Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Minister, I am just going to lean into your better side and ask if you will indulge us before you give your evidence. We just had an evidence session with the maritime organisations on a statutory instrument (SI): the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) (Extension to Maritime Activities) Order 2026. We took evidence from those organisations, but I thought it only fair to delay putting the Question on that SI to the Committee until after we asked you a few questions about it. Following that, we will not ask any further questions, but I will ask the Committee for its position on the SI, and we will then move on to the additional business, if you are OK with that.

Mr Muir (The Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs): Yes. I understand that that is an important issue, Chair. Officials are available to engage with the Committee on that, because it is quite technical. I am happy to facilitate the Committee in meeting them on Monday in advance of the debate on Tuesday, if you want, or I am happy to answer any questions that the Committee has today: whichever works for the Committee. I understand that there was quite a lot of evidence from the witnesses in the Committee's previous evidence session that you might want to drill into.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I will open up with a brief question and then go to members.

Members, our time is tight.

The maritime sector representatives said that the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) and the UK emissions trading scheme (UK ETS) do not mirror each other in how they support their respective industries. They talked about the need for delayed implementation and a staged approach. They were not necessarily saying that it had to be kicked into touch — they recognised the need for decarbonisation — but, in the UK context, they see it as a draconian tax that does not incentivise decarbonisation in any way. They said that, locally, we do not have the options that are needed, such as onshore charging for ships in the harbours. They also talked about the lack of provision of other biofuels, such as methanol, and the exorbitant prices of such fuels, where they are available. Nevertheless, they are ready for it. Have you an update on any dealings with the UK Government on dispensation for Northern Ireland, given the unique position here of 90% of our trade back and forward being by sea?

Mr Muir: This has been proposed and discussed for a number of years, so it should be no surprise to the industry that it has come before the Committee. There is a wider goal that so many stakeholders raise with me, which is linking the UK ETS and the EU ETS and the impact of that on the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM). That would be a real prize from the negotiations. The UK Government are progressing with that. From our engagement with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) — sorry for the acronyms — our understanding is that ETS maritime is a prerequisite for linking those schemes. When we engage on the issue, we need to be conscious of its wider impacts.

The ETS has proven to be successful in driving decarbonisation. There is an issue in that ETS maritime will apply between GB and the Republic of Ireland, so, to ensure parity and not have gaming, it is important that it applies to routes from GB to Northern Ireland. That is why that is being sought.

It is important that we understand the need to support industries with decarbonisation — I totally get that. My Department has been engaging heavily with DESNZ on that. As Minister, I have secured agreement with the UK Government's Department for Transport to ensure that a Northern Ireland-specific event is held to drive local engagement around the recently announced additional £271 million boost to shipping and coastal communities. I will work with the UK Government to support the Northern Ireland maritime sector to secure good outcomes from that opportunity. There is support there, and we will make sure that people in Northern Ireland engage with that.

It has been on the sector's agenda for quite a while. Companies such as Stena Line operate in the EU so are used to ETS maritime already.

Do you want to add anything, Katrina?

Mrs Katrina Godfrey (Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs): No, I will just pick up on a point that the Chair made. From our perspective, as well as from the UK-wide perspective, the linking of the two schemes will facilitate the removal of the barrier and the exemption from CBAM. That is a crucial point for trading.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I will pick up on that one, because the linkage of that to CBAM is a very important point that we got to at the end of the previous session. It was pointed out that CBAM applies to only six component parts but our trade, which will be linked to the ETS, is infinitely greater than that. The suggestion from the maritime organisations was that the linkage is unfair and does not apply, on the basis that ETS covers everything from foot passengers to every trade item — chilled foods and so on — whereas CBAM applies only to six component parts.

Mrs Godfrey: Absolutely, although we consistently hear about the importance of the CBAM linkage. That is raised so many times. Whether here, in Brussels, in GB or in the South, the issue of the avoidance of divergence has come up time and time again.

Mr Muir: I would be careful not to underplay the importance of linkage of the CBAM schemes. The desire for that has been raised regularly with me. You took evidence from witnesses from maritime organisations this morning, but there is a responsibility on us all to make sure that we take evidence from a broad range of stakeholders on the issue and to ensure that that evidence feeds into our decision-making.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I totally agree. The difficulty is that, while it should all be about reducing the carbon footprint, it seems that opportunities for reducing the carbon footprint are limited, given that we do not have the infrastructure to support that, so it looks like a tax. I know that it is not taxed by you, Minister, but that is what it looks like.

Do members have questions for the Minister on this topic? I am minded to put the Question on the SI to the Committee, unless anybody else wishes to ask a question.

Miss McIlveen: I have one question. It became clear in our previous evidence session, prior to your arrival, that no robust economic assessment had been done on the implications for the Northern Ireland-GB route. That is worrying, given the representations that I have had from hauliers and others about the consequences for their business as well as the potential uplift of the price of goods for consumers. I am just looking for your comment on that.

Mr Muir: I am surprised to hear that comment. I am surprised at some of the comments that were made around that in the previous evidence session, because there has been significant engagement about and significant assessment of the impacts of it.

Is there anything more you want to say on that, Katrina?

Mrs Godfrey: An impact assessment was completed. It was published in November 2025, accompanied by an additional Northern Ireland-specific study that was undertaken to supplement the wider impact assessment. I am informed that it showed that there would be marginal impact. From our perspective, a full impact assessment was carried out, and it included consideration of the potential impacts on Northern Ireland. It was published and is available.

Miss McIlveen: You suggest that there will be marginal impact. I felt that the officials who came to the Committee a couple of weeks ago downplayed the economic impact. When we speak to the practitioners who will be directly impacted on, we find that they see something very different.

Mr Muir: That is their perspective. We need to be conscious that what we are trying to do in the wider negotiations between the UK and the EU is to address concerns that have been raised with me for the past number of years on the linkage between the two emissions trading schemes and CBAM. We have ETS maritime in place between GB and the Republic of Ireland at 50%. We seek to bring parity between GB and Northern Ireland. There is the risk of gaming if that does not occur.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): It is an interesting one. They are making the case that Northern Ireland is not like the GB mainland because we are an island whose trade is 90% east-west. That does not apply to GB. It is the same with the derogation in Scotland and the Scottish isles but for different reasons.

Does anybody else want to raise any points with the Minister? I will then put the Question.

Minister, I appreciate your saying that officials could be available on Monday, given that the SI will be debated on Tuesday, but I am OK to state my position on it today because we are stressing with everything else. Are members content that I put the Question and then move on to other business? Are there any alternative proposals?

Mr McAleer: We have received a huge volume of information in the last hour and a half, so we will find it difficult to make a decision today. We will hold off on making any decision until we deliberate over the weekend. There is a lot of stuff for us to absorb.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Do you want to make a proposal, Declan, and put it to the Committee? I am happy either way, because the SI will be moved on Tuesday. The Committee can decide that it did not come to a conclusion, and each party can make its own statement based on that and vote accordingly. That is what will happen anyway. If members are minded to do that, I am happy to convene a really short meeting on Monday to put the Question. Unless anybody wants to take any more evidence, I am not sure that, bandwidth-wise —.

Mr Muir: As I said, officials will be happy to come on Monday to answer questions, if you want to do that.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Do you want to do that, Declan?

Mr McAleer: So much information came in today that I want to take time to go through it.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Take time to digest it. OK. That is fair.

Members, I suggest a one-item agenda on Monday morning: is that OK?

Mr McAleer: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Will we agree to do that at 11.00 am? We will try to seek a room. If we cannot get a room, we will do it via Zoom or Teams. Getting a room might be —.

Mr Muir: Do you want the officials to come?

Ms Murphy: On standby maybe, because other questions could come out of it over the weekend.

Mr Muir: We can ask them to do that.

Mrs Godfrey: If there are issues —

Mr Muir: Send them through.

Mrs Godfrey: — it is useful to let them know in advance so that they can be ready with answers.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Are members content?

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Clerk, are you OK with that? Sorry.

The Committee Clerk: Yes.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): The Minister suggested it.

Mr Muir: I asked them before I came, so do not worry.

Mr McAleer: Katrina spoke about the impact assessment that was carried out in 2025. I would like to get a chance to read that, for example.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): It is a good point, Declan. The difficulty is that there is a difference between a specific financial impact assessment and a full impact assessment. A full impact assessment will be more general, but it would be useful to have sight of it because there seems to be a divergence when it comes to the impact. Are members content with that?

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): OK. Clerk, that is what we will do. We will see if we can get a room. If we cannot, we will do it online. Officials will be there, if required.

Minister, you can brief the Committee, and we will then move to questions.

Mr Muir: No problem at all.

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to return to the Committee. Since my last appearance on 4 December, my Department has continued to make progress on the priorities set out in our corporate plan. Before I get into the detail, I acknowledge the constructive engagement with Committee members in recent months, both with individual members and through ongoing scrutiny of the Department's work. As ever, delivery requires close collaboration across government; stronger relationships with stakeholders and industry; and ongoing engagement with our farming and rural communities.

At the outset, it is important for me to recognise the broader strategic context in which we operate. My Department continues to operate in a highly constrained financial environment. As members are aware, there is no agreed Executive Budget to provide planning certainty, although the Minister of Finance has published proposed allocations as part of his consultation. The multi-year nature of the Budget intensifies the challenge, with decisions in one year carrying consequences for later years. The Department faces significant pressures on its resource and capital budgets.

My officials and I are working through internal allocations based on what is in the Finance Minister's draft Budget, and the finance director will brief the Committee once that process concludes. In outline, we will struggle to stand still with the resource position. The finance director will set out more on that, but you know that there are challenges, particularly with resourcing, across all aspects of the Department — agriculture, the environment, rural affairs and climate change — and the resource budget will be extremely challenging.

The budget will also be challenging for capital. As you know, we seek to proceed with major capital projects, such as the veterinary science building and new buildings in the College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise’s (CAFRE) Greenmount and Loughry campuses. We will struggle to deliver those buildings within the envelope that we have received and at the pace that we would like.

It is also important to outline that DAERA is a high-performing paying agency and has maintained excellent performance targets for making farm payments. Farm businesses have come to expect annual payments to commence on 1 September, with approximately 98% of payments being successfully processed on that date. To maintain that standard this year, we would need to know the confirmed budget by early July to facilitate payment processes and the required activities associated with them. If agreement is not reached on the Budget until later in the year, payments will be delayed, but entitlement trading, applications and associated validation will have taken place. It is important for me to acknowledge those issues, and it is important that the Budget be agreed for the year ahead. Ideally, we would like a multi-year Budget, which would deliver opportunities across government.

The farming sector faces constraints: I acknowledge that. The constraints are compounded by external pressures, such as poor weather; market volatility affecting the agri-food sector; the evolving UK/EU regulatory dynamics; animal health risks;l and the public's concern about environmental quality, which we all need to work together to address. Together, those factors shape our programmes and operational capacity, and they underline the need for prioritisation, clear evidence-based decision-making and strong value for money. Continued engagement with the Executive, the Committee and sector partners will be essential as we navigate those pressures to deliver our corporate planned commitments. In that context, I will have to make difficult decisions as we seek to prioritise and safeguard essential programmes and, most important, deliver our statutory functions.

In that challenging context, I will provide an integrated update across our major programmes to highlight the progress planned for the months ahead.

Since the first confirmed outbreak of the bluetongue virus on 29 November 2025, my officials and I have worked intensely with the industry to manage a fast-moving situation. There have been five confirmed cases of bluetongue virus serotype 3 (BTV-3) in Northern Ireland since 29 November, and all surveillance measures were completed within the 20-kilometre temporary control zone (TCZ) that was established around the sites in County Down. The TCZ remains in place, with pre-movement testing requirements for high-risk animals moving out of it. I have made financial support available to cover the laboratory costs for farmers impacted by the pre-movement testing requirements. I acknowledge that the restrictions have had undesirable consequences for the industry, particularly for trade with the Republic of Ireland, GB and Northern Ireland.

DAERA's bluetongue disease control framework made it clear that decisions on lifting control zones would be based on epidemiological and scientific evidence and on the necessary consideration of the economic implications for the sector. Given that, I acknowledge the industry's concerns about the continued restrictions as a result of the TCZ. My officials have engaged intensively with stakeholders on the next steps, and I hope to make an announcement on the matter either today or tomorrow. Further details will be made available shortly via the appropriate communication channels and the DAERA website. We are working at pace on that. I received a written briefing about that just before the meeting.

On the impact on trade to other member states, including the Republic of Ireland, it is possible for member states, including Northern Ireland, to authorise certain derogations set out in EU animal health law to enable the movement of animals between member states that have declared BTV incursions. My officials and I continue to liaise closely with counterparts in Ireland and GB about whether it is appropriate to authorise the application of the derogations in Northern Ireland. I also acknowledge the impact of the ban on movement for breeding and production between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and I hope to make an announcement on that either today or tomorrow. Stakeholders will be promptly notified about any changes.

From one animal health challenge to another, namely bovine tuberculosis (bTB). Northern Ireland continues to experience persistently high rates of bovine TB. Herd incident rates stand at 9·9%, and this year's programme costs are forecast to exceed the £60 million spent in 2024-25, a level that is clearly not sustainable either in the stress on farm families or on the public purse. Significant work is already under way, including expanding interferon-gamma testing, subject to funding, launching a vet-led biosecurity scheme for farms and strengthening TB testing processes. Preparatory work is progressing well on a forthcoming consultation on wildlife intervention options, ensuring that future decisions are fully informed and evidence-based.

In parallel with that, we are advancing the north-west regionalisation initiative with the Irish Government, which I was delighted to launch alongside Minister Heydon last month. The Shared Island Fund pilot marks a highly positive step forward in strengthening cross-border cooperation and developing effective approaches to tackling TB.

Building on our animal health responsibilities, I turn to animal welfare. I published my animal welfare pathway in May of last year, setting out forward-looking reforms to be delivered in the remainder of the mandate. Good progress has been made, including establishing an expert group to review dog breeding legislation and, following public consultations, taking final decisions on mandatory CCTV in abattoirs and the introduction of Lucy's law. Further positive work includes developing a responsible dog ownership campaign and preparing a pre-summer consultation on proposals, including the banning of aversive training devices, updating microchipping rules and regulating rescue and rehoming organisations.

I will now focus on one of our most urgent Programme for Government (PFG) commitments and a central challenge for us all: tackling climate change. Recent extreme weather has been a stark reminder of the challenges that we face. Statistics from the Met Office confirm that January was the wettest January in nearly 150 years and that 2025 was the warmest and sunniest year on record in the UK since 1884. That extreme, unpredictable weather and other climate-related impacts are already disrupting normal farming patterns, increasing livestock disease risks, reducing yields and driving up costs for farmers.

Progress on climate action depends on everyone working together. A summary of responses to the consultation last year on our first climate action plan (CAP) will be published shortly. Members will have the opportunity to examine it in detail in the coming weeks. The plan will set out how Northern Ireland will deliver the emissions reductions required under our first carbon budget. Subject to Executive agreement, I hope that the final plan can be published before the summer recess.

Work has begun on our second climate action plan, which must be considerably more ambitious to meet the 48% emissions reduction target by 2030. The plan will set out actions across all Departments to deliver our second carbon budget by 2033. In December 2024, the Assembly agreed regulations setting our first three carbon budgets. Consultation on the level for the fourth carbon budget recently concluded. It sought views on aligning the budget with the Climate Change Committee advice recommending a 77% emissions reduction against baseline levels for 2038 to 2042. That is in line with the 2040 target agreed by the Assembly in 2024. A summary of the responses has been published and shared with the Committee.

Over the weeks ahead, I will engage with Executive colleagues with the intention of bringing draft regulations to the Assembly. I am pleased that the Executive have agreed to the establishment of a just transition commission. Draft regulations are progressing through the Assembly, and I intend to launch the public appointments process as soon as possible following Assembly approval. The Committee has already received the draft regulations, and I understand that officials are to brief the Committee on 12 March.

I now turn to Lough Neagh. Climate impacts and environmental pressures intersect most visibly in Lough Neagh. Restoring and protecting its ecological health remains a major priority, and we now see clear momentum behind that work. Of the 37 actions in the Lough Neagh action plan, 19 have been completed, and the remaining actions continue to progress. That progress reflects sustained cross-departmental collaboration, and I will keep the Committee updated on progress.

With regard to the sustainable agriculture programme, supporting the agri-food and fisheries sectors remains central to my Department's work. I remain committed to ensuring that the Executive's earmarked budget of approximately £330 million for agriculture, agrienvironment, fisheries and rural development provides value for money for Northern Ireland's citizens. The farm sustainability payment and farm sustainability standards came into effect on 1 January . That demonstrates my commitment to supporting farmers whilst delivering for the environment and meeting our animal health and welfare obligations. I am encouraged that almost 2,500 farmers attended recent CAFRE events, reflecting a high level of engagement and interest in current and future measures under the sustainable agriculture programme.

In December, I launched the Farming for Sustainability innovation scheme, which is already supporting farmers to adopt new ideas and innovative approaches that enhance sustainability and long-term resilience. Work is also progressing to further expand the scope, reach and scale of the Farming with Nature package. That remains a key priority for me: supporting farmers to deliver biodiversity and enhance the environment across Northern Ireland.

I also intend to bring forward a crisis framework to provide a structured approach to government intervention during major agriculture shocks above and beyond the normal scope and responsibility within the farm sustainability payment. A briefing for members is scheduled for April. In the year ahead, I will continue to drive further progress across a range of initiatives, including bovine genetics, the sustainable farming investment scheme and the carbon footprinting project.

I turn now to our rural communities more broadly. I am pleased to highlight the significant support being delivered across rural areas. Over the past two years, my Department has provided grant aid totalling £13·19 million, supporting 4,877 rural organisations and businesses. This year, DAERA has committed more than £8 million in rural grants to address poverty and isolation. That will benefit about 160,000 rural dwellers.

