Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I welcome the following College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) officials to the meeting and invite them to brief the Committee: Paul McHenry, director; Francis Breen, head of livestock genetics and data branch; and Noel Lavery, senior technologist in livestock genetics and data branch. We are keen to hear your evidence.

Mr Paul McHenry (College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise): Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to provide the Committee with a policy briefing on DAERA's bovine genetics project and to present to you the Bovine Genetics Genotyping Scheme Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025.

On 10 October 2024, we provided the Committee with a written briefing on the bovine genetics project. I will begin with a brief overview of the project, and I will then pass to Francis Breen, who will provide an overview of the bovine genetics genotyping scheme and take you through the statutory rule (SR) that you have in front of you.

To set it in context, the agricultural production sector employs approximately 52,000 people across 26,000 farms and has a gross output of approximately £2·9 billion.

The dairy and beef subsectors dominate agricultural production in Northern Ireland and account for approximately 51% of the value of output ex-farm. The bovine genetics project is one of the measures being progressed through the DAERA sustainable agriculture programme. The project is of significant interest to industry. It is also of significant interest to government, owing to the benefit to the public good of breeding animals with enhanced production efficiency, lower pollution potential, lower carbon footprints and improved health and welfare. Genetic improvement is detailed as a mitigation for the agriculture sector in the 'Draft Climate Action Plan 2023-2027'; is identified as a key measure in 'Bovine Tuberculosis in Northern Ireland: Blueprint for Eradication'; and is one of the mitigations identified in DAERA's draft ammonia strategy.

Genetic improvement is achieved by breeding from the best-performing animals in a population. That requires the identification of animals with the most desirable traits. The project will provide farmers with the data and evidence to identify animals with the most desirable traits at a younger age in order to make better-informed breeding decisions to accelerate the rate of genetic gain, particularly in traits that are difficult to identify visually, such as feed efficiency. Genetic improvement in cattle can deliver long-term and permanent changes to a range of desirable traits, leading to more profitable, efficient animals with reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Few farm businesses with breeding herds have access to genetic information on their animals. Only 30% of dairy cows and 2% of suckler cows have genetic merit information available; indeed, that information is available only to herds with pedigree animals. Therefore, the key issue is that the vast majority of breeding decisions are made in the absence of robust information that identifies an animal's genetic potential. Most breeding decisions are based on the visual appearance of animals and the breeder's intuition. Without genetic information feeding into breeding decisions, the majority of dairy and suckler beef farmers are not utilising the opportunity to breed more efficient, healthier and more productive animals with lower carbon footprints.

Genotyping the dairy and suckler cattle population is a critical component of delivering the bovine genetics project in Northern Ireland. Genotyping is a lab procedure that analyses DNA to identify genetic differences between individuals or populations. Genotyping enables the accurate identification of animal parentage, which is critical to ensuring that the genetic merit information provided to farmers is accurate. Without accurate parentage information, it is impossible to provide accurate genetic information on individual animals. Genotyping also enables genetic merit information to be provided for traits that are currently impossible to identify at farm level, such as feed efficiency, and genes that directly impact on animal health and welfare. Genotyping of animals in the project will involve the analysis of an ear tissue sample that will be collected using an ear tag in a way similar to the process used in the bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) eradication programme.

The full business case for the bovine genetics project concluded that maximum benefits will be achieved through genotyping of the entire Northern Ireland dairy and beef male and female cattle breeding populations, including replacing youngstock in each annual dairy and beef calf crop. The full business case for the bovine genetics project was approved in December 2024 with a capital budget of £60·5 million. The project has the potential to deliver significant monetary benefits. It is projected to generate a net present value to the Northern Ireland economy of approximately £372 million over 30 years.

The project is being delivered by DAERA in partnership with the agri-food industry, which has established a non-profit company: Sustainable Ruminant Genetics (SRG) Limited. SRG's sponsoring organisations are the Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU), the Livestock and Meat Commission, the Northern Ireland Meat Exporters Association and the Dairy Council for Northern Ireland. SRG works collaboratively with DAERA to deliver several key functions, including the supply of industry data and the promotion and marketing of the project to producers and other stakeholders.

