Debate contribution: Veterinary Medicines

Debate contribution by Mr Patsy McGlone on 21 May 2024.

MLA

Mr Patsy McGlone

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

21 May 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Veterinary Medicines

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4491549

Read the official Assembly record

Text

If you permit me, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will start with a quote from a historical figure, Napoleon Bonaparte:

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap."

Here we are today, however, debating another unadvertised consequence of Brexit, which was one of the greatest self-inflicted stupidities in modern history. I will go back to the regulation of veterinary medicines. The Veterinary Medicines Directorate, sponsored by DEFRA, regulates veterinary medicines in the UK. According to a recent review, we are more closely aligned to EU regulations on veterinary medicines than we were before, so the issue, at present, is not a divergence in regulations. The problem is a result of the failure in negotiations between the EU and a Tory party that was tearing itself apart. Both sides have since stated that they continue to work for a long-term, sustainable solution. However, they may have different destinations in mind, and that could leave us stranded in the middle. On the DUP amendment, I have a concern about legislation that could lead, maybe inadvertently, to obstacles in cross-border trade, which Declan McAleer referred to. That is a very important matter on this island, given the all-island nature of the economy in regard, in particular, to agri-food business. Following the publication of the Northern Ireland protocol, a grace period was initially put in place for the use of veterinary medicines from Britain to achieve that solution. That has now, as we heard, been extended to the end of 2025. That is the point by which a long-term solution must be in place. Otherwise, the loss of the only licensed salmonella vaccine for cattle and the most widely used salmonella vaccine for poultry risks causing a public health emergency. We simply cannot have that. There are two main issues that may affect the supply of veterinary medicines if an alternative agreement is not found by the end of 2025. Veterinary medicines stored in warehouses in Britain will have to go through another quality check before coming here. That also includes veterinary medicines manufactured and checked already in the EU that are being transported through Britain. Secondly, the marketing authorisation holder location will have to be in the EU or Northern Ireland. Those issues have the potential to affect the number and variety of veterinary medicines available here, as the increased costs involved — this is a major issue too — may prove prohibitive to manufacturers. There are also a smaller number of veterinary medicines imported from countries such as the USA and Australia under special import licences that will not be allowed to be used here at the end of that grace period. As was the case with the issues around human medicines, there are potential solutions. Those solutions will require compromise from either the EU, the British Government or, more likely, both. While we will support the motion from the Ulster Unionists, I am not entirely convinced that it is realistic for the sponsors of the motion to expect the Minister to interject in any negotiations with proposals of his own. However, I expect that the Minister will have had conversations with both sides about the potential impact on the supply of veterinary medicines here if an agreement is not reached. The Minister will be able to confirm that later. Most of the veterinary medicines at risk of being discontinued here are licensed in other EU member states by the relevant licensing authority so that they meet EU standards. Among the potential solutions are a bonded warehouse for storing veterinary medicines in transit to the North; acceptance by the EU of quality testing in warehouses in Britain and of the current market authorisation holder addresses; and the introduction of a grandfather rule to allow for the continuation of the supply of veterinary medicines that were available pre-Brexit. That would also mean that only newly licensed products would require a marketing authorisation holder address in the EU. There is still time for the issues to be resolved. The danger is that both sides may think that playing hardball will get them a better deal. I would venture that, in this instance, where there is such a serious risk to public health, conciliation needs to be the priority at this point rather than playing silly political games. Meanwhile, that deadline inches closer, as does the risk to animal and human health not just in the North but across the entire island of Ireland. I suggest that that is the message that the Minister should take to the British Government and the EU. Agus sin é, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Sin mo chuidse.

765 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

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 reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification