people live in Ireland's Gaeltacht areas. In the 2022 census of Ireland, 63% indicated they could speak Irish. That's down from 72% in the previous census, and the local people are quite certain why it's happening. Even from Banu, which is an organization which advocates for housing policy reform in that area, has made it clear their language is under attack by people coming in, setting up short term lettings and Airbnbs. So inadequate planning policies and unchecked corporate acquisitions are causing difficulty, particularly for Airbnb style rentals. It is not a widespread problem, but it is a problem in some specific areas. We must face up to it in this committee. We must take on this, this challenge or we will have a people without homes and b we will lose part of our culture and our language, our native language. Thank you chair.”
  EU policy on urban development
• “(16:57:01 – 16:57:02): Thank you, chair. Across the European Union, farmers expected the commission to bring forward a serious and an effective response to the dramatic rise in fertilizer prices. Now while the measures announced are welcome, they do not confront the core problem. Farmers are already under immense pressure from soaring input costs, volatile markets, and uncertainty around food production. They need decisive European intervention, and, regrettably, I have to say they did not get us. Once again, the EU has effectively left member states to manage a crisis that is clearly European in scale. I acknowledge the Spanish government, which has delivered meaningful support for farmers facing exceptionally high fertilizer cost. That that shows governments can act when the scale of the problem is properly understood, but they should not depend on the capacity or the willingness of individual member states. This is a European crisis affecting European food production and food security, and it requires a coordinated European response. Is it acceptable that farmers are expected to shoulder these costs alone while Europe hesitates to act? The facts are stark. Fertilizer prices have increased by around 70%. Before the war, urea cost roughly €500 per ton. Today, farmers are paying over €850 per ton. No farmer can absorb increases of that magnitude. So the commission's proposal may be a step in the right direction, but it falls short of what is required. And that is why I'm proposing a clear solution today. All CBAM related revenues collected should be channeled directly back to farmers to a dedicated EU fertilizer support mechanism. If the EU is unwilling or unable to suspend the CBAM levy as a temporary crisis measure, then the least we can do is ensure that this money flows straight back to those who need it most. Chairman chairperson, commercial interests cannot be allowed to stand in the way of essential supports. Farmers need meaningful intervention, not half measures, and Europe's food security depends on us. We must act, chair, and colleagues, we must act. If we do not, we will have another crisis on our hands next autumn, next winter, and next spring. And because this time, our farmers and others have not been in a position to buy stock in advance, we will have a serious problem. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “I'm wondering about the cost involved. How would you suggest addressing the build costs per square metre in the EU? Based on the recent surveys in Dublin, the cost of houses is €3,775 per square metre and for apartments 3414 per square metre. So, based on predictions that inflation will remain reasonably stable over the next five years. What can we do to bring down this cost? Across the EU, but particularly in Ireland, which is one of the highest in the EU. You mentioned it. So I'm wondering for example, would it support. Would you support a VAT refund to first time buyers who could amount which could amount to up to 40 or €50,000 in Ireland's case? And how do you see the expansion of the remit of the member States affordable housing delivery bodies being expanded to the delivery of private housing? So I understand this is under consideration by the Irish government on Thursday of this week. Given the finite supply of state owned land in suitable locations and the need to develop large scale housing projects in the near future, could this be seen as a method to deliver? And would it be in keeping with state aid laws? One wonder as well.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the panelists. I want to begin by complimenting Mr. Brady and your organization on the significant amount of land you have helped to facilitate into productive arrangements. Over a thousand agreements covering more than 80,000 hectares is indeed significant. And it seems to be a relatively new model. I have personally experienced the positive impact this approach can have, and I believe it's a model that should be fully supported both at EU level and national governments. My questions to you today are as follows. What is your view and what is the single greatest obstacle at European level to encouraging older farmers to enter into transfer arrangements, either long term leasing or transferring the farm to the next generation? Is it primarily a structural or a policy barrier, or, in your opinion, is a more cultural issue where older farmers are reluctant to step back because farming is their identity and their way of life? And is there a sufficient interest from young farmers who are willing and able to take up farming or, you know, or are they all gone to college? Are they all academically driven, or is the real challenge that the current generation is simply not letting go of their farms? Is this the problem? Have you seen the same level of interest from young, professionally trained female farmers? You know, is there a demand equal there? And if not, what would you suggest to address that imbalance?”