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 6 of 52.
“Those acting on its behalf felt that the withdrawal of the 4·1% match funding for producer organisations and the lack of support for the three proposed horticultural pilot schemes in particular disadvantaged them. It was unfortunate that the emphasis on that left the broader principle of the Bill behind. <BR /> <BR />As we know, the role of the mushroom sector is significant in horticulture in Northern Ireland. It produces 40% of our output and over 10% of UK mushrooms, including 50% of organic mushrooms; that is not insignificant. However, the sector, understandably, feels under pressure not only because of the support issue but — we have raised this on numerous occasions — from labour challenges.”
“Like you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker, I extend my condolences to John on the passing of his father; it is the first time that I have seen him since then. <BR /> <BR />The DUP stands four-square behind the principle that, after decades in the EU, locally accountable Ministers should be able to bring forward proposals to support our agri-food sector; however, that has to go hand in hand with financial certainty and security for growers who are supported under the existing FVAS. <BR /> <BR />As we articulated throughout Committee Stage, we were concerned about the Minister's intention to move to a discretionary model, which is framed in clause 1, without providing concrete proposals on what would come next. Those concerns were also articulated by the mushroom sector.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Three thousand acres of land were vested by DFI for the A5. Many of the people affected by that are sheep farmers. What support does the Minister intend to give those who have been caught up in that debacle? In particular, will there be any amendments to the payment scheme this year? Will the Minister now confront the reality that Northern Ireland's climate change targets, cheered through by many who are now wringing their hands, are proving to be unworkable and unaffordable?”
“If we have learned anything from last week's debacle, apart from the fact that not all legislation is good legislation, it is that policymaking should not be rushed and must be based on robust scientific advice and be economically viable and environmentally credible. <BR /> <BR />Once again, I stand with our farmers — the keystone of our local economy — and the thousands of rural families who put food on our tables. Again, along with the 5,000-plus signatories, I call on the Minister to listen and act: to withdraw the consultation and find another way, one that is smarter, fairer and evidence-driven and that protects both our land and those who steward it.”
“Farmers are the custodians of our countryside. They care deeply about the land that they work and the watercourses that run through it. To target farmers is unjust. The current proposals are unbalanced and would be impractical and economically damaging. On 10 June 2025, the Assembly debated and passed a motion calling on Minister Muir to withdraw the current public consultation. He has chosen to ignore the Chamber and the rural community. Rather than listen, he has added insult to injury by launching a further consultation on his draft climate action plan, which will not only place a financial burden on the public purse and industry, but, like NAP, lead to a reduction in herd numbers and cripple agriculture in Northern Ireland.”
“They are proposals that are based on evidence that is scientifically flawed and will lead to a reduction in livestock numbers and a forced contraction of our agri-food sector. They will impact on food security and increase the cost of living, the consequences of which will be felt across sectors, communities and our economy. <BR /> <BR />This is not about rejecting environmental responsibility; it is about demanding a fair, workable and evidence-based approach.”
“I present the petition as a DUP MLA for the rural constituency of Strangford. The 5,000-plus signatories from across Northern Ireland call on the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to immediately withdraw the current public consultation on the nutrients action programme (NAP) 2026-2029. <BR /> <BR />The measures currently proposed could devastate agriculture, reduce livestock numbers and undermine food security. We call on him to bring forward a policy based on genuine partnership, rather than punitive policies that risk the viability of our agriculture industry. Stricter phosphorus limits, mandatory low-emission slurry-spreading equipment (LESSE) and compulsory buffer zones are unworkable and unaffordable.”
“We are doing so not out of concern about keeping pace with the EU or to avoid a breach of the oppressive requirements of the Windsor framework but because we believe that the cause of preventing the accumulation of PCBs and the adverse effects that those substances can have on animals and humans is an important one.”
“In recent years, as, again, we have heard, England, Scotland and Wales have passed regulations requiring the removal of equipment containing more than 0·005% PCBs by 31 December. <BR /> <BR />In Committee, I sought and received reassurance from officials that what is before us will provide full parity with those arrangements, that there is not going to be any divergence and that the convention that has been mentioned should serve to minimise the prospect of that happening. Although I am uncomfortable with the aspects that are attached to the EU, I am therefore content that we support the draft regulations. Members should, however, be in no doubt about the rationale behind our taking that position.”
“I will place my comments in context, because it is important to reiterate my party's position. The Democratic Unionist Party believes that it is wrong that change to legislation in Northern Ireland be made at the behest of the EU as a result of the Windsor framework. Doing so is undemocratic and leaves those who elect us bereft of effective representation in the making of laws that govern them. We also recognise, however, that today's draft regulations are the product of an international agreement that takes steps to reduce risks to the environment and human health from PCBs, which can be released from ageing electrical equipment. <BR /> <BR />As we have heard, the UK and the EU are parties to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. He said that 24,000 children will be eligible for the scheme in the incoming year. Will he give some detail on the impact that that will have on families?”
“I thank the Minister for his very full answer. What level of participation did this year's statutory assessment have, given that industrial action and the Department's decision came after teacher-directed time budgets had already been agreed?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. What discussions has the Minister had with the Agriculture Minister in the development of the nutrients action programme 2026-29 consultation, given the potential impact on rural jobs and the fact that potential solutions are being developed as a consequence of work in her Department?”
“It is not anti-environmental to oppose the proposals; it is pro-common sense. The DUP believes in balancing sustainability with survival and environmental action with economic reality. We are not asking to abandon water protection; we are asking for a different approach that is rooted in partnership, practicality and progress and a plan that engages with farmers instead of lecturing them; supports adaptation instead of mandating unviable change; invests in waste water infrastructure; uses actual field data, not flawed modelling; and builds consensus, not conflict. We need to stand with our farmers today. We need to stand with the keystone of our local economy and the thousands of rural families who —”
“The DUP's position is clear: we support a multi-agency, cross-sectoral response; we support serious action on waste water treatment; and, yes, we support enforcement action against deliberate polluters. We cannot and will not accept agriculture being treated as the sole culprit. Over 1,000 farmers came to the Greenmount campus last month, and the Minister was nowhere to be seen. There was palpable anger, and it should not be ignored. The Minister has been in his role for 16 months. From the farmers' perspective, he has failed to grasp the TB crisis, has offered no robust ammonia strategy and now offers a nutrients policy that is so tone-deaf that the entire agri-food sector is united in opposition to it.”
“Instead of recognition, however, it gets blame. Instead of support, it gets red tape. Instead of collaboration, it gets consultations written without it. That is not how change is built. Rather, it is how resentment builds. <BR /> <BR />While farmers are hounded, other sectors face little scrutiny. Where is Northern Ireland Water (NIW) being held accountable for repeated untreated discharges into our rivers? Where is the accountability for the construction sector, for councils and for industry? The consultation reads like an exercise in scapegoating, whereby farms are being asked to bear the cost even though the problem is much more complex.”
“<BR /> <BR />We believe in taking a balanced approach to environmental protection that should recognise the vital role played by agriculture in our economy and society. We must tackle the pollution that is affecting water quality in Lough Neagh and our rivers, but that must be done in a way that is fair, workable and supportive of our farmers. The Alliance Party wants to paint that as a binary choice: either one cares about Lough Neagh or one sides with polluters. That is unfair and untrue. Our farmers live and work on that land. The health of Lough Neagh and its surrounding catchments is not just a policy concern but personal. Farmers want clean water. They want to protect biodiversity, and many already do. For example, our dairy sector has cut greenhouse gas emissions by 37% per litre of milk since 1990.”
“Furthermore, the Department proposes lower fertiliser rates for derogated farms, despite no evidence being presented to support that action. That will ultimately negate the positive environmental impacts that have been observed on derogated farms to date. <BR /> <BR />We are seeing a continual pattern of abrupt policy changes and inadequate consultation that undermines the trust between DAERA and the farming community. The consultation paper is evidence of a rushed job, with inaccuracies and inconsistencies between proposals and the draft regulations making it difficult for stakeholders to comment. Farmers are being asked to invest in expensive equipment and to make expensive and significant changes to their operations without clear guidance or support, which creates an environment of confusion and frustration.”
“The new chemical limits are not even covered in the draft regulations that have been provided. Bizarrely, the proposals ignore the time required to evaluate ongoing initiatives such as the soil nutrient health scheme (SNHS) and the sustainable utilisation of livestock slurry (SULS) project, both of which are intended to provide industry with solutions to help with nutrient redistribution in Northern Ireland. Let us see the outworkings of those initiatives before layering on more regulation. <BR /> <BR />There is concern that the changes to NAP derogation will also provide the derogation with limited value. It will impact on the take-up of derogation, because of the necessity to incur additional costs and bureaucracy.”
“Other AFBI research concluded that grazing systems emit less ammonia than indoor house systems, yet, perversely, the NAP proposals will limit grazing systems. Specifically on new grazing limits that are included in the consultation paper, AFBI stated that it:”
“There are concerns about the gathering and analysis of water quality monitoring data, and, in the DAERA NAP review, no statistical analysis was presented to support the conclusion of increased concentrations of nitrate levels in surface freshwaters between the reporting periods. <BR /> <BR />The proposals suggest a new, reduced maximum limit for nitrogen fertiliser, with no scientific rationale behind it being offered and no discussion with stakeholders having been had in advance, yet that limit would significantly reduce the competitive advantage of Northern Ireland's ruminant livestock sector, which is based on high yields of grass. Research by the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) has shown that growing high yields of grass removes more P from the soil.”
“Given that agriculture contributed £2·87 billion to the local economy last year and food and drink processing contributed another £6·5 billion, it goes to the core of our economy. <BR /> <BR />The DUP believes in evidence-based policymaking, but what we see here is evidence distortion, not evidence direction. Previous NAPs were designed around robust scientific evidence, with the data published and peer reviewed. While the measures being added under the proposed regulations are referred to as being based on scientific research, much of that has not been provided to be examined, which is a failure in the consultation process.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU) has expressed deep concerns about the financial implications of the proposals, particularly for smaller farms and those located near designated sites. Low-emission slurry-spreading equipment is prohibitively expensive, never mind the availability of the machinery at the scale required, and the requirement of buffer strips could reduce the land available for productive use, further straining farm incomes. Those are not green investments, they are shackles. Small and medium-sized family farms, especially beef and sheep producers, cannot absorb those costs. The dire situation already faced by many of those farms has been starkly laid out in the Chamber on numerous occasions over the past year. Put bluntly, LESSE is totally impractical without proper financial support.”
“<BR /> <BR />A minimum of 3,500 local farms will be affected by one of the toughest new measures: phosphorus balances. Those measures, while, on the face of it, seemingly well intentioned, fail to recognise the economic realities faced by our farmers. To comply with the P rules, some farmers would need to double the land that they currently use for slurry spreading. That land is simply not available, and, if it were, its price, thanks to the proposals, would be pushed up to such a degree that it would be utterly unaffordable to the average local farmer. The only alternative is reducing livestock numbers — a forced contraction of our agri-food sector that would hit local food production hard and drive a greater dependence on imports.”
“The measures laid out — stricter phosphorus (P) limits, mandatory low-emission slurry-spreading equipment (LESSE) and compulsory buffer strips — are not just challenging, they are unworkable, unaffordable and unjust. They amount to an economic sledgehammer being brought down on one of the most productive sectors of our economy. This is a cross-cutting and controversial matter that has ramifications across sectors, communities and our economy. The consultation comes with a £40 million price tag in new costs: £33 million for LESSE alone, and £7 million for phosphorus separation systems at anaerobic digester plants. That does not even include the £3·6 million each year for inspections, databases and added bureaucracy. However, DAERA has failed to carry out a proper economic assessment to go alongside those proposals.”
“Often, when we debate motions in the Chamber, we face the criticism, sometimes correctly, that we are not discussing the big issues. Today, we are debating an issue that will decide the future of our rural economy, our food security and the very people who feed us, many of whom are with us today. Undoubtedly, we will face the usual barrage of unsubstantiated, pejorative comments about being anti-environment or not caring about Lough Neagh. However, you can disagree with the nutrients action programme (NAP) proposals without being anti-environment, and you can seek a more pragmatic way forward while still caring about the quality of our water. <BR /> <BR />The nutrients action programme currently proposed by DAERA is not just flawed, it is dangerously disconnected from the on-the-ground reality.”
“I thank the Minister for his important and far-reaching statement. I particularly welcome the additional allocation to Libraries NI. As the Minister is aware, I have been championing investment in Newtownards library for 20 years — I am that old — and I am delighted to see £200,000 being allocated to it. Could the Minister provide some more detail on the purpose of that money and on whether we will see that much-needed new build become a reality? To copy a colleague's phrase, I hope that it will be on his watch.”
“I thank the Minister for the short statement; I am not sure whether that reflects the fact that it was a short meeting. <BR /> <BR />In an answer to a tabled question last month, the Minister informed me that there were 55 exotic pets or, as he referred to them, "dangerous wild animals" registered in Northern Ireland. In the absence of any detail in the statement, will the Minister explain why the matter of exotic pets is being considered as a priority pathway and outline the terms of reference for that work stream and whether we should expect a change in the licensing of such animals?”
“<BR /> <BR />Farmers have led the way in sustainable practices for years. I have no doubt that the outworking of the future Farming with Nature policy will again demonstrate that. As a party, we fully support responsible environmental stewardship, but it must be achieved through genuine partnership, not punitive measures. We support the measures before us.”
“The Minister will have heard that loud and clear at Balmoral. Instead of working with producers to find balanced and science-led solutions, he has produced a plan that threatens to undermine an industry that is already under immense pressure from rising costs and other climate adaptation requirements. <BR /> <BR />The agri-food sector is the backbone of our rural economy. The proposed restrictions could devastate farm incomes, jeopardise Northern Ireland's food security and lead to unintended consequences such as farm consolidation or even the abandonment of productive land. The Minister needs to scrap the proposals, return to the table, engage with stakeholders across the industry and deliver a new approach that protects both our environment and the livelihoods of those who live and work in our rural communities.”
“<BR /> <BR />Whilst the regulations are framed as being technical — I do not want to repeat many of the concerns that Mr McAleer highlighted — we need to see clarity from the Department on the operation of any cap on the value of claims, along with assurances that the overall level of financial support available will not be reduced. It is welcome, however, that the intention is to avoid a prescriptive approach to the actions and supporting actions available and that future claims will be allowed irrespective of whether the cap on the annual claim has been reached in the previous year. It would be irresponsible, however, to consider today's regulations in isolation from the Minister's harmful proposals for a nutrients action programme. The proposals show a deep lack of practical understanding of the realities that farmers face.”
“The Democratic Unionist Party fully supports the design of a Farming with Nature policy that provides fair and attractive outcome-based payments. With about 78% of land in Northern Ireland being managed by farmers, it is crucial that agrienvironment schemes are capable of meeting demand and that they are practical, particularly given that it is often not financially viable for farm businesses to take actions with the sole aim of improving the environment. Farming with Nature policies have to coexist with productive agriculture. There is an underlying fear that, although the Minister's intention at present is to respect the voluntary nature of the scheme, that could change. When that is coupled with the destructive proposals on nutrients, many in agriculture have legitimate concerns about what the future holds.”
“Too often, in negotiations between the UK and the EU, our fishing industry has been the sacrificial lamb. Today's agreement is no different. Does the Minister agree that, in the same way as the annexation of Northern Ireland should not have been the price that the previous Government paid for exiting the EU, the interests of the Northern Ireland fishing industry should not be expendable? He said here today that he looks for solutions, so will he give a commitment to the House to bring forward additional financial and practical support to assist our local fleet and processors as they grapple with reduced access in the years ahead?”
“— has been rejected by the Supreme Court as wrong in law, will the Minister recognise the conflict that arises in that situation and ensure that the Civil Service and other public bodies withdraw from that programme?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Minister for his answer. The Civil Service and some other public bodies have been members of the Stonewall diversity champions programme since July 2018 run by the lobby group Stonewall, providing access to training and resources. While the annual spend of £2,575 is small, the impact can be huge. Given that Stonewall's stated position that a man who has transitioned is a woman —”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Awaab’s law, which is part of the Social Housing (Regulation) Act 2023 in England and Wales, requires social landlords to fix dangerous damp and mould within set timescales and to address all emergency hazards within 24 hours. It will come into effect in October 2025, with His Majesty's Government also consulting on extending it to the private rented sector. Will the Minister be following that course of action?”
“Sinn Féin attacks the DUP support for our unionist culture and identity because of the distasteful actions of a few, yet it has absolutely no problem giving full-throated support for the veneration of terrorist godfathers within their own communities. For republicans and for the First Minister, it is a case of, "Do as I say, not as I do". <BR /> <BR />Glorifying terror will only poison the future. There is an onus on all of us to lead with integrity, truth and a shared commitment to peace.”
“There are serious question marks over the role of others in that event, in particular Mr Sheehan and Mr Baker. Political leadership demands moral clarity. <BR /> <BR />Social media remains fertile ground for radicalisation, and the glorification of figures like Bobby Sands, Séamus McElwain or Jim Lynagh emboldens a new generation to romanticise violence. The First Minister is the first one to point out the harm that can be caused on such platforms when abuse is targeted towards women and girls, including those in the public eye, but what about the women and girls who were left bereaved or whose lives were indelibly scarred when their father, grandfather or brother was barbarically attacked by the IRA? Do they not matter? <BR /> <BR />The hypocrisy on display by Sinn Féin is breathtaking.”
“Bobby Sands was not a freedom fighter. He was a convicted criminal; someone wedded to violence; a member of a brutal terrorist organisation that was responsible for the murder and maiming of thousands. To honour his legacy is to reopen the wounds of the past. For the innocent victims of the Provisional IRA and their families, that is not distant history. It is lived pain. It is the empty chair at the dinner table. <BR /> <BR />The First Minister's attendance in Twinbrook on Sunday was a wilful decision to reopen that hurt. As we are all aware, the ministerial Pledge of Office requires an unambiguous rejection of violence and paramilitarism. Glorifying, through speeches or shrines, people who broke the law is a gross abdication of those duties.”
“<BR /> <BR />I request guidance on maintaining the integrity of the Assembly's discourse and ensuring that Members' public statements do not inadvertently undermine legal processes or public confidence in our commitment to upholding the rule of law. Can I further ask you, Mr Speaker, whether you have been notified that Mr Donnelly wishes to make a statement to the House to apologise for his comments?”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek clarification on the appropriateness of public commentary by Members concerning matters that are under active police investigation. I refer specifically to social media posts by the Alliance MLA for East Antrim, Mr Danny Donnelly, regarding the inflammatory statements that were made during performances by the rap group Kneecap, which are currently being assessed by counterterrorism police for potential incitement to violence. Given the serious nature of the allegations and the ongoing investigation, is it appropriate for Members to publicly characterise such content as "art" and make excuses for the group? Surely that could be perceived as dismissive or even prejudicial.”
“I rise to mark the passing of Pope Francis — a figure of immense significance to millions across the world. Alongside my party colleagues, I recognise the profound impact that Pope Francis had on the spiritual lives of thousands of people across Northern Ireland. At such a moment as this, we are reminded of the importance of respecting the sincere beliefs of our neighbours, even where deep theological differences remain. On behalf of the Democratic Unionist Party, I extend my condolences to all those mourning today, particularly our Roman Catholic neighbours and colleagues.”
“There is a challenging budget and an ever-growing pressure to meet targets set by an Assembly that was desperate to push through ill-considered legislation in 2022. We now hear that the office of a climate change commissioner will cost in the region of £1 million per year. Does the Minister consider that to be value for money?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. That is just one of 253 recommendations from the Gillen review, the report of which was published in 2019 and led to the 2020 implementation plan. How many of the Gillen review recommendations remain outstanding? When are we likely to see the full implementation of the accepted recommendations?”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. As the Minister will know, following the ABO Wind NI Ltd case, if a PAC decision is not challenged by way of judicial review, it must be accepted or respected by local planning authorities. That places a potentially huge financial and time burden on those authorities. Will the Minister raise that issue with her counterpart in Justice in order to accommodate a review mechanism in the PAC that would improve decision-making and allow for more consistent and robust decisions?”
“<BR /> <BR />The representation of women in agriculture is not just a matter of fairness; it is a matter of future sustainability and economic prosperity. It is really positive to hear a united voice in the Chamber on supporting our women in agriculture and ensuring that they have opportunities and are given the recognition and support that they deserve.”
“The Committee report showed how providing that support, including childcare assistance, can help to relieve some of those pressures. Initiatives such as the childcare subsidy scheme have already benefited many working families by reducing childcare costs by up to £160 per month, and they need to continue. <BR /> <BR />The new Farming for the Generations scheme, which is set to launch in 2026, gives a unique opportunity to shape the future of agriculture. Young women need to be involved in the scheme's co-design and associated financial support. Young people, including young women, are more willing to invest in sustainable farming practices and new technologies. By empowering young women to take leadership roles, we can make sure that agriculture is dynamic and resilient for future generations.”
“An increasing number of young women are pursuing qualifications in agriculture at the College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE), which is key to shaping the sector. However, continued investment in training pathways and opportunities for young women is needed. The Agriculture and Economy Ministers must cooperate to nurture and support the next generation of women leaders in agriculture. <BR /> <BR />The barriers that women face are often more pronounced. Long working hours, the absence of maternity leave and the lack of childcare support are real issues that prevent many women from entering the sector full time. We need to explore practical options for supporting women farmers during pregnancy and beyond.”
“We recognise the fundamental role that women play in ensuring that farms remain productive, profitable and sustainable. Indeed, in our Assembly election manifesto, we prioritised the removal of barriers that prevent women from becoming more involved in the management and control of farm businesses. We remain committed to tackling those obstacles and to cultivating an environment in agriculture in which women flourish. <BR /> <BR />Attitudes towards women in agriculture must also change, and the proposer of the amendment was very clear about that. The recommendations in the 'Breaking the Grass Ceiling' report provide a clear road map for addressing some of the barriers that women face in participating fully in all aspects of agriculture. <BR /> <BR />We must also look at the next generation.”
“Those barriers include inheritance practices, limited access to finance and land, reduced training opportunities and exclusion from decision-making processes. <BR /> <BR />Despite that, many women have proven to be trailblazers in the agriculture and agri-food sectors. We have only to look at Minette Batters, the former NFU president. She is just one perfect example of how you can rise to the top. At 22%, Northern Ireland has the lowest percentage of women working in agriculture in the United Kingdom. The essential roles carried out by many women in the sector often go unnoticed, and more work is required for women to be recognised as farmers in their own right. <BR /> <BR />As a party, we are committed to supporting policies and initiatives to encourage greater female participation in the agriculture workforce.”