Debate contribution: Children’s Hospice: Funding
Debate contribution by Ms Liz Kimmins on .
- MLA
- Ms Liz Kimmins
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 14 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Children’s Hospice: Funding
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4590229
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the DUP for the motion and the Alliance Party for the amendment, both of which we support. The issue has touched all of us, and we understand the huge challenges that surround it. Many parents and family members will become carers for their loved ones who are suffering from terminal and life-limiting illnesses. One in two people is affected by cancer at