Robbie Butler
Lagan Valley · Ulster Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“Officials highlighted that alignment was provided through existing EU-derived arrangements and that coherence with existing regulatory frameworks was identified as a main consideration.”
“I note that the Member for Strangford agrees: she understands the value of our fisheries in those areas. There are other complexities. The Isle of Man Government have now done a bit of a circle around that island, which makes it difficult for our fishers from Portavogie, Kilkeel and Portaferry to craft and graft a living from some of the…”
“The Committee took the opportunity to question officials on several issues and highlight matters warranting scrutiny at Committee Stage but was not limited to those areas.”
“As the Minister said, they have possibly been viewed as competing demands, but they are not competing demands, because clean water is part of sustainable food production.”
“<BR /> <BR />I am glad to see language in the Bill on the sustainability of the aquaculture sector, and I want to lean in a bit on that. Aquaculture pastimes have, perhaps, been underutilised, whether they relate to the angling fraternity or other river and water users.”
“Today, I want to talk about a very talented young girl from Lisburn called Freya Terris. Freya, who is 17 years old, attends Friends' School and studies the piano under former Lisburn resident Rory Dowse. Freya is an incredibly accomplished young pianist and has performed in the Ulster Hall.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,636 lines we hold for Robbie Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 22 of 53.
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee then heard from the Minister about his priorities for 2024-25, which included tackling climate change together; protecting our natural environment; supporting sustainable, resilient and productive agri-food and fishing sectors; and building strong, sustainable and diverse rural communities, which is an absolute priority for my Committee. It came as no surprise, therefore, when he had to agree to difficult reductions in some divisions in order to fund additional work in other areas, such as the Lough Neagh project. It immediately became clear to the Committee that the monitoring rounds would be needed for essential purposes, not for development purposes beyond the statutory functions.”
“We were pleased to consider the revised out-turn and forecast out-turn document that was forwarded to us from the Finance Committee. That allowed us to monitor any budget overcommitments and how dependent DAERA was on monitoring rounds. <BR /> <BR />In June, the Committee heard that DAERA, like many other Departments, started the Budget year in a difficult opening position, with no additional funding to take forward new work and with statutory obligations and contractual pressures not covered. In financial terms, bids for £95·8 million in resource DEL and £155·2 million in capital DEL led to allocations of only £15·2 million in resource DEL and £95 million in capital DEL.”
“On farmers in particular, I think of the bovine TB compensation piece that the Minister often has to speak to. We know that, even with in-year funding, those funds have not been wholly secured. Today, with the onset of avian flu, there are further fiscal pressures on the Minister's Department. As he said today, there are limitations to what he can do with the limited funds that he has available. It is good to note that the Department of Finance is continuing to work to set an improved fiscal floor through a more permanent fiscal framework for Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />The Committee considered DAERA's allocations through the monitoring rounds over the year, receiving briefings from officials in June and December 2024 and in February 2025.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs. By way of introduction, it is good that, at least for the 2024-25 spring Supplementary Estimates, we find ourselves in a somewhat more normal budgetary circumstance. The SSE Supply resolution offers us all the opportunity to debate the changes that have been made to the departmental and ALB budgets in 2024-25 following the June, October and January monitoring rounds and any other exceptional transfers. <BR /> <BR />In the case of DAERA, without those monitoring rounds, many farmers and those involved in the agricultural and, indeed, environmental sectors would have desperately wondered where the vital funds would come from.”
“I thank the Minister for engaging late yesterday evening on the matter. I am looking at the dates around the outbreak. The housing order was issued on Wednesday 12 February, I believe, with measures being put in place at the farm on 14 February. What confidence can poultry farmers have that the Department is responding in time when it gets the information?”
“It is interesting to note that the amendment that the TUV tabled when we last debated the matter sought the granting of powers to the Commission to influence the independent panel, which would have removed every essence of independence. It will be interesting to see whether the TUV will continue to adopt that new policy position today. <BR /> <BR />These are difficult things to talk about, but rigorous independence in determining MLAs' salaries is absolutely what this should be about. I hope that the TUV will not table the amendment that it sought to have made in 2020. Perhaps the Member would like to speak to that, if he gets a chance.”