SRG was established in June 2022 and appointed a dedicated CEO in November 2023. SRG is engaging widely throughout the supply chain to gain widespread support for the project, as evidenced by the securing of data-sharing agreements from livestock markets and the main dairy and beef processors. Securing data from those sources will significantly reduce the data that is required directly from farm businesses. Following open-tender procurement, the service contract for the bovine genetic project was awarded to the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation (ICBF). ICBF has engaged the services of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) to provide genetic evaluations that are bespoke to the Northern Ireland dairy sector. The contract commenced on 1 January 2025. ICBF has considerable experience and expertise in the delivery of genetic improvement in the Republic of Ireland.

I will now pass over to Francis Breen, who will take you through the provisions of the SR relating to the bovine genetic scheme and the proposed farm sustainability payment (FSP) conditionality.

Mr Francis Breen (College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise): Thanks, Paul.

First, I will provide a brief overview of the bovine genetics genotyping scheme. As has been highlighted, the implementation of industry-wide genotyping is critical to delivering the bovine genetics project. Failure to accurately identify animal parentage and genes relating to specific desirable traits would undermine the accuracy of information presented to farmers and result in a failure to deliver the project's objectives. The bovine genetics genotyping scheme is planned to provide support to herd owners to incentivise them to genotype their animals. The total approved business case budget for the scheme is £16·6 million, which is based on all eligible animals being genotyped. Animal eligibility and opt-in functionality for the scheme will be provided on a dedicated bovine genetics user portal that will be located on the Sustainable Ruminant Genetics website and accessible through the normal government gateway process. Detailed guidance and a link to the scheme rules will be available on the DAERA website and the bovine genetics user portal.

I will now take the Committee through the provisions in the SR. The regulations establish the bovine genetics genotyping scheme. The scheme provides the legal powers for payments to be made by the Department to eligible farm businesses that meet the scheme requirements. Skipping citation and commencement and interpretation, I will begin with regulation 3, which specifies the £13 payment that the Department will make per eligible genotype to an eligible farm business. It states:

Payment shall be made as soon as reasonably practicable to the eligible farm business that submits the sample to the approved genotype laboratory.

Regulation 4 specifies the eligibility requirements for animals and businesses. It specifies eligible animals as all existing dairy and beef cows; all existing dairy and beef youngstock females; all existing dairy and beef stock bulls and males with potential to be a stock bull in the future that are in the herd of the applicant between 1 September 2026 and 31 December 2027; and all new birth registrations, male and female, dairy and beef, between 1 January 2027 and 31 December 2027. It specifies that the Department shall issue payment for eligible genotyping events in which an eligible cow has given birth to dead calves from the date of commencement of the regulations. It specifies:

It specifies that, subject to eligibility criteria being met:

It specifies that an eligible farm business shall apply to be part of the scheme and that applicants shall provide such further information in relation to any animal as the Department may request. Finally, it specifies:

Regulation 5 specifies the tissue-sampling requirements for live eligible animals. It specifies that the keeper of an eligible animal shall take a tissue sample from that animal during the scheme period and dispatch the tissue sample to an approved laboratory for genotyping within seven days of taking the sample. It specifies:

Regulation 6 sets out the tissue-sampling requirements for aborted foetuses, stillborn calves and calves that die before being tagged. It specifies that, as soon as is reasonably practicable, a tissue sample is to be taken from the aborted foetus, stillborn calf or calf that dies before being tagged; that the abortion or birth is notified to the Department; and that the tissue sample is to be dispatched to an approved laboratory for genotyping within seven days of having been taken.

Regulation 7 specifies the requirements with regard to inadequate tissue samples and specifies:

before the end of the scheme duration. It specifies that the keeper shall ensure that a further tissue sample is to be taken from the eligible animal and that the tissue sample is to be dispatched to an approved laboratory for genotyping within seven days of having been taken.

Regulation 8 specifies:

under the scheme.

Regulation 9 specifies that the Department shall use the information recorded on the NI food animal information system (NIFAIS), along with information provided from the service provider to determine whether the scheme eligibility requirements are met. It specifies:

by an eligible farm business.

Regulations 10 and 11 provide the general powers for the withholding and recovery of overpayments and powers of authorised persons.

Regulation 12 specifies:

The schedule to the regulations provides details of the breeds of cattle that are eligible under the scheme.

I will speak about the proposed bovine genetics farm sustainability payment conditionality. The Committee received an update on the FSP legislation on 26 June 2025 that provided a high-level overview of the associated FSP conditionality. Officials will provide an update on all proposed FSP conditions in the coming weeks. I will provide a more detailed description of the proposed FSP conditionality requirement specifically in relation to the bovine genetics project.

The conditionality is registration and training. Given the investment from government and industry in developing the genetics platform, it is critical that an effective policy instrument is in place to drive access and uptake of the data being provided for farmers, allowing them to access enterprise performance and make better-informed breeding decisions. It is proposed that, in order to be compliant, farm businesses with bovine animals must have registered for the project and completed training by the closing date of the single application form window, which is 15 May 2028. It is proposed that a 10% penalty will be applied through the FSP in 2028. The penalty will be increased to 15% for continued non-compliance in 2029 and will continue to be applied at 15% until the conditionality has been met.

Registration functionality will be provided on a dedicated bovine genetics user portal that will be hosted on the Sustainable Ruminant Genetics website and will be accessible through the normal government gateway process from September 2026 at the latest. Training will be provided by CAFRE through a combination of online and face-to-face delivery. That training will also be available from September 2026 at the latest.

I will pass you back to Paul.

Mr McHenry: Thank you, Francis.

Mr Chairman, that concludes the presentation on the bovine genetics project, the bovine genetics genotyping scheme and the bovine genetics FSP conditionality. I am happy to take questions. Thank you very much for listening.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you. I remember getting a wee taste of this when the Committee was at CAFRE recently. I genuinely think that this could be of huge importance.

The significant number of scheme changes that farmers have faced and the challenges that they face have probably narrowed the space in which to negotiate change with farmers in Northern Ireland. How confident are you that the communications will transfer your confidence to farmers, where it will be needed, considering the scale of this? You said that, at the moment, the information is held only really for pedigree cattle. That means that it is not done for probably 97% to 98% of cattle in the country, but they will need to move into it. How advanced is that?

Mr McHenry: We recognise that it is a big project. It will be very much industry-led. It will be led by SRG, which has already engaged closely with the key players across the industry. We see SRG having a key role in getting the message out to farmers. There has not been a lot of communication to date, but that is where the training and support that CAFRE will provide will link into it. We recognise the need to do that to ensure that we get good uptake of the programme.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I think you indicated that it is £16 per animal.

Mr McHenry: It is £13.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That is £13 that farmers will get back. What will it cost a farmer to do the tissue test and receive the tag or whatever?

Mr McHenry: We had wide pre-market engagement across the industry, and we arrived at the figure of £13; that is what the benchmark has been set at. It is seen across the suppliers as a good estimate of the actual cost. That will cover the cost of delivering the service.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): As regards giving farmers confidence, how would the Department react if, in the roll-out, it cost a farmer more to engage in the scheme and it looked as if it would cost that farmer money?

Mr McHenry: On the basis of the engagement that we have had to date, we feel that that is the level at which the project will be able to be delivered. We do not see it exceeding that cost.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): OK. Is there any anticipated impact on the single farm payment or cross-compliance?

Mr McHenry: No, there is no impact on those.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): On eligibility, will it be a mandatory scheme?

Mr McHenry: It will be a voluntary scheme.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): OK. It will be a voluntary scheme with no anticipated impact on the single farm payment.

You might like this question, Francis. We were talking about breeds, and I was trying to go full circle from farm to butcher's block to restaurant. There seems to be a significant breed list. Have there been any controversial exclusions about which our inboxes will be rattled? Is it anticipated that there will be an "excluded" list as well as an "included" list?

Mr Breen: No. All breeds that are currently in Northern Ireland are included.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Brilliant. I note that, as you mentioned, discussions have been carried out through the agricultural policy stakeholder group (APSG) and Sustainable Ruminant Genetics to consider stakeholder views. Did the Department come across any issues during those discussions, and, if so, what steps have you taken to allay fears?

Mr McHenry: The biggest issue is communication and making the industry aware of what the programme involves. A lot of the feedback comes through SRG. We propose for SRG to ramp that up over the next number of months.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): We received a written briefing from the bovine genetics project last October that noted that CAFRE proposed to deliver a suite of knowledge transfer and innovation programmes. As we have touched on, that knowledge transfer will be absolutely key. Can you tell us any more about the innovation programmes and any feedback that you have received on them?

Mr McHenry: We will give the Committee an update on the innovation programmes next week. We will set up innovation farms that are focused on bovine genetics. There will be the potential for innovation visits to other areas and regions to see how they deliver this type of programme. A third element is innovation partnerships.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I will be happy to come back to that next week.

There was a cut-off date for introduction to a herd after 2027. Does that preclude cattle that are transported into a herd? Does it mean that the scheme will not be applicable to that line after that date, or am I reading it wrongly?

Mr Breen: The payment is for animals that are in a herd between 1 September 2026 and 31 December 2027. We want to allow farmers the time from 31 December 2027 to 15 May 2028 to send in the genotype and have it processed. We will make payment on all genotypes received until 15 May 2028. Let us say that a calf is born on 31 December 2027: we need to give time for that genotype to come in. As long as an animal has been in a herd between 1 September 2026 and 31 December 2027 and its genotype comes in before 15 May 2028, we will make payment.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): How many cattle — cows and bulls — do we have?

Mr McHenry: When it comes to suckler herds, there are about 235,000 cows and then their progeny. In the dairy sector, it is over —

Mr Breen: There are approximately 325,000 on the dairy side, and all their progeny can come through as well. If you divide the £16·6 million by £13, you can see the —

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank goodness for calculators. Thank you.

Mr McAleer: Thank you for that. I can certainly see the benefit of the scheme. We got a briefing on it earlier this year when the Committee was at Loughry.

You have said that it is a voluntary scheme, but, earlier in the presentation, you said that farmers must do training or they would be penalised through their single farm payment. How is it voluntary, if they will be penalised?

Mr McHenry: Farmers do not have to join it, if they do not want to. It is a personal decision.

Mr McAleer: They will be penalised, if they do not: is that right?

Mr McHenry: There will be a reduction in their farm sustainability payment, if they do not come into the scheme.

Mr Breen: We should maybe separate the two things. We have the genotyping scheme, which is a voluntary scheme that is open to all. Any farm business can genotype its animals and get the payment for that. The conditionality is around the training, which is not linked to the scheme, on all the information that comes out of the portal and on registering for that portal. There was a huge investment. As I said, we need to ensure that farmers access that information and complete the training. The conditionality is not linked to the scheme: the scheme is separate from the conditionality.

Mr McAleer: Farmers are under a lot of pressure across all fronts. Will this put an added bureaucratic burden on farmers who are already hard-pressed?

Mr McHenry: We believe that the benefits that the project will deliver will far outweigh any additional work that a farmer has to do to provide the information, because it will provide them with genetic information that will allow them to make better-informed breeding decisions that will, hopefully, add value to their herd.

Mr McAleer: I can see the merit in all of this; it is a good scheme. The likes of Teagasc in the South will be doing something similar. Will you be able to avail yourselves of its dataset to assist this project with identifying the desirable traits — the environmental health of animals or whatever — and expand your dataset?

Mr McHenry: There are two bits to that. There is the information that comes out through the ICBF, which collects and holds the data. As the genetics used, particularly in the beef population, are the same in the South of Ireland and Northern Ireland, we will tap into that information. We are also looking across at the UK and using information that the AHDB holds on the dairy population to inform the breeding indexes there. We are using information from two jurisdictions.

Mr McAleer: The briefing note says that there are no direct comparisons in Britain. That is why I did not include that in my question. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I am slightly confused. That has led me back to a question that I asked about implications. I just want to bottom this one out. It is a totally voluntary scheme. By not volunteering, you are not excluding yourself from any other sustainability payment or single farm payment.

Mr McHenry: That is for the genotyping.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Yes. It sits over here, because, obviously, there are other schemes. You are not excluded from participating in the scheme. However, if you participate in the scheme and do not complete the scheme, that is where the conditionality applies. Is my understanding correct?

