Member's statement: Cancer Patients in Northern Ireland: Inequalities
Member's statement by Miss Nuala McAllister on .
- MLA
- Miss Nuala McAllister
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 21 September 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Cancer Patients in Northern Ireland: Inequalities
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5741758
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The unacceptable inequalities affecting cancer patients in Northern Ireland is an issue that has been further highlighted in the past week after the news that the breast cancer drug Enhertu has become available to patients in England. I congratulate all who campaigned for the past two years to make that drug available in England and Wales. When it is prescribed to eligible patients, Enhertu can extend the life of someone who has terminal breast cancer by an average of almost seven months, but there have been reports of people living up to three years. Whilst seven months may not seem like a very long time, it is everything to someone who has been given a diagnosis of terminal cancer. The fact that people are receiving the drug across the UK but not in Northern Ireland comes as another blow to patients here. Following the decision to recommend the use of Enhertu for HER2-low metastatic breast cancer, we need that urgent clarity and action from the Department of Health and the strategic planning and performance group (SPPG). The website for the Northern Ireland Formulary, which everyone can access on their phone, outlines that, following the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines, it is available in Northern Ireland because they have already calculated the cost on a case-by-case basis. We need clarity from the Department of Health and the Minister on that. This is not the first time that we have seen drugs added to the Northern Ireland Formulary that mean that they technically should be available in Northern Ireland yet people are not getting them. We know that NICE sets the guidelines, but, because of resources, the Department of Health and SPPG often diverge from what is available, whether that is because there is no specialised nurse to administer the treatment or because of ongoing treatment plans. That does not make it any less unacceptable. My colleague Sorcha Eastwood and I have been working on the issue of inequalities across cancer care in the UK and have written to the Minister of Health to ask him to outline that. We hope that he takes the opportunity during Question Time today to confirm that the issue will be resolved as soon as possible. It is not the only issue, and breast cancer is not the only cancer. There is also ovarian cancer and prostate cancer. Young people's cancer fund — we do not have a specific one here for the local scheme. Another issue is the cost of travel to hospital for treatment; there is no similar scheme here in Northern Ireland. Cancer patients are consistently being let down. Alliance will continue to advocate for all cancer patients here in Northern Ireland, because they are of equal value and worth as any patient across the UK.
467 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.46 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.28 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.21 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.03 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:23 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.