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 5 of 52.
“Is this where we are as a society, where politicians are condemned for speaking directly to the innocent victims of the 7 October massacre, public representatives are not permitted to ascertain facts for themselves and we must source our news and current affairs only through avenues permitted by nationalism? No, thank you. Once this pantomime is over, perhaps we can get back to what we are paid to do. I support my colleague.”
“It is not the party of Oliver Napier, Bob Cooper, John Ferguson and Basil Glass. It was a party that was once not neutral on the union and explicitly supported it, but now the world and his dog can see what its position is as, once again, it falls in behind nationalism and republicanism. Any party with any wit would have steered well clear of the toxicity of such a motion, tabled by Gerry Carroll and supported by Sinn Féin, but the Alliance Party could not help itself as it seeks to boost its credibility in nationalist areas. <BR /> <BR />The people of Northern Ireland deserve better.”
“<BR /> <BR />The SDLP, of course, is struggling for relevance, and being the official Opposition necessitates supporting pointless motions such as this. However, it would have been nice to think that the SDLP was better than that. It will be interesting to note what approach the SDLP takes in response to the outcome of court proceedings involving the Infrastructure Minister. If she is found to have acted unlawfully, what then? Or is it only going to do this when a unionist Minister visits Israel? Where was its criticism of its former party leader, Colum Eastwood, on his visit to Lebanon, funded by the Council for Arab-British Understanding, or is it only when fact-finding trips are organised by the Israeli embassy? <BR /> <BR />Then we come to the Alliance Party. If ever there was a party that has drifted from its roots, this is one.”
“Here we have a Minister who visited a school — not just any school but an integrated one where Arabs, Christians and Jews are educated together. In response, People Before Profit, Sinn Féin, the SDLP and the Alliance Party — a pan-nationalist pile-on — decide that that is enough for them and he needs to go. Is it any wonder that this place is ridiculed? <BR /> <BR />Unsurprisingly, my party will not support the motion. We know that Gerry Carroll is a Hamas fanboy; that was clear from his tweet. We know that Sinn Féin have been long-time admirers of Hamas, having met them multiple times over the years, with Declan Kearney, Gerry Adams and Pat Sheehan all having courted them and tried to give them credibility. Sinn Féin have done the same with terrorist groups around the world. It is what they do.”
“Those were and remain the deeply held sentiments of Gerry Carroll, as he submitted the motion of no confidence in the Education Minister. The motion is nothing more that an extension of his continued support for the brutal actions of Hamas on 7 October 2023. It is not a nuanced position. It is unequivocal support for the terrorist slaughter of men, women and children: an explicit anti-Israel position. That is at the root of the motion. <BR /> <BR />The motion is not about the competence of the Education Minister or about what the Department did or did not do. It is not about any of those things. It is a convenient vehicle to attack Israel. It is a performative motion and, frankly, it is grotesque.”
“"Victory to the Palestinian Resistance" alongside a raised fist emoji. What a thing to write as Hamas, an internationally proscribed terrorist organisation, not only fired over 4,300 rockets indiscriminately into Israel but murdered more than 1,200 innocent men, women and children, raping and pillaging as they went. What a thing to write from the comfort of your home, thousands of miles away, as young people at a music festival were hunted down and slaughtered, young women were brutalised and hundreds were dragged off to an uncertain future and reduced to commodities. However, the mover of the motion felt that that was the most appropriate thing to post as the murderous brutality of the Hamas attacks unfolded on 7 October 2023.”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. If the Department cannot adequately fund what is currently in place, how can we expect a new, additional organisation to be properly funded to carry out its functions? Further to that, what safeguards did the panel suggest should be established to prevent the mission creep seen with other independent bodies established through statute? The Equality Commission and Ashers case comes to mind in that regard.”
“The UFU's unprecedented vote is a damning indictment of the Department but more so of the Minister and the Alliance Party, which have set the current policy direction for that Department. At the heart of this are the aspirational and unachievable interim climate change targets set by the Assembly. Does the Minister recognise that, if he is to restore confidence in both himself and his Department, he has to take the first step to look at introducing a workable and achievable suite of targets and quit demonising the agriculture sector?”
“My supplementary question is also about spending money wisely. What steps will the Minister take to ensure that his Department's investment of £40 million a year in tuition fees benefits health provision in Northern Ireland?”
“What direct engagement has the Minister had with Minister Muir on those points, and what action will be taken as a consequence of those discussions?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. When the AERA Minister appeared before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee recently, he was extremely critical of the Infrastructure Minister's inaction on the pollution of Northern Ireland's waterways by Northern Ireland Water, a company that is wholly owned by the Minister's Department. He said:”
“His agenda of environmental purism is hugely damaging to our most important industry and threatens to undermine the very fabric of our rural economy and community. He has lost the trust of his biggest stakeholder. It is time that he listened.”
“He was told that he needed sincere partnership working when developing his NAP proposals. He has been told repeatedly about action being needed on ammonia controls and how they are stifling betterment proposals and planning, but nothing has happened. He was told about the issues with generational renewal during the debate on the Farm Sustainability (Transitional Provisions) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025. He and his Department were warned. The Minister has not been the critical friend that farmers have needed. He has set himself against the sector rather than working with it. <BR /> <BR />The Minister and the Department need to change course, whether that is on TB, NAP, ammonia controls, betterment proposals or climate change targets.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Alliance Party may blame everyone else for its woes and drop as many dead cat arguments as it can, but the vote cannot have come as a surprise to anyone. We have repeatedly warned the Minister. We raised those issues time and again in the Chamber. The Minister has been told that he has been placing too much of the blame for and burden of climate change on farming and that he needed to be proportionate and even-handed in his approach. He has been told that a wildlife intervention was needed to tackle bovine tuberculosis. He said that that was in hand, but there has since been nothing. He pressed ahead with the nutrients action programme (NAP) consultation, which did not engage the sectors and was based on scientific assumptions that had not even been peer-reviewed.”
“Last week, the Ulster Farmers' Union, which is one of DAERA's largest stakeholders and a body that represents over 12,500 farmers and their families, took the extraordinary step of passing a motion of no confidence in DAERA. That extraordinary step was passed unanimously by the executive committee, which comprises around 150 people. It was not only an extraordinary step but an extraordinary vote, given the breadth of diverse views and interests in farming. The farming sector is worth £6 billion to the Northern Ireland economy and is recognised as providing 25% of the UK's food supply. This is no small matter. The vote was a damning indictment of the Department and the course that the Minister has set for it. The buck stops with Minister Muir on that.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. I declare an interest as the chair of the board of governors of Nendrum College in Comber. The proposals in the consultation would see the role of governors diminished. In the appointment of principals, the voluntary chair could be replaced by a paid, independent chair, and teaching appointments could have the input of only one governor. That would not happen in any other sector, which shows exactly why controlled schools need their own dedicated managing authority. Will the Minister engage with the EA on that as a matter of urgency and support the role of governors?”
“I thank the Minister for coming to the Chamber to answer the question. As this was unforeseen, I imagine that no budget had been allocated for the work that is being carried out in respect of Asian hornets. What is the estimated cost of that work? Is any potential bid likely to include support for beekeepers and compensation in the event that hives are lost?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Can he detail the budget that he has available to deal with this type of outbreak? What departmental mechanism is in place to deal with crisis incidents and to support financially those who have been adversely affected across sectors, be that the horticultural sector, the poultry sector, the fishing sector or others?”
“In a previous mandate, I raised serious concerns about children missing from care and the lack of data on that in the Department of Health. The lack of accurate data relating to this issue is, as another example, also very alarming. Who has responsibility for monitoring protocols for children missing in education?”
“Will the Minister finally admit that he got it wrong when he prematurely launched the NAP consultation without prior engagement with industry? Will he apologise for the annoyance that he and his Department caused as a consequence of those actions?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Given that NAC NI is not a union and therefore not subject to the protections afforded to unions, does he agree that strikes or other industrial action, as signed off and recommended by council members from the Alliance Party and the SDLP, in order to attain wish-list items such as pay rises, golden handshakes for those who lose their seats or, indeed, choose not to defend them, free broadband and other items, puts participating councillors at risk under the councillors' code of conduct?”
“I pay tribute to chairman Warren Patton and all of the team at Ards Football Club who have worked so hard throughout the process. They, along with supporters, are disappointed and angry. Ards has been homeless for over two decades and has demonstrated need. Will the Minister meet the club to discuss next steps? What support will be made available to clubs such as Ards and Institute who are homeless?”
“With work progressing on greenways in the Ards and North Down Borough Council area, will the Minister publish the timetable for the DFI works to connect the Comber greenway to the Bangor greenway and confirm that a budget has been allocated to those works?”
“That group should have been established beforehand to help to develop the NAP proposals, not to patch them up retrospectively. It might be useful if the Minister took the opportunity today to acknowledge that he got it wrong in jumping the gun with the consultation and that genuine partnership working is the best way forward. It is disappointing that the SDLP does not recognise that. Instead, it decided to conflate two issues today, and, as a result of that, we are unable to support the motion.”
“No, if you do not mind. <BR /> <BR />They involve providing collaborative leadership and support, not knee-jerk punitive measures that will have a devastating impact on our rural communities and our local economy. <BR /> <BR />It is worth reiterating the DUP's position on the matter. We support a multi-agency, cross-sectoral response. We also support serious action on waste water treatment, including strict enforcement against deliberate polluters. We do not support the scapegoating of farmers. We have consistently seen an imbalance in the approach to environmental protection, and, sadly, the motion plays into that imbalance. <BR /> <BR />Given the actions of the Minister subsequent to our motion, it was clear from his actions, if not his words, that, by establishing the stakeholder group, he recognises that consultation was premature.”
“Absolutely. The SDLP has also totally ignored the numerous debates that we have had in the Chamber over the past year. Rising costs, inheritance tax changes, farm payments, ever tighter and costly regulations — and now it wants the agriculture sector to pay even more while ignoring Northern Ireland Water and industry. <BR /> <BR />There are solutions to the blue-green algae issue. They are cross-sectoral and do not involve singling out the farming industry.”
“How much more does the SDLP think farmers can take before the industry completely collapses?”
“<BR /> <BR />Genuine co-design is where you need to bring people together and bring them with you, and, in doing that, you are much more likely to have buy-in and some success. Workable proposals also need to be evidence-based and not ideologically driven. The approach of the Minister and the Department has been to punish farmers while ignoring others, such as Northern Ireland Water, industry and construction. <BR /> <BR />We know that the SDLP has abandoned its position of supporting our agrisector, despite what Mr O'Toole said in his opening remarks. That was clear in how it voted on the NAP proposals. It is further clear in its new proposals to introduce an agri-tax. As if farmers are not finding it tight enough due to the actions of the Labour Party in Government, now its sister party, the SDLP, wants to stick the boot in even more.”
“<BR /> <BR />Further to that, the failure to carry out a proper economic assessment to go along with the proposals; phosphorus balances fail to recognise the economic realities faced by our farmers; the introduction of buffer strips, reducing the land available for productive use and driving up land prices; the lack of peer-reviewed scientific evidence to underpin the proposals; and the failure to evaluate and incorporate current schemes, such as the soil nutrient health scheme and the sustainable utilisation of livestock slurry (SULS) project, which were designed to provide solutions to the industry to help with nutrient redistribution within Northern Ireland. All were totally ignored by the NAP proposals.”
“Those flaws included the failure to co-design proposals with key stakeholders, including the Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU), the huge cost implications to the agrisector — £40 million in new costs, £33 million for low-emission slurry-spreading equipment (LESSE) alone and another £7 million for phosphorus separation systems at anaerobic digester plants. That does not include the £3·6 million each year for inspections, databases and added bureaucracy. Those are only basic costings and do not reflect the true economic impact, as that work still has not been carried out by DAERA.”
“We can agree across the Chamber that we are concerned about the return of blue-green algae at Lough Neagh and other sites across Northern Ireland and the impact that it has had on many, including the eel fishery. We also agree that all necessary actions should be taken to address the problems. Where we do not agree is in the approach adopted by the Minister and his Department, nor do we agree, unsurprisingly, that the motion calling for the NAP consultation to be withdrawn was misguided. <BR /> <BR />The SDLP appears to have come to the Chamber today to patronise us but seems to forget that our motion pointed out fundamental flaws in the consultation and called for genuine partnership to develop workable and sustainable proposals that would address the sources of pollution.”
“The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) is announcing a new bovine TB action plan today, which will include further wildlife measures. The Minister will be aware of the call from our local industry for a wildlife intervention strategy. Without one, any other proposals are deemed to be unworkable. Will he provide an update on a wildlife intervention strategy for Northern Ireland?”
“Minister, I note that the NSMC approved the Loughs Agency's revised business plan for 2024 and the business plan for 2025. Does the Minister believe that there are any efficiencies that could be made, and has the Loughs Agency been tasked with that?”
“I note that there is agreement on working to achieve offshore renewable energy targets while ensuring the protection of marine ecosystems. The protection of our fishing industry should also be a priority alongside that. Will the Minister give assurances that any meaningful engagement will also include the fishing sector, which will, obviously, be at risk from any offshore renewable activity?”
“Will the Minister confirm, as referenced in the media, that the Rainbow Project was part of the gender clinic review group putting pressure on the clinicians to ignore the Cass review recommendations and, as such, was briefed on the Minister's plans before they were brought to the Executive? If so, how appropriate was that?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Will he provide an assessment of how schools that have previously transformed to integrated status have fared with regard to reasonable numbers? I am conscious of the fact that the controlled school sector is demonised by ideologues who preach about the label of "integration".”
“I thank the deputy First Minister for her answer. Does she unequivocally agree that the response continues to leave women feeling vulnerable in places where they should feel safe, such as in single-sex changing rooms and toilets, and that any ongoing uncertainty that is caused by that delay from the Equality Commission is deeply frustrating, given the recognition of the common-sense reality that that judgement provided?”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister's decision follows careful consideration of the judgement issued in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers and the important legal implications that that case holds for departmental policy. It is right that educational guidance in Northern Ireland align with legal precedent and provide schools with a clear and lawful framework to support all pupils while respecting the rights of every individual. Any future guidance must be developed with due regard for biological reality, legal obligations and the welfare of all children. It is a common-sense decision that lets kids be kids.”
“<BR /> <BR />Importantly, the decision provides reassurance that single-sex spaces, including school sports facilities, changing rooms and toilets, can remain protected, where appropriate, in accordance with safeguarding considerations and biological sex. That is particularly fundamental for the safety and privacy of young girls. Furthermore, teachers and pupils will not be placed under pressure to use language, such as pronouns, that denies biological fact. That upholds the rights to freedom of belief and expression for all members of the school community and avoids compelling speech that may conflict with personal convictions or scientific understanding.”
“I am absolutely delighted to welcome the decision by my colleague Paul Givan, the Education Minister, to withdraw the transgender guidance that was issued to schools in Northern Ireland. It is a significant and commendable step that reflects a commitment to clarity, fairness and the recognition of biological reality in our education system. It is also common sense. I asked for that guidance to be reviewed when I was Education Minister, then at the start of this mandate and again when Dr Cass issued her interim report, so I am pleased that we are now seeing its withdrawal. The withdrawing of the guidance ensures that schools are not compelled to adopt policies that conflict with biological facts.”
“His legacy remains in this place and across his beloved Fermanagh.”
“Throughout his years as a public representative, Tommy worked tirelessly for the people of Fermanagh and South Tyrone. He was passionate about his community, especially rural areas, and he championed better healthcare, education and opportunities for local families. <BR /> <BR />Beyond his political career, Tommy will be remembered for the person he was. He had a warmth and generosity of spirit that were endearing. He was approachable, genuine and deeply committed to helping others. Even at times of disagreement, he sought understanding, which is a quality that earned him respect right across the Chamber and far beyond. <BR /> <BR />On behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party, let me say that our thoughts and prayers continue to be with Tommy's family, friends and former colleagues.”
