Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): I welcome Fiona Dickson, deputy director of the natural environment policy division in DAERA. I invite you to brief the Committee.

Ms Fiona Dickson (Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs): Good morning, Deputy Chair and Committee members, and thank you for your welcome and for the opportunity to appear before the Committee today to discuss DAERA's assessment of the impact of regulation (EU) 2026/1388. I should note at the outset that the current notification relates specifically to article 37 of this EU Act that amends regulation (EU) 2017/625 on official controls. My remarks will focus primarily on article 37 and the conclusions reached by the Department in its assessment of impact.

You may recall that officials appeared previously at the Committee when the wider regulation on new genomic techniques was still under negotiation. At that stage, discussions focused on the broader policy framework that was established by the regulation as a whole. Today's notification is narrower in scope and relates specifically to article 37, which has been identified as the provision amending the existing EU legislation. The Department has, therefore, focused its assessment on article 37, while taking account of the wider legislative context.

Next, I will consider what article 37 does and DAERA's assessment of its application. Article 37 amends regulation (EU) 2017/625 on official controls. In practical terms, it provides powers for the European Commission to adopt delegated and implementing Acts relating to official controls and verification arrangements associated with plants obtained through certain new genomic techniques. The provision is therefore primarily enabling in nature. It does not introduce new obligations for consumers, change food safety standards or alter day-to-day activities in Northern Ireland. Rather, it provides a legal mechanism through which more-detailed technical provisions may be adopted in the future, if needed.

I now turn to the Department's assessment. DAERA does not consider that the application of article 37 is likely to have a significant impact on the everyday lives of communities in Northern Ireland in a way that is liable to persist. That conclusion reflects the nature of the provision itself. Article 37 is administrative and regulatory in character, and concerns powers relating to official controls and verification arrangements. While future measures adopted under those powers could have operational implications for regulators or businesses, article 37 itself does not introduce immediate requirements that would significantly affect citizens' day-to-day lives. For that reason, the Department concluded that the application of article 37 would not be likely to result in a significant and persistent impact on everyday life.

The Department has reached a different conclusion when considering the non-application of the regulation. Article 37 amends regulation (EU) 2017/625 that already applies in Northern Ireland under the Windsor framework. Failure to apply the provision could therefore result in regulatory divergence between Northern Ireland and the European Union in relation to official controls associated with new genomic techniques. The Department considers that such divergence could create uncertainty within the regulatory framework and have longer-term implications for the coherent operation of official controls in that area. For that reason, the Department considers that non-application presents a greater risk of significant and persistent impacts than application would.

I turn now to stakeholder engagement. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has undertaken stakeholder engagement in relation to the wider regulation. That included direct engagement with more than 200 stakeholders and additional engagement through the Northern Ireland industry bulletin. No responses were received through those exercises. The Department does not interpret the absence of responses as evidence, either in support of or opposition to the regulation. Given that the regulation is directly applicable as part of the Windsor framework agreement, further engagement will continue following publication of the regulation and will focus on awareness-raising, understanding practical implementation issues and providing information to affected stakeholders.

Whilst today's notification relates only to article 37, the Department recognises that members may have an interest in the wider regulation relating to new genomic techniques. The Committee has previously considered that broader framework. Having reviewed the final, published regulation, the Department has not identified material changes that alter the overall conclusions previously presented to the Committee.

In conclusion, the Department's assessment is that article 37 is an enabling provision relating to official controls and verification arrangements. The Department does not consider that its application is likely to have a significant impact on the everyday lives of communities in Northern Ireland in a way that is liable to persist. However, the Department considers that non-application could result in regulatory divergence and regulatory uncertainty in an area of legislation that already applies in Northern Ireland and under the Windsor framework.

Thank you. I am happy to take members' questions.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): Thank you for your presentation, Fiona. We will take questions, and I will start. Are we clear that the UK Government intend to notify the rest of the regulation at a later stage?

Ms Dickson: I am uncertain of that at the moment.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): OK. No problem. Thanks for that. The UK Government have said that the goods moving via the Northern Ireland retail movement scheme will not be affected. However, in theory, you can imagine that there are some concerns around whether that will pose problems for plants that come from GB and that do not meet the criteria. Will you speak to that?

Ms Dickson: The assessment of impact shows that not applying the amendment risks creating issues with the movement of goods between jurisdictions. Therefore, applying the amendment will allow greater alignment with England, and it will continue to allow alignment with the EU, Scotland and Wales. It has the potential to reduce the risk that there might be with the movement of goods.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): So, it reduces the risk for plants that come this way that do not meet the EU criteria. It would not stop them from coming.