“The Bill will ensure that MLAs' salaries and pensions are managed independently, while allowances will benefit from the practical expertise of Assembly officials who understand the day-to-day challenges of running an office and serving constituents. <BR /> <BR />Since 2020, as has been said, the Assembly Commission has improved conditions for members of staff, including the introduction of maternity leave support, better employment protections and enhanced security measures. Crucially, every claim is subject to robust scrutiny, with 25% of claims audited externally. This is about transparency, good governance and public confidence. <BR /> <BR />The last couple of debates caused me to reflect on the last discussions that we had in the House.”
“It does not set the salaries for Members. It simply ensures that pay and pensions are set independently, while allowances remain under the Assembly Commission's remit. This is a matter of process. It is not an outcome. It is not predetermined, and it was never mentioned that it would be predetermined. Anybody who implies that that was ever my intention or the intention of any other former member of the Commission is absolutely wrong, and I reject that outright — absolutely outright. <BR /> <BR />Every party in the Chamber has criticised past decisions of the independent financial review panel. However, complaints alone solve nothing.”
“Legislatively, this Bill is long overdue. It has been the settled will of the Assembly since 2020 that salaries and pensions should be determined independently — a word that I will return to shortly — and free from political interference. That the Assembly Commission has delayed its progression, first due to the pandemic and then due to the pressures of the heavy legislative programme of the previous session, is a credit to the Commission members with whom I served. <BR /> <BR />Let us be honest: the delay was a deliberate choice. There really is no good reason to ensure that, going forward, independence is not part and parcel of how this place determines Members' salaries. However, we need to be clear about what the Bill does, not add to the misinformation that has been spread in the Chamber, the media and on social media.”
“Their future is our future. We will not stand idly by while they are put at risk.”
“That starts with demanding an urgent reversal of the inheritance tax changes, fighting for fair funding and protection for our farmers and standing up here, in Holyrood, in the Welsh Assembly and, more important, in Westminster to ensure that the next generation of Northern Ireland family farmers has a future. We need to send a clear message. <BR /> <BR />I heard the Member for South Antrim talk about living in people's heads. I will live on the family farms of Northern Ireland if that is what is needed to protect them. I will not be living in anybody's head, but I will hold to account those with responsibility for tackling this at its core in Westminster with the Labour Government, who brought in the changes that could see the end of food security across the UK and inflict the greatest harm on family farms across Northern Ireland.”
“I absolutely am. What happens in each of the legislatures, whether it is Westminster, Edinburgh or Cardiff, is important when we talk about the topic at hand. I was talking about a vote on the inheritance tax. They are intrinsically linked, so I thank the Member for that. <BR /> <BR />Family farmers need more than press releases and social media posts; they need every legislative and political tool at their disposal. That means physically showing up in the voting Lobbies where it counts. If we are serious about protecting the future of family farms in Northern Ireland, we must move beyond word salad signalling into tangible and meaningful action.”
“That is an absolute insult to every farming family in Northern Ireland. Let us be honest about what happened. Sinn Féin, to be fair, true to its abstention policy, did not vote: that was no surprise. The SDLP, sadly, did not vote. Revealingly, the Alliance Party, whose MP is from Lagan Valley, did not record a vote. The parties failed to show up. When push came to shove, they all had the chance to stand up for farming families in Northern Ireland —.”
“Those farms form the backbone of our agriculture sector, rural communities and local food security. If the changes are not reversed, we risk forcing the next generation off the land, accelerating the decline of family farming, handing even more power to large agribusinesses and speculative investors and ending food security for good. <BR /> <BR />The Executive must do more than simply acknowledge the crisis: they must act. That means actively lobbying the British Government ahead of the spring statement to secure the urgent reversal of those damaging changes. Let me be clear: words without action are like wheels without traction. It is how you vote that counts, not the likes that you accrue. <BR /> <BR />When the official Opposition brought the issue before Westminster, only six of our MPs recorded a vote — six.”
“There is no doubt that farmers want to play their part in tackling change, but they need clarity, stability and funding. <BR /> <BR />I will focus on the specific threat, which is mentioned in the motion, to the future of family farms brought about by the changes to inheritance tax announced in the Chancellor's autumn Budget 2024, with DAERA's analysis showing that half of farms, accounting for a staggering 80% of farmland in Northern Ireland, could be affected. Let me be clear: that is almost certainly an underestimate. <BR /> <BR />With average land values rising from £15,000 per acre to £21,000 per acre and to even higher levels in high-yield areas, many more farms will be caught in the inheritance tax net. It is not just a technical adjustment in a tax code; it is a direct attack on the viability of family farms in Northern Ireland.”