“It was with great sadness that we learned of the passing of Tommy Gallagher. I served with Tommy in the Assembly from 2007 to 2011, and found him to be a man who was not only a dedicated public servant but someone who demonstrated great warmth and kindness.”
“I understand that the current enforcement framework under section 5 of the Welfare of Animals Act 2011 will be strengthened as a consequence of those provisions, which will enable further action against individuals who import animals that have been mutilated. We recognise that withholding our consent for the provisions that can apply to Northern Ireland would be counterproductive and increase divergence within the UK. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that the Department will use the powers contained in the Bill to bring forward further legislation. There will, therefore, be no immediate change, but, ultimately, that will lead to a situation in which there are additional protections in place for dogs, cats and ferrets, which can only be welcomed.”
“Those include powers to prohibit the importation of animals under six months; the ability to restrict animals that are pregnant; and the reduction in the number of animals that are permitted in personal import. That creates divergence. While officials suggested that that divergence would not have a major practical impact, we continue to be concerned that Northern Ireland could be left further behind in respect of the welfare of pets and animals because we are being denied the ability to legislate in line with our counterparts on the mainland. While we cannot consent to the arrangements conceived by the EU and, obviously, previous Governments that underpin divergence in that area, we welcome the extension of at least some of the provisions.”
“Mr Speaker, you will be glad to know that I do not intend to rehearse everything that has been said. The Chair of the Committee has outlined the merits and the issues with the LCM. As a party, the DUP believes that Northern Ireland should have exceptional standards of animal welfare. We are a nation of animal lovers, and it is only right that they should be treated with the same care and love that they so freely give us. It is heartbreaking to see examples of cases in which pets have been abused, mistreated or, indeed, mutilated. <BR /> <BR />We remain concerned that there are elements of the Bill that cannot be extended to Northern Ireland due to the continued oppressive and undemocratic arrangements imposed by annex 2 to the Windsor framework.”
“<BR /> <BR />I place on record the fact that it is only because of the later representations that were made by those acting on behalf of the industry that I now support the legislation. To be fair to the sector, I want the Minister to move at pace, reaffirm his commitment to a process that is based on co-design principles and confirm a timeline for the introduction of secondary legislation before the end of the mandate. I thank the officials who came to Committee nearly weekly — it was a painstaking process for them, I am sure — and the Committee staff.”
“What we have before us gives us no indication of future support. Those qualms will not have been eased by the Minister's decision to reject the proposal from producers that he baseline support at 4·1% of value of marketed production sales. <BR /> <BR />I welcome the U-turn by the Minister during Committee Stage to allow time for his officials to work with the sector. There is no shame in that at all, and I encourage him to reflect on the merits of that approach in respect of other policy areas. I encourage the Department to work at pace with the mushroom sector to develop an action plan and provide support that will allow growers to access new technologies in order to increase their productivity and plan for a sustainable future.”
“<BR /> <BR />It is of little assurance to mushroom growers or those of us on these Benches that the design and detail of future schemes will be left to secondary legislation, with the limited opportunity that we will have to scrutinise that. I have stood on my soapbox in the House and in the Committee on our role: should we really give the Department and the Minister a blank cheque in that respect? I am not sure that I want to do that, but, sadly, it comes down to trust. <BR /> <BR />The FVAS has played a crucial role in reducing barriers to entry to markets for farmers and producers. It enables them to meet standards in order to trade and to avail themselves of support for environmentally sound cultivation practices and production techniques. That is the only funding stream for mushroom producers, however.”
“<BR /> <BR />I remain concerned by the suggestion from mushroom growers during Committee Stage that the Department's engagement with them on the drafting of the Bill left much to be desired. Sadly, that is a theme that we see more and more often with policies, strategies and legislation. I ask the Minister — I plead with him, because we have seen that pattern of behaviour — not to let that happen again. <BR /> <BR />It should not have taken the Committee's expression of concern to prompt the Minister to begin preparatory work on the co-design of a replacement scheme or, indeed, to provide assurances that POs in Northern Ireland will be able to submit a new operational programme for approval under the current scheme beyond the end of the calendar year. However, we welcome the certainty that has been provided.”