Debate contribution: Women in Agriculture
Debate contribution by Ms Emma Sheerin on .
- MLA
- Ms Emma Sheerin
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 11 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Women in Agriculture
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4855677
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the broad support across the House for the motion, which seeks to formalise the role of women in the agriculture sector, because, as others have acknowledged, we all know that women are very often at the heart of farms and very much involved in their daily operation. I can attest to that. I am a farmer's daughter and the daughter of a farmer's wife who herself was a farmer's daughter and whose mother was a farmer's daughter and a farmer's wife. Most of the time, one will find that, in such situations, that person is as involved in the farm business as anybody else in the family is. I think particularly of my paternal grandmother, who was a farmer's wife and would have been recognised as such, but she milked the cows every day, collected the eggs, reared the family and did everything else in between. She was therefore as much a farmer as anybody else in the house was. My own contribution to farming is limited. I cannot boast to being as involved as my colleague Áine behind me. My contribution is confined to standing in the gap or feeding the odd pet lamb. That is as much help as I provide. Otherwise, I would be a hindrance. I have reflected on comments from other Members. We acknowledge that farming is a business, and, in most households, everybody ends up being involved whether they want to be or not. It is mainly the women in the household who fill in the movement books, are responsible for the tax returns and do all the other farming tasks that are as much a part of making the business a success as the hands-on, out-and-about work. Women are also heavily involved in that an awful lot of the time, yet they do not get the recognition that they deserve. Barriers are put in place for them. It is about recognising that and providing support to ensure that women can be recognised as farmers in their own right, as opposed to their being just an add-on or somebody who is —.
I thank the Member for her intervention. I agree completely. That is what it is about. It is about supporting women to come into the sector, removing those structural inequalities and barriers and trying to ensure that everybody is on a fair footing and has an equal place in the industry. I commend the motion to the House.
408 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: 0.04 (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 (0.65).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.25 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.65 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.84 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.16 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:15 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.