“I welcome the motion tabled by Sinn Féin in the names of Declan McAleer, Nicola Brogan and Áine Murphy. It is really useful to be able to highlight the mounting financial pressures that face farming families across Northern Ireland. Those pressures are compounded by inflation, rising living costs, planning restrictions and delays in tackling the scourge of bovine TB. All of that is set against the backdrop of economic uncertainty, with global markets opening further due to trade deals, such as the EU-Mercosur partnership agreement, which threatens to undercut local produce and further lower imports from outside Northern Ireland. Added to that burden is the uncertainty that surrounds future support from the Department in meeting climate and environmental challenges.”
“Their futures are at stake. The Ulster Unionist Party supports the motion and the amendment.”
“While that was achieved via additional COVID moneys, the fund was indeed justified and perhaps offers us a template for how we can do better. <BR /> <BR />We must also acknowledge the often overlooked struggles of young carers. Many young people bear the burden of caregiving at a critical stage in their life. I apologise for using the word "burden", which is probably a cumbersome word, because they do not see it as a burden. It is an honour to provide care, but the reality is, as I have said before, that it comes at a financial, social and sometimes emotional cost. Studies show that many of those young people — as many as one in four — face serious disruption to their education and personal development. That cannot be right. If we passed any of those problems through a child's rights impact assessment, they would fail.”
“Such a scheme would provide financial relief to carers across Northern Ireland. In relation to the amendment, we see value in a cross-departmental approach to support unpaid carers more broadly, including the provision of paid carer's leave and improved access to respite services. Those measures are essential in order to ensure that those who care for others are not neglected themselves. <BR /> <BR />In 2021, before Stormont was collapsed, the Ulster Unionist Party took proactive steps to highlight the plight of carers. The then Health Minister, Robin Swann, detailed a £4·4 million initiative, the support for carers fund, managed by the Community Foundation NI. The grant scheme was available to community and voluntary sector organisations with a charitable purpose and marked an important step towards offering our carers tangible support.”
“For that, we absolutely thank them. <BR /> <BR />Despite the monumental role that they play, however, our carers face significant challenges. Many have been let down by inadequate social security support, leaving them to struggle financially and socially while they dedicate their lives to caring for loved ones. The reality is stark. Carers are often forced to balance the demands of paid work with overwhelming unpaid responsibilities. That is a combination that takes its toll on them financially, socially and emotionally. <BR /> <BR />Today, I hope that the Assembly recognises those challenges and agrees with the motion and the amendment, both of which call on the Minister for Communities to introduce a carer's allowance supplement scheme, as recommended by the Carer Poverty Commission NI.”
“I will highlight the indispensable contribution that Northern Ireland's unpaid carers make. There are around 220,000 individuals, nearly 60% of whom are women, who are the indispensable thread that helps hold our society together. They provide daily care for children with additional needs, as Mr Carroll points out in his motion, and care for the elderly, those with disabilities and those with chronic illnesses. Without them, as the Member for Strangford Kellie Armstrong aptly states in an article:”
“I bring Members' minds back to legislation that was passed in 2016 or 2017. It used to be a real bugbear of mine that, when you sat in traffic and looked at a car, you could see car seats with babies and children in the back of the car while one or two people were puffing away in the front. Thankfully, we do not see that so much now. <BR /> <BR />I congratulate my party colleagues Mike Nesbitt and Robin Swann, who moved at pace and worked closely with the UK Government last February to ensure that the Bill's provisions would extend to Northern Ireland. That did not happen by accident; it was done on purpose. I fully support the motion, and I pay tribute to all the departmental staff, clinicians and community and voluntary organisations that have been so critical in getting the Bill to this point.”
“I know that the Minister has a particular interest in and focus on tackling health inequalities, so the legislation is a step along that path. The previous public consultation showed that what the UK Bill and today's LCM will do has strong public support. It is greater here, in fact, than in the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“There are people out there who are pushing counterfeit and illegal products into the hands of people.”
