Explicaciones de voto por escrito Lynn BOYLAN

I voted in favour of this report. The report is progressive, advocating for feminist politics that embrace an intersectional approach to addressing women’s issues. It covers a range of topics which includes a critique of anti-gender movements, highlights the scourge of gender-based violence (GBV) both online and offline, and draws attention to unpaid care work.

I voted against the establishment of the Health (SANT) and Security and Defence (SEDE) sub-committees as stand-alone committees.
Until now, the SANT sub-committee has been part of the Environment and Public Health committee. I believe that this is the most appropriate place for discussions on health policy to take place. A lot of the health problems we are facing have an environmental component, for example air pollution, toxic chemicals and anti-microbial resistance. Splitting the committees will create silos and prevent us from finding holistic solutions. I am very worried that the SANT committee will become focused on pharmaceutical policies and so very subject to lobbying from the pharma industry. I of course believe that the European Parliament should continue to discuss health policies, particularly cross-border measures, but I regret the way in which it will now be done.
As for the SEDE committee, its creation represents a huge shift towards defence and militarisation in the European Parliament. One of its stated roles is to promote a Common Defence Union, to which Sinn Féin is resolutely opposed. I find it outrageous that the Parliament will have a Commission with a specific goal of promoting increased militarisation of the EU.

I voted in favour of this resolution and the establishment of this committee which will uphold human rights, freedom, equality, solidarity and democracy by addressing how foreign state actors and malicious non-state actors use information manipulation and other tactics to interfere in democratic processes in the EU.
Crucially the Committee will deal with rights of minorities and other discriminated groups.

I supported the establishment of this Committee. Housing is, and must remain a Member State competence but given the mandate to analyse and map out data this committee can aid countries like Ireland in providing data, expertise and ideas for policy initiatives. We are clear however that the housing crisis is a result of FF and FG failure and will only be solved by a Sinn Féin led government with radically different policies.

I voted against this report, as I am opposed to expanding the highly unfair and unsustainable EU-Pacific Interim Economic Partnership Agreement. The EPA requires small-island states highly vulnerable to the climate crisis to liberalise their markets and gradually open them up to EU competition. This creates a highly asymmetric trading relationship where these countries are forced to compete with the EU market. Furthermore, there has be no sustainability impact assessment on these agreements for the past 20 years. For these reasons, I could not support the report.

I voted in favour of this report because, while not going as far as I would like in terms of dismantling investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), it is a welcome first step. It is especially welcome given that in fighting against ISDS one of the key arguments is the lack of transparency and opaqueness around the process. I will continue to work to build on these first steps to bring an end to ISDS.

I voted against this report, as I am opposed to expanding the highly unfair and unsustainable EU-Pacific Interim Economic Partnership Agreement. The EPA requires small-island states highly vulnerable to the climate crisis to liberalise their markets and gradually open them up to EU competition. This creates a highly asymmetric trading relationship where these countries are forced to compete with the EU market. Furthermore, there has be no sustainability impact assessment on these agreements for the past 20 years. For these reasons, I could not support the report.

I voted against this report, as I am opposed to expanding the highly unfair and unsustainable EU-Pacific Interim Economic Partnership Agreement. The EPA requires small-island states highly vulnerable to the climate crisis to liberalise their markets and gradually open them up to EU competition. This creates a highly asymmetric trading relationship where these countries are forced to compete with the EU market. Furthermore, there has be no sustainability impact assessment on these agreements for the past 20 years. For these reasons, I could not support the report.

I voted against this delay to the application of the Deforestation Regulation. This is a classic case of environmental policy falling victim to other priorities, namely trade and corporate interests. These attacks against our environmental and social justice policies are only set to increase under this new Commission. I understand that the delay of the Deforestation Regulation was a prerequisite for signing the Mercosur deal, and the Mercosur text actually undermines the Deforestation Regulation even further. But the Amazon is reaching tipping point: we cannot afford to wait another year without taking real action on deforestation.
I have heard and understand the concerns raised by Irish farmers about the Deforestation Regulation. Ireland should be classed as a low-risk country and so farmers will have minimal obligations under the Regulation: they will have to provide information that they already provide to avail of CAP payments, and coordinates that can be found on any online map. Any increase in feed prices can be compensated by the EU’s urgency funding for agriculture - there is good precedent for this. But the answer is not to dismantle the Deforestation Regulation, particularly not in exchange for the Mercosur deal, which will be very detrimental to Irish farmers.

I am not happy with the proposal that will allow re-cycling of unspent cohesion money to help reconstruct after natural disasters. This is a dangerous precedent as it opens the door for hijacking of structural funds for emergency response when the Solidarity Fund already exists for this purpose. However given the current crises I supported this proposal as an emergency measure. The EU must however prepare better for future climate and natural disasters,