Member's statement: Maedi Visna
Member's statement by Miss Michelle McIlveen on .
- MLA
- Miss Michelle McIlveen
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 14 October 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Maedi Visna
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4589546
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Maedi visna (MV) is a highly infectious viral disease affecting goats and sheep. It is transmitted through the ingestion of milk from a virus-infected sheep and within flocks through direct contact or contamination. It has no impact on human health. MV is a wasting disease in sheep, similar to lung cancer. The symptoms lie dormant for several years, so it is detected only in older animals. The disease is currently widespread in Great Britain and the Irish Republic. Until recently, Northern Ireland had just nine flocks testing positive for MV, low enough to maintain our MV-free status. At present, DAERA samples any new arrivals into Northern Ireland from outside the island of Ireland to keep Northern Ireland MV-free. Animals from GB flocks that do not have an MV-free accreditation are sampled in isolation five months after importation. Animals from MV-free accredited flocks from mainland Europe and the Irish Republic are sampled on arrival. It is really disturbing that DAERA plans to stop carrying out that testing. It is proposed that 2025 will be a transition year for the industry to implement its own scheme. The DAERA recommendation is that farmers test their own sheep six months apart to get MV-free accreditation. That places further financial pressure on our farmers. Any potential scheme is likely to be expensive, which may affect buy-in. It would also affect how marts and shows work, with accredited and non-accredited animals needing to be kept apart with separate sheds and classes, as has been seen in Great Britain. Due to the different schemes operating in Northern Ireland and Great Britain, that could have a negative financial and social effect on the industry. Last week, over 100 commercial and pedigree sheep farmers met to voice their concerns. The industry is willing to act responsibly but would prefer Northern Ireland testing to lie with the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) and be administered by Animal Health and Welfare NI (AHWNI). If DAERA does not keep up border checks on the importation of sheep, MV sheep could be imported into Northern Ireland. DAERA has said that it needs to look at the cost of border checks, which need to be funded by industry. Despite the upheaval being based on budget cuts to the DAERA Veterinary Service, when I asked the Minister for the cost of testing for MV in each of the past 10 years, he told me that it was not retained in a readily available format. What financial advice is DAERA basing the cuts on, given the vulnerability being thrust on the sheep sector by this ill-thought-through proposal? Keeping Northern Ireland MV-free is vital for animal health and trading status. One farmer said that MV has the potential to be the bovine TB of the sheep sector. That is something that the House should not allow to happen.
471 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.99 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:13 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.