Debate contribution: Independent Reconfiguration Committee
Debate contribution by Mr Robbie Butler on .
- MLA
- Mr Robbie Butler
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 7 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Question for Urgent Oral Answer
- Heading
- Independent Reconfiguration Committee
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5670193
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for her very kind words. There was no sandwich there, to be fair. The Member has illustrated what can happen when you do not bring your community with you, and I accept that. I do not accept or recognise the points about Minister Swann and Minister Nesbitt. I have worked with both of them. They are two absolutely fantastic public servants who were Minister of Health in increasingly difficult times. I remind the Member that, for five of my 10 years here, we have not had a Health Minister, an Executive or an Assembly. I contend that, in essence, we are five years behind where we should be. Political confidence does not exist in a bubble; it does not exist just in the health sphere — it is up to us all. If the Executive loses confidence, the Health Minister does not retain confidence; it does not work like that. The Executive need to face forward, and, to be fair, the Executive have been supportive on transformation, albeit not necessarily on this issue. I come from a background of risk-management planning. I have confidence in the committee, because that is what this is about. When I talk about being forensic about something, that is what I will be. I will ask the hard questions of the clinicians, the directors and the chief executives, because I need to understand that any transformation is patient- and outcome-focused and not a response to another pressure. If it is a response to another pressure, I want to see the avenues that have been explored to find other solutions. We need to be much more agile, and I have some ideas on that, which the Health Committee will be made aware of in the coming weeks.
I thank the Member for his question. He has met many all-party groups, so his interest stems not just from his profession or from being a Committee member, but it is organic, through the all-party groups. In that vein, it is a reasonable question. I cannot demand of others what I am not prepared to give, so transparency will be absolutely key. That will be demanded. When I decided to take the role, initially, I was full of fear because all I could see were the pressures and challenges that, at a glance, looked insurmountable. However, we come from a fantastic country, and we have the best people. If you are open, honest and transparent, and you bring them on the journey and do not tell them what is best for them, but you include them in the design and the steps that need to be taken and convince them and win the argument, and you have to be in the room to do that, we can take those steps. The last part of your question was whether I have confidence in the decisions that were made previously. I absolutely do. All Departments and Ministers face myriad problems and challenges, mostly centred around money, but a lot are centred around culture, tradition and how we do things. Health impacts on most people almost every day of their life. There are two nurses in my family, my wife and my daughter, and there have also been health issues, so it impacts on all of us. My commitment is that it will be transparent and honest, and it will build on the good work of my colleagues Mr Robin Swann and Mr Mike Nesbitt.
How many more questions are there?
I will probably regret it, but go for it.
I thank the Member for his question. He rightly points out that he represents the area, and he understands acutely the challenge that we face. Any Member wants the best services in their constituency. It is my ambition, through the process, to either prove or disprove the findings in the report that will be brought to me. You have to remember that the report is still somewhere between the Northern Trust and the Department. These things do not happen overnight. In fact, the report has been ping-ponging for some time because it is incredibly important to get it right. I will not dismiss the previous work because the outcome of that work that all those people contributed to was exactly the same. However, we have the opportunity to bring another level of forensic, transparent information sharing to it. I have not seen the report yet, but when it comes through, if it is controversial and is referred, it will be really important for the people of Causeway to have confidence that the committee, which will be established quickly, based on the report that it is reporting on — it will not be a fixed committee — will have the requisite professional people with the relevant experience who are best placed to speak to the public. It is my ambition that the committee will deliver that.
I thank the Member for her question. It is a really good question. I will have to repeat myself a little bit because there are a couple of conflicting topics in the question. The first thing is this: getting over 30,000 responses to a consultation should indicate to any of us, and give us a clarion call, that the public are saying, "We need confidence". At the very top level of that consultation response, people are also saying, "We are open to change". People are open to change because they recognise that what is happening at the moment could be a whole lot better. In order for something to get better, change may be required. However, change for change's sake is not the answer. I have not seen the report in question. That report was not a response to the 2024 network of hospitals documentation: it was done prior to that and was part of the wider hospital network plan. That is absolutely fine. It is absolutely right to pass any significant change through a panel and give it rigorous scrutiny. If you give something rigorous scrutiny and then make a decision, you can stand on your evidence with confidence. At this moment in time, however, I have neither seen the report nor had a qualified clarion call from all clinicians that it is the right thing. What you do in one hospital to squeeze the balloon will cause it to pop out somewhere else. There will be pressure somewhere else, because the need has not dissipated. I want to know where it is going to pop out, who will be there when it pops out and what will happen to keep it sustainable. I want to ensure that any change that is configured anywhere in our hospital network is recognised right throughout the system.
I thank the Member for his question. I have no reason to believe that it will not be. I am only three weeks in post. Certainly, I want anything for which I am responsible, and which I put my name to, to be in the public domain. The health service exists not for clinicians, nurses and doctors but for public health and the constituents whom we serve. It is absolutely vital that any transformation or change has the confidence of the very people who own it. I want to move into a sphere — it will be difficult and there will be challenging decisions to make; of that I have no doubt — but I want to ensure, before we get to that challenging moment, that we give all the relevant requisite information to those who want to see it and read it and become part of that process. We are running out of time — I do recognise that — but we will not make a rushed decision. We will make the right decision.
I thank the Member for his question. Having watched and sat beside the Member in many Committees over the years, I am sure that his remarks to me will not always be as genteel as those that he has just delivered. The Member lives in a rural community and understands the complexity of where we interface with health provision. As I have said, there are finite budgets. We have our structures, which we are having to reconfigure in that networking piece. As Minister, I will take everything that comes before me as it comes. I will look at the business case, the complexity and whether it is controversial.
If I believe that it has not been tested enough, I will not be behind the door in invoking the committee. However, there is no point in invoking that committee if it does not have public confidence, so it is vital that the terms of reference, the chair and what that panel may look like are set out clearly at the start. Every hospital is different, Mr Speaker. You served as Health Minister, and you know only too well that each case has to be dealt with on its own merits, and that means taking into consideration who lives where, how people get that care and separating out those functions. Giving people confidence is vital. If we do not give them confidence and we heap worry on them, perhaps by being forced to make rushed decisions — no one will make me make a rushed decision; I will not do that — we will impact on the well-being and mental health of the very people for whom we are trying to fix this. I thank the Member for his useful question.
1,586 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.