Debate contribution: Sheep Scab
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 25 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Sheep Scab
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4674966
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Sheep scab is one of the most severe skin conditions for sheep. It is highly contagious, responsible for large economic losses and a significant welfare concern. Sheep scab remains a notifiable disease in Northern Ireland. The Sheep Scab Order (Northern Ireland) 1970 places a legal obligation on any person who has reason to believe that sheep in their possession or care have sheep scab to notify their local divisional veterinary office. My Department welcomes and continues to support the efforts of industry stakeholders such as the Northern Ireland Sheep Scab Control and Eradication Group to tackle sheep scab and commends the group on the success of its pilot project, Stamp out Scab. DAERA continues to use its social media channels to raise awareness of sheep scab and to remind flock owners to remain vigilant for signs of it in their flock. The DAERA website provides details on the disease, including information on clinical signs and on how the disease spreads, as well as key advice to the industry on preventing its spread. The Department also provides a range of practical support and advice to the industry and to individually affected flock keepers in order to minimise spread. DAERA staff continue to report cases of sheep scab that they encounter as part of their official duties. The staff are also involved in market and abattoir inspections and have been reminded to remain vigilant for the signs of sheep scab. My Department will continue to support industry efforts to tackle the disease. Although we will assist where we can, that assistance must be set in the context of the current climate of departmental budgetary and resource pressures.
275 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: 0.02 (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).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.01 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.50 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 | 1.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:40 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.