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Consumers all over Europe are experiencing a significant and sustained surge in food prices. On the 20th of April this year, food price inflation had risen by 4.9% over just 12 weeks. This staggering rise is hitting households directly in their pocket. According to Ernst and Young survey published in May, the average Irish household is now spending nearly two €0 per month compared to 2021. That is an enormous burden on working families. Figures from the Central Statistics Office confirm a cumulative increase of 3.6% for 12 consecutive months. Everything is going up, Commissioner. Even the butter in our canteen outside has gone out. Gone up by over 5% since I joined this Parliament last year. We know that food inflation hits hardest. Those who least can afford it, the lower paid, the disadvantaged. At European level. We must be honest about this. We must look at all the key contributing factors to fluid inflation. We know energy costs and conflict can play a role, but part of the cost pressure is driven by the rush to implement climate targets in non-realistic timescales. Well intentioned they may be, but our aim must be to strike a balance between environmental responsibility and economic affordability. Food security and the cost of living cannot be sacrificed just in the name of idealism.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you chair. And thank you to Doctor Hyland for the very interesting presentation this afternoon. Your statistics, uh, tell a tell a story of considerable difficulty for people in vulnerable, particularly in vulnerable situations. And I've met these people. I put faces on your statistics and you've described them so well this afternoon, last Thursday, I was in Barley Barn on the outskirts of Galway city in my constituency, and I met Corina, a mother of seven, living there, um, with six of her seven children still at home, the eldest, 29, and many of them working what she described as decent jobs, but cannot afford to buy a house in that city. Can I get a house? Um. And one other child not living at home, uh, paying €1,000 per month for a bedroom in a house where she said the landlord was not even registered. These are the victims of our housing crisis throughout the European Union. Not just an Irish story, but these are also the reason why we need to adapt an urgent approach to what we're doing. I'm pleased to say that in the course of the preparation of my amendments to our housing report, I've tried to address these issues and in terms of the emergency supports that are needed in these situations. Vulnerable groups come in all shapes and sizes. I met with Frances Hayworth from the Meath Women's Refuge and Support Services, and she explained to me, even within the level of support for vulnerable groups and vulnerable people. Technical issues and red tape often frustrate people in those situations. Very frustrating for them. If a woman is a joint name, for instance, on a tenancy and she removes herself voluntarily from that situation, then she goes to the bottom of the housing list. This type of critical issue is affecting people on the ground. We must be flexible and we must be support people. If it is a housing crisis, as I've said before chair, we need to act and act quickly to make it to ensure that we can bring some ease to those affected. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you, chair. And thank you, colleagues. And happy New Year to all colleagues. And thank you, chair, for allowing me to raise a short matter over the course of the last seven days, chair farmers all over Europe have taken to the streets again to protest against the proposed EU Mercosur trade deal. On the streets of Poland, on the streets of Germany, on the streets of Italy, and at the weekend, over 30,000 people in my member state in Ireland issuing once again their concerns over food safety issues and the threat to industry and to livelihoods. Two quick questions for you, chair. On Saturday, we read not only of president von der Leyen's plans to sign a preliminary agreement, but we read a report that she will proceed to implement this agreement before we, as MEPs, get an opportunity to vote in the European Parliament. This is not only undemocratic, it's dangerous. It is setting a precedent chair, which I hope that members of this House will see. We are entitled to have our vote on this issue. Whether you're for or against, you are entitled to have your vote on this issue before the final matter, before the matter is ratified or rejected.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you. Chair, I want to speak plainly about this proposal. In my view, it amounts to what's really the terms and conditions of the new cap payment for 2028 to 2034. And when we talk about terms and conditions, we must remember who is expected to live under them. Farmers right across Europe, farmers in Ireland, the people who produce food that keeps our citizens fed every single day. Now these farmers listen carefully. When Commissioner Hansen spoke about the new cap, many understood him to say that the future policy would reduce bureaucracy, would restore fairness and put food production back at the centre of cap. This is what farmers were told to expect. But there is another point that must be absolutely clear Irish and European farmers cannot tolerate additional environmental requirements unless they are properly paid for. As an extra measure, if new actions are needed, they must be funded as additional commitments not slipped in as new conditions that farmers must meet must meet just to receive the basic payment. So I say farmers cannot carry unfunded obligations. They cannot continue producing food for Europe while absorbing extra costs that are not recognized or compensated for. Thank you.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)