Debate contribution: Veterinary Medicines
Debate contribution by Mr Declan McAleer on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan McAleer
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 21 May 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Veterinary Medicines
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4491539
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I support the motion. The North faces serious and exceptional challenges with regard to post-Brexit trade, and there are serious concerns about the future of veterinary medicines. Before Christmas 2022, an extension to the current grace period for importing veterinary medicines, which was due to end on 31 December 2022, was granted until the end of December 2025. That eliminated, at that stage, the risk of the discontinuation of supply of over 50% of products. Thankfully, the extension was deemed necessary by the European Union, although it has stated that it will be the last extension granted. Veterinary products available in the market in the North must comply with EU regulatory requirements by the start of 2026. The EU-UK Joint Committee is a key instrument for agriculture and agri-food trade, and we have always appreciated the significant role that it has played in adopting solutions to lead us on a more sustainable path that promotes food security and protection for rural communities. An EU-UK veterinary agreement would be helpful, but the British Government are opposed to it. Last year, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate indicated that supply to the North of over 50% of medicines was at risk of being discontinued. Recent information from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) shows that that figure has reduced to approximately 35%. The risk of the supply of medicines being discontinued has been reduced due to some supply lines being amended, meaning that supply can be re-routed through the South rather than Britain. I encourage the continuation of negotiations to further reduce the number of medicines whose supply to the North is discontinued. The agri-food sector is a vital indigenous industry. There are over 20,000 small family farms in the North. A report produced recently by Rural Support, a charity based in Cookstown, highlighted an increase in family farm referrals, with the main concern being financial issues resulting in an impact on mental health. It is vital that there is no additional risk to the viability of small farms as a result of a reduction of access to veterinary medicines. Our food and drink industry is recognised as world-class. For example, the North won the world's best food destination at the 2018 international travel and tourism awards. It is vital that the UK Government and the EU continue to work together to get a solution on veterinary medicines before the grace period ends in 2025. The protocol is an international treaty between the EU and the British Government that recognises the special status of this island and stops a hard border emerging in Ireland. That safeguards jobs and the all-island economy. Importantly, it also safeguards our food-processing industry. Taking the dairy industry as an example, Members will know that a third of the milk that is produced in the North, which amounts to 800 million litres, is exported to the South for processing. It is vital that we remain aligned across the island to protect that really important industry. It is vital that the UK Government continue to work with the EU to get a solution on veterinary medicines and ensure that there is no impact on food production or food processing from a lack of access to those medicines. I encourage the AERA Minister to work with the Economy Minister to take advantage of the opportunities provided under dual market access, particularly in the granting of protected geographical indication (PGI) status for Irish grass-fed beef.
575 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-qualifying threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.82 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.16 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:32 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.