Debate contribution: Mental Health Provision in Northern Ireland

Debate contribution by Mrs Michelle Guy on .

MLA
Mrs Michelle Guy
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
30 September 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Opposition Business
Heading
Mental Health Provision in Northern Ireland
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4563519

Text

I thank the Member who tabled the motion. I will focus on mental health provision and support for our children and young people. The statistics tell a story. The results of the Northern Ireland youth wellbeing prevalence survey indicate that 12·1% of 11-to-19-year-olds in Northern Ireland have thought about or attempted suicide. The CAMHS waiting list from March this year showed that almost 2,000 young people were waiting for an assessment. Those statistics for adolescents are a particular worry, given that those are their formative years. The World Health Organization (WHO) states:

"Suicide is the fourth leading cause of death among 15-29 year-olds."

That is a shocking figure. It further notes:

"The consequences of failing to address adolescent mental health conditions extend to adulthood, impairing both physical and mental health and limiting opportunities to lead fulfilling lives as adults."

Statistics do no justice to the individual stories of pain that they represent or to the complexity of the circumstances that have caused the mental health condition to develop. Over the weekend, I took time to speak to Matthew Taylor, a young man living in Lisburn who has openly talked about his mental health struggles, which eventually resulted in inpatient care. He tells of an uneven experience. Matthew got help and is grateful for it, but, in some early interactions, he was simply not believed. He was told that he was selfish and that, if he was serious, he would have tried to kill himself already. It is crucial that, when people take the difficult step to ask for help, especially when our resources are so constrained, our pathways do not fail from within. Excellent work is being done to help young people who are suffering with mental health issues. Parents, guardians, healthcare professionals, teachers, community clubs and more are working to ensure the well-being of children. However, the need is so great that more support is required. As Matthew's experience highlights, we have to ensure that services do not fail those in crisis. Staff who interact with anyone presenting in mental distress should have a basic level of training to ensure appropriate triage and referral. As with so many things, evidence tells us that early intervention is essential; cross-departmental working and multi-year Budgets are a must; and we need to not just keep producing strategies but to implement actions. The Public Accounts Committee produced a stark report on our mental health services and where the mental health strategy stands. The disappointing progress on implementation to date that it notes is, in large part, down to the fact that only £10 million of the £35 million deemed necessary for 2023-24 was allocated. Perhaps it is time that we stopped saying, "We can't afford to do these things", and accepted that we cannot afford not to do them. The words that really jump off the page in the PAC report are those that note that the majority of the work that has been done to date would not be felt by users. The actions that we take must be felt by those who are suffering. The mental health champion identified clear ways for impact to be felt, the number-one priority being the workforce and the need to grow the CAMHS and therapies workforces, yet little appears to have been done directly on that. While some good progress has been made through Education and Health working in partnership on the emotional health and well-being framework, for instance, we still have not had the funding for Healthy Happy Minds restored. Its absence can create unacceptable inequities within families. For example, a year 8 child in a family experiencing bereavement can receive counselling through school, but that child's sibling in primary school will receive no support. More fundamentally, the independent review of education noted clear examples where the system itself creates unnecessary stress and anxiety that can lead to or exacerbate mental health issues. Specifically, I refer to our SEN crisis and our current approach to assessment. I look forward to the Education Minister bringing forward an extensive departmental response to that review. On page 44 of our mental health strategy is the line:

"Children and young people should receive the care and treatment they need, when they need it, without barriers or limitations."

Those cannot be just words on a page in a strategy.

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

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.97).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.97Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits0.98
No identity-related subject0.01
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:20 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification