Written question AQW 35808/22-27
Written question by Miss Órlaithí Flynn on .
- MLA
- Miss Órlaithí Flynn
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 19 November 2025
- Type
- Written question
- Assembly reference
- AQW 35808/22-27
- Department
- Department of Health
- Business
- To the Minister of Health
- Assembly identifier
- Document 460076
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Health, pursuant to AQW 32896/22-27, to detail (i) any assessment as to whether full and safe removal surgery for the types of implants used in the north of Ireland constitutes a surgical super specialism and whether such surgery can be safely provided within local services; (ii) any assessment of the effectiveness of services for patients who have experienced complications from mesh procedures since the 2018 pause; (iii) any assessment of the operation of the Extra Contractual Referral (ECR) scheme, including referrals of patients to Dr Sohier Elneil; (iv) the rationale for the cessation of the ECR scheme; and (v) whether he will consider providing reimbursement of surgery-related costs for mesh-injured patients, past, present and future, who seek full and safe removal surgeries outside of the north of Ireland, on a basis comparable to reimbursement under the Waiting List Reimbursement Scheme.
145 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: 0.05 (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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | 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 | 0.84 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.07 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.07 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 05:10 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.