Member's statement: Bovine Tuberculosis: Farming Families
Member's statement by Mrs Cathy Mason on .
- MLA
- Mrs Cathy Mason
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 23 September 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Bovine Tuberculosis: Farming Families
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5129102
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Last week, a number of Sinn Féin colleagues and I met farming families in Seaforde in South Down to hear about the devastating impact that bovine tuberculosis is having on them. What I heard that night can only be described as heartbreaking. Generations — three, four, five or six generations — of families have seen their work and investment wiped out in a matter of weeks as their herds were destroyed by bovine TB. Farmers spoke that night with raw honesty about the huge emotional and financial toll that that has taken on them and about their despair at seeing their life's work reduced to almost nothing. The overwhelming message from the floor that night was one of anger: anger at being neglected; anger at being ignored; and anger at being left behind. Among the crowd of men and women was a passionate young farmer called James. James is just 10 years old. He sat quietly beside his grandfather while his mother told the family's story, which was one of heartbreak, cattle loss and livelihoods under threat. In that young man's face could be seen his pride in his family's farm but also his worry as he listened to local farmers' devastating stories. James represents the next generation of farmers, and he deserves a future in which farming is supported rather than undermined. That night, James showed me a picture of his cow, which he had reared himself from birth. Just the week before, he had watched helplessly as it was taken away to be destroyed. The look on his face said more than any report, review, strategy or consultation ever could, but what struck me the most was his determination to keep on farming. I have to say, "Fair play" to James, because, after that late-night meeting, he still managed to get up in the morning and get to school on time. That night, farmers told me that they felt abandoned by DAERA and by the Minister, who, they believe, has sat on his hands for far too long. While their herds are being wiped out, the Department produces review after review and undertakes consultation after consultation. Farmers do not need another consultation on this: they need action. They believe that the strategies are already in place: fair compensation; meaningful intervention; support for farm biodiversity; and urgent implementation of existing recommendations. The Agriculture Minister needs to step up to the plate and deliver. It is a human crisis, with families who have farmed for generations now at breaking point. I call on the Minister to meet the farmers without delay, listen to their devastating stories and take urgent action to protect our agri-food sector.
445 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: 0.05 (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 (0.89).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.62 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.18 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.12 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:10 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.