That is not my position.
On prevailing side: this member voted with the winning side in 52 of 1,007 decisive votes (14 abstentions excluded). Read it as a government-or-opposition indicator rather than a measure of influence — the figure is near 100% for members supporting the government of the day and near 0% for those opposing it.
This is the point of the site: contributions keep the party held on the day, not the one held now.
| Party | Recorded as | Contributions | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| SF | Sinn Féin | 2,327 | 2020-02-20 – 2026-09-30 |
| CC | Ceann Comhairle / Chair | 1 | 2024-02-22 – 2024-02-22 |
Membership spells on record: SF 2020-02-08–2024-11-08 · SF 2024-11-29–present
That is not my position.
My position is that there should be full convergence. That was the Minister's position a little over 12 months ago.
What is the Minister's position?
May I ask the Minister the following question?
Why did the Minister sit on a platform with me at a hotel in Letterkenny in a roomful of farmers and say categorically his position was that he was in favour of full convergence?
In other words, the Minister still does not have a position on that matter.
The Minister has been a defender of sovereignty and has fought for flexibility to ensure decisions are made at a national level. That is laudable. Will he ensure the CAP strategic plan that is being sent by the Irish Government is first approved by the Dáil?
Will we have an opportunity to vote on the matter?
Will the Minister bring that before the Dáil?
I take it, therefore, the Minister will not bring it before the Dáil.
The Minister will not allow the Oireachtas to have its say.
This legislation is a litmus test for the Government, particularly for the Green Party in government. I often wonder if the Minister accepts at all the critiques that are made of his approach to climate. Representatives of all parties, across all political parties, have reiterated that point. Many people see climate action as meaning very little other than additional charges on them and their families, forcing people to pay for things for which there is no alternative. The Minister's utterances in the past have sim…
Farmers receive various payments per hectare under the Common Agriculture Policy. These payments are based on production levels from two decades ago. Most EU countries have moved to a flat rate payment per hectare in a process known as convergence. Such a process would benefit the majority of farmers in Ireland. A total of 60% of Irish farms would get more. Why is the Government adopting a position in the CAP talks that runs against the interests of the majority of farmers? Why is it fighting against a front-loaded…
No. The House needs to have a debate this week on the EU agricultural talks. It is not good enough to suggest that a discussion can take place after the negotiations are over. We need to hear from the Minister as to why he has adopted an approach to those negotiations that will disadvantage the majority of Irish farmers. Unfortunately, we are dealing with this in the context of the Government having agreed to an EU budget that will see Irish contributions increase by up to €1 billion per year-----
-----while the proportion spent on CAP will fall from 37% to 30%. A Cheann Comhairle, this is very important. This week, we learned that two farms under the control of Larry Goodman received €414,000 last year in CAP payments-----
-----and a farm owned by a sheikh received more than €222,000-----
These are the inequalities and the Minister is trying to prevent equality measures being put in place. We need that debate this week.
He is.
The Minister should come before the House and explain himself.
He is fighting against every redistributive measure at EU level.