Michelle McIlveen
Strangford · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Public confidence depends not only on effective enforcement but on enforcement being exercised fairly and consistently. <BR /> <BR />There is widespread concern across Northern Ireland about the condition of many of our lakes and rivers, and there are a vast number of factors that contribute to water quality challenges.”
“Although we support the overall direction of travel, I think that is appropriate to reflect on the concerns that have been raised and ensure that the legislation is proportionate, practical and capable of delivering its intended outcomes.”
“If we are therefore serious about improving our aquatic environment, every source of pollution must be addressed. New legislative powers are meaningful only if the Department has the resources, the expertise and the personnel necessary to implement them effectively.”
“There is, however, a need for accompanying clear guidance and support and for regulatory consistency and prompt decision-making. Delays, uncertainty and excessive bureaucracy will undoubtedly discourage investment and undermine confidence in the sector.”
“Subordinate legislation should not become a substitute for proper democratic accountability. Consultation and engagement must be undertaken before regulations are introduced, and I cannot overstate the need for stakeholder engagement. <BR /> <BR />I will now talk about the Bill's proposed enforcement powers.”
“The DUP broadly welcomes the Bill. As has been said, it provides an opportunity to modernise legislation that, in some areas, has remained largely unchanged for decades. The Bill strengthens the protection of our fisheries, improves the regulatory framework for aquaculture and enhances the management of our water environment.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,597 lines we hold for Michelle McIlveen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 52.
“Whilst concerns remain about the extent of delegated powers, the practical implementation of regulatory provisions, departmental capacity and the need for continued stakeholder engagement, we can continue to address those issues as the Bill progresses. The DUP is content to support the Bill at this stage. We look forward to scrutinising it in the Committee.”
“The DUP has consistently argued that environmental policy must be practical, proportionate — a word that I have used quite a lot in this speech — and based on sound science. We believe in protecting the environment because it is the right thing to do, but we also believe in supporting businesses, farmers and fishermen, because they all contribute so much to our rural economy. If implemented sensibly, the Bill can achieve both objectives.”
“If we are therefore serious about improving our aquatic environment, every source of pollution must be addressed. New legislative powers are meaningful only if the Department has the resources, the expertise and the personnel necessary to implement them effectively. That applies right across the board: to licensing, inspections, monitoring, scientific assessment and enforcement. <BR /> <BR />I recognise both the importance of protecting our natural environment and the importance of supporting productive industries that provide employment, food security and economic opportunity. Those are not, and should not be seen as, competing priorities. Good environmental stewardship and economic prosperity can and should go hand in hand. It is a balance that needs to be struck correctly, requiring pragmatism over idealism.”
“Public confidence depends not only on effective enforcement but on enforcement being exercised fairly and consistently. <BR /> <BR />There is widespread concern across Northern Ireland about the condition of many of our lakes and rivers, and there are a vast number of factors that contribute to water quality challenges. The Bill represents one way of addressing those problems, but legislation alone will not resolve them. Improving water quality requires coordinated action across Departments, investment in infrastructure and meaningful engagement with farmers, landowners, local councils and environmental organisations. It also requires honesty about where responsibility lies. Too often, discussions about water quality focus exclusively on agriculture, while ignoring long-standing deficiencies in waste water treatment capacity.”
“Subordinate legislation should not become a substitute for proper democratic accountability. Consultation and engagement must be undertaken before regulations are introduced, and I cannot overstate the need for stakeholder engagement. <BR /> <BR />I will now talk about the Bill's proposed enforcement powers. Effective enforcement is clearly necessary if any legislation is to have credibility. Illegal fishing, environmental damage and deliberate pollution must all be dealt with appropriately. With strong enforcement powers, however, comes an equally important responsibility to ensure that those powers are used fairly, consistently and proportionately. Some of the higher levels of fines, for example, will exceed what some fishing vessels make in a year, and that needs to be considered.”
“There is, however, a need for accompanying clear guidance and support and for regulatory consistency and prompt decision-making. Delays, uncertainty and excessive bureaucracy will undoubtedly discourage investment and undermine confidence in the sector. <BR /> <BR />There is also a need for assurances from the Department that the powers in the Bill will be exercised in a transparent and proportionate manner. I have made the point previously about the use of secondary legislation, and the Bill contains a number of enabling powers that will ultimately determine how many of its provisions will operate in practice. There can be good reasons for taking that approach, particularly where technical detail is involved, but there is also a real need for there to be appropriate Assembly scrutiny.”
“Although we support the overall direction of travel, I think that is appropriate to reflect on the concerns that have been raised and ensure that the legislation is proportionate, practical and capable of delivering its intended outcomes. A recurring theme is the importance of balancing environmental protection with the realities facing those who work in the fishing and aquaculture industries. No one disputes the need to protect our waterways. Clean rivers and healthy fish stocks benefit everyone. Regulation, however, must be evidence-based and proportionate. Placing unnecessary administrative burdens on businesses that are already operating in very challenging economic circumstances needs to be avoided. The aquaculture sector supports high environmental standards as it is. Businesses depend on healthy aquatic ecosystems.”
“A modern legislative framework is required in order to provide certainty while enabling sustainable growth.”
“The DUP broadly welcomes the Bill. As has been said, it provides an opportunity to modernise legislation that, in some areas, has remained largely unchanged for decades. The Bill strengthens the protection of our fisheries, improves the regulatory framework for aquaculture and enhances the management of our water environment. No one would deny that those are important objectives. Our rivers, lakes and coastal waters are among our greatest natural assets. <BR /> <BR />Worthy of note is the fact that, although our aquaculture sector is small in comparison with that in other jurisdictions, it makes a really important contribution to local employment and food production, particularly in rural and coastal communities, such as the community in my constituency of Strangford.”
“Given the genuine concerns of the wider public in Northern Ireland, what measures is the Minister putting in place to specifically address the illegal networks that have been set up to support and encourage the flow of undocumented immigrants coming across the border from the Irish Republic?”
“Before seeking to occupy the moral high ground, others would do well to reflect on their own records. The DUP is clear that, when legitimate questions are raised, they must be answered. Openness, not evasion, is the only way to rebuild public confidence. We will not deflect, hide or shrink from scrutiny. We will follow the facts wherever they lead, because that is what victims deserve and what the people of Northern Ireland have every right to expect.”
“In recent days, further allegations regarding inappropriate behaviour have emerged, and there have been suggestions that others may have been aware of aspects of that behaviour. Those matters are deeply concerning. That is precisely why our party leadership has commenced the process of commissioning a specialised independent review. We intend to follow the facts, wherever they lead. <BR /> <BR />We could seek to deflect and to use today's debate to remind people of how Sinn Féin and the First Minister dealt with the McMonagle conviction or the scandal regarding Gerry Adams's brother Liam — about the cover-up and protection that was given to them. Indeed, the mover of the Matter of the Day is in no place to talk about truth and transparency: we all remember her timely trip to the toilet in Magennis's bar.”
“The guilty verdicts returned against Jeffrey Donaldson one week ago represented justice being delivered following the most serious and disturbing of criminal offences. No sentence can undo the harm that has been caused, but, at least, the victims can know that the truth has prevailed and the law has taken its course. Our thoughts remain with the victims and their families. For the courage that they demonstrated in coming forward and the strength that they showed throughout a lengthy and traumatic legal process, they deserve the respect of the entire House and the wider public. <BR /> <BR />When Jeffrey Donaldson was first charged, the Democratic Unionist Party acted immediately, because we believe in the rule of law and in allowing criminal proceedings to take their proper course.”
“Today, however, our thoughts remain with the victims. We pray that the verdict brings comfort as they move forward with their lives.”
“<BR /> <BR />No one is above the law. It does not matter how prominent a person may be, what position they hold or how much influence they possess. Everyone is equal before the law and equally subject to it. The evidence presented in this case was shocking. It is now clear beyond doubt that Jeffrey Donaldson abused positions of trust and power over many years while concealing vile and manipulative behaviour. It is now clear that Jeffrey Donaldson led a double and duplicitous life. His lies and cover-ups have been exposed. The spotlight of justice has shone upon them. That should serve as a reminder that perpetrators cannot outrun justice. We are writing to the Forfeiture Committee, through the Cabinet Office, asking that Jeffrey Donaldson be stripped off his knighthood and Privy Council titles.”
“A jury has concluded that Jeffrey Donaldson is guilty of some of the most heinous and despicable crimes imaginable. We welcome the fact that justice has been done and the rule of law has prevailed. Our thoughts are, first and foremost, with the innocent victims whose lives were profoundly impacted on by his vile and filthy behaviour. What they endured was wicked. The abuse itself was appalling, but so too was the burden placed upon them in having to relive that trauma through a lengthy criminal process. It is right that he will face the full force of the law in sentencing. Today, we stand with those victims. We salute their courage, resilience and determination to speak the truth. Their bravery in coming forward should serve as an encouragement to others who have suffered abuse that they will be heard and believed.”
“How a structure will be established as being dangerous without a comprehensive survey is not made clear, and the reasons for having such an audit or review are not made clear. Therefore, I am afraid that I cannot support that amendment or, as a result, amendment No 35. <BR /> <BR />We are content with the requirement for individual registers to be kept that is set out in amendment No 34, as that is in keeping with other environmental legislation, and for the registers to be open for inspection if needs be. That ties in with the review that forms part of amendment No 32. <BR /> <BR />In conclusion, I thank the departmental officials, the witnesses, the Committee Clerk and the AERA Committee team, and, of course, the Bill Office for their work and support during the Bill's Committee Stage.”
“However, the principle underpinning the legislation is sound. Communities deserve protection from the blight caused by long-term dereliction and neglect, and councils deserve effective powers that are clear, workable and proportionate. <BR /> <BR />I do not wish to repeat too much more of what other Members have said. We are content to support amendment Nos 1 to 32 and amendment Nos 34 and 36. Amendment No 33 is bureaucratic, unwieldy and, potentially, costly. The Bill proposes that councils be given discretionary powers to take the most appropriate action in the circumstances. Amendment No 33 is at odds with that. How a Department-appointed body or person would gather the necessary evidence to meet the obligation is not made clear. The number of buildings, structures and sites will be huge, but access issues are not made clear.”
“While councils need effective powers to address the most serious cases, we should encourage engagement with owners at an early stage and seek voluntary compliance where possible. The best outcome is often the one that is achieved through cooperation rather than enforcement. <BR /> <BR />The case for reform is compelling. The Bill provides a long-overdue opportunity to replace outdated legislation with a modern framework that better serves communities, supports regeneration and helps councils to address persistent problems that have too often gone unresolved. No legislation is perfect, and the Committee's scrutiny has highlighted areas where safeguards, guidance and implementation arrangements will require careful attention. Those concerns should continue to inform the Assembly's consideration of the Bill.”
“Otherwise, there is a risk that communities' expectations will be raised without councils having the practical ability to deliver the expected outcomes. In the short term, at least, it will be very much about managing those expectations. <BR /> <BR />Another important issue raised during Committee Stage scrutiny relates to historical and heritage buildings. Northern Ireland's built heritage is an asset that must be protected. In some cases, buildings may appear neglected but possess significant historical or architectural value. It is therefore essential that the new powers operate in such a way as to complement existing heritage protections and, where possible, to encourage restoration, rather than simply focusing on enforcement for its own sake. <BR /> <BR />Prevention should remain an important principle.”
“Enforcement should always be targeted at genuine cases of dilapidation and neglect rather than becoming an unnecessary burden on responsible owners who face temporary difficulties. <BR /> <BR />There is a real onus on the Department to ensure that the passing of the Bill does not mark the end of its role in this. I have said clearly that statutory guidance must go hand in hand with the powers and that there must be clarity on that. The Committee heard the concerns of local government stakeholders about resources and implementation, which we have heard about from other Members. Granting councils additional powers is one thing; ensuring that councils have the capacity, expertise and funding to use those powers effectively is another. If the legislation is to succeed, it must be accompanied by appropriate guidance, training and support.”
“It is finding, however, that closed catchment in NI Water assets means that new connections cannot be made in properties vacant over five years, so steps need to be taken by other Departments to ensure that the causes of dereliction and dilapidation are addressed. <BR /> <BR />Our support for the Bill and the amendments tabled by the Minister does not mean that we are ignoring the concerns that were raised during the Committee's scrutiny. The Committee carefully examined the balance between public interest and private property rights. The powers in the Bill are significant and, as with any enforcement legislation, need to be exercised fairly, proportionately and transparently. Property owners should have clear rights of appeal and access to due process.”