Ms Dickson: It is important to recognise that the FSA is the body that looks after the safety of food. Article 37 is specifically about introducing controls in the future. It is enabling future controls. At the moment, there is a lot of developing technology with regard to genomic techniques. What those might look like in the future is uncertain. Therefore, the enabling regulation will help with controls that may be needed in the future, as opposed to controls that are currently in place.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): Do you understand from our point of view that things that enable things to happen in the future still present a concern around divergence in general for Northern Ireland?

Ms Dickson: Article 37 is about minimising the risk of divergence.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): OK.

Dr Aiken: Thanks very much for the evidence, Fiona. The explanatory memorandum states:

Will we have any say over those if article 37 is adopted?

Ms Dickson: I am unsure about what say we would have, but if article 37 is adopted, and there is a need to introduce controls in the future for new techniques, those impacts would be assessed at that stage. Any new controls and their impacts would be assessed separately.

Dr Aiken: By whom?

Ms Dickson: If it is about official controls, it would fall under the Department of Agriculture. However, if it is to do with food safety, that lies within the remit of the Food Standards Agency.

Dr Aiken: I have been familiar with this European stuff for a long time, and it states that it is enabling technical legislation that basically allows the European Commission to change the rules as it sees fit. That is what it says.

Ms Dickson: I would have to come back to you on that one.

Dr Aiken: If article 37 goes through, and, at some stage, the European Commission decides, for various reasons, that it will change the definition of GMO or any other definition, that will automatically be applied to Northern Ireland.

Ms Dickson: I will have to come back to you on that one.

Dr Aiken: That is what it says. That is what you have said. It states:

Therefore, we do not have a say in it. I would like clarification on that one.

Ms Dickson: I can come back to you on that.

Dr Aiken: It is counter to the position that we are trying to get to.

Mr Martin: Thank you, Fiona. I want to pick up on two areas. One is a theme that the Deputy Chair was exploring there. I understood your answer about the regulation protecting goods moving within the EU from Northern Ireland. We have some level of protection for goods moving from Northern Ireland to GB for sale. I am more interested in the GB to Northern Ireland route and the implications of, for example, plants moving from GB to NI and the impact on that, were this regulation to be introduced.

Ms Dickson: I am sorry; would you repeat that?

Mr Martin: No problem. I get the policy impact in the EU of stuff that falls within the criteria in Northern Ireland. We have protections for trade moving from Northern Ireland to GB for sale. I am more interested in the implications of this proposal for trade from GB to Northern Ireland. Let us say that someone in GB wants to move goods to Northern Ireland. Were this regulation to be implemented, would it affect that route? That was the context for David's question, but I was not too sure about —.

Ms Dickson: I am not able to answer that question. I will have to come back to you on that as well.

Mr Martin: That is OK. I want to ask you about stakeholder engagement. It is always very tough to flick between screens, especially remotely. I read the pack and noted the response from the Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU). More or less, it said that it needed more information at all levels around the impact of the policy. Do you accept that as a response from the UFU? Does it cause you any concern that the UFU needs a significantly greater level of detail? What engagement has DAERA had with the UFU on that matter?

Ms Dickson: The FSA carried out significant stakeholder engagement, including with the UFU, and that is where that response has come from. We are always happy to engage with stakeholders, and we regularly engage with the UFU on a wide range of matters. No significant concerns came back to the FSA. We are working really closely with the FSA on its stakeholder engagement. We are happy to review any concerns that have been raised and to take forward stakeholder engagement as necessary.

Mr Martin: OK. Do you accept that, perhaps, before this proceeds, more detail would need to be provided to the UFU in order to enable it to get to a position on the issue?

Ms Dickson: Yes. We will be happy to engage with the UFU. We do so regularly on a wide range of issues, and we can pick that one up with the UFU.

Mr Martin: OK, that is fine; thank you very much, Fiona.

Mr McGuigan: I cannot predict what is likely to happen in future. I want to deal with what we need to understand today. Essentially, this proposed change is about making things more adaptable in order to allow future changes that will improve standards. Is that correct?

Ms Dickson: It is about making a provision for controls to be introduced, where they may be needed, when new technologies and products come on board.

Mr McGuigan: That all sounds eminently sensible. Is it the Department's view, having carried out the consultation and the engagement, that were we not to go down the route proposed by this change, that would have a significant impact? Is it the case that if we go down this route, there will be no significant impact?

Ms Dickson: That is correct. If we do not introduce it, there is a risk of greater regulatory divergence, which poses risks to the regulatory framework going forward.

Mr McGuigan: That is information that we have today. I have no idea what is going to happen in future. I am not here to make proposals about what happens in future. You have been very clear, and I appreciate your coming to the Committee.

The Deputy Chairperson (Mr Brooks): I have no other indications. Fiona, thank you for your presentation; it is appreciated.