Debate contribution: TB Eradication Targets
Debate contribution by Mr Andrew Muir on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew Muir
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 6 May 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- TB Eradication Targets
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4929765
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Declan, for raising a key issue for me. I am glad that you have raised it. TB is a vital issue for the farming community in Northern Ireland and for my Department. I thank all the stakeholders who have engaged to agree a blueprint for the future on the issue. Significant work has been undertaken in my Department, led by the Chief Veterinary Officer, and I am grateful for that. Tackling TB requires a holistic approach that has to be based on the three pillars that were set out in the Chief Veterinary Officer's report last year: people, cattle and wildlife. I am committed to doing that. It will take a while to change course. It is a significant issue that I inherited as Minister, and I have been open and honest about its challenges, but we owe it to the farming community to drive down the level of infections in herds. The blueprint sets out a way forward for us to do that, and we will consult on measures that come from it, particularly in relation to wildlife, over the time ahead. A lot needs to be done, and I thank stakeholders for sticking with us so that we can work together on it.
207 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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.66).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.66 | Yes |
| 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 12:26 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.