Debate contribution: Muckamore Abbey Hospital Inquiry Final Report

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on 22 June 2026.

MLA: Mr Mike Nesbitt
Party at the time: Ulster Unionist Party
Date: 22 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business: Ministerial Statement
Heading: Muckamore Abbey Hospital Inquiry Final Report
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5637756

Text

I very much agree with a lot of the sentiment that the Member has expressed. It should not have happened. I think that we all agree that families should have been listened to. I also think that we all agree that the Department of Health, the Belfast Trust or any other trust, the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA), the Patient and Client Council (PCC) and any of the bodies delivering across the Health and Social Care system exist for the benefit of patients, service users and our society. I am particularly disturbed to read the stinging criticism from the chair about the adversarial nature of the Belfast Trust's response. To my mind, it is acceptable to protect the integrity and reputation of an organisation when it is under unfair attack — unfair attack. However, there was nothing to defend about Muckamore: it was evil. Evil was perpetrated by healthcare workers who were there to look after the people whom they were attacking. There is a big deal of work to be done in trying to restore public confidence, and I get that. I am also conscious that we are talking about a system that has 75,000 or 76,000 people in it, so we face a massive challenge to make sure that not one of them ever does anything that they should not do.
I agree with the Member that those are the right asks, and I will work tirelessly to try to implement them. I was struck by how Mr Kark makes a conclusion that the trust was about the business of assurance rather than reassurance. In other words, at board level, they were asking the question, "Is there are a process in place?", but, when they were told, "Yes, there is", they effectively moved on to the next agenda item rather than saying, "What is that process delivering? What outcomes are we getting? Is it working to protect people?". There was a lack of curiosity, frankly, and Mr Kark refers to a lack of curiosity in the report. When it comes to how we want to do things differently, we will listen to what the report says, and, rather than review abuse on a case-by-case basis, we will look for trends to see whether the issue is systemic and, if it is, do something about it. I have mentioned the two things that we are doing: the patient safety and quality committees that are being set up in each of the trusts; and the adult safeguarding Bill that is going through the House. We will learn lessons and adjust the Bill accordingly. All I can say to the Member is that I promise a renewed and more laser-like focus on abuse, not just on a case-by-case basis but on how it is being perpetrated on a systematic basis. I hope that that has stopped, but we cannot rely on hope. We have to have systems and structures in place to make sure that we nip it in the bud.

501 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification