Gareth Wilson
Newry and Armagh · Democratic Unionist Party · Northern Ireland
“At its core, this is a practical and proportionate step to strengthen animal welfare, improve public confidence and bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. For some time now, there has been a gap in our regulatory framework.”
“This legislation creates consistency, putting all operators on the same footing and ensuring that there are clear, enforceable standards across the board. There is public and stakeholder backing for this approach.”
“In so doing, the regulations are not about creating an additional burden for the sake of it. Rather, they are about strengthening transparency, improving standards and giving regulators the tools that they need to enforce the high levels of animal welfare that the public rightly expect.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. It is, however, disappointing that MLAs will not get sight of the updated strategy before recess. Given the importance of the issue to our constituents, will the Minister outline how the strategy will address the role of utility companies in degrading road surfaces?”
“Thank you for your answer, Minister. Do you agree that, for a mother who is about to give birth or who seeks medical attention from maternity staff for her unborn child, suspension of those vital services at short notice is the last thing that is needed in a time-pressured situation?”
“It is important that amendment No 32 be progressed, as not to have a review mechanism for this significant legislation would be highly regrettable and lead to important points that councils would raise being missed, because, by the time of the review, the councils would have built up a considerable weight of experience.”
The complete record
Every one of 131 lines we hold for Gareth Wilson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“This legislation creates consistency, putting all operators on the same footing and ensuring that there are clear, enforceable standards across the board. There is public and stakeholder backing for this approach. The Department's consultation showed support for mandatory CCTV, including support for full coverage and the 90-day retention period. That reflects a wider expectation that high animal welfare standards must be demonstrated, not simply assumed. <BR /> <BR />This is a measured and common-sense step forward. It supports animal welfare, enhances transparency, aligns us with the rest of the UK and ensures a consistent regulatory approach across the sector. I am happy to support the motion.”
“In so doing, the regulations are not about creating an additional burden for the sake of it. Rather, they are about strengthening transparency, improving standards and giving regulators the tools that they need to enforce the high levels of animal welfare that the public rightly expect. We are, rightly, proud of the high quality of food that we produce in Northern Ireland, and it is right and proper that we aspire to our food being produced to a high ethical standard. <BR /> <BR />It is worth noting that most of the industry is ahead of the legislation. The majority of slaughterhouses here already operate some form of CCTV system, often driven by retailer requirements and assurance schemes.”
“At its core, this is a practical and proportionate step to strengthen animal welfare, improve public confidence and bring Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom. For some time now, there has been a gap in our regulatory framework. While England introduced similar measures in 2018, with Scotland and Wales following in 2021 and 2024 respectively, Northern Ireland has remained the only UK jurisdiction without mandatory CCTV requirements in slaughterhouses. The regulations address that gap in a sensible and balanced way. They require slaughterhouse operators to install CCTV systems in all areas where live animals are present, ensuring a clear and complete record of operations. They also require footage to be retained for a minimum of 90 days and made available to authorised officers for inspection where necessary.”
“I thank the Minister for her answer. It is, however, disappointing that MLAs will not get sight of the updated strategy before recess. Given the importance of the issue to our constituents, will the Minister outline how the strategy will address the role of utility companies in degrading road surfaces? I ask that due to the concern that there was no mention of utilities in the original document.”
“Thank you for your answer, Minister. Do you agree that, for a mother who is about to give birth or who seeks medical attention from maternity staff for her unborn child, suspension of those vital services at short notice is the last thing that is needed in a time-pressured situation?”
“Thank you, Minister. Can you indicate what the present funding position is in relation to that Executive priority?”
“<BR /> <BR />I take the opportunity to thank everyone who played their part in creating and contributing to the Bill.”
“It is important that amendment No 32 be progressed, as not to have a review mechanism for this significant legislation would be highly regrettable and lead to important points that councils would raise being missed, because, by the time of the review, the councils would have built up a considerable weight of experience. I therefore urge the Minister to resource the review properly to ensure that it is wide-ranging and encompasses fully the experience of all 11 councils. Indeed, should councils speak with one voice that a particular provision in the legislation has proven in practice to be ineffective, inefficient, too costly or not to have had the impact promised, I hope that the Minister will present with an attitude to adjust the legislation and ensure that the best possible legal outcomes are obtained for our councils.”