Our new rural policy — 'Rural NI: our new approach 2026 to 2041'— is being developed in partnership with stakeholders to ensure that it reflects the needs and ambitions of rural communities. Outline proposals were shared with the Committee and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE) last year. A 12-week public consultation will commence shortly. Following a statutory review, I have agreed to extend the schedule to the Rural Needs Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 by including 54 additional bodies to ensure more consistent and meaningful consideration of rural needs across government.

Improving environmental governance remains our priority. I brought forward a paper seeking Executive agreement in principle to establishing a new independent environmental protection agency (EPA). Unfortunately, I have not received support from the Executive for an important reform that would mean long-term benefits for everyone. That is disappointing, as it is a lost opportunity to transform environmental governance here. However, officials are taking forward a number of recommendations from the independent panel's report and will brief the Committee next week.

I am committed to improving the environment. Recent progress has included the launch of the nature recovery strategy for consultation and the waste management strategy. The final marine protected area strategy was also published recently.

Our focus remains clear across all those areas from climate action to water quality and from animal health to rural development: to deliver credible and evidence-based action that protects our environment and helps to drive a sustainable and resilient economy for the future. Central to that is our commitment to supporting farming families, whose hard work and stewardship continue to underpin our agri-food sector and rural way of life.

I have one matter to address before I close. A press release was issued this morning, but it is important that I brief the Committee on the issue. A suspect case of notifiable avian influenza was reported on Tuesday 3 March at a commercial poultry premises near Omagh. Preliminary results from the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) indicate the presence of highly pathogenic avian influenza. On the basis of that and the clinical science, the Chief Veterinary Officer has decided to introduce a temporary control zone around the premises. The keeper has been notified, and plans are being made to start the depopulation of the site today. My officials will meet stakeholders, and a press release will be issued today.

As members will be aware, the avian influenza prevention zone and the housing order are still in place across Northern Ireland. It is, therefore, mandatory for all bird keepers, including owners of pet birds, commercial flocks and backyard and hobby flocks, to keep their birds indoors or otherwise separate from wild birds. That is the latest case. It is unfortunate, but it shows that the risk of bird flu is still present. Avian influenza is a notifiable disease. Anyone who suspects that an animal may be infected by a notifiable disease must, by law, report it to a local DAERA Direct office.

I am happy to take questions.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you, Minister. Having listened to what you have shared with us, I am in no doubt that occupying the seat of the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs is complex. You have set out some of the long-standing ambitions and shared them with us. Hopefully, the Committee has offered a high degree of scrutiny and, at times, help. However, sometimes, Minister, it is incumbent on us to ask harder questions.

You have rightly pointed out that farming and agriculture are a priority, as are viability, stability, carbon reductions and emission reductions, and the Committee is particularly interested in clean water and clean air. What goes hand in hand with that, Minister, is the confidence of those sectors. It is fair to say that, for some weeks, you have not enjoyed the full confidence of the farming sector; indeed, this week, confidence in AFBI in particular has been raised again. Some members and I shared evidence given to us by a whistle-blower about practice at AFBI, evidence that has since made its way into the media. Minister, I want to be blunt: what are you doing to restore confidence in you? If we are to effect change, all sectors will need to have confidence in you.

Mr Muir: The Committee has shared with us the information on the allegations about AFBI, and we have engaged with you on that. AFBI was in with you on the issue. However, it is important that I set out again the facts for the record. The Department takes animal welfare issues and our responsibilities to the environment extremely seriously. Prompt action was taken on the allegations that were raised with us. On receipt of those allegations, inspections of the site by veterinary service and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) took place on 28 October. The inspection by veterinary service found no issues of concern, and the inspection by the Northern Ireland Environment Agency confirmed that allegations of slurry spreading outside the permitted period were unfounded.

The Northern Ireland Environment Agency inspection, however, identified sewage fungus in a waterway below the farm, which was assessed as a low-severity incident. Remedial action was requested and carried out, and NIEA determined that formal enforcement action was not required. Northern Ireland Food Chain Certification, which provides inspection and certification services for the Northern Ireland beef and lamb farm quality assurance scheme along with Red Tractor, also carried out an audit of the site in respect of its certifications on 6 November last year at AFBI's request, and AFBI's accreditation was maintained.

AFBI senior officials appeared before the AERA Committee on 29 January of this year to brief it on the recent AFBI data breach, and I know that you also asked AFBI about the allegations, which were responded to. As I have referenced, on 2 December, the AERA Committee provided the Department with images relating to the allegations. AFBI reviewed the images and provided explanations for each of them. The majority of the photos appeared to relate to circumstances in 2023 and 2024. Since that time, however, there have been changes in line managers and line-management structures. Departmental officials from veterinary service and NIEA have reviewed the images and confirmed that no additional actions were necessary.

AFBI has taken several additional steps to strengthen controls and oversight at the Hillsborough farm, including convening a board subgroup to review relevant documentation and make any recommendations that it sees fit regarding standards at the Hillsborough farm. The subgroup is expected to deliver a report by April 2026.

Is there anything further that you want to say, Katrina?

Mrs Godfrey: In every case where video or written evidence has been provided, we have made sure that every one of them has been followed up. My line to our staff in veterinary service and to the NIEA was that we might reasonably expect AFBI to have higher standards than other farms. Therefore, I asked them to carry out unannounced visits. No evidence has been presented to us that we have not followed up; indeed, we have probably followed up more robustly than we would in any normal case.

Media coverage has continued, showing clips that are, as far as I can tell, the same clips as those investigated last year. That is the position. However, if new evidence comes to light, we will follow it up because it is absolutely reasonable that a public body running a farm needs to be a role model. AFBI needs to be a role model, and I say the same thing to our staff in CAFRE.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): I have two points on that before I move to my next question. AFBI has a site in my constituency of Lagan Valley. Its proximity to Hillsborough lake must always be considered, and, Minister, you reflected that there has been some pollution there at some stage into a watercourse.

Confidence really is key to effecting change. Has there been any reflection on building the confidence of the agriculture and farming sector in the make-up and function of AFBI? Perhaps a farmers' forum could generate the confidence required to deliver the environmental challenges and changes that are evidenced.

Mr Muir: AFBI is engaging with stakeholders, and farmers are a critical part of it. They are making sure that there is stakeholder engagement. As I have outlined, we take the issues seriously. You received the allegations and passed them to us, and we have investigated them. You had AFBI in to discuss them. I reassure you that we take those issues very seriously. Anything that comes through is properly and fully investigated. If anyone is aware of anything else, forward it to us. One of the frustrations has been that people have been saying, "I am aware of this", and I say, "Can you pass it on?", but that does not happen. People need to pass things on.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Katrina, do you want to come in on the farmers' forum?

Mrs Godfrey: AFBI has a wide range of responsibilities: agriculture, forestry, fisheries, natural environment, food and all the rest of it. In every case, there is a need to ensure strong stakeholder engagement with all the component parts of the legislation that underpins AFBI.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): It is an opportunity to springboard that and evidence it better, because I cannot over-emphasise the importance of confidence. If confidence is not there, we could miss our targets and our ambition.

Mrs Godfrey: You are absolutely right, Chair: AFBI's role is crucial and its work so important. That is why engagement becomes important for it as well. That should be engagement in a way that builds confidence in the robustness of the work that it does. It does some amazing things.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you very much. I will move on. I have two more questions, Minister, and there is a lot of interest from members.

We all celebrated the ring-fencing of the budget at the start, particularly, I think, the £327 million. However, unfortunately, as you pointed out, about 20% of that resource budget is being swallowed up in tackling bovine tuberculosis. You said that the cost would exceed £60 million, but I have heard figures of £70 million and £75 million. Are those figures that you are projecting or are aware of? How much above £60 million will it be? Is it sustainable, given that we have a project in train? Has it become a rudimentary part of our annual budget?

Mr Muir: Katrina will probably come on to the figures, but that is not sustainable. It is not sustainable for us as a Department, but, more important, it is not sustainable for our farming community. The levels are too high, and we need to get them down. I am seeking to make sure that our decisions follow proper process and are based on science and evidence.

There are lessons to be learned from previous interventions. I get this. I see the mental health toll that it takes on farm families. We are progressing the regionalisation initiative in the north-west and in County Donegal, and we will consult on wildlife interventions in the time ahead. We are also looking to make interventions on the other pillars, which are people and cattle.

Do you want to say a bit about the financial aspect?

Mrs Godfrey: The blueprint sets out the strategic way forward. There is a slight positive in that incident rates fell slightly in the last quarter, but falling from "too high" to "still too high" does not really help me. We need costs to go down, and we need to make sure that we have action on all three pillars — people, wildlife and cattle — of the blueprint. Those measures are in place.

Not all of them are universally popular, but we have had to put tighter governance around the bovine TB work to make sure that everything pulls in the right direction. That has been in place for a number of months. All credit to Brian, the Chief Veterinary Officer, for insisting on a new look at governance to make sure that we can be accountable for the actions that are taken and the results that they deliver.

As the Minister often says, this will not be a short-term fix. We need to see that curve turned, because we cannot sustain the cost.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Absolutely. It is a tragedy for farmers, for the animals and for your budget, Minister.

Mrs Godfrey: And the taxpayer.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): And the taxpayer.

Mrs Godfrey: Yes, absolutely.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): OK. Thank you very much.

This is my final question before I move on to the Deputy Chair. You might want to mention the Farming for the Generations scheme and build on that. Last week, we had in front of us the Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU) and the Young Farmers' Clubs Of Ulster. They said that the previous land mobility scheme was successful and that there was a great deal of collaboration on it.

Given the age profile of farmers, how confident are you that the Farming for the Generations scheme will address the ongoing challenges for the Northern Ireland agrisector? Is there any scope to reintroduce the land mobility scheme in particular?

Mr Muir: I totally get the importance of that. It is a key issue not just in Northern Ireland but across the rest of the UK and Europe. The common agricultural policy proposals on which the European Union is consulting are quite radical in how they address the issue. Our previous interventions did not move the dial. If we are to make new interventions, we have to make sure that they will be effective.

The Farming for the Generations pilot scheme has been done. I engaged with officials recently on its wider roll-out and, alongside that, on how we can attach potential financial incentives to it to make sure that there is good use of public money and we achieve the results that we want. I thank the stakeholders who have been engaging with us for their feedback on the pilot scheme, because that has been important for us as we shape the scheme. Hopefully, we will be able to make some announcements in the time ahead and then engage with the Committee. One thing that is critical is that, if we make regulations for the scheme, we get support for them so that we can then move at pace. We understand the importance of having a scheme in place.

Is there anything that you want to add, Katrina?

Mrs Godfrey: On the point about the effectiveness of making interventions, particularly at a point at which public finances are so stretched, the onus will be on us to make sure that any new scheme demonstrates that it will make a difference. As the Minister says, our experience, including at European level, is that interventions have not really changed the position.

The Chairperson (Mr Butler): Thank you Minister. I hand over to the Deputy Chair to ask further questions. He will also take the Chair. I will speak to the Committee Clerk for a minute, after which the Deputy Chair and I will change seats.

Mr McAleer: Thank you very much for your presentation, Minister. Thanks to Katrina as well.

I support what Robbie said about the young farmers' issue. Last week at the Committee, I cited some correspondence that I had received from a young woman who has had the opportunity to start farming. She is passionate about farming but is frustrated that, as a new entrant, she cannot get entitlements of her own from the regional reserve. As a new young farmer — someone whom you want in the industry, Minister — she is frustrated about that. She will be forced now to purchase her lease at the rate of other farmers, which is at a reduced rate, because it is going to be purchased at the leasing price. To me, that is an example of why it was the wrong decision to close the regional reserve to new entrants. That is just one case study among those of many people who have spoken to the Committee since that happened. Will you reconsider?

Mr Muir: Let us take a step back. As a result of leaving the EU, we are having a discussion about how to design our own farm support policies. The resource implications of doing that are significant for the Department, and the level of change that has to be delivered is challenging for us all. We considered that last year. We were clear that the decision had to be made so that we could move forward and deliver the sustainable agriculture programme. We have to make sure that the interventions that we make deliver the change that we need to see. That is why it is important that we have a new scheme in place that delivers the outcomes that we want, and it is the Farming for the Generations scheme. I have engaged with officials on the proposals for the scheme, and they will want to engage with the Committee. That is one of the next steps in the time ahead, and I am happy for them to do that.

Mrs Godfrey: A full evaluation of the pilot scheme is under way, Declan, to make sure that we can be absolutely confident that any new proposals represent value for money, because, as the Minister says, we are now doing this under the Assembly's public expenditure rules. It is no longer aggregated at an EU level.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): It is also important to assess constantly the impact of the new land that is eligible for the new farm sustainability payment and the impact that that will have on the availability of entitlements.

Another thing that I have been asked about a lot is the grant scheme. Will you give us a flavour of what it entails, what farmers might expect from it and when it is scheduled to open for applications?

Mr Muir: I will answer first about the eligibility criteria for the farm sustainability payment. That is a really positive move, because we are bringing stuff into eligibility that was not previously eligible. That is really good for the environment and has been welcomed by many environmental groups. That is a positive thing that has been put in place.

You mentioned a grant scheme: do you mean the sustainable farming investment scheme?

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): Yes.

Mr Muir: That is moving to approvals. One of the issues here is budget. I need to get a bit more certainty on the budget situation. I engaged with the Minister of Finance, and he told me that there is not full budget cover for the scheme. That is why I will need support to deliver the scheme, be that through the final budget or through the scheme's being prioritised in monitoring rounds.

I will say this to you, Declan: the sustainable farming investment scheme is critical to being able to deliver a just transition for farmers to deal with the challenges that we have with, for example, air and water quality. There is a just transition fund for agriculture. That requirement was not met in line with our bid. We therefore need to find a way forward so that we can support delivery of that scheme. If something is already a statutory requirement, funding from the scheme probably will not go towards meeting that; rather, it is about allowing people to use technology that provides us with a way through the challenges. Science and evidence are really important. They may deliver inconvenient truths, but they will also find us a gateway through some of the challenges. I would like to see the technology that is available to help with, for example, ammonia emissions supported through that scheme.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): Lately, we have been lobbied a lot about poultry litter. We have a surplus of poultry litter here, but there is a deficit elsewhere. There is a willingness from farmers down South, where there is a phosphorus (P) deficit, to take it. We have a P surplus up here. You will be aware of the dialogue that is going on between the Shared Environmental Service (SES) here and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) in the South of Ireland. Have you had any update on that? That issue is a big one for poultry farmers here, but there is potentially a quick win to be had that will help lower our P surplus.

Mr Muir: I will say two things in response to that. Moy Park/Pilgrim's Europe has the Tully biogas plant operating outside Ballymena. That is good model for how we deal with the issue. I understand, however, that the plant is operating at capacity. Whatever we do has to be in line with environmental law. In the absence of advice from the South, the NIEA engaged with the Shared Environmental Service on whether it should go ahead and determine the application.

I know that there have been concerns about the Shared Environmental Service. I will raise them now before we come on to them. I have to respect the different bodies that exist in Northern Ireland. The Shared Environmental Service sits within Mid and East Antrim Borough Council but is the result of all the councils across Northern Ireland collaborating to have that shared service. Concerns have been raised with me by some of you on the Committee, as well as by stakeholders, about how councils engage with the Shared Environmental Service. Last night, I spoke to the president of the Northern Ireland Local Government Association (NILGA) and told him that there was potentially a role for NILGA to play in how councils can collaborate. He will follow up on that. There is a role there for NILGA to ensure that we engage properly with the Shared Environmental Service strategically in order to address some of the concerns that you set out.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): Thank you for that. May I suspend the meeting for a minute? [Laughter.]

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): We are now back online.

Miss McIlveen: Thank you, Minister, for your lengthy presentation. Over the past few days, I have been reflecting on whether you like GB News. Dougie Beattie is doing his job. He is asking questions and scrutinising the Department, but, on Tuesday, you in some ways demonstrated your prejudice and contempt towards both him and GB News. It was not your finest hour; in fact, I felt that it was a little cringeworthy. Do you regret saying what you said, and will you withdraw the comment?

Mr Muir: I have two things to say about that. There have been a number of broadcasts by GB News, the transcripts of which are being reviewed. I am reluctant to say any more, because there is the potential for legal action.

I outlined to the Chair a response to the allegations that were received and the investigations that were undertaken concerning the issues in hand at AFBI in Hillsborough. My Department received interview requests from Mr Beattie at GB News in October and November 2025. He was asked to submit a formal request containing details of what he wished to discuss. Although a formal request was received, it did not provide information or material on the allegations that he wished to discuss. As a result, his requests were declined.

We take animal welfare and environmental issues very seriously. If we receive any allegations, they will be promptly and fully investigated.

Miss McIlveen: I therefore take it that you have no intention of withdrawing or apologising for the comment that you made on Tuesday.

Mr Muir: No.

Miss McIlveen: On 3 November, I tabled questions for written answer to you about the photographs and video that I had seen. I also asked why you had refused to speak to the media on 23 October about the conditions at the research farm at AFBI in Hillsborough. On 14 November, you responded:

Photographs and video were provided as evidence at that time. I struggle a little with whether it was a case of the questions that were being asked or the person who was asking the questions. If the BBC, ITV or Channel 4 were to have asked the same questions, would they have got the same response?

You will be aware that I have asked a series of questions about the protocols in your Department and other Departments for granting interviews and holding press conferences. In response, you talked about taking an approach that ensures broad and balanced coverage, but that clearly does not include GB News. Moving forward, have any lessons been learnt from this week? Will GB News be invited to AFBI in Hillsborough as requested? Will GB News be invited to press conferences and interviews? Will questions be taken from GB News, or will the perceived prejudice in your Department towards that media outlet continue?

