DEAR EDITOR,

I have followed with considerable concern the controversy surrounding DAERA and the events at Fivemiletown, together with the subsequent decision of the Ulster Farmers’ Union (UFU) to express no confidence in the minister, permanent secretary and chief veterinary officer.

I believe the UFU is entitled to take the position it has. I say that not because I wish to prejudge the independent review into the events at Fivemiletown. That review should be allowed to establish precisely what happened, why particular decisions were taken and whether appropriate procedures were followed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Nor should the wholly unacceptable threats reportedly directed towards the minister or departmental staff be regarded as anything other than reprehensible. There can be no justification whatsoever for threats or violence in public life. But the present controversy cannot simply be viewed in isolation. For many within agriculture, Fivemiletown appears to have become the latest manifestation of a much deeper and longer-standing problem: a breakdown in confidence between the farming community and the Department responsible for serving and regulating it. I have some experience of that relationship. In 2014, I was appointed by the then agriculture minister to chair the independent TB Strategic Partnership Group. Over the following two years, our group examined in considerable depth the continuing failure to eradicate bovine tuberculosis in Northern Ireland.

Our central conclusion was straightforward. There was no single solution to bovine TB. Eradication required an integrated programme addressing cattle, wildlife, farming practices, disease testing, governance, incentives and, crucially, the relationship between government and the farming community. We also warned that the existing programme was controlling the disease rather than providing a credible pathway towards eradication.

Almost a decade later, the figures speak for themselves.

When our strategy was published, herd incidence was approximately 7%. By February 2025 it had reached 10.76%. At the same time, the cost to the taxpayer has risen dramatically. Annual expenditure on the programme was in excess of £27m when we reported; departmental expenditure reached £55.7m in 2023/2024 and was expected to approach £60m in 2024/2025.

Perhaps most tellingly, DAERA’s current blueprint acknowledges that the majority of the recommendations flowing from the earlier strategy have still not been fully implemented. That should trouble everyone involved in public administration.

It is easy, 10 years later, to establish another group, produce another strategy, use different terminology and promise a “transformational” approach.

It is much harder to answer the fundamental question: why were recommendations developed through extensive consultation, independent analysis and scientific scrutiny not implemented when there was an opportunity to change the trajectory of the disease?

That is not an historical question. It is a question of accountability. The issue now facing DAERA is bigger than one deeply troubling incident involving 51 cattle. It concerns the quality of decision-making, institutional culture and whether those affected by departmental decisions retain confidence in those making them. The minister is entitled to defend his position and to await the findings of the independent review. The UFU is equally entitled to conclude that its loss of confidence extends beyond the events at Fivemiletown.

The UFU’s intervention should not simply be dismissed as another disagreement between government and farmers. It should be regarded as a warning that the relationship between DAERA and a sector fundamental to Northern Ireland’s economy and rural society has reached a dangerously low point. Restoring that confidence now requires more than words.