“<BR /> <BR />Tobacco use is a leading cause of health inequality in Northern Ireland. Everybody seemed to touch on that, and I will expand on the point a little. There are those in our communities — not just in shops — who are selling illegal, smuggled, counterfeit products, and they do so predominantly in areas of social deprivation. They are leaning on and squeezing the most vulnerable in our society. A multi-pronged approach is required, and there are other areas that we need to look at. It is a tragedy, although an avoidable one, that lung cancer incidence rates in the most deprived areas are about two and a half times those in the least deprived areas. That is why the focus needs to be on looking beyond health and even beyond the economy.”
“Shockingly, it accounts for over 2,000 deaths here every year. My family has been impacted on. My grandfather died from a respiratory illness, and he was a regular smoker of Park Drives, a particularly harsh type of cigarette, I think. There have been instances of lung cancer in my family and in my wife's family that were almost certainly down to smoking. <BR /> <BR />Lives will be saved because of this legislation. That is why today is such a good day. It has long been proven that the vast majority of people who smoke became addicted as children, and that needs to remain a focus for us. I am not so naive as to think that, of itself, legislation will stop every young person taking up smoking, but it will do enough to prevent many, and we can help in that effort.”
“The layer of smoke was down to about 2 or 3 feet off the floor, and just about everybody whom I could see who was under 16 was smoking. All right, that was 35, 36, 37 years ago, but, if we fail to look at evidence from the past, we cannot combat the wickedness of the future. In tackling vape use, we have to encourage young people not to start vaping because it smells nice, looks nice or whatever: it does not. It hurts me when I am in my own town or anywhere and see young people in school uniform doing what, they think, looks cool and probably smells OK — it smells a lot better than cigarette smoke, to be fair — but, if vaping is a gateway to smoking, we need to look at it very seriously. <BR /> <BR />Many Members who have spoken have said that tobacco use is the biggest cause of cancer in Northern Ireland.”
“We see reduced hospital admissions, improved health among hospitality workers and reduced exposure to second-hand smoke. <BR /> <BR />We need to return to the issue of vapes every time that we talk about tobacco. When I was 11 years old and had just started secondary school, I remember getting an Ulsterbus to school. It used to pull up outside a shop to pick us up. It was my first day, and I was in my wee school uniform. I am not tall now, but I was even smaller then. The Minister said that 23·6% of year 12s, which is fifth year — I have to convert it into old money — vape and that vaping is potentially a gateway to smoking. I remember getting on to the bus, and, no word of a lie, you could not see the back of it.”
“I certainly did not like the smell of cigarettes, and I grew up with an individualised aversion to smoking. <BR /> <BR />As a young person, I often wondered when the day would come when we would have an honest discussion on the subject. Yes, that discussion started around 20 years ago when some of the first legislation came in. If you remember, you will know that the discussion was primarily led by the health bodies outlining the impact of smoking on people. There was also the counter-lobby, which included those who had restaurants, bars and other places where people smoked while congregating and socialising and said that a ban would have a detrimental impact on them; in fact, the statistics show that it did not. The statistics also bear out the fact that we are in a better place because of the changes that were made.”
“Today's vote and the Tobacco and Vapes Bill more generally are undoubtedly the right thing to do. That is what I have written down, but, inside, I feel so much better about what is happening today than what is typed up at the top of my page. Unlike probably all the Members who have spoken so far, I have no declaration to make. I have not been a smoker at any stage in my life. I am really not saying that in a pious way. In my family, I was surrounded by smokers. My paternal granny and granda smoked. My granda on my mum's side smoked quite heavily, as did most of my aunts and uncles, and my dad smoked. I am grateful that, for reasons unknown to me, I just did not like it. I did not like the look of it. I did not think that anybody looked cool when they were doing it.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Committee agrees to recommend that the draft Waste (Fees and Charges) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025 be approved by the Assembly.”
“Secondly, we asked whether the agencies in other jurisdictions also based their cost recovery on running costs and whether their model for cost recovery was the same as the NIEA's. The officials confirmed that that was indeed the case. The Committee then agreed that it was content to support the SR as drafted. <BR /> <BR />More recently, at its meeting on 6 February, the Committee considered the SL5 letter and the draft SR. The Committee noted that no changes had been made since the SL1 was submitted to the Committee and that the Examiner of Statutory Rules (ESR) had advised that the SR was to be included in the next ESR report and would not be drawn to the special attention of the Assembly. Since then, the ESR report has indeed been issued.”