Mr Muir: AFBI has confirmed that, following the video in which it invited groups to visit the farm, which was released on 5 February, Mr Beattie reached out to AFBI to request a visit. He was asked to submit a request to AFBI's communication team for consideration, but my understanding is that he has not done so. I have a serious concern about the accuracy of some recent broadcasts by GB News, and that is why the transcripts are being reviewed. I do not want to say anything further about that.

I will engage with the media, and I am happy to do so. I also want to engage with the media about their impartiality and correct behaviour.

Miss McIlveen: You know my view on AFBI, and I have great respect for the people who work there. I was genuinely upset when I saw what was presented to me back in October, and I submitted my questions for written answer as a consequence. You should have fronted up earlier and done an interview, be it with GB News or another media outlet, to discuss the findings at AFBI at a much earlier stage not only to bring the matter to some sort of conclusion but to protect the integrity of AFBI and those who work there. Do you now plan to have a conversation with the media about what has gone on at AFBI?

Mr Muir: If there are any requests for interview, I am happy to receive them, but I am at the Committee as the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to be scrutinised alongside officials about the Department's role, and I respect that. The Assembly is set up to provide scrutiny of Departments, and it is important that the Committee do that and that the media do so as well. I am here today to answer any questions that the Committee has, and I am happy to do so.

Miss McIlveen: One of the criticisms of AFBI's board is that it has no farming representative on it. It is in your gift to appoint board members. Is it you intention to consider appointing a representative of the farming community to the board?

Mr Muir: I would not describe it as being in my gift, because that does not show a full understanding of the importance of the process that needs to be followed for board appointments. All members of the AFBI board are appointed following a public appointments competition that is based on merit. Appointments are regulated by the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments for Northern Ireland (OCPANI), and I have followed the process. The focus must be on ensuring that AFBI fulfils its statutory functions, and, as the sponsor Department, we seek to achieve that.

Miss McIlveen: It is most disappointing that we cannot get a definitive answer on that.

I have been communicating with you about the Isle of Man and the challenges for our fishing industry. Will you provide an update on ongoing discussions, if there are any, and on any plans that you have to assist the industry?

Mr Muir: I am on the record as saying and will restate today that I am very concerned about the Isle of Man Government's decision, which is affecting Northern Ireland fishing vessels' access to Isle of Man waters. I am meeting industry representatives about that this afternoon. I have been corresponding with the Isle of Man Government on the matter, and I intend to travel there later this month to meet them and to make representations on the matter and the impact that it is having. Hopefully, I will get them to understand better the need to address the issue, given the detrimental impact that it is having.

The Isle of Man Government stated in correspondence that no recent changes had been made to Isle of Man Government immigration legislation or to visa requirements for non-British and non-Irish nationals working in the island's territorial waters. They then set out the current legislation. The issue for me is that the matter arose without any notice. It is having a severe impact on our fishing industry and therefore needs to be addressed. As part of their engagement, the Isle of Man Government said that there is a desire on their part to work constructively to explore practical solutions together, and that is what I intend to do. As well as meeting industry representatives, I am looking forward to engaging with elected representatives who have raised the issue with me. I understand the concern.

Miss McIlveen: The only practical solution is that Northern Ireland vessels be exempted from the Isle of Man's current policy.

Mr Muir: I agree, Michelle, and that is where we want to get to. I will try my best to find a way forward, because I understand the impact that it is having and know how suddenly the situation arose.

Miss McIlveen: My final question is about lifting of the temporary control zone for bluetongue. I am conscious of the impact that the TCZ has in my constituency, particularly on the movement of animals. It is, however, also having an economic impact on Saintfield livestock market, which has been caught up in the situation from day 1. You know that I have been looking for some support for them during the process.

Mr Muir: We are working through everything at pace and will hopefully make an announcement later today or tomorrow morning. If you wish, I will see whether officials can come to the Committee to brief you. I get its importance, and that is why we are working at pace.

I am conscious of the TCZ's impact on the farming community. That is why we intervened and why I issued a ministerial direction on some of the costs associated with the testing of animals in order to move them out of the zone. We all have to be conscious that there could be further outbreaks of bluetongue in Northern Ireland. Such is the nature of climate change, bluetongue has moved much further north than we had expected. We will continue to engage with stakeholders. We are a single epidemiological area, so we have been engaging closely with colleagues in the South, as well as with our colleagues in the rest of the UK.

Katrina, is there anything more that you want to say on that?

Mrs Godfrey: No. I am aware of the correspondence and am happy for officials to come to the Committee or to speak to Committee members separately on the issue. It has been the subject of some formal correspondence, however, so there may be limits to what we can say.

Mr Muir: Although it is a concern for the farming community, particularly given the impact on trade, there are no issues with food safety or public health. It is important that I re-emphasise that.

Ms Murphy: Thank you, Minister and Katrina, for coming to brief us. I will touch on just transition. I welcome the development of the regulations. How will the Department properly implement any future recommendations that the just transition commission may and, hopefully, will make specifically on rural communities to ensure that they fully reflect the communities that they are supposed to support?

Mrs Godfrey: In some ways, that sits nicely alongside the work that we are doing on the new rural policy, because rural communities will have to be climate-resilient as well as economically and socially resilient. The Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 defines the gamut of just transition considerations, and the commission will be able to advise on any aspects of them. As we do with the Climate Change Committee, we will take the expert advice, which will be used to inform not just policy development but policy responses to enable the required transition and make sure that it is fair.

The priority at the moment, however, is to get the commission up and running. It will have the job of providing us with advice, but it will also advise the other Departments. We have the overarching responsibility for just transition as well as the just transition responsibility for agriculture, but every sector will need support, advice and challenge to make sure that it adapts its policies in a way that is fair and just.

Earlier, the Minister mentioned that the work on CAP 1 is coming to an end, and it will hopefully very shortly come to the Committee and then the Executive. The real challenge will then start as we finalise the climate action plan 2 in light of the carbon budgets approved by the Assembly, and that will mean that there will be an even greater demand and need for advice on the just transition.

Ms Murphy: To be fair, when Patsy was on the Committee, he raised the issues of just transition and funding for the commission almost every week. How will the just transition commission be funded?

Mrs Godfrey: The commission will be funded to provide advice. We will provide it with core funding. Other Departments, if they need bespoke advice, will have to support the commission to provide it. The just transition fund for agriculture is a separate fund, and the Minister has already referenced that. It is one of our Budget bids, so it is crucial that, if we are to support the agri-food sector in particular to make the changes in practice that are needed to comply with the law, we get the funding.

Ms Murphy: I asked you about the rural policy framework when you were previously at the Committee, and it will hopefully go out to consultation ASAP. It feels as though it has entered the Bermuda Triangle.

Mr Muir: It will go out to consultation next week.

Ms Murphy: That is fantastic. I know the amount of work that has gone into the framework and how many groups fed into it. It has been brilliant. It was not easy work to embark on and get right. It is brilliant to hear that it is out of the Bermuda Triangle and that the consultation will hopefully be online next week.

I will switch subject totally. I declare an interest, because I sit on the TEO Committee. Officials briefed that Committee on ending violence against women and girls (EVAWG). I was happy to hear that they are embarking on work with you, the Rural Community Network (RCN) and the NI Rural Women's Network (NIRWN) through the community-led review. It is brilliant that that review is being done, because it will give rural women a voice to engage and will allow the Department, the RCN and NIRWN to understand fully the challenges that rural women face. More broadly, Minister, what more can your Department do internally?

Mr Muir: The work that is being done is excellent. Ending violence against women and girls is a priority in the Programme for Government, but it is also a priority for Katrina, the Department and me. It is also a priority for the rest of society because we have to address the issue. I can get quite upset about some of it. We have seen some things in the last year that tell us that we have a major problem here that we need to face up to. The Department will focus on working with others, but there is a wider societal issue. I was at an event just this week at which it was said that we all have a responsibility to challenge attitudes and ensure that there are good role models in society, particularly in the online space, given the implications that that can have. We are therefore very conscious of the issue, particularly in rural communities.

Mrs Godfrey: International Women's Day is this week. On Friday, we will be looking not just at the role that women play in the Civil Service but at how we can support others.

Women's Aid will be part of that conversation.

Áine and others will know that, at the end of July last year, we had to face the reality of one of our colleagues being impacted by violence against women and children. That has left a mark. Even though we were passionately committed to that before, we now feel that it is personal and that we owe it to our colleague to play our part. The community-led review is really important, but we are also looking with TEO colleagues at where else we have touchpoints that might allow us to identify risks and determine whether our staff know enough about what to do if they suspect that a customer or client is at risk of domestic violence. We have training programmes that we are encouraging all staff to take up, but, as I say, this feels personal to us; we want to make sure that we do everything that we can to support colleagues in the Executive Office on the ending violence against women and girls strategy.

Ms Murphy: Absolutely. You referenced the tragic events that took place in Maguiresbridge last year. That was a horrific time for everyone, including your colleagues in the Department.

Mrs Godfrey: As so many of you will know, that is felt across a community, whether it is children at school, work colleagues, family or sports mates. Those impacts are deeply felt for a long time.

Mr Muir: Thank you for raising that; it is a key issue. The role of stakeholders is often done on a voluntary basis and is totally invaluable. Katrina and I, along with the Justice Minister, went to Newry to engage with Women's Aid and see the work that it is doing. That is literally a lifeline.

Mrs Godfrey: There are particular risks for women in rural communities, who can feel isolated. There may be traditions that do not value the full place of women, and it may be harder for them to reach out and get support. They may worry. That was explained to us. You know what it is like when you live in a small town: people know you, so, if you are seeking help or support, will somebody see you? There are different issues. The third sector has a massively valuable role to play in providing those places of support. Violence against women and girls is even more complex if you are in an isolated rural community. The Minister is right: we need to make sure that, in engagement with women and girls, our tone is respectful, because that can give rise to different sets of behaviours.

Ms Murphy: I have one more question. Rural crime has been a very pertinent issue over the past number of weeks in my constituency. In the small rural area of Knocks, a resident suffered a very violent break-in. The community response at grassroots level has been absolutely fantastic: a community neighbourhood watch has been formed. On rural crime more broadly, Minister, what further steps could your Department take to support rural communities that face violent crime, thefts and things such as that?

Mr Muir: Katrina can come in on that issue. We engage quite heavily with all partners in that regard. I was at an event recently in Kilkeel at which we engaged with the police, the Loughs Agency and other bodies about how we can cooperate on tackling poaching. It can be really difficult to get evidence around the theft of farm machinery in rural communities because there are not many people in the area. The theft of livestock has also been reported, as have violent crimes, such as what you outlined. We cooperate on that. The new policy that we are bringing forward will be really important when it comes to how we ensure that rural communities buy into everything that we are doing as a Government.

Mrs Godfrey: The Committee has been very supportive of the work, but the needs of rural communities need to be baked in at the start of policy and service delivery, rather than being picked up at the end.

We have good relationships with the PSNI. Obviously, the job of investigating rests with the PSNI, but we work with it to understand the issues and what prevention and detection look like. That is really important.

Mr McCrossan: Minister, I have something quite topical: at about 5.00 pm yesterday, an incident of preliminary avian influenza was declared in my constituency of West Tyrone, which I share with Tom Buchanan and Declan McAleer. Will you give us an update on that? What action is your Department taking to support local farmers in the immediate area, who are, understandably, quite concerned?

Mr Muir: We have made announcements today and are engaging with stakeholders. There was a suspected case on Tuesday. We get preliminary results back and then respond promptly. A depopulation of the site is occurring from today. My thoughts are primarily with the farmer who has been affected. I fully appreciate that its impact is indiscriminate. I thank officials for responding promptly to it. We have wider messaging that we continue to reiterate: a housing order is still in place. It is important that people observe that. The vast majority of farmers do, because they understand the importance of biosecurity. We continue to monitor the situation.

Mr McCrossan: Thank you. I appreciate that, Minister. It is an important issue that my office is being contacted about today.

A number of areas have been touched on, but I will focus on one that continues to come to my attention, and, I am sure, that of others on the Committee: the frustration of farmers who are trying to adapt and transition to meet the stricter environmental and water quality standards. What action are you taking to ensure that the planning system does not block the construction of the essential infrastructure that is key to delivering those outcomes, such as slurry storage, silage pits and nutrient management facilities?

Mr Muir: Thank you, Daniel. That is really important. I will separate the issues. One issue is the law and policy in that regard, and the second is the Northern Ireland Environment Agency as a statutory consultee and how it responds to planning applications.

All of us across this island need to do more to improve water quality. Lough Neagh is a demonstration of the call to action in that respect. We also need to deal with air pollution in the form of ammonia. You know that we consulted on the nutrients action programme last year. A task and finish group, with an independent chair, was set up. It is doing its work and will, hopefully, come back in the spring with recommendations on the way forward. There will then be a further consultation, after which I will bring a paper to the Executive. I am hopeful about that.

One of the key issues — it has been highlighted by the Deputy Chair — is about how we ensure that there is a just transition for farming. The sustainable farm investment scheme will be key to ensuring that I have the funding to support the farming community in adapting to the issues at hand, particularly those that we have seen recently, such as the impacts of climate change and heavier rainfall. Farmers also want additional covered slurry stores, which will reduce the impact of ammonia. That process is under way.

The ammonia issue is going on alongside that. We need to find a solution where farmers are able to replace farm buildings with ones that do not add to but reduce ammonia pollution in the area. We want to incentivise stuff, such as covered slurry stores, that will reduce ammonia pollution. That engagement is ongoing. I want it to come to a conclusion very soon, because it is really important that we provide a way forward.

The other issue is about the Northern Ireland Environment Agency as a statutory consultee. I get the importance of that to many people in the room, and to those outside who contact you as their MLAs and representatives. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency has a planning improvement plan in place. I spent a good part of yesterday afternoon with the agency in Lisburn, going through what is being done, the actions that have been completed to date and those that it seeks to take in the short, medium and long term. It set out to me a number of short-term deliverables that it seeks to take between now and June. We need improved customer service. I get that. We need to be able to give you better updates on queries. I have to clear those to you. I feel the pain when I have to approve those, because I know that, when you receive them, you will not be too happy. More importantly, your constituents will not be too happy when we say, "We've received the application, but, because of resource constraints, we can't provide you with an update".

Alongside that, we need to find a way in which to turn around applications more quickly. There is a role for district councils to make sure that applications are fully complete before they go to the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. That will avoid what we describe as "MOT applications", which is where you submit an application to find out what is wrong with it. It takes time for us to identify the issues, and it takes up the applicant's time when it comes to getting it turned around. It is about better enabling planning officers in district councils to evaluate the information in front of them. We have a role to play in empowering people in that respect. I get that we need to improve the situation with the statutory consultee. A team has been set up to drive that improvement. Katrina and I have a laser-like focus on the issue, because we realise that the Committee, the Assembly, and, most importantly, many people around Northern Ireland, particularly those in our rural communities, are not happy.

Mr McCrossan: I appreciate your honesty, Minister. It is a particular point of frustration in the farming community, which is trying to comply as much as possible with the higher and stricter standards that are coming before it. However, in order to meet those standards, it has to adapt. The problem is that the system is preventing the farming community from adapting. Minister, you have outlined quite a bit, but do you accept that the delays in the planning system for farm storage infrastructure are undermining the farmer's ability to comply with the environmental regulations?

Mr Muir: The environmental regulations are law, and there is a requirement to comply with them. It is important that a Minister, after taking the pledge of office, uphold the rule of law and set that out. If you take a step back, look at what I inherited and read the Office for Environmental Protection's report on ammonia pollution, you will see that the Department was previously acting unlawfully in that regard. Legal action was taken against the Department in the absence of Ministers, and Katrina had to take a decision, which I fully support, to get the Department on the right side of the law. That means that things are much more restrictive when it comes to ammonia pollution. A lot of areas in Northern Ireland are saturated with ammonia, and we need to find a way in which to get those emissions down. I am acutely aware of the legal obligation to reduce those emissions, and of the need to deal with practical issues on farms.

Mr McCrossan: My questions are connected. I am not moving on to any other area, because this is coming up quite a bit. The issue of applications is quite a wide one; I hear it in my constituency. Do you have any details of the scale of applications for agricultural infrastructure, such as slurry tanks or lagoons, or livestock housing, that are currently being delayed by the system or have been refused outright? That is creating a considerable issue for the farmer when it comes to environmental compliance.

Mr Muir: I do not have the statistics in front of me. I have answered a lot of questions for written answer about the issue. I get that there is an issue. We need to find a way through it, but we need to meet our environmental obligations as well. It is about trying to match that together. That is why, fundamentally, I need the budget cover for the sustainable farm investment scheme. I have not been in the media every day slamming the Finance Minister — that is not my style; I want to work with people — but that does not mean that there are not issues with our budget to support the farming community. We, as an Executive, have to work through the issues collectively and agree a Budget for the time ahead. It is really important to give certainty to everyone across Northern Ireland.

Mr McCrossan: From a reassurance point of view, what discussions have you had with the relevant people in positions of power about planning policy to ensure that the process moves more swiftly, rather than obstructing the environmental transition that is required of farmers? The message that I am getting time and time again from farmers who are greatly frustrated is, "We want to transition, but the system is preventing us from being compliant because of all the blockages". Many agricultural businesses are expanding at a rapid rate, but they are being blocked, which is a major detriment to those businesses.

Mr Muir: Katrina can probably reply, but she will also verify that I have consistently engaged with officials on the issue.

Mrs Godfrey: Yes. The Department, the NIEA and the agency are clear that the level of performance when it comes to responding cannot continue. As you know, Daniel, it is not the decision maker, but it provides advice to the decision makers.

