Debate contribution: The Animals (Identification, Records, Movement and Enforcement) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025: Prayer of Annulment
Debate contribution by Miss Michelle McIlveen on .
- MLA
- Miss Michelle McIlveen
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 24 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- The Animals (Identification, Records, Movement and Enforcement) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2025: Prayer of Annulment
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4813488
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move:
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. The Democratic Unionist Party has a mandate to continue the fight to fully restore Northern Ireland's place within the United Kingdom, including removing the application of EU law in our country and the internal Irish Sea border that it creates. By implementing the changes to EU animal health law and drawing a distinction, both in law and in practice, between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, in the identification, registration, movement and enforcement of livestock, the regulations before us conflict with our fundamental objectives. As unionists, we will not, in good conscience, accept the undermining of the United Kingdom's internal market in that way. Local representatives had no say in making those changes to EU law or in their application in Northern Ireland courtesy of annex 2 of the protocol, which rides roughshod over the principle of cross-community consent. The Department has been keen to stress the technical nature of the regulations. Yet the Minister clearly deemed the contents to be of such legal and political significance that it warranted discussion by the Committee in a closed session, which was a request that the Committee ultimately denied. It is not credible for the Minister or his officials to claim that the regulations do not represent a significant policy change whilst, in the same breath, denouncing the potential negative impacts on trade and animal welfare if they are not introduced. We all accept the arguments that are put forward about the single epidemiological unit and disease control. However, prior to Brexit, even when there were controls over live animals being moved across the Irish Sea, Northern Ireland was not required to have a unique prefix code for cattle and sheep tags. The bottom line is that there should be no circumstances in which exports into the EU from Northern Ireland are distinguished from those that are entering the EU from other parts of the United Kingdom. We are part of the United Kingdom and its trading block. The regulations sustain the fundamental obscenity of Northern Ireland's being annexed into the EU in over 300 areas of law. Not only has the distinction inflicted unnecessary additional costs on farmers, as they have to purchase new tags and will potentially be left with a glut of redundant tags, but it is a manifestation of how Northern Ireland has been annexed into the EU. The Minister has placed much emphasis on the fact that the switchover date from UK to XI tags for newborn livestock has been extended to 30 June 2025, yet he and his colleagues in the Alliance Party initially called for the rigorous implementation of the protocol, which would have enacted the disruption even earlier and in a way that would be entirely out of kilter with the farming calendar. Ultimately, the XI prefix dilutes the UK branding that is renowned throughout the world for its high quality and excellent welfare. It is unsurprising, therefore, that farmers have questioned the impact on access to existing and premium GB markets. While I appreciate that the SR does not mandate the new tags, it gives the Department the ability to enforce them, and, by virtue of agreeing to that power, we are endorsing the introduction and use of the tags. The SR also extends the timescale for retagging sheep and goats that are imported from third countries from 14 days to 20 days. It is worth noting that, up until the middle of last year, movements of livestock from GB to NI were captured by that onerous requirement. Indeed, the EU and the UK finally agreed to waive the retagging requirements between GB and NI only because there was an outcry about the impact on farm-to-fork traceability. However, how can we be sure that the agreement will not eventually break down? If it does, the difference between 14 and 20 days will provide very little benefit in tackling the additional red tape and costs to farms across the UK. This is very much a matter of principle, and I commend the motion to the House.
681 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.