Debate contribution: Women in Agriculture

Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .

MLA
Mr Andrew Muir
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
11 March 2025
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Women in Agriculture
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4855689

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members for tabling the motion. I am happy to support the motion and the amendment. The debate comes just after we all marked International Women's Day on Saturday. I pay tribute to the women who, every day, make a difference in the Chamber, our constituencies, my Department and, of course, our agriculture, environment and fisheries sectors. The theme of this year's International Women's Day was, "Accelerate action", and there was good reason for that. It is clear that progress towards gender parity has been made in public life and agriculture, but the World Economic Forum estimates that, at the current rate of progress, it will take until 2158 — five generations — to reach full gender parity. We need to be concerned about the under-representation of women in any sector. It is right that we seek to accelerate action and drive improvement. That point was also picked up in the 2022 report 'Breaking the Grass Ceiling', as referenced in the motion, which found that 98% of respondents to the survey that formed part of it agreed that women help improve farm productivity. Only 50% agreed that farming offers equal opportunities for men and women, and, shockingly, only 15% agreed that women are treated fairly in farm succession. I assure Members that I and my Department have been playing our part not just in taking forward recommendations from the report but in looking more widely at the barriers that exist. That includes the work of our College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise, the progress that we want to make through my sustainable agriculture programme (SAP) and the work that we are doing on rural development. I am both proud and delighted that enrolment on to CAFRE's agriculture courses continues to attract a high number of females, and I am determined to do all that we can to support women at all levels as they progress through their education programmes. Whilst that is encouraging, I recognise that some of those women will face barriers as they aspire to take over their family farm or start a new farm business. We are exploring that in the delivery of the Farming for the Generations pilot scheme. Issues with female succession were highlighted in the scheme awareness campaign and will feature in upcoming planning for succession workshops. In those workshops, the role of women in business will be emphasised, including the vital role of those women who are in jobs off the farm but who make a key contribution to the viability of the farm business. The mentor will work with all members of the farming family to support them in developing a succession plan that meets the needs and aspirations of all. The evaluation of the pilot will consider the impact of the scheme on encouraging the succession of female farmers into the business. Across my Department, we are also working to develop a new evidence-based rural policy for consultation. I have met rural stakeholders and reiterated my intention for co-design and collaboration to form a key central element of that policy. Recognising the crucial role that women play in our rural communities, I want to work with partners to make sure that the new policy makes a significant contribution to the "Accelerate action" theme, with a particular focus on breaking down barriers and cultivating opportunities for women in agriculture. My officials continue to engage with rural stakeholders, and it is my intention that the draft proposals will be consulted on this year. I am also conscious of the importance of leading by example. We cannot call on others to play their part if we are not doing so ourselves. I am proud of the work that my Department is doing to champion women in leadership roles, and I encourage Members to review the videos that we posted on social media at the weekend that show just some of the key roles that women play across the Department. The 'Breaking the Grass Ceiling' report called on my Department to do more to:

"ensure that appropriate equality, diversity and unconscious bias training is provided to its staff"

and to improve the diversity of representation on its boards. I confirm that the Department provides training in that area and works with other Departments on that, including through the Civil Service's diversity champions network. We have our own departmental diversity champion, and I am proud that we also provide wider leadership in the area. One of our deputy secretaries is a Northern Ireland Civil Service gender champion, and our permanent secretary is the joint Northern Ireland Civil Service diversity and inclusion champion. We are also working hard to ensure that women are properly represented at the top of our organisation, particularly on the boards of non-departmental public bodies. I am pleased with the progress that we have made, but there is no room for complacency. The motion and the amendment call on me, as Minister, to take action, and I have outlined my commitment to do so. Members should have no doubt about the fact that I and my Department will play our part. However, genuine equality of opportunity for women in our farming and agri-food sector must be driven not just by government but by the sector itself. That requires leadership not just by encouraging women to come forward but by creating conditions that make it possible. That means leadership in showcasing the significant roles that women play across the industry; leadership in ensuring that meetings, engagements and public events actively encourage and visibly include women leaders; and, crucially, leadership in challenging misogyny and outdated attitudes towards women.

On that issue, as reflected in the amendment, the report from the diversity and inclusion review, commissioned by the National Farmers' Union Scotland, makes interesting and concerning reading. It recognises the importance of the organisation being:

"more representative of the wide range of people involved in and connected to"

farm businesses. It highlights examples of areas in which improvement is needed if diversity is truly to be valued. Those include language, behaviours and the management of meetings and events. I invite the industry and those who represent it to read NFU Scotland's report, consider which of the findings could apply to their organisation and decide to take action to ensure that, whatever their organisation's role, they do everything that they can to challenge outdated attitudes and ensure that diversity and inclusion are not just talked about but actively and visibly embraced. The amendment specifically references partnership working to increase women's:

"participation and leadership within the agriculture sector."

Partnership is crucial if, together, we are to make a difference. I thank the Members involved in bringing this important topic to the Floor and am happy to support the amendment and the motion.

1,133 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

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 (0.88).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.79).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.13No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.88Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.79
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.21
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.86
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.14
No identity-related subject0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

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.

Challenge this classification