That advice has to reflect the fact that, in some areas, such as where there is saturation, it will not be enough legally to just not make it worse; the proposals have to make it better, which is challenging.

In answer to your earlier question, a number of case studies are being considered by the task and finish group. That has been looking very carefully at the areas where it has been entirely possible for NIEA to give positive feedback to the relevant planning authority. I am not so sure about what happens when it goes back, but, where applications come in and there is really good evidence that the approach taken reflects the legal position, there is not an issue.

Mr McCrossan: There is a bit of a contrast: the planning authorities in the councils tell me that it is not about making a decision; the problem is with getting it back from NIEA.

Mrs Godfrey: Absolutely.

Mr McCrossan: That leads to environmental problems on farms across Northern Ireland.

Mrs Godfrey: The performance has not been good enough. NIEA staff admitted that here a few weeks ago. Things need to improve. The agency needs not just resources — we have given it the budget cover to have resources — but a process that is not overcomplicated. If it is of any comfort to you, there is a review of communications and stakeholder engagement, so that there will be a much easier way of being able to see where things are on the planning portal. That has been a particular frustration. Like the Minister, when I see some of the letters coming out from NIEA, I wince a bit. I understand completely. We have said that the position cannot continue. It is not fair to elected representatives.

Mr Muir: I know that it is an important issue. It was very useful to go through it yesterday afternoon at NIEA in Lisburn. If it would be useful as an informal Committee session — I know that some other Committees do this — the Committee could come out to NIEA in Lisburn, and it could take you through the issues. We are willing to facilitate that, because it is a critical issue for you and it would be good for you to go there and go through some of the policy issues. I believe in openness and transparency, and in your scrutiny role. If you want to do that, we will set that up.

Mr McCrossan: That is a good suggestion.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): It is something we could potentially look at in our forward work programme.

Mr T Buchanan: Thank you, Minister, for being with us today. Young farmers were mentioned briefly earlier. How can a young farmer who falls into the possession of a piece of land or a farm obtain entitlements? Without them, he will not be able to compete against other farm businesses in the area. Will the Department consider making entitlements available for young farmers to purchase?

Mr Muir: I understand the challenges with not just entitlements but land values. We have seen those of late. There is a range of multiple issues. The previous schemes did not change the dial in that regard, so we need to be very conscious that, by doing what we have always done, we will get what we have always got. We need to change things a bit. You know what the European Union is consulting on about generational renewal, which is that what are farm sustainability payments in our case — they are basic payments in the EU's case — will stop at the age of 65. That how radically the EU is looking at that. We do not propose to go that way. However, we need to find better ways in which to do it. The previous schemes did not move the dial.

Is there anything that you want to say, Katrina?

Mrs Godfrey: The trading window is now open for those who are able to trade. The pilot will help us to articulate what has worked and what has not when we do the evaluation. Minister is absolutely right: anything new that we do needs to be demonstrably able to deliver results, and not just be more of the same. What has happened before has not worked, frankly.

Mr T Buchanan: The concern is that, if we cannot encourage our young people into the agriculture sector, it is going to die off.

One of your 10 pledges is that you will deal with bovine TB. By the end of this Assembly term, is a document containing "evidence-based solutions" all that we can expect to see when it comes to dealing with the issue, or are we going to see some positive action on the ground?

Mr Muir: First, I acknowledge the importance of the issue. I had a farm family with me yesterday, and I understand the mental health toll that it is having on people in Northern Ireland. I understood the challenges when I came into office. Only a few months before I took up office, we heard the outcome of the judicial review of my predecessor's proposed wildlife intervention. I commissioned the Chief Veterinary Officer to do a full review of that, and we got stakeholders to agree a blueprint for the way forward. Our getting that clear agreement around the room on the actions that we wished to take was fundamental.

We are taking forward the regionalised initiative in the north-west of Northern Ireland and County Donegal. I thank the Irish Government for their support for that through the Shared Island Fund. We held an event that many people attended, including a contributor from New Zealand, who outlined how the regionalised approach worked there. Alongside that, we continue to roll out the blueprint for people, cattle and wildlife. Additional funding for testing has been put in place, a review of testing regimes is being undertaken, and, in the time ahead, we will consult on wildlife interventions.

If, in politics and in life, you are not prepared to learn lessons, you are in the wrong game. Given that, on the last day of the previous Assembly's term, my predecessor announced a wildlife intervention that fell at the first hurdle of judicial review, it would be wrong of us not to take lessons from that and make sure that any of our interventions are correct and proper. It is important that we do not do something that is highly vulnerable to legal challenge. I am clear that primary legislation is needed. I could have progressed that if another party had not decided to walk out of this place and deny us two years of the mandate.

I am doing all that I can, but I am trying to make sure that everything goes through the proper process and is done correctly. I understand the cost to farm families and to my Department, and I understand the importance of the matter, but I am trying to ensure that we do things right.

Mr T Buchanan: You talked about the Shared Island project. Why did you decide to carry out that project in an area where bTB is less prevalent than it is in other areas? Will that give you an accurate reading of what you are looking for?

Mr Muir: We chose that area because of its geography. If people were to say to me that the level of bTB in that area was not concerning, I would be baffled. There is a very high level of bTB in that area and across Northern Ireland. Nearly 90% of farmers have signed up to do surveys on their land; I thank them for their engagement on that. It is important that we make progress. We have to move beyond the stage of saying which area we want. A pilot is going ahead, with Shared Island support, and it is important that we progress that.

Mr T Buchanan: I do not think that anybody would say that it is not important. All that we are saying is that it is less prevalent in that area than it is in other areas.

Mr Muir: It is still very high, Tom.

Mrs Godfrey: It is very high.

Mr T Buchanan: Therefore, it is just as important in that area as it is in other areas. My question was about just the reading.

I will ask one further question; I have others, but I will put them in writing. If what happened at AFBI — welfare issues, slurry being blown into woodland, and that type of thing — were to happen on somebody's farm, what consequences would there be for the farmer?

Mrs Godfrey: They should be no different. In the instructions that we issued — unannounced inspection by NIEA; animal welfare checks by veterinary service staff — we probably did more in that case than we would do in a similar case. Staff followed the rules that would apply in any other case to determine whether there had been a breach and whether it was low-, medium- or high-severity and, in line with the enforcement policy, to take the appropriate action. If anything, an even more resilient, robust and rigorous standard was probably applied, because, if your farm is run in a public-sector organisation, you do not just fall over the line of meeting the minimum: you ought to be better than that.

Mr T Buchanan: OK. Given the fallout from that across the farming sector, what are you doing to rebuild confidence in the farming community, so that it can trust the Department and its arm's-length bodies?

Mr Muir: The Department takes those allegations seriously. They are fully investigated without fear or favour. Some of the commentary is inaccurate, which is concerning, but it is important to say that we take all allegations seriously, and that they are investigated and followed up on. AFBI has come to the Committee before. I am sure that, if you want it to come again, it will be happy to attend.

Mr Blair: I have a question on a different topic, but, before I go to it, I thank the Minister and the permanent secretary for the attention to detail that they have shown on the issue that Áine raised around violence against women and girls. I extend that thanks to the members of their wider teams who are closely involved in those issues and have been affected by loss themselves.

We should always be very mindful that, outside the domestic setting, there is a very large risk to women in rural areas because of the isolation of rural roads. That was really brought into focus for me during COVID, when a large number of people contacted to me to say that, when a car came along in their neighbourhood and slowed down, they immediately felt threatened. There is also a lack of street lighting in rural locations. That is something that should feature in the consideration of all rural matters.

My question is about a seasonal issue. We are coming into the season in which there will be news stories about the burning of hazardous materials. The issue was flagged up to me in my constituency last summer, and it recurs, as members will know, so it is good to get in early on those matters. There was a high-level issue in South Belfast, which was on the news quite a bit. It was not dissimilar to an issue in my constituency, although that was at a lower level. I am keen to know from the Department whether there are any updates on those issues. Are there any plans based on outcomes so far?

Mr Muir: I am limited in what I can say, because there is an environmental crime investigation ongoing in relation to that matter, alongside litigation. However, I am deeply concerned that, despite warning signage having been erected and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency urging people to stay away from the Meridi Street site, it appears that people have entered the site and deposited pallets. Unauthorised access to the site could amount to a criminal offence.

Given the ongoing risk to the safety of people accessing the site, the Northern Ireland Environment Agency again urges members of the public not to access it under any circumstances. I, as Minister, urge local elected representatives to provide the leadership needed to ensure that people obey the law and heed the warnings issued to keep people off the site. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency previously confirmed that a consultant assessing the Meridi Street site detected the presence of asbestos, despite efforts by the landowner to remediate it. The full remediation of the site at Meridi Street, where the Sloan Molyneaux factory once existed, could take up to two years. Whilst the risk from the remaining asbestos is low if undisturbed, ongoing trespassing at the site makes it extremely difficult for any further remediation work to be conducted. As the site is privately owned, it remains the responsibility of the landowner to fully remove all asbestos material.