“That having been said, in coming to the Assembly with my experience in local government, I know that councils still have concerns with the legislation. It is because I recognise that that I am not in favour of amendment Nos 33 or 35. I feel that they would place an even greater burden on our councils' already stretched resource requirements. As I said, I have an affinity with ABC Council and am acutely aware of the dilapidation issues that exist in the town and village centres in my constituency. <BR /> <BR />The other amendments seek to streamline the legislation, and I understand their inclusion.”
“Given that there are 11 councils, it is possible, if not most likely, that there will be 11 different responses to the legislation and 11 methods of applying the law. NILGA has taken a keen interest in the legislation, and rightly so. Its involvement with the Committee was very useful. The fact that extra sessions were organised with the Bill Office and departmental officials was important and, in my view, necessary. At Committee, I made the point that, when legislation such as this, which is to be administered by our councils, is being developed, councils must be heard fully. Our councils are at a tier of government that cannot be detached from this legislature. Legislation with the greatest buy-in that has been worked up with the widest possible slate of opinions has the greatest chance of success.”
“From looking at the Roads Order, I feel that there remains very much a responsibility on DFI to take action. Like the AERA Minister, I am not in favour of a system that provides escape routes for one section of government. He should have a conversation with his counterpart in DFI about that, as that responsibility should be reasonably shared. I would like the Minister to respond on that matter, either in the House or to me in writing.”
“That is slightly concerning, given that, in my public representational role over the past 20 years, I have seen, on many occasions, a ping-pong approach between DFI and councils about who should deal with the dangers that are present on the edge of a public footpath or road. That is the main and clear domain of the Bill in attempting to refresh and update laws that have not been changed in many years. I feel that, even with this legislation, there will still be that ping-pong approach between councils and DFI in the circumstances.”
“I recognise that, Minister, but, on that point, it is important to cite the article in the Order that relates to "Dangerous land adjoining roads". Article 51 states:”
“His response made particular reference to article 51 of the Roads (Northern Ireland) Order 1993. He stated:”
“It is clear that, around Northern Ireland, there are a high number of dilapidated buildings and structures — that almost goes without saying — and this is an attempt to enable councils to have more powers to deal with those types of structures. <BR /> <BR />The process involving the AERA Committee was considerable. It was a new experience for me as a new Member. It was interesting to scrutinise the legislation, taking it line by line and working through all the clauses and proposed amendments. That was an enlightening and enjoyable process for me. <BR /> <BR />I have raised concerns about the potential for duplication of legislation, and I point to the existing powers of the Department for Infrastructure. I raised that with the Minister recently in a question for written answer.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention. He will appreciate that I came from a council quite recently — within the past six months. I have an affinity with my colleagues on Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough (ABC) Council — I know that one of them was on the Committee — and they said that they would very much like resources. The pressures on council resources are quite fresh in my mind. That is why I cannot not say that in the House. At times, a chasm exists between the House and councils that we should be working harder to bridge. The Bill is part of that process. <BR /> <BR />The process is now at this point, and the legislation will, hopefully, soon become another tool in the shed of our councils across Northern Ireland.”
“This has been an interesting process. It must be made clear at the outset that the legislation will be passed from the House to our 11 councils to operate. That is not an action without significant impact, as we have heard from other Members in the House today. That being the case, I have concerns that no extra resourcing will come from DAERA to our councils to assist them with the exercise of these functions.”
“My focus is on farmers in my Newry and Armagh constituency. What immediate measures will be introduced in this financial year that will allow them to see a difference?”
“Indeed, if you did your 11-plus in the year in which the Provisional IRA had declared would be its year of victory, you are now just a couple of years off collecting your UK state pension. I will mention that many of my constituents never got to lift their state pension because of the terrorism of the IRA. <BR /> <BR />The latest grand plans to abolish Northern Ireland will come and go, and the world will move on. Then, as is clearly the case now, the arguments in favour of maintaining Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom will be overwhelming.”
“in preparation for unity — "all political parties". That, apparently, is the framework that the Fine Gael Northern Ireland engagement group facilitated by Professor Deirdre Heenan will be working on. There is certainly no doubt that the group's work would be much easier if it conveniently ignored all of us who will continue to promote the benefits of Northern Ireland's place in the United Kingdom. <BR /> <BR />Talking about a border poll is certainly much more attractive than getting on with delivering in government. I reckon that, perhaps, that is the lesson that Fine Gael has learned from Sinn Féin. We have been told that unity is just around the corner for longer than I have been alive.”
“in preparation for what he calls "unity", that is telling in itself. He is speaking, of course, to a Republic of Ireland audience. He is pitching to voters in the Republic of Ireland because, for Simon Harris, Fine Gael and so many others, it would be much preferable if a so-called united Ireland did not include Northern Ireland. Nowhere is that more evident than in that comment:”
“The most recent University of Liverpool study shows that support is not just not falling but has increased over the past few years, so, when Simon Harris tells us:”
“Over the weekend, Simon Harris TD boldly announced that Fine Gael would develop a blueprint for a so-called united Ireland by November. That is another grand announcement that we can file alongside the dozens, if not hundreds, of other such announcements over the years. For some nationalists in Northern Ireland and, increasingly, in the Irish Government, if they are looking for a convenient distraction, they can always rely on the old faithful: banging the united Ireland drum. Meanwhile, back in the real world, support for the abolition of Northern Ireland has fallen to a 10-year low. <BR /> <BR />Despite the predictions that Brexit would usher Northern Ireland out of the Union, we are now just short of 10 years on from the referendum.”
“<BR /> <BR />The centenary stone is not about triumphalism. It is about acknowledging history, recognising the significance of Northern Ireland reaching 100 years and looking forward with confidence to the future. Sinn Féin may refuse even to utter the words "Northern Ireland" while sitting in the Northern Ireland Assembly, but that refusal changes nothing. Northern Ireland is here, people love living here and people love visiting here. Its history will be marked, and no volume of coordinated copy-and-paste objections will alter that fact.”
“The fact that Sinn Féin could not tolerate the memorial stone inside the Stormont estate and now cannot tolerate it outside Parliament Buildings makes clear the level of intolerance that Sinn Féin has for Northern Ireland. There is not much "First Minister for all" about that. <BR /> <BR />What is truly revealing is Sinn Féin's inability to show even the slightest respect for the history and constitutional reality of Northern Ireland. Sinn Féin demands respect at every turn yet consistently refuses to extend it to those who cherish Northern Ireland's history and its place in the United Kingdom. Most embarrassing of all, perhaps, is the spectacle of elected representatives apparently incapable of producing original objections of their own. The volume of near-identical submissions tells its own story.”
“We now have Sinn Féin representatives submitting what appear to be coordinated copy-and-paste objections to a commemorative stone marking the centenary of Northern Ireland. Frankly, their objections are as pathetic as they are predictable. <BR /> <BR />Northern Ireland reached its centenary despite decades of terrorist violence and intimidation carried out by Sinn Féin's IRA bedfellows, who attempted to destroy this place through the bomb and the bullet. They failed. Northern Ireland endured, Northern Ireland remains and Northern Ireland will continue into its next century. In a mature and confident democracy, the fact that unionist MLAs wish to mark that historic milestone with a modest memorial stone should offend no one.”
“Yet again, we witness the staggering hypocrisy of Sinn Féin laid bare for all to see. It is a party that lectures everybody else about respect, equality and the rule of law, yet, when it comes to its own agenda, there is always one rule for Sinn Féin and another for the ordinary law-abiding citizen. We saw it when Sinn Féin defended and justified the erection of an illegal statue in west Belfast of convicted IRA terrorist Bobby Sands without planning permission. We saw it again when Sinn Féin refused to remove its illegal billboard at the Egyptian Arch in Newry. The House backed my motion that it should be removed; indeed, in an act that Penn and Teller would be proud of, that billboard has gone. It seems that planning law matters to Sinn Féin only when it can be weaponised against something that it dislikes.”
