Debate contribution: Mental Health Services: Waiting Lists

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .

MLA
Mr Mike Nesbitt
Party at the time
Ulster Unionist Party
Date
1 October 2024
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Mental Health Services: Waiting Lists
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4562756

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Member for the comment and the question. I have to say gently that the irony klaxon is sounding on that one, because the nature of the Department of Health's budget for this year means that we are trying to consolidate and preserve existing services. Many additional services are brought to me, pretty much on a daily basis, that I know would help deliver better outcomes and take us into areas where we are not but should be. That sounds like one of them. I am afraid that, on the current budget, I can make no promises, but I am very happy to listen to the Member offline about the advantages and benefits of that service.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

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: 0.03 (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).
  • 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-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

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 framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.59No
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging 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 benefits0.72
No identity-related subject0.28
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:21 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.

Challenge this classification