Mr Blair: I welcome that response and echo the Minister's call for public and political support. The risks in my area last year were not known until after the event, so people who left a window open in the general vicinity on that occasion may not have done so had they known in advance that there was an issue at the site. However, there was no knowledge of that until some weeks after the event. It was thanks to the media that we found out. That is why I raise the issue now, and I will do so again before it is too late to do anything. We need to keep a close eye on such issues, particularly when it comes to air quality and environmental impact.

Mr Muir: I am really concerned. Signage has been erected and warnings have been issued, but people have accessed the site and deposited pallets on it. As Minister, I urge people not to access the site. I ask for the support of local representatives in that regard.

Mr Wilson: Thank you, Minister. I will go back to TB and its spiralling cost to the industry and the Department. The rise in incidence levels is obviously concerning. The electoral cycle will give a performance indication for everybody in the House, but, as Minister with overall responsibility for the matter, how do you judge your performance on TB? Overall costs were a lot lower than £60 million, and they are now in excess of £60 million. When it comes to eradication, are you on course to achieve the aspiration to halve levels by 2040? If you are, what are the outworkings of that? TB is a really invasive disease that affects farmers' mentality, first and foremost, and their welfare and how they see their farm. It is also invasive in its impact on animal welfare and its economic impact on the Province. As a Minister, how do you view your performance on TB?

Mr Muir: It is not about me, to be honest. It is about farm families and the impact that TB has on them. I am doing all that I can. My officials work on the basis of science and evidence, and they follow due process on the issue. TB was prevalent in Northern Ireland long before I became Minister. I am conscious of the decision that was announced on the last sitting day of the previous Assembly. That fell at the first hurdle in judicial review, and I was left to pick up the pieces.

I seek to take a holistic approach through the three pillars of people, cattle and wildlife. I understand the importance of the issue, which I see in its impact on farm families. I will take a decision on it at the end of the consultation period, and that will be based on a proper consultation and the science and evidence that is presented to us. I know how important the issue is. I see it regularly and saw it just yesterday. We need to get a grip on it. A lot of action is being taken. The regional initiative in the north-west and Donegal is a key intervention. I thank officials in my Department and the staff who have been working with us in that regard. I also acknowledge the Shared Island Fund, the leadership from the Taoiseach and support from the Executive Office on potential transformation funding that we hope to get. We are focused on the issue, I get it, and I will continue to work through it.

Mr Wilson: When you say that it is not about you, that has an impact across your Department.

Mr Muir: No, it is about the people that the issue affects, Gareth.

Mr Wilson: Absolutely, but they are looking for the leadership that is required.

Mr Muir: I am giving that leadership.

Mr Wilson: It is not useful to say that it is not about you, because, in the outworking of any programme or achievement of targets that have to be met in order to halve the level of TB by 2040, ultimately, it is about you.

Mr Muir: No, we all have to do it together.

Mr Wilson: I understand that, but —

Mr Muir: We have to do it together.

Mr Wilson: I understand that, but I do not like hearing people in a senior position saying, "It is not about me". I realise that it is about everyone, but it is also about the Department, and you lead it. Have you said today that it is about you when it comes to AFBI's outlook on what happened previously and what the videos and evidence pointed to? It should be about your having overall responsibility for improving that picture. Farmers go through the mill. When the inspectors come up the drive, it is no picnic. Farmers are really stressed about that type of thing.

Mr Muir: I totally get that.

Mr Wilson: That is what I am getting at. I would rather that you say, "It is about the entire outworkings of the Department's performance in driving change to make the landscape suitable to drive down the incidence levels".

Mr Muir: That is what the Department is seeking to do, but we have to do it collectively. We cannot do it alone. No one individual can achieve all that. I will provide the leadership, and I will come to the Committee and provide the scrutiny. I go to the Assembly. I will be there on Monday for Question Time. I understand the responsibilities of being a Minister. I am up for that, and I am continuing to do that. However, we know that a collective approach is required to address bovine TB.

The issues that the member raised were discussed previously at the Committee. The Committee has corresponded with us about it all, and I have outlined our responses. AFBI has been here, and you have been able to ask questions of them. You will understand that AFBI is an arm's-length body of my Department. We are the sponsor Department, and we hold that role, understanding its responsibilities, and we will continue to engage with AFBI on that matter. When allegations are received, they are investigated and followed up.

Mr Blair: Can I raise a point of order?

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): Yes, John.

Mr Blair: I have no experience of this at Committee because never before at Committee have I been in a position where I have heard the same questions being asked repeatedly and, ultimately, getting the same answers, although this time, I admit, with a slightly different slant. The point of order is not based on the repetition, which I will address with the Committee Clerk and the Chair after the meeting. It is really not a good use of time to repeat the same question over and over again.

Separate to that and on an issue of accuracy, is it permissible for misrepresentation to take place through a line of questioning indicating that a Minister should have a performance appraisal on the outcome of one issue conducted at a Committee meeting with no information given at all to highlight that the same issue existed, was prevalent and was raised repeatedly at the Committee prior to the current Minister taking up post? In the previous mandate, the Committee had the same conversations on bovine TB and compensation payments, so it is inaccurate and unrepresentative to attribute responsibility for that on this Minister alone. It is not in the interests of the Committee to do that.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): John, you said that it was a point of order. Maybe that is something that we will get the Committee Clerk to check out and come back to us on. Is that OK?

Mr Blair: It is unrepresentative —

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): OK.

Mr Blair: — and inaccurate.

Mr Wilson: I do not get where you are coming from, John.

Mr Blair: It happened before. I will put it more straightforwardly —

Mr Wilson: The Minister himself referred to a previous Minister who is not in post at the moment.

Mr Blair: The issue of compensation going through the roof was raised here in the last term, in the one before and in the one before that.

Mr Wilson: It is a simple, aspirational question to say, "How do you think you have performed on an issue?" We are asked that all the time. We go around the doors quite a few times in our lifetime if we are committed to this job, and that happens. You are asked on the doorstep, "How do you think you've performed?" I am sure that the Minister has been asked that himself on many occasions in that situation. Anyway, I digress.

Minister, we had a short back-and-forth in the Chamber about waste water. I am particularly interested in the septic tank issue, which is an issue that needs a greater degree of thought. From someone who has one of the newer-style biotanks that is run off electricity, there is an issue when there is no electricity supply to those tanks. What will be the outworkings of your ultimate aim with that legislation? Will it mitigate? Will it contain clauses or provisions that could assist homeowners in the event of power cuts, whereby it could be demonstrated that they did not willingly cause any issue or that manufacturers delayed in responding to a technical fault? They are not like a normal, historical-style septic tank that you would find in rural areas, which I assume is what you are trying to address. You said in the Chamber that the legislation will not apply retrospectively. What part of that legislation will address potential issues that may arise with new systems? I do not think that there is a failsafe solution on the market at the minute.

Mr Muir: The Northern Ireland Environment Agency has an enforcement policy, and that is what it would follow. I am sure that we can share the policy with the Committee is you wish. Environmental law sits as it does with regard to that. The legislation that we are seeking to introduce is the fisheries and water environment Bill. I outlined in the Chamber and will outline it again now that we are planning a public awareness campaign for the spring on how to better manage your septic tank. You have the newer type, and some people have older ones and are, perhaps, not fully acquainted with how to manage them, so I want to raise awareness. The best step is always to raise awareness and focus on education and incentivisation rather than regulation and enforcement, because that is where we have failed. We need to have the ability to respond to low-severity water-pollution incidents. The number of such incidents that have been verified is quite high. The legislation will allow us to issue fixed penalty notices. That is something that we will do as a last resort. We do not want to do it in the first instance. Instead, we want to make sure people are not polluting in the first instance. That is the whole focus of it.

On the management of septic tanks and the like, there is a wider issue around the fact that we are responsible for regulation and enforcement, and there is another issue around where that sits. I get your point. Hopefully, we can raise people's awareness. The issue has been raised with me. A lot of people have said, "How can we better ensure that we address the issue of septic tanks?". Gareth, I understand the importance of doing that. However, there is a wider issue around larger waste-water plants that are all around Northern Ireland. There is one in my constituency that regularly pumps raw sewage and waste water into the lough. That is where the focus has to be, given its impact. There is also a resourcing issue for the Department.

Mr Wilson: That is my point. It is using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, if you want to use that analogy, given that there are much bigger polluters. I am an advocate of those new systems. The water that comes out of them is very clear. They are exemplary, and it is where we want to get to. It is just about mitigating the effects of technical issues that people may experience from the like of a power cut, which is beyond their physical control.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr McAleer): Minister and Katrina, thank you very much. This has been a marathon session. I have been on the Committee for a right while, and I have to say that this is one of the longest sessions — that is not a complaint, by the way — that we have had with a Minister. We thank you for your indulgence and taking the time to give a detailed presentation, take a wide range of questions and give detailed answers.

Thank you very much for taking the time to come here today. We appreciate that.

Mr Muir: No problem. Thank you.

Mrs Godfrey: Thank you, Deputy Chair.