“Minister, you will be aware of the good news over the weekend that a curlew was discovered to be nesting in Northern Ireland and of the fact that there has been a 98% decline in the species here since the 1980s. You may also be aware of the proliferation of foxes and other vermin in Northern Ireland. What are your concerns about the ongoing safety of curlew here to encourage their return and about the methods that are used to deal with vermin such as the fox, which poses a real risk to our curlew population?”
“Minister, you will be aware of the progress of the works at Narrow Water. What discussions have you had about the ecosystems in that location and what considerable construction work potentially means for that body of water? Was that discussed, and what parameters, restrictions or controls were placed on the work to ensure that there will be no damage to Narrow Water and its surrounding area during the construction phase?”
“Thank you, Minister. On the road user safety element of your statement, we serve the same constituency, so you will be aware that Gosford is one of the busiest parts of it. A wide variety of visitors come to it, not least a lot who come across the border via Newry to access the forest park. Doing so is hugely risky, because they have to wait in the middle of one of the busiest carriageways in the constituency in order to access that park. I am due to meet your officials later this week, but it would be useful if you were to front-load that meeting with a positive statement about your intention to improve safety through the release and increase in safety and basically say, "Yes, I agree that we need to improve safety here, and a right-turning lane is the best way to do that".”
“<BR /> <BR />There has been substantial commentary in recent months about the need to move on from the Troubles. I challenge the likes of John Swinney or anyone else of his opinion to meet the families face to face and tell them to move on from the loss of their loved one. No one has ever faced justice for their deaths. There are many today who strangely claim that there was no alternative to the barbaric attack that devastated Glenanne, even damaging the local primary school, which the terrorists had zero regard for. We will not allow the sacrifice of those men to be forgotten, and we will not allow their deaths to be rewritten as anything other than what they were: a cowardly, murderous attack that achieved only hurt, pain and endless heartache for the families who lost their loved ones.”
“Lance Corporal Robert Crozier, Private Sydney Hamilton and Private Paul Blakely were all upstanding and respected members of the local community, and their loss is still formally remembered annually in various ways. Indeed, this evening will see such a memorial event take place in Redrock Orange Hall. The bravery of the three men who were murdered by the IRA in that attack prevented further loss of life, and their sacrifice is consistent with the actions of many brave men and women who served in the Ulster Defence Regiment during the darkest days of the Troubles. We also remember the impact that the attack had on the 14 people who were injured in it, including civilians, as well as the families of those killed, as they continue to deal with the pain and hurt that that senseless act of IRA terrorism caused.”
“Yesterday marked 35 years since the devastating IRA bombing of the Glenanne UDR base, the home of 'B' Company 2 UDR. That cowardly attack resulted in the death of three soldiers. A lorry containing one of the largest bombs detonated during the Troubles was rolled down the hill before colliding with the base and ripping it apart. The explosion echoed across the County Armagh countryside for miles, and it was heard as far away as Dundalk. Debris from the indiscriminate attack landed in the nearby village and damaged residential dwellings. For many residents, the sound of the explosion still haunts them to this day.”
“It is absurd that someone who is involved in trail hunting, which involves no real, living animal, can receive a justice outcome that is of far greater severity than that received by someone who kills or otherwise takes a protected species under the Wildlife and Natural Environment Act (Northern Ireland) 2011. That is not advancement of animal welfare but a backward step legislatively. <BR /> <BR />Many other elements of the Bill raise considerable concerns. However, I am hopeful, despite what I have heard, that the House understands that the outworkings of the Bill, if it were to be implemented, would create such confusion, fear, resource pressure and, no doubt, wrongful prosecutions that it should be rejected at this stage.”
“Absolutely. I agree with the Member. That is where it opens up or, rather, closes down legitimate hunting with guns. There is that risk when a dog, a number of dogs or, as I have seen on many an occasion, more than one person with a dog is out hunting on a large expanse of territory that is owned by an individual landowner. <BR /> <BR />What weight is given to the word "permit"? How is permission to be tested and validated, and what weight is to be given to the test? I am sure that there are instances when hunting activity accesses lands and owners are not content with it and, regardless of a request to leave, those involved do not leave. Who decides the remedy in such instances? Look at the proposed sentencing regime for that example.”
“It could easily be argued and most likely will be the case that hunting could take place on land when the owner did not know nor give consent for hunting with a dog or that land could be accessed when no communication has taken place. Land could be accessed by a dog inadvertently, given that a dog has a mind of its own and often does not follow a command. Would those landowners be similarly held responsible? Who would decide whether a person involved in the outlawed description of hunting with dogs had argued that permission had been given when no permission had been given? What weight —?”
“While Mr Blair will say that that is not the intention of the Bill, he will, hopefully, also have read the concerns of the former Attorney General and will understand my concerns for dog owners up and down the country who have been in contact with me and are deeply concerned about the clear overreach of the proposed legislation. <BR /> <BR />I am deeply concerned about the impact on landowners. The Bill has the ability to criminalise not only the dog owner or those present but, most worryingly, a landowner or occupier. Whilst the word "knowingly" is included — presumably, meaning a clear intent — the wide-ranging implications are stark.”
“Our PSNI officers and, indeed, our courts are overwhelmed and under-resourced, and the Bill would needlessly add to that workload. <BR /> <BR />When considering the Bill, we must note the fact that anyone out in the countryside with their dog could be criminalised. A dog has, by all accounts, an ability to act on its own instincts and accord and could chase or follow a scent. It is preposterous that that very act could end up criminalising a dog owner, yet that is highly possible under the proposed legislation in its current format. It therefore goes without saying that, on that point alone, the Bill should be rejected.”
“That takes on many forms and formats and is done by many methods, all with the sole purpose of protecting our important habitats and our agri-food industry from the over-proliferation of various listed vermin species. While there is some recognition of that fact in the Bill through some minor exemptions, it is, by its construction, so complicated and convoluted that I pity anyone who is seeking to ensure that they are on the right side of the law were the Bill to receive Royal Assent in its current form. It also follows that it would be an absolute legal and resource-guzzling quagmire for the PSNI and, indeed, those in the justice system generally, who undoubtedly would be tasked with trying to make sense of such a complicated Bill in practice.”
“There is a real and prevailing fear that the legislation would create the possibility of criminalising any dog owner who has no intention of seeing any animal killed and that, under the Bill, through no fault of their own, they could face prosecution. That would be disastrous. <BR /> <BR />Let me be clear: I have no wish to see any animal suffer needlessly. I do not believe that anyone in the House has such a wish; indeed, everyone wants the highest animal welfare standards to be exercised regardless of the scenario. The control of vermin is no different. However, it is clear that there are many in the House who also understand the countryside and the fact that effective control of vermin is essential.”
“I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I have spent some time considering the issue, and it raises many questions and scenarios that have caused considerable concern in the countryside of Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />The Bill is unwieldy, and it is far from clear what its implications would be, given the commentary and timely warnings from senior legal figures in Northern Ireland, such as the former Attorney General John Larkin. I commend organisations such as the Countryside Alliance and the BASC, of which I am a member, for their attention to the Bill and all its implications. I also recognise the high level of contact from rural dwellers, who, likewise, have raised their concerns.”
“That contrasts sharply with non-terror extradition requests, for which, in the same period, out of 296 requests, 124 extraditions took place. That clearly shows a blatant disregard for justice for victims of terrorism. It remains deeply unacceptable that Dublin continues to sweep its role under the carpet. Victims and survivors deserve better. That is why we felt compelled to table the motion. I encourage all Members here today to back it.”