Mr McHenry: There is maybe a bit of confusion. There is conditionality around the genotyping project, but the scheme is actually within the project, if you understand me. The genotyping is one element of the overall genetic project.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Yes, and it is a silo to the —

Mr McHenry: There is no conditionality attached to genotyping. In order to participate in the genetics project, you have to sign up for it and complete the training. There is conditionality in that regard, but there is no conditionality attached specifically to genotyping. You do not have to genotype.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I think that Michelle will pick that one up. I will not flog it too much; I will do a bit more thinking.

Miss McIlveen: Thank you very much for the presentation. Thank you also for the presentation a couple of weeks ago in Cookstown. It was really interesting and informative.

I am still confused about this, and, if we have confusion, it will be mirrored outside here. I am positive about the concept of bovine genetics genotyping. It was part of the much-maligned Going for Growth strategy, on which a number of parties have done a U-turn. I am positive about it, but I am still concerned about the connections to conditionality. The regulations refer to reverting, essentially, to the rules on farm sustainability:

I need to know what that means.

Mr McHenry: The genetics project is the overarching project, and there is an element of genotyping in it. We want to deliver genotyping to inform the overall project. There is conditionality in the overall project in order to get farmers to sign up for it and do the training. Through our industry engagement, we were told, "Farmers don't know a lot about this project, so you need to deliver training". We want farmers to do the training so that they better understand the project. However, if they want to do the genotyping aspect, that is completely voluntary; there is no link to conditionality. You can take the tissue sample out of the ear and send it away to get a genetic evaluation carried out.

Miss McIlveen: I can register and get trained, but I do not need to submit any tissue or be part of anything further than that and you will not touch my payments.

Mr McHenry: No.

Miss McIlveen: I will not then be subject to the 10% or 15% non-compliance penalty.

Mr McHenry: No. We want the industry to do the genotyping. We want SRG to drive that, because it will deliver significant improvement.

Miss McIlveen: OK. You have met the stakeholder group. I raised this point in Cookstown: I am not convinced that everyone is on the same page as much as has been articulated. Have you spoken to stakeholders again, and are they content with what is being presented here today?

Mr McHenry: We have engaged with the agricultural policy stakeholder group. A range of opinions is coming from the stakeholders, but the overall opinion of the stakeholder group is that stakeholders see the benefits of the programme.

Miss McIlveen: There are still elements of that group who are not content. Are they the stakeholders who will be involved in carrying it out? There is quite a range of stakeholders on that group, many of whom will not have farms or livestock.

Mr McHenry: Some of them are not completely convinced, but they see the merits of the programme.

Miss McIlveen: As I said, I am positive about the project, but I am really concerned about it being linked to future payments.

Mr McHenry: The conditionality that we have put in place is that, first, you need to register, and, secondly, you need to do the training. That is not that onerous on a farm business.

Miss McIlveen: OK. I will leave it there.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I am writing stuff down, including the difference between a project and a programme. The bovine genetics is the project, and one of the programmes is the genotyping, which is where there is a payment of £13 per head. That is cost recovery, not an incentive, but it helps everybody.

Francis, I am sold on it because it will confirm the gold standard of what we produce here. We already knew that, but this will give us the evidence to say it.

Just so that I can separate it further, will you outline anything else that comes under the bovine genetics project?

The Committee Clerk: Programme.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Is it the programme or the project that is the bigger bit? It sounds like school, but it is really important.

Mr McHenry: We call it the "bovine genetics project".

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): OK.

Mr McHenry: Francis, you may want to come in here.

Mr Breen: In a nutshell, the project is a data platform that pulls together data from NIFAIS, livestock markets and beef and dairy processors, and that allows us to give farmers genetic merit information on their animals. That data is based on the lineage of the animals. By collecting it, we can also deliver a suite of benchmarking reports, which are currently not available to farmers. It is about improving the productivity and environmental sustainability of their businesses. That is the project. We set around that the conditionality of wanting people to register to it and complete the training so that they can understand the data that comes out of it and use the information and act on it on their farms. There is probably a lack of knowledge about the project at the moment, so we really want to drive that.

