By Joe McCann
COUNCILLORS have called on the Agriculture Minister to ‘actively engage with and listen to’ farmers and to treat them as key stakeholders in shaping policy.
Members of Ards and North Down Council’s Environment Committee decided that on the back of a vote of no confidence in Minister Andrew Muir, the North Down MLA needs to change his ‘environment first’ approach to his portfolio and with work more closely with the farming community.
However, the committee was split with Alliance members backing Mr Muir and arguing that farmers are causing the majority of pollution in Northern Ireland, especially around Lough Neagh.
The debate was introduced by Ards peninsula councillor Pete Wray who called on Mr Muir to actively engage with the farming community to help ease their serious concerns.
“The Ulster Farmers Union vote reflects mounting frustration from farmers about how the Department is handling, or not handling, a range of issues affecting the industry,” said the UUP man.
“The vote of no confidence is unprecedented and it reflects the deep frustration and anger within the farming community,” he added.
“Farmers feel that the multiple issues that are impacting the industry are not being effectively dealt with and that farming is becoming a scapegoat for some wider societal issues like the pollution to Lough Neagh.”
Mr Wray pointed out that the agri-food industry was NI’s biggest industry, worth £7 billion, feeding over 10 million people and employing over 53,000 across 26,000 farms.
He said: “This a call for him [Andrew Muir] to change his approach for the benefit of the farming community and in turn for all the citizens of Northern Ireland who benefit from the fruits of their labour.”
Supporting the motion, Ards peninsula alderman Robert Adair said the DAERA Minister was more concerned with the environment than farmers.
“He is the Minister of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, but really he exalts environment. He forgets agriculture and rural affairs, and has lost the confidence of many farmers, fishermen and the rural community in the constituency.
“We have a minister who appears to be out of touch with the farming community, and many in the farming community have lost confidence.
“It’s very well to blame all the ills on the farmers but the farmers are the custodians of our land. You can’t blame the farmers for Lough Neagh. It’s always the farmers, the farmers, the farmers.”
However, Mr Muir’s Alliance Party colleague, alderman Lorna McAlpine, rejected the unionist arguments.
The Ards peninsula councillor, who has a BSc in Botany and a BA in Mycology and Plant Pathology, said she was concerned why the issue of the inheritance tax is in the motion when Mr Muir was always against the proposals and he campaigned with farmers to get that changed.
“Cows used to be producing something about 7,000 litres [of milk], and they’re up to about 9,000 to 10,000 litres now. That’s to do with them being fed at a higher level and therefore producing nitrogen and phosphorus at a higher level,” she said.
“Whilst I totally agree that we must be supportive of our farmers, it’s what my business was. Sadly, the way farming is going at the moment, it’s not helping, it’s actually making things much worse, because of the intensification.”
Alderman McAlpine added that most of the phosphorus polluting Lough Neagh comes from agriculture which is harming drinking water, fisheries, tourism, recreation, and farming itself. She said urgent action was needed to protect the environment, public health and long-term agricultural sustainability.
Also opposing the motion, Bangor Independent councillor Tom Brady said after doing research on the pollution caused by intensive agriculture, he agreed with alderman McAlpine in her assessments.
He said: “Can we really say that spreading fertiliser with a high phosphate content on already phosphate-rich soil, leading to the nutrient runoff, which is a major contributing factor to the pollution in our waterways with blue-green algae, is responsible custodianship of the environment and biodiversity?
“I don’t think so. When that changes, I’d be happy to revise my stance. But until then, I’m worried that saying that it does raises questions about the council’s credibility.”
The motion criticising Mr Muir was carried 10-4 and will now go before the full council.
