Minister Muir can’t use threats against staff as a shield against scrutiny of DAERA’s decision to destroy 51 animals in Fivemiletown.
Threats or abuse directed at DAERA staff are completely unacceptable and should be condemned without qualification. But condemning those threats is not the same as accepting no scrutiny.
There are serious, reasonable questions here. Why was killing the cattle considered necessary? What alternatives were explored? Was animal welfare actually at the centre of these decisions, or an afterthought?
A farmer’s last-minute interest in buying more cattle reportedly led to animals escaping and being chased on a public road.
If a sale was genuinely still possible days before the operation, the public deserves a clear account of why it wasn’t pursued to completion - not a claim that no alternative existed at all.
Cllr Anthony Flynn said: “DAERA cannot talk about strengthening animal welfare standards on one hand while presiding over the mass destruction of healthy cattle in a public field on the other.”
“The independent review must fully examine the decisions that led to this outcome, including what alternatives existed and why they were rejected.”
“Minister Muir and DAERA owe the public complete transparency about what happened, and why.”
The circumstances of their former owner do not erase the Department’s duty of care. Once these animals came under state control, every reasonable effort should have been made to protect them.
These are legitimate public concerns. Dismissing them, or trying to shut down scrutiny by pointing to the abuse, does nothing to provide the answers people are owed.
With the external review’s findings not expected until autumn, DAERA should not use that timeline as a reason to withhold basic facts now .
The operational plan, the welfare risk assessment, and the rationale for how the cull was conducted should be published without waiting for the review to conclude.
ENDS
Media contact:
Anthony Flynn
07823668432
[email protected]
[email protected]