“Fresh from my experience with innocent victims in Armagh city on Sunday, I say this to the party opposite: desist from your yearly glorification events and desist from heaping grief and re-traumatisation on the innocent victims of IRA terrorism. It has to stop. <BR /> <BR />In closing, if the Dublin authorities claim to respect the rule of law and the human rights of victims, it follows that they should act of their own accord to investigate the state's role in the IRA campaign. There needs to be a full and comprehensive public inquiry into gardaí collusion in the Irish Republic. It is a travesty when one considers that, between 1973 and 1997, out of 113 extradition requests made to Dublin, only eight people were extradited for terrorist-related offences.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I indeed agree with the Member. It is a shame that Members from the other side of the House refuse to give way to have their points of view challenged. Anyway, I will proceed. <BR /> <BR />Only last Sunday, I stood with families of innocent victims in Armagh cathedral, where a poignant tapestry, representing the burden borne by women throughout the Troubles, was unveiled. Those women had to keep going, keep strong and keep focused for their families, relentlessly persevering, despite the loss of a husband, a father, a brother or a grandfather to IRA atrocities. Moreover, given that lived reality, the fact that the Government in the Republic of Ireland continue to fail to live up to agreements is nothing short of shameful.”
“We cannot forget that the coroner criticised the reluctance on the part of the Irish state to acknowledge the role of the border in the Kingsmills atrocity, noting that it was, at least in part, organised in the Republic of Ireland. Sadly —.”
“I want to take a few moments to highlight some important examples of atrocities that deserve the attention and transparency of the Irish Government. The first is the murder of Lord Justice Maurice Gibson and Lady Gibson at Killean. As they travelled home from a holiday, their car was ripped apart by an IRA bomb after they had been given a garda escort to the border. The second is the cowardly murders of Chief Superintendent Breen and Superintendent Buchanan in 1989 as they crossed the border into Northern Ireland, crucially after meeting in Dundalk garda station. That was confirmed by the Smithwick tribunal to be the result of garda collusion. The third is the Kingsmills massacre, which was one of the darkest days of the Troubles. Ten innocent men were gunned down in cold blood for the crime of being Protestant.”
“As a representative of a border constituency that was absolutely ravaged by ruthless IRA terrorism, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. The issue exposes the gross injustice and blatant hypocrisy of the Irish state's approach to legacy. Victims cannot be expected to accept a system where information flows in only one direction and where key evidence and, in some cases, key witnesses remain beyond reach. <BR /> <BR />The scandal of the Irish Government's approach to legacy in recent years is truly sickening. Their track record is no cause for hope for innocent victims. Many of my constituents bear the scars of decades of terrorism that was waged by the IRA as it operated with impunity on both sides of the border.”
“She referred to the pressures in delivering domiciliary care in rural areas across Newry and Armagh. She referred to the dilemma of carers not making ends meet. Timothy Gaston spoke of the crisis in provision and referred to the situation in the Northern Trust. He spoke of the rural versus urban divide in service delivery. Minister Nesbitt said that he is wedded to improving the outlook for social care. He spoke of the issue of a multi-year Budget. The Minister said that more of the same will not deliver the change required. <BR /> <BR />Our amendment strengthens the motion and reflects the unique challenges that are taking hold of our rural areas. I encourage all Members to back it.”
“Behind every person who is cared for is someone who deserves to feel safe and valued, regardless of where they live in Northern Ireland. <BR /> <BR />I will recap some Members' comments. Danny Donnelly pointed to the statistics in the domiciliary care system, the waits in A&E and the impact that they have on the healthcare system. Alan Chambers spoke of the importance of the role of home care staff and the lack of recognition of those staff. He said that, when home care issues arise, it creates pressures in our hospitals. Colin McGrath spoke of the worry that the issue creates for families and staff delivering a stretched service. He highlighted the voice of carers on time, pay and the pressured environment. Aoife Finnegan pointed to the fact that the Health Minister sits at the Executive table.”
“<BR /> <BR />The Minister, in response to a recent question from me, admitted that delivering the real living wage for carers is essential. It is clear that addressing the rising costs of fuel for carers in our community and increasing care in the community, particularly in rural areas, are all solutions to the growing crisis. The Minister needs to act now. Failing to address the issue will lead to a financial and human cost. Morale among staff is arguably low. Now we are asking them to do the impossible. When a carer's time is cut short, it means rushed conversations and less time for important and caring interactions. It means less care delivered. If the crisis is not averted, carers will have less time to be present with those whom they care for.”