Declan McAleer
West Tyrone · Sinn Féin · Northern Ireland
“The regulations are designed to strengthen and complement the existing framework governing the welfare of animals at the time of killing. They build upon EU regulation 1099/2009 and the Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2014, ensuring that the North maintains high standards of animal welfare.”
“Inspectors are granted clear powers to enforce the regulations, including the ability to enter premises, carry out inspections and, where necessary, seize evidence to ensure compliance. Enforcement notices may also be issued where breaches are identified, with appropriate mechanisms in place for appeal.”
“<BR /> <BR />From a resource point of view, which is another key debate, and looking at the practicalities of the Bill, we must not create a situation in which councils will be expected to take on significant new responsibilities, incur substantial costs and manage increased workloads without the necessary resources.”
“I will follow on from the key points made by my colleague Aoife Finnegan MLA. First, I record our appreciation of the Committee staff, including Janice and Glenda, for the work that they did. I also thank the Bill Office for its assistance during our scrutiny of the Bill.”
“We support the ambition of the Bill — we made that clear at First Stage and at Committee Stage, and we have made it clear today — to give councils stronger powers to intervene. However, the stronger powers must be accompanied by a framework that is properly resourced, legally robust and workable.”
“There are three council areas in our West Tyrone constituency, for instance. <BR /> <BR />We heard a lot from NILGA and received correspondence from SOLACE about the costs and the fear that costs could not be recovered. If legal challenges were brought to councils about notices that were made, it would be costly to the ratepayer.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,560 lines we hold for Declan McAleer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 32.
“That was done on the basis of listening. For example, I was at the conference and listened carefully to Professor Myles Allen of the University of Oxford, who is a world expert on the matter. We have also listened to good developments. Earlier today, the Minister spoke about some of those developments, including the use of seaweed as a food additive. Last week, I noticed that the EU signed off on additives to feed that will potentially reduce methane emissions by up to 35%. Some really good stuff is happening. Through our Committee, I get six-weekly reports from the Department on the great mitigation work that is going on in the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Teagasc and universities, North and South. That is all very good and hopeful. <BR /> <BR />I am from a farming family and represent a rural constituency.”
“At Consideration Stage, we also brought in an amendment to require the Department to consider the special economic and social role of farming when working up the climate action plans. Indeed, we also introduced an amendment on methane. At this stage, we have built on those amendments. We have continued to listen. We have tabled further amendments to strengthen protections, including making it clear:”
“<BR /> <BR />We have listened carefully and intensively over the last number of months. We want climate change legislation that is effective but does not impact disproportionately on farmers or any other sector. At Consideration Stage, we either tabled or supported a number of what, we felt, were important amendments to strengthen the Bill by helping to mitigate the impact on the farming community. They included the requirements for co-design of the climate action plans through a 16-week consultation, rural-proofing, equality-proofing, economic-proofing, small business impact-proofing and, of course, the agricultural fund.”
“There has been huge focus on this debate. We have been working on it since last May, when the first of the climate change Bills came to the Committee. We have listened intensively to all of the sectors, including the farming sector. We have listened to farmers on their doorsteps, in their sheds and in different places. They have valid concerns. They are also in the eye of the storm. Climate has a huge impact on agriculture. On Saturday, my colleague Emma Sheerin MLA and I were in Glenelly again, as, unfortunately, the valley has been hit by storms again. The three named storms of last week hit the valley and did a lot of destruction, washing away a lot of riverbanks, destroying ground and all the rest of it. Farmers are at the centre of climatic change.”
“and paragraph 34 refers to "collaboration and partnership". Will the Minister explain to us what level of cooperation his Department has had with its counterpart in the South of Ireland to realise the actions in the action plan?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement. Minister, you will be aware that our marine environment is not bound by borders and that we share the same territory around all of the island of Ireland. <BR /> <BR />Paragraph 29 of your statement refers to:”
“My colleague Philip McGuigan will pick up on this from the Sinn Féin perspective during the Budget debate tomorrow.”
“<BR /> <BR />In summary, the Committee considers that DAERA's utilisation of its 2021-22 budget broadly reflects its statutory remit and that it has engaged usefully in the allocation of capital moneys to support worthwhile initiatives in rural areas. However, the Committee believes that, through more proactive and forward-looking financial management, the Department may have been in a position to use its declared capital reduced requirement to support a broader number of projects. <BR /> <BR />It is imperative, given the period of flux that will likely manifest over the next several months, that the Department has some degree of certainty regarding its 2022-23 budget spend. The Committee, therefore, supports the passage of the Vote on Account.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given the breadth of issues facing the Department, the Committee believes that there are numerous initiatives that would have benefited from additional capital funding, such as the expansion of the existing rural development programme schemes, the provision of training grants and the consideration of short-term compensatory support to the meat-processing sector. The Committee corresponded with the Minister, urging him to consider options for using the declared capital reduced requirement, and it is disappointing that it will not be possible to use that in the current financial year.”
“<BR /> <BR />However, the Committee was concerned about the significant net reduced capital requirement of £7·5 million that has been declared by the Department in this financial year and considers that there may have been missed opportunities to reallocate those moneys for alternative purposes that could have been avoided had better financial controls and oversight of planned capital activity initiatives been in place. Those concerns have been communicated to the Department.”
“The Department transferred a total of £14 million in-year capital funding to the Department for Communities and the Department for the Economy in order to support the COVID recovery small settlements regeneration programme and Project Stratum respectively. The Committee welcomed those transfers to support local businesses in their recovery from the pandemic and accelerate the roll-out of high-speed broadband to citizens in rural areas.”
“<BR /> <BR />From its capital DEL, the Department spent approximately £30 million this year on research and development activities at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), which the Committee supports, in order to help develop an evidence base for key projects that will be introduced in the years ahead to improve carbon sequestration and the optimisation of productive livestock genetics. A further £19 million was expended on digital transformation activities, including the development of the roll-out of the new IT systems, such as the NI farm animal information system (NIFAIS).”
“<BR /> <BR />The Department was successful in securing additional revenue through the October and January monitoring rounds, including £1·4 million to support inescapable ICT pressures and £4 million to facilitate compensation payments to owners of flocks affected by the ongoing outbreak of avian influenza. There was a negligible 0·2% decrease in the Department's resource DEL in the spring Supplementary Estimates, compared with that in the 2021-22 Main Estimates.”
“Direct payments comprised 92% of net farm business income in 2020. Other substantive elements of DAERA's revenue spend include staffing costs, of which approximately £144 million were incurred in this financial year, and the bovine TB control programme, which is expected to run to around £38 million by the end of March. Of that, £26 million will be used to pay compensation to farmers whose herds have been affected by the disease. The Department advised the Committee on 21 January that it expects to incur its full budgetary allocation of £18·8 million revenue funding by the end of the financial year for measures to support the EU exit, which are mostly associated with the need to recruit additional staff.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs on the spring Supplementary Estimates. DAERA has a wide-ranging remit that encompasses support for food and farming, the protection of the natural environment and the development of rural communities. Its budget is therefore used to deliver a diversity of schemes and projects that help maintain key industries, support animal, plant and environmental health and improve the health and well-being of people living in rural areas. <BR /> <BR />Just under £316 million was used to make direct payments to farmers in 2021-22, which comprises the vast majority of the DAERA revenue budget. It is an essential aspect of expenditure, as local farmers fundamentally rely on direct payments to make ends meet.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. I agree with him that it is clear that restricting the use of red diesel alone will not reduce emissions, and, at present, there are no sufficient alternatives. Does he agree that, if the British Government continue with the plans, the hardest-hit sectors will be small businesses, construction, manufacturing and the agri-food sector, and that that will, indeed, place jobs at risk in all those sectors?”
“I thank the Minister for his statement this morning. Minister, your statement refers to the environmental challenge fund and the opportunities for not-for-profit organisations to apply for funding for strategic environmental projects. I welcome that as great news. I can think of projects in places in my constituency such as Seskinore, Dunmoyle and Altmore, and there are many other examples where community-based projects are in partnership with councils and DAERA. Will the Minister give us a little more specific information about the environmental challenge fund? For example, how much has specifically been set aside for it; when will it open for application; and what is eligible? Will it be capital, resource or a blend? I know that it will be very much welcomed by voluntary and community-based organisations.”
“On a personal level, Christopher would never pass you in the corridor without a smile or a conversation. He was clearly a devoted and proud father and husband. I am father of young children myself, and we spoke frequently about the challenges and importance of balancing a very demanding public life as an MLA with family life. Christopher was a good man. I extend my thoughts and prayers to his family and his colleagues in the DUP. Rest in peace.”
“He performed his role as Principal Deputy Speaker impeccably and applied the rules of the House equally to his colleagues in the DUP and to other Members. The DUP made a good choice in Christopher for the position of Principal Deputy Speaker. I believe that, in the fullness of time, he would have made a great Speaker of the Assembly.”
“I was extremely shocked and saddened yesterday to learn of the passing of our Principal Deputy Speaker, Christopher Stalford. As Chair of the AERA Committee, I extend my heartfelt sympathy to Christopher's wife, Laura, his young family and his mother at this awful time. I also extend sympathy to our fellow Committee members, Harry, Tom and William and, indeed, the wider DUP at the loss of a dear colleague. <BR /> <BR />My experience of Christopher was that he was a man of conviction and passion who could eloquently argue his case from the Benches opposite. When he took his place in the Chair, he was scrupulously impartial and fair to everyone in the Chamber.”
“<BR /> <BR />Concerns have been raised with us that cattle imported from the South may not be eligible for suckler payment. That could impact on the quality of the suckler herd in the North. We also have concerns that, if the South were to refuse to take sheep from the North, that could subsequently impact on the sheep trade. For us, the South and the rest of the EU is the biggest market. <BR /> <BR />I am disappointed that the Minister did not agree to my requests for an extension to the consultation period. There was only a six-week consultation period, which opened two days before Christmas, when people were distracted by the festive period. I encourage farmers and rural communities to respond to the consultation by —”
“Again, we are seriously disadvantaged compared with the South of Ireland and the rest of the EU. <BR /> <BR />With regard to generational renewal, there are no concrete proposals for a replacement for the young farmers' scheme. The policy also refers to the historical reference period for getting quotas; however, if you are a new entrant or a young farmer, you may not have that historical reference period, which disadvantages you. <BR /> <BR />On the role of women, we discovered through a recent AERA Committee inquiry that only 5% of businesses have a woman as the principal farmer. That is a very bad statistic and one that we need to redress. Future agricultural policy should have a role in redressing it, but it has, so far, fallen short.”
“That will be devastating for the businesses affected. Members from rural constituencies will know that one of the only ways to get planning permission in rural areas is to have access to an active farm business number. We believe that it could deprive rural areas of up to 5,000 planning permissions for domestic dwellings in the country every 10 years. That would have an knock-on impact on rural services such as schools and clubs. <BR /> <BR />Another aspect of the proposal that seriously concerns us is the absence of sheep support. There are no plans in the scheme for sheep support measures. That would leave us at a serious disadvantage compared with the South of Ireland, which has sheep support measures in its policies. The same is true of the area of natural constraint payment. No ANC payment is planned in the new policy.”
“I take the opportunity to raise concerns about the future agricultural policy, the public consultation on which will close tomorrow. Farmers have been waiting anxiously to see what plans the Minister and the Department will put in place in the wake of Brexit and the loss of EU funding. One of the proposals in the future agricultural policy document is to increase the minimum claim size from the current 3 hectares to 10 hectares. We have concerns that that will have a serious impact on the less-favoured areas (LFAs) and areas of natural constraint (ANCs). We believe that it could have an impact on up to 5,000 small farms, effectively putting them out of business because they would then not be eligible for the proposed resilience payment, which is the successor to the single farm payment.”
“It is important to work with them, and it is key that they are central to the co-design of climate action plans.”
“To that end, we believe in the just transition fund. We also believe that it is important that the proposed climate action plans are subject to a 16-week consultation with all sectors that will be involved in the co-design of those plans. It is also important that the plans undergo equality, rural and economic impact assessments, as well as the small and medium business impact test, before being agreed by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />We tabled an amendment on just transition funding because it is an issue that we raised during discussions on the private Member's climate Bill. We believe that that is necessary in order to support farmers to make the transition to net zero. We recognise that farmers are the custodians of the countryside, and we cannot do this without them.”
“First, I will speak on the group 4 amendments on behalf of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. The Committee's support for the principles of just transition was reflected very strongly during the deliberations on the Climate Change Bill and the Climate Change (No. 2) Bill. The Committee supported the just transition principles in one of the earlier groups of amendments. I should say that although the Committee has not taken on a view on the specific amendments in group 4, it very strongly welcomes the principles of just transition. <BR /> <BR />I will speak briefly in my capacity as a Sinn Féin representative. We feel that it is essential that just transition is at the core of the Bill. We want to ensure that the transition to a net zero society does not adversely impact on any sector.”
“On Thursday, we received evidence from the chief executive of the NI Pork and Bacon Forum (NIPBF), who mentioned the importance of the protocol. The very notion of checks stopping would damage us and risk our being delisted. Is the Minister of Agriculture, as someone who reminds us constantly of his care for the agri-food sector and for agriculture, not concerned about the potential recklessness of his decision for the industry?”
“However, despite seeking assurances from the Department, the Committee remains unclear about what penalties or sanctions may be brought against Departments that consistently fail to meet those responsibilities. In future planning, consideration should be given to having a locally based entity that provides scrutiny and advice to Government and has a role in reporting poor or deficient practice.”
“The Committee also supports clauses 27 and 28, which provide that the CCC should report on adaptation programmes taken forward by the Executive under the Climate Change Act 2008. The Committee believes that that is a welcome aspect of the Bill that will facilitate an independent expert assessment of those schemes, which are currently evaluated only by Departments and through scrutiny by the Assembly. <BR /> <BR />Clause 29 places an obligation on all Departments to act in a manner that is conducive to meeting the overall emissions targets. The Committee understands that that is a relatively novel provision in local legislation, and supports its intention of placing binding obligations on all sectors of the public service to address climate change.”
“The Committee, therefore, supports the inclusion of new clause 28A, via amendment No 67, to enable that consultation to be delivered.”
“The Department told the Committee that it is not practical to include a prescriptive provision in the Bill, given the short time that is left in the mandate and the work that would be necessary to secure additional resources for a new body and scope its functions. <BR /> <BR />Officials did, however, commit to undertake a consultation on the potential models for a locally based scrutiny body. While that may fall short of the expectations of many stakeholders, it nevertheless commits the Government to undertake a public consultation on the best way to deliver a locally based entity on climate change and to report on that within two years. That will give members of the public and other stakeholders the opportunity to have their say on the need for such a body, how it should be formed and its role and functions.”
“Many stakeholders who engaged with the Committee told us that the oversight and governance provisions are not sufficient and that there needs to be a locally based, independent entity to augment the role of the CCC on scrutinising actions on climate change. The Committee heard that many people do not have faith in local and environmental oversight structures given their record, and it heard that a new body would provide an additional layer of oversight. <BR /> <BR />The Committee recognises and shares those concerns, and it sought the Department's endorsement to suggest amending the Bill to establish an independent climate office here that would carry out that function.”
“The Committee is, therefore, content with amendments Nos 61 to 63, which will not only bring that into effect but require councils to have regard to transboundary considerations when they are setting their climate change policies. <BR /> <BR />The Committee recognises and respects the role of the UK CCC as an internationally renowned expert body. The Committee has significant concerns about the independent oversight and governance provisions in the Bill, as the CCC is the sole source of independent advice and scrutiny. As per clauses 22 to 26, the CCC will submit reports to DAERA on its assessment of the delivery of the carbon budgets and the emissions targets.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee, therefore, considered strongly that the duty should be implicit in the Bill from the outset and requested that the Department consider embedding it automatically in the legislation. The Committee recognises the need to ensure that there is adequate consultation with public bodies in order to make sure that the scope and requirements of the duty are both effective and deliverable. The Committee, therefore, requested that the Bill be amended to bring forward regulations that would implement the duty within 18 months of the Bill's passing. The duty will obligate the Department to carry out the necessary consultation work and ensure that it is brought into effect expediently.”
“The Committee recognises the important role that councils and arm's-length bodies have in addressing climate change. While many local organisations have independent engagement projects and policies, there is a need to embed that practice across the public sector. <BR /> <BR />The Committee heard a strong message from members of the public and, indeed, from public authorities that they are keen to see more responsibilities placed on local institutions for climate change actions. As a result, the Committee supports clause 21, which will enable DAERA to bring forward regulations to impose a duty on specific public bodies to report on their mitigation and adaptation activities following consultation. In other jurisdictions, such as Scotland, climate change legislation places an automatic duty on public entities to do that.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee considered at length the provisions for progress reporting, as set out in clauses 17 to 20, and the concern that was raised by stakeholders that the proposed time frame for laying reports is too long. The Committee recognised that it is a difficult issue and that a balance must be struck between having regular reports and allowing sufficient time for measures that have been put in place to take effect. On balance, the Committee supports the provisions and did not seek any amendment to them.”
“<BR /> <BR />Clause 16A will also obligate Departments to have regard to harmonising their policies with those of other jurisdictions, both in the South of Ireland and Britain. That takes account of the importance of cross-border working in alignment with our neighbours. It was also recommended that Departments be required to promote the use of nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation, where possible, in order to harness the abilities of the natural environment to reduce emissions, such as through carbon sequestration via reforesting, peatland restoration and conservation of the blue marine. The inclusion of that provision in clause 16A to ensure that those strategies will be promoted by government is welcome. The Committee is also content to support amendment Nos 76, 77 and 79, which are consequential to clause 16A.”
“The Committee, therefore, welcomes the introduction of clause 16A via amendment No 38, which means that, when setting their policies to meet the carbon budget, Departments will have to adhere to the just transition principle, ensuring that their plans support environmentally and socially sustainable jobs; support the agriculture sector and other sectors of the economy that are likely to be most affected; engage with workers, trade unions, communities and business; and create decent, fair and high-value work. The Committee understands the central importance of a just transition to support sectors of the economy to engage in climate action and considers that that addition to the Bill will provide appropriate support and safeguards for core industries.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee identified a number of significant shortcomings in the Bill in terms of the provision obligating Departments to prepare policies to meet carbon budgets, set out in clause 16. In particular, the Bill does not mention just transition and does not provide any mechanism to support industries with regard to adopting new ways of working. The Bill also offers no explicit provision for cross-border working or recognition of the need to address climate change on a collaborative basis across jurisdictions. To that end, and in response to the overwhelming feedback from stakeholders, the Committee requested that the Department make amendments to the Bill to obligate government to have regard to just transition and transboundary considerations.”
“I will speak on the group 2 amendments. <BR /> <BR />The Committee recognises that, although emissions targets are vital, of equal importance is the pathway that will be followed to get there and ensure that key stakeholders are engaged with, supported and encouraged to take the steps that are necessary to reduce their carbon outlay. Virtually all the respondents to our call for evidence informed the Committee of how important it is to ensure that just transition is built in to the Bill, and that our leaders and policymakers should work collaboratively with those in other jurisdictions to ensure that we keep pace with our neighbours and are not left behind.”
“Eighty-six per cent of their income is the single farm payment, which you have threatened as a consequence of forcing us out of the EU. Earlier, I said that climate and the DUP are the biggest threats to hill farmers, and I say it again.”
“A while ago, you talked about carbon leakage and the potential of whatever type of legislation emerges to impact on that. Last week, the heads of the LMC and UFU were present at a meeting of the Westminster NI Affairs Committee on the Australia and New Zealand trade deals. They said that they wanted the gates open, and they got that. The head of the LMC said that the Australia and New Zealand trade deals have the potential to displace our position on the British market, which is our main market. Last year, the island of Ireland exported 105,000 tons of beef to the British market. The deal with Australia is for 110,000 tons of beef. That is a consequence of the hard Brexit into which your party forced the Tory Government. As well as displacing our share of our main market, you are on about income. Hill farmers survive on subsidies.”
“The other week, I received a report on the fantastic work on abatement by Teagasc scientists. That was not included in the KPMG report, which concluded that the only way to reduce emissions is by cutting herds. That ignores the work done by scientists in DAERA and Queen's University. Does the Member accept that there are other opinions out there from other scientists who are also experts?”
“I thank the Member for taking an intervention. There are a couple of points there. <BR /> <BR />Does the Member accept that the UK CCC, while a very respectable and internationally renowned group of scientists, is an advisory body? Does he also accept that, during our investigation in the AERA Committee, we met a range of other climate change experts — for example, Dr Ciara Brennan of Newcastle University, Dr Thomas Muinzer of Aberdeen University, Dr Andrew Jackson of University College Dublin and Professor Peter Thorne of Maynooth University, and there may be others — who do not agree with that analysis? <BR /> <BR />Also, the Member is quoting scientists. The KPMG report ignores the seismic work that has been carried out by DAERA, AFBI and Teagasc.”
“I hope, if God spares me, that I will still be alive, that my children will be adults and that I will have grandchildren. This climate legislation is about trying to balance the levels of emissions that we produce against what we sequester. If we go for 82%, come 2050, when we have grandchildren, the children of Scotland, Wales, England and the South of Ireland will have reached 100%. Their air will be much cleaner. There will be less nitrous oxide and methane in the air. Why should we sit here and tell our future generations that it is OK for the children of the North to have that lesser-quality air whilst the rest have better-quality air? <BR /> <BR />The other principle of fairness —”
“You are very generous with the interventions, Linda. <BR /> <BR />Does the Member agree that fairness and justice are at the heart of our conversations about climate change? A lot of Members have talked about the importance of young people. From all the evidence-gathering sessions of the AERA Committee — I should have expressed my thanks to the staff for putting everything together and to the people who attended — I remember the young people the most. We held over 52 evidence-gathering sessions and met separately over 300 pupils in schools. I was at every one of those engagements except for one, as a consequence of a family bereavement. In all of that, the young people stuck out the most. <BR /> <BR />In 2050, I will be 76 years of age.”
“I thank the Member for taking the intervention. One of the amendments that we put in — I think that the Committee proposed the amendment to the Climate Change Bill as well — proposed that the five-year climate action plans can come about only through co-design and working with the wider sector and after a 16-week consultation and that they must be subject to an equality impact assessment, an economic impact assessment and a rural needs impact assessment before they are ultimately agreed by the Assembly. Does the Member agree that that co-design aspect and working in partnership with all of the sectors, rather than imposing things on people from here, should be a crucial part of the legislation?”
“— and stopped the transition towards the flat rate —”
“I thank the Member for giving way. There will be amendments to try to mitigate the potential impact of the legislation, but I will turn back to the comments that the Member made about its impact on hill farmers. Does he agree that the two biggest threats to hill farming are climate change and the DUP? On top of the shambles that the DUP made of Brexit, it took away the hill farm payment from the hill farmers —”