“It discourages investment, adversely impacts on neighbouring property owners, contributes to antisocial behaviour and creates a sense among communities that they have been forgotten. In giving councils a more effective means of addressing those problems, the Bill has the potential to support regeneration, improve local environments and increase civic pride in towns, villages and urban neighbourhoods across Northern Ireland. However, the Bill alone, as others have mentioned, cannot achieve that. In my constituency of Strangford, Ards and North Down Borough Council's Empty to Energised is a vehicle by which the council wants to bring vacant commercial properties back into use in Newtownards town centre.”
“It is important, however, that the Department is supportive of councils in delivering clear statutory guidance on the subjective terms in the legislation as well as the discretionary nature of the powers being conferred, and also on enforcement. The Committee heard that the Bill would bring Northern Ireland more closely in line with powers elsewhere in the United Kingdom and that it would provide councils with a coherent set of tools to intervene where buildings and sites have fallen into disrepair and strengthen the ability of councils to recover costs when they are required to take action. Those are important reforms if we are to be serious about tackling blight in our streets. <BR /> <BR />Dereliction does not affect just the appearance of an area.”
“The evidence presented to the AERA Committee demonstrated a broad consensus that the current legislative framework is no longer fit for purpose. Much of the law in the area is outdated. It is fragmented across a range of statutes, and it is often difficult for councils to use it effectively. As the Minister said, the Bill represents an opportunity to modernise those powers, consolidate enforcement mechanisms and provide councils with a clearer and more effective framework for tackling dilapidated buildings and neglected land — a problem that has worsened, not improved, in the intervening 14 years. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that there is discomfort among councils about the application of some of the powers, and we heard that throughout the Committee Stage. The fundamental objective of the Bill, however, is a good one.”
“However, it is, perhaps, disappointing that it has taken a further 14 years for us to get to this stage. After all this time, I remain an advocate for the creation of these powers, and therefore I welcome the Bill. <BR /> <BR />At its heart, it is a practical piece of legislation that seeks to address a problem that communities across Northern Ireland know only too well. That has certainly been mentioned in the Chamber today. We have all seen buildings and sites that have been neglected for years, creating eyesores, damaging local confidence, undermining regeneration efforts and, in some cases, posing genuine risks to public safety. We have all had complaints from constituents asking what is being done about the problem.”
“I am pleased to contribute to the Consideration Stage of the Dilapidation Bill. As you noted, Mr Deputy Speaker, when you chastised me earlier, I have been here a long time. I first raised the issue of the need for powers to be given to councils to address dilapidation in February 2012 with the then Minister Attwood in a motion that I brought to the Assembly on behalf of the DUP. During that debate, I referred to the enforcement difficulties being faced by councils, highlighting many of those issues along with problems that had been brought to me by environmental health officials in the then Ards Borough Council. I went through some of the prevailing legislation and suggested that that was something that the Minister needed to address. I was delighted to find a willing Minister, which is not always the case, so credit to Alex Attwood.”
“The Nolan principles exist to ensure that those who govern act solely in the public interest. The principles include avoiding obligations to outside individuals or organisations that might influence official duties; making decisions based on merit; being accountable to the public for actions and decisions; declaring private interests; and resolving conflict to protect the public interest. How can the public be assured of compliance with those principles when the Minister appoints a former IRA prisoner and a former Sinn Féin Minister to the same board?”
“That is disappointing to hear. How does the Minister intend to address the concerns of professionals over the heightened risk of exploitation of children by criminals should her party colleague's amendment on raising the age of criminal responsibility be passed?”
“Does the deputy First Minister agree that the public expect more from their political leaders than simply blaming others for all the challenges that we face, and that we can do things at a devolved level to put our finances on a more sustainable footing?”
“I am aware that PEACE PLUS projects looking at nature-based solutions to improve water quality on farms are being held up because of bureaucratic hurdles introduced by DAERA in relation to state aid. Will the Minister ensure that those hurdles are removed to enable work to commence?”
“I note from the statement that there was a discussion on the response to the impacts of climate change. Was there a wider discussion on the Irish Republic's Critical Infrastructure Bill 2026? Closer to home, has the Minister had any communication from Sinn Féin Ministers following the First Minister's comments that she would be open to amending the Climate Change Act, which would, of course, need to consider broader issues beyond infrastructure?”
“The Northern Ireland fishing industry is in crisis and, in its own words, facing a "perfect storm", with rising fuel costs, reduced fishing opportunities, restrictions that have been enforced by the Isle of Man Government and issues with foreign workers' visas. Sadly, many rely on gathering periwinkles, especially during bad weather, to supplement their income. Will the Minister stand up for the fishing industry and take account of the impact that such policies will have on the sector?”
“<BR /> <BR />Those who work in the industry deserve more than token gestures once a year. They deserve representatives who will stand up for them consistently not only at the Balmoral show but in the Chamber when votes are cast and decisions are made.”
“Unfortunately, other parties in the House chose a different path. Too often, Sinn Féin, Alliance, the Ulster Unionist Party and the SDLP have voted for policies that make life harder for Northern Ireland, while attempting to present a very different message when they arrive at Balmoral for a photo opportunity. <BR /> <BR />Farmers do not need lectures from politicians who speak warmly at agricultural events while supporting measures that increase costs, weaken competitiveness and make it harder to produce food. Agriculture is not a problem to be managed; it is one of Northern Ireland's greatest strengths. It sustains tens of thousands of jobs, contributes billions of pounds to our economy and plays a central role in maintaining the social fabric of rural communities.”
“The DUP has consistently stood with the agri-food sector when it matters. We oppose unrealistic climate targets that would pile additional pressures on to farmers and rural communities. We opposed the creation of a climate commissioner, which would have meant more bureaucracy and more cost. We have challenged policies that restrict infrastructure development and hold back the much-needed road projects that rural communities rely on. <BR /> <BR />When concerns were raised about the flawed nutrients action programme, it was the DUP that campaigned, alongside farmers and rural organisations, to force a rethink. As a result, the Agriculture Minister was compelled to revisit those proposals and engage more meaningfully with primary producers, rather than simply placing blame on the farming community.”
“Last week, tens of thousands of people from right across Northern Ireland gathered at the Balmoral show to celebrate the very best of our agri-food sector, our family farms and our rural way of life. Like many Members, I spent time speaking to farmers, producers, manufacturers and local businesses. The message that I heard, repeatedly, was straightforward: people want this place to help rural Northern Ireland, not burden it with costs, more regulation and more bureaucracy. <BR /> <BR />Every political party turns up to the Balmoral show. There is no shortage of smiles, handshakes and warm words for the cameras during those four days in May, but warm words at a show mean little if they are not backed up by votes and policies for the other 51 weeks of the year. That is where the difference lies.”
“Ards and North Down Borough Council, along with Newry, Mourne and Down District Council, have passed DUP motions supporting a fixed crossing between Portaferry and Strangford, and even though Strangford is no longer in the constituency of the Sinn Féin MP for South Down, he has come out and endorsed the plans. The Minister has highlighted that it would improve connectivity and that it would be good for tourism and economic development. Given the Minister's party position on the issue along with ours, will she commit to commissioning a full economic appraisal of the proposal?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. I am happy to request a meeting to discuss the matter further. What progress has been made on access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in Northern Ireland? Will the Minister outline any reasons for the delay in the availability of CAR T-cell therapy?”
“Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results has been described as the definition of insanity. If we keep doing the things that we have been doing, costs will continue to rise. The burden will grow, and, unless decisive action is taken, our farmers will continue to pay the price financially, emotionally and socially. If we are serious about eradicating bovine TB, we must be willing to act. The action that we take must be guided by evidence and be focused on outcomes. We must be committed to delivering real change. At present, we are failing to deliver for our farmers and our rural communities. I commend the amendment to the House.”
“Farmers are playing their part by complying with testing regimes, investing in biosecurity and adapting to changing requirements. They now need decisive action from the Department that matches their commitment. Our amendment reflects that reality. It recognises the full economic burden of bovine TB, acknowledges who is bearing that burden, highlights legitimate concerns about current approaches and calls clearly for immediate, evidence-based action, including wildlife intervention.”
“Each breakdown brings financial strain, operational disruption and emotional stress.”
“<BR /> <BR />We also recognise the allocation of funding through the Shared Island initiative and the intention behind the regionalisation pilot. Cooperation can, of course, play a role. However, it is important that we listen carefully to the concerns raised by the Ulster Farmers' Union, which has warned that the chosen pilot area is not representative of the wider Northern Ireland TB picture. If the data that we gather is not representative, the conclusions that we draw will be fundamentally flawed. That risks setting policy back rather than moving it forward. <BR /> <BR />Farmers want solutions that work in the real conditions that they face every day. They want us to grasp that this is urgent. Across Northern Ireland, herd breakdowns remain far too high. In many constituencies, they are a regular and disruptive reality.”
“Peer-reviewed research, including the 2024 analysis by Birch and colleagues, shows that, where a comprehensive package of measures that includes wildlife intervention, enhanced testing and strengthened biosecurity is implemented, TB incidence reduces significantly over time. Reductions of up to 56% have been seen by the fourth year. The evidence also shows that progress is not immediate but builds over time. That reinforces the need for a sustained, balanced and integrated approach if we are serious about eradication. That is the approach that the DUP has consistently supported. There is a need for robust, evidence-based policies, including targeted wildlife intervention alongside a long-term ambition to move towards vaccination where possible.”
“We need to move beyond simply managing the consequences of bovine TB and, instead, focus on tackling the underlying drivers of disease persistence. To do that, we need to introduce a truly comprehensive disease eradication strategy. <BR /> <BR />We welcome the work of the TB partnership group and the publication of its eradication blueprint, but having a blueprint is not enough. It must be implemented in full and with urgency. To do that, the Department needs to address all three pillars: cattle, people and wildlife. That unavoidably includes a wildlife intervention. We know that that is not a straightforward issue. No one in the Chamber takes it lightly. Badgers are an iconic part of our countryside, and there are strong views on all sides. In saying that, however, we cannot ignore the growing body of scientific evidence.”
“<BR /> <BR />Why, after all this time and all the rural policy, are we still here? In its 2018 report, the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) made it clear that, despite significant public expenditure, the eradication programme has not delivered the desired outcome. The cycle of testing, removing and compensating for animals has not succeeded in eradicating the disease. Continuing with the same approach will not change that. Of course, compensation, while necessary, addresses only a fraction of the problem. There are farmers who do not recognise it as compensation. It reflects the value of animals lost, but it does not cover productivity losses, the disruption to work on the farm or the ongoing financial strain on the business.”
“They mean that farmers no longer want to farm and the next generation looks elsewhere. Some 50·9% of farmers state that they have considered leaving farming because of bovine TB. That is over half our farmers. <BR /> <BR />The impact does not stop at the farm gate. Local marts feel it when throughput declines, supply chains are disrupted and export opportunities are constrained. Our TB status limits access to certain international markets, placing Northern Ireland at a competitive disadvantage compared with other regions. When we talk about bovine TB, we are talking not just about an outbreak on a farm here and there but about a structural issue that affects the entire agri-food economy. It affects rural employment, food production and our ability to compete globally.”
“Those are not abstract costs; they include production losses, additional labour demands, increased biosecurity costs, cash-flow pressures and environmental inefficiencies. They are felt day-in, day-out by farmers who are already working long hours in a challenging economic climate. <BR /> <BR />Behind every statistic is a real farm family who are dealing with uncertainty. Individuals are feeling the stress and emotional strain every day. Herds that have been built up over generations are being placed at risk. Livelihoods are at risk, and farms that have been handed down from generation to generation are facing ruin. There is an inescapable and significant emotional toll. The report highlights stress, anxiety and even social withdrawal as common experiences during TB breakdowns. Those pressures persist long after restrictions are lifted.”
“Importantly, however, and a fact before now unknown, is that over £96 million of that figure is borne directly by farmers themselves through indirect costs. For every £1 that it costs the Government, it costs farmers over £1·60. What is particularly striking is that over half those costs arise even in herds that have never experienced a TB breakdown. The cost of bovine TB is a burden that is being carried across the entire sector, not just by a small number of farms. <BR /> <BR />The Andersons Centre report is clear that bovine TB is not a short-term or isolated issue. Rather, it is a structural constraint on livestock farming in Northern Ireland. It is embedded across the sector, cumulative in its impact and acts as a persistent drag on farm profitability, efficiency and sustainability.”
“That context matters, and it allows us to respond proportionately whilst still taking the issue seriously. While the direct public health risk may be low, the impact on our farming community is profound and increasing. Members will be aware of the recent report from the Andersons Centre, commissioned by industry bodies including the Ulster Farmers' Union, in which the true scale of the burden that is being placed on the farming community as a result of bovine TB is laid bare. The report is not just timely with regard to this debate but provides us with invaluable information to understand the true cost of bovine TB, including on the mental health of our farmers. <BR /> <BR />What we learn is that there is an annual economic cost of approximately £156 million to Northern Ireland's agriculture sector.”