Debate contribution: Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs
Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on .
- MLA
- Ms Claire Sugden
- Party at the time
- Independent
- Date
- 6 October 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5776819
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I rise as an independent with no party political baggage to respond to a legitimate motion in the Order Paper that was agreed by the Business Committee. The motion asks this simple question: "Do I have confidence in the Minister to lead this Department effectively?". No, I do not. As the unofficial opposition, I will be consistent in saying that I do not have confidence in any Minister to lead the Executive competently. Having looked at the record, listened to those who have been most affected by the decisions of the Minister and his Department and considered the breadth of his responsibilities and remit, how can we honestly say that we have confidence? This is not about one incident; the concerns have been building for some time since he took office. Nowhere is that clearer than in agriculture. Last year, the Ulster Farmers' Union unanimously passed a vote of no confidence in DAERA. Following the Fivemiletown incident, it extended that directly to the Minister. You cannot simply brush that aside because you think that it is one stakeholder group being difficult. The UFU represents the body of farmers across Northern Ireland, and, when one of the principal organisations representing the people whom your Department exists to serve says that it no longer has confidence in you, how can any Member of the House continue to have confidence in you? The Minister's response matters too. It is deeply regrettable that the Minister has walked out, because he is disrespecting every Member of the House who has a mandate. It is not about us as individuals but about the people whom we represent. I put this to the Members who are minded not to support the motion: after that stunt, how can you continue to have confidence in him when he will not come to the House?
I appreciate that, but by that determination we are saying that the House supports a motion of no confidence in the Minister, and so be it. The Minister is not here to defend himself, which will go down on him. One organisation should not dictate government policy, but there is a difference between refusing to be dictated to and refusing to recognise when trust has finally broken down. In my constituency at the weekend, farmers were telling me, "Yes, Claire, vote for a motion of no confidence. We're not being heard." They feel that decisions are too often being made about them rather than with them. Bovine TB, for example, is not just a policy problem at a high level: entire herds are being lost across the country. It is restrictions on business and years of disruption and pressure on family farms and rural communities. There is an emotional cost to it too. Those are animals that have been bred, reared and cared for. Farmers care deeply about the welfare of their stock, and they should not be reduced to numbers on a spreadsheet. Then there is the nutrients action programme. Farmers do not deny that water quality has to improve — they know that agriculture has responsibilities — but, when people were being asked to contemplate major changes to how they farmed without feeling properly involved in shaping those proposals, stakeholders were rightly angry. Engagement is not an obstacle to good environmental policy; it is essential to it. Rural communities feel that they need a strong advocate at the Executive table, someone making sure that policies are designed centrally to work in places where services are further away, public transport is limited and isolation is on a daily basis. Rural communities are honestly saying that they are not being listened to and not being heard. On that point, I have no confidence in the Minister. I also have serious concerns about animal welfare despite the Minister talking to his record on that. The reality is that animals are suffering. There are too many cases where the response is slow, responsibilities are fragmented and people struggle to understand who will act. The Minister says that that is a council responsibility: Minister, the councils are not doing anything. Animals are suffering, therefore you have to take the lead on that, and you are not. If enforcement is inconsistent, if resources are inadequate and if legislation needs to be strengthened, do your job. That is where leadership is required. Fivemiletown brought those issues into sharp focus. Fifty-one healthy cattle were destroyed in circumstances arising, ironically, from an animal welfare case. How is killing 51 healthy cattle a response to animal welfare? The public looked at that and rightly asked, "How could the process end in such a way?". We are hearing about proposals for a version of Lucy's law. Yes, that is welcome, and I appreciate the Minister doing that, but where is it? Where is the policy? We can talk about good intentions all we want, but it is outcomes that matter. That is nowhere more visible than at Lough Neagh. Again, I appreciate the Minister speaking out about that, but, year after year, we see that problem get worse and escalate. It is something that we need to get a grip on. When I consider all that and ask myself whether I have confidence in the Minister to lead the Department effectively, the answer is no. It does not matter whether it is an Alliance Minister, a DUP Minister or a Sinn Féin Minister: I will stand up and say what is right, because that is my job as an MLA for East Londonderry.
919 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.