On top of that is the genotyping scheme, which is intended to improve the accuracy of the information in the database. We want to encourage farmers to genotype their animals so that we can have accuracy of their parentage and can identify the genes that are hard to measure at farm level, such as the myostatin gene, for feed efficiency and so on. That really drives the rate of genetic gain. Genotyping is a key component, and that is why we are paying for it. We have the genetics project, which will always be available to farmers, but the genotyping is, as you say, an added benefit, so we want to incentivise farmers to come into it, and there is full cost recovery in it.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Yes, but I do not think that it is incentivising; it is cost recovery, and that leaves me with a wee bit of nervousness. If there is no incentive but there is cost recovery, that is fine, but the conditionality may lead to a reduction in a payment for that part of it. Will that reduction be the cost-recovery piece, or does it eat into the farm payment? I am trying to get at this: is there a risk that participating in the scheme is greater than the value of the scheme to the farmer?

Mr Breen: No.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Definitely not?

Mr Breen: There is no risk to the farmer in participating in the scheme. In the genotyping scheme, if an animal is genotyped, the farmer gets paid. There is no conditionality attached to that whatever.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That point has come up with a few members. Before I move on to William, we will try to kill the issue.

Mr Blair: May I answer a point that was made before a particular member leaves? I think that the member is leaving. I am keen to do this in the interests of openness, and I will do it only with the Chair's permission, of course. It will probably take me to my question as well, so —.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I give you right of reply.

Mr Blair: Thank you very much. I will answer Michelle's question, which she asked a couple of questions ago. Cheap jibes about Going for Growth will not wash with me. I will answer. I need no reminder that there are those who are not particularly open-minded about things that are new to them, are being reviewed or do not represent their views or thinking. The only proof that I need of that is played out twice weekly at least in an increasingly toxic Chamber.

As someone who cares about our environment and its future, I make no apology that processes, policies and programmes such as Going for Growth could be reviewed, particularly when they are shown to have had a detrimental impact on our environment. That is a no-brainer to some of us, but it is clearly a major challenge to others.

I had a question on clarification of the training and the impact of the conditionality, but you have more or less answered it. If there is anything further to say on the training component or the conditionality, I am happy to hear it, but it seems to have been clarified.

The only other question I have is on the lead-in time for the project. There seems to have been a considerable lead-in time. From December 2021 to February 2022, a consultation was done. What was the delay in getting to the decision in December 2024? Was it due to the absence of government or consultation with the sector?

Mr McHenry: It was a large project, and it took a significant amount of time to arrive at a final decision on it. We have made a lot of progress since. It was a large piece of work, given that it had to go through a procurement exercise and to service providers. That takes time.

Mr Blair: OK. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you. Just on how we do business, Committee, it was fair to give John the right of reply on that point, although, to be fair to Michelle, she referred to "parties" as opposed to "one party". I understand the context, because I was in the Chamber. You gave it to Daniel outside.

Mr Blair: We could open it to review.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That is fair enough. Listen, we will be a robust Committee because we are going to offer scrutiny. I am not afraid to allow you to do that now and again, but we have a really important piece of business in front of us today.

Returning to that, I will hand over to young William, who has already declared an interest.

Mr Irwin: Yes, I have already declared an interest in that I am a farmer.

The scheme is a good idea. Proving genetics can only be good. Farmers can be set in their ways, so you might need something to incentivise them. You said that there was a bit of confusion about a penalty in the single farm payment. I am still a little confused. You must do the training: is that right?

Mr McHenry: Yes.

Mr Irwin: If you do the training and even if you do not participate in the scheme, there is no penalty: is that right?

Miss McIlveen: Yet.

Mr Irwin: Older people and older farmers might need some encouragement to participate in the scheme. Farmers could lose money from their sustainability payment due to their lack of knowledge. They would need some encouragement.

Mr McHenry: William, that is a fair point. We recognise the age profile of farmers, and that is why the delivery of the project is very much seen as industry-led. That is where we have engaged with Sustainable Ruminant Genetics. It is in the process of recruiting a couple of staff members who will be there to provide that support to farm businesses. On the back of that, we want to deliver the training programme. We will do it in a way that means that it will be delivered at a time and place that suits the farmers. There will be an opportunity for face-to-face and online delivery of the training. As I said, the key bit is the engagement with the industry and getting it to take the lead in the delivery of the project. We see that as critical.

Mr Irwin: Is it not about undertaking it in one fell swoop to get everybody in during the lead-in period?

Mr McHenry: There is a lead-in period now, because we will not start delivering the project until September 2026. Over the next number of months, there will be a lead-in period to start to ramp up that communication about the project. SRG has a key role to play in the delivery of that.

Mr Irwin: Is the cost of the project £16·6 million per year or in total?

Mr McHenry: That is the total to deliver the project based on the total number of livestock that we want to genetically profile. It is based on an individual cost of £13 per animal.

Mr Irwin: OK. Thank you.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): A slight bit of confusion about something returned to me there. If you do not participate in the project completely, will that have an impact?

Mr McHenry: There is a conditionality in that.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That is the condition. It is still voluntary, but —.

Mr McHenry: The genotyping is voluntary, but you have to participate in the project. As we said, that is really about registering for the project and doing the training, which is about upskilling you on what it is about. For example, what reports will you get out of it? How will it benefit your business, and how can you use the report to make informed decisions on your farm and add value to the business?

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): As William pointed out, the most important part of it is the communication at the start and giving people confidence. I think that you are hearing from every member so far that they like it but the mechanisms can make it hard to deliver, as we know.

Ms Finnegan: Given the high rates of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in the North, how will the new bovine genetic scheme identify and support breeding animals that are most resistant to bTB?

Mr Breen: We want to deliver a genetic merit on animals on their resistance to TB. We know that there is a 12% variation in the number of animals exposed to TB that actually contract it compared with those that are resistant. We want to provide farmers with the information to identify the animals that are most resistant so that they can breed from them. We will not solve the TB problem with that, but it will allow farmers to make some progress with the animals that are resistant. The key benefit of genetics is that, when you make those gains, they are cumulative and locked in.

Ms Finnegan: Thank you. That is all.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Are you happy enough, Aoife?

Ms Finnegan: Yes. Thanks.

Mr McCrossan: Sorry for being late; I had a Planning Appeals Commission meeting this morning that was unavoidable. If there is one thing that I enjoy more than the Committee, it is fighting with DFI officials.

I have a few questions that may have been answered. If they have, correct me. How much of the £16·6 million will reach farm businesses versus administrative costs?

Mr McHenry: That is all the cost that will go to farm businesses. The farmer will get back £13 for each animal that is tagged, so that is all the costs. You can ramp that up depending on the number of animals, so all the money will go back to farm businesses.

Mr McCrossan: OK. That is positive. This point may also have been clarified, but will the scheme be voluntary or compulsory from the outset?

Mr McHenry: We have two elements. The project —.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Do not open that one again. I am only joking. [Laughter.]

Mr McHenry: The farmer must take part in the genetics project, register and do the training. The genetic profiling, which is an element of that project, is not mandatory. They do not have to do it. However, the farmer must register for the scheme and do the training. We recognise that there is a lack of awareness about the programme, so that is why we want the conditionality in it.

Mr McCrossan: OK. I do not want to make you repeat yourself for the third time. What specific health productivity and emissions reductions are forecast by year 3 of the roll-out?

Mr Breen: Without getting into specific details of percentages and the exact data, I will say that the first five years are about establishing the baseline. Where animal health is concerned, I have mentioned TB, but we can identify other genes, such as myostatin, which is a double-muscled gene associated with harder calf births. However, by providing information to farmers, they will breed animals that are more efficient and productive. Those animals will be slaughtered at a younger age and calve earlier and more often, and that automatically leads to lower emissions from those animals. We have specific targets in the business case, and we can provide them to you afterwards. Ultimately, hand in hand with productivity goes a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr McCrossan: OK. Finally, can CAFRE and local labs process samples to maximise the local economic benefit?

Mr McHenry: Can CAFRE process the samples?

Mr McCrossan: Yes.

Mr McHenry: No. We do not have the skills or resources. There are specialists in that area, and we have gone out with a pre-market engagement and set a standard for what is required. If a lab wants to do the genetic profiling, it has to meet a certain standard. We did that pre-market engagement piece, and labs across Northern Ireland and further afield have expressed an interest in the project.

Mr McCrossan: Finally, we live in a world that is sensitive about data, and all sorts of issues are involved. What protections exist for farmers whose data will be stored in NIFAIS?

Mr McHenry: It is the same data protection process as is already in place. The data that is lifted from farms remains in the farmer's ownership.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Are members content? As far as you can be? OK.

Thank you for your participation.

I will now put the Question to the Committee. Are members content for the Department to proceed to make the SR? If you are content, we will consider it in due course subject to the Examiner of Statutory Rules' (ESR) report.

Before you go, Francis, do you have any indication of when the Minister is likely to want to make the SR?

Mr Breen: We want to make the SR in advance of December this year, so by the end of the year.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you. Do members agree that the Department can proceed to make the SR? If not, can you give a rationale for that? We will return to consider the SR in due course, regardless of that.

Miss McIlveen: I have said my piece about the project. I am positive about it, but there needs to be more clarification of it. I would like some time to have conversations with the stakeholders who have raised concerns about the project. I suggest that, if members of the Committee do not want to meet in a formal session, those who want to meet the UFU should do so to be clear about its position. Obviously, the UFU will very much be required to lead on the project, as well as the SRG.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): A flow chart would be helpful. That would be really good, because I am a picture type of guy. We are in a good place with the payments and those types of things, but could you supply a flow chart that separates the processes so that we can see it all clearly? Nothing speaks like a picture on a page. Anything that is to do with the cost of compliance and the payments would give me confidence. At this stage, I am with you, Michelle: I need confidence on that piece before we make a decision on the SR. The Minister will bring it in anyway.

Mr Blair: To clarify, are we taking the decision now or not?

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That is what I am asking the Committee. So far, there is reluctance to have a vote.

Mr Blair: I am happy to take a decision. I am not so happy about deferring a decision.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): The SR is not imminent, to be fair, John. It will not come until about December. The Minister wants to make it in December, so it is not as though we are in a rush here.

Mr Blair: I am aware of that, but we are nearly into October, and you will have seen earlier in the meeting a huge —.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): We have been here before, to be fair, with SRs and when they come, but this is not a late one, so I thank the officials for that. Given that the questions are from my perspective, I am happy to put it to the vote.

Mr Blair: Can we include the questions from your perspective rather than having some process whereby people have informal meetings, which was mentioned a moment ago? I would not be content with that being a formal record. I have no issue with people having informal meetings — I may have one myself — but, if we can put a more businesslike definition on the deferral, I will be perfectly happy.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I am certainly happy to take on board any propositions from members about what we should do. The SR is not likely to be laid before December-ish. That is obviously not a target, but —.

Mr Breen: Essentially, we need to get it through by the end of December.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): The sooner you get it through, the sooner you can get out and do the information piece: I get that.

Members, we do not need to take a decision on it until we see it. I will follow up on my point. My ask is for some kind of flow chart to set things out much more clearly. That will be a publicly available document.

Mr McAleer: It would probably be useful to have the space to get a bit more information from the APSG, which is leading on this, and from SRG.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): We could raise the queries and get the Clerk to put together a series of questions, if you want to communicate by that means. That may be more efficient, given the forward work plan. We can reserve the right to invite people to give evidence, as the Committee does, but, in the first instance, we could write to them.

Mr McAleer: That is notwithstanding our individual parties or members.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Yes. I will ask William to come in. You are smiling, Michelle.

Mr Irwin: I still have some concerns that elderly farmers with small farms may not realise that they need to do the training, may not do it and could find themselves fined from the sustainability payment. We need a bit more time to look at the matter.

Miss McIlveen: We have been down this route before. We get a general email back from the APSG when we know that there are stakeholders in that group who have concerns. They may be the stakeholders whom we need to lead on the project. I just caution people on that.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I do not want to dilute the value of the APSG, because it is useful, but, as members, we are all lobbied by concerned stakeholders anyway. We can pick that up through our parties, if that is OK.

I need to be clear with the Clerk. Witnesses, you guys are free to go. My request is for the flow chart. Does anybody else have a specific request? William's piece on comms for older farmers is useful. I think that it was you who picked up, Francis, that we know that our farmers may be older than people in some other industries.

Mr McHenry: There is a big communication role to be played in this. We recognise that.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Do you have confidence in the strategy, William?

Mr Irwin: Yes, but, when farmers get their sustainability payment and see that 10% to 20% of it is gone, it is too late for them at that stage: do you understand?

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): That flow chart will help us. We will have that too. OK? We will talk about this a wee bit more.

Guys, thank you very much.