“These regulations, however, are made under schedule 4 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which means that they are subject to the draft affirmative resolution procedure, unless they are only altering a fee or charge to reflect changes in the value of money. The Committee noted that, as the fees and charges are being uplifted beyond a statutory inflationary measure, the SR was required to be laid by draft affirmative resolution. <BR /> <BR />The Committee then asked a series of questions, two of which I will bring to the House's attention. First, we were interested in the fees and fines applied in the rest of the UK, and the officials highlighted the fact that the guidance that insists on full cost recovery is statutory and applies throughout the UK.”
“The Committee heard that they are normally uplifted by the GDP deflator figure that the Treasury issues in December but that, after analysis by the NIEA finance branch, it was agreed that the fees and charges for 2024-25 should be uplifted by 9·5%. The uplift applies to the schemes in the NIEA charging policy for 2024-25, covering two distinct payroll years with different rates applied and includes associated employer pay costs. The Committee heard that, if the NIEA had used the 2024-25 GDP deflator figure of 0·8%, it would have lost an estimated £1 million in fees and charges across all the charging schemes. <BR /> <BR />The officials advised that the SR to bring the waste management charging scheme into operation each year is usually laid by negative resolution.”
“The Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs met on 23 January and received an oral briefing from officials from the waste legislation branch and the environmental resources policy division on the SL1 regarding the draft statutory rule. <BR /> <BR />The Committee heard that the Northern Ireland Environment Agency operates an annual charging policy for its regulatory activities, covering eight separate charging schemes, one of which is the waste management charging scheme. We heard that legislation was needed to bring the scheme into operation each year. The Committee noted that the NIEA charging policy is a model of full cost recovery, meaning that those activities are not subsidised by the taxpayer and that the fees and charges are uplifted annually.”
“Anaerobic digestion (AD) is often an overlooked aspect in the recycling of household waste, including food and garden waste. Will the Minister provide an update on where he sees that fitting into the circular green economy that he is talking about? Is any action being taken with councils to encourage greater use of AD?”
“I thank the Minister for giving way. I think that most Committee members are here. Was the Minister made aware — I am sure that he was — of the Committee's form of words, which was to look at a tiered, segregated response that would take out all the pertinent points that relate to climate and the environment? I will give you another example as to why that should happen. A County Tyrone farmer received fines twice, in 2022 and 2023, of £2,500 for ordering too many tags. That is nothing to do with the environment or climate.”
“Just on the point that the Member raised, to clarify and answer his question, there was no communication from any big industry, such as Moy Park. In fact, there was very little lobbying from stakeholders except farmers, who will be impacted on by the SR. <BR /> <BR />Let me put this on the record: the Member for Upper Bann is absolutely right. Most of our farmers are actually making great strides with regard to the environmental impact —”
“I thank the Member for giving way. There is no doubting the Member's passion for protecting the environment and on climate issues. However, will the Member confirm that, in reality, I have said nothing that could be contradicted? In the meetings that we had with the Department, it was very clear from anything that the other members and I said that we are serious about the climate and environmental protections and — I am pretty sure that these words will be in Hansard — that the Committee would have looked at segregating those matters. If you do not accept that, I am not sure that we were at the same meetings.”
“<BR /> <BR />Given the fiscal environment in which farmers and others in the agriculture sector are working, we are desperately trying to build their trust. They will be trusted stakeholders as we face into the climate crisis and the targets that we have to meet. In this instance, a simple fix would be for the Minister and the Department to segregate the environmental and climate matters and allow us to look at the other issues in the round. <BR /> <BR />In bringing my remarks to a close, I look forward to the rest of the debate.”
“We do not need to play high politics with this. The Member is absolutely right: the problem is that, if we pass the SR, farmers such as that would be exposed to 100% of the fine, which is an increase. At the moment, we have derogation on those fines, and that is what has been achieved here. We need to move into getting absolutely serious about environmental and climate breaches, but, in reality, while I do not have the number of instances when the Department has acted in that manner, I do not think that that manner could be described as draconian. It is something that happened and could still happen. It might be a reduced fine, but it should not happen anyway. There are operational issues.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, which is useful. I will be honest: in my time as Chair, I have not detected that any member of the Committee has demonstrated to me that they do not share the Minister's ambition. We all need to reflect that we passed the Climate Change Act in the previous dispensation. I am facing in that direction as the Chair of the Agriculture Committee and as someone who voted for that legislation, but, in reality, I refer the Member to what I said: farmers and the agriculture sector want to be green, but they cannot be green if they are in the red. The Minister and his Department could have segregated the environmental and climate matters out of the regulations, and that would have put the Committee in a position where it could have supported them.”
“One second, please. <BR /> <BR />Perhaps the Minister and the Department will accept the offer that has been made by my Committee since I have taken the Chair and its willingness to engage proactively on matters relating to cross-compliance failures, particularly in relation to environment and climate harm.”
“Perhaps the Minister and the Department will accept the offer made by the Committee —.”
“The notification of the tag inspection came through on a Friday at 4.00 pm. She said that the closest place that could print tags was 35 minutes away, and it could not be done before closing. In that family's case, the grandfather passed away on the Sunday. Monday was a bank holiday, and the funeral was on the Tuesday. The tag inspection was at 9.00 am on the Wednesday. They failed the inspection, and, even after handing in the grandfather's death certificate and all other evidence, they were still penalised on cross-compliance matters. That has nothing to do with the environment or the climate, and it is exactly what the SR would do. <BR /> <BR />That is just one example of the many that I have received since taking the Chair of the AERA Committee, and it is evidence of why the move by the Department does not do what it says in the tin.”
“<BR /> <BR />I remind the House that the change should be considered against the backdrop of the major challenges faced by farmers in regard to inheritance tax changes, the un-ring-fencing of the agri-food budget and the imminent and likely significant challenges that farmers will need to meet for us to achieve our environmental targets without clear pound-for-pound support from the Department. That is still unknown. <BR /> <BR />I will give the Assembly one example from the many that I have received on what the change does on those cross-compliance matters. It is from a young female farmer, and she relates a story where her dad was fined 5% of a single farm payment for a breach of two cattle out of 380. One had a fully intact tag and one broken tag, and the second had one fully intact tag.”
“I will reiterate the words that I regularly hear from them: "We want to be green, but we cannot be green if we are in the red". <BR /> <BR />I believe that, in every deliberation that the AERA Committee had with departmental officials, we demonstrated a desire to work with the Minister and his Department and that, if the Department was serious about tackling climate change and about environmental protections in regard to cross-compliance issues — I do not diminish the Minister's desire to combat climate change and protect the environment — work could have been done to amend certain areas specific to environmental and climate breaches rather than have a broad-brush request.”
“<BR /> <BR />The majority of the Committee did not support the SR in its current form, and the Committee divided on the rule, resulting in Ayes 1 and Noes 7, with no abstentions. <BR /> <BR />For completion, at the meeting of 30 January, members considered the thirtieth report of the Examiner of Statutory Rules (ESR), which included the SR. The Committee noted that the ESR had not drawn special attention to the SR. <BR /> <BR />In concluding my remarks as the Committee Chair, I point out that the majority of members present at the Committee meeting on 16 January agreed to put down a prayer of annulment, but there was no consensus. <BR /> <BR />I will now speak on behalf of my party and as an MLA. The Ulster Unionist Party understands the current relentless pressures that family farmers face across Northern Ireland.”
“However, many Committee members now expressed concern that the Minister had not reflected on the issues that the Committee had raised at the meeting on 28 November or reconsidered any aspect of the SR. Some members stated that the Department should have reflected on what was said at the Committee on 28 November and come back with a proposal for amendments to provide a more tiered system of penalties specifically relating to climate and the environment. Some members contended that there are already substantial penalties in place for breaches and that there was no need to segregate minor and major breaches. The view was also expressed that there is a need for harsher fines for environmental and food security breaches.”
“<BR /> <BR />The majority of members did not support the SR, but there was no consensus. A vote was taken on DAERA proceeding with the SR. The Committee divided, resulting in Ayes 1, Noes 6, and one abstention. <BR /> <BR />The Committee then considered the SR at its meeting on 16 January 2025, and many members were concerned that there had been no changes to the policy content since the SL1 briefing in November. Those issues were repeatedly highlighted by members. Only the title had been amended from "(Revocation) Regulations" to "(Amendment) Regulations". Many members again discussed the regulation and expressed a range of views similar to those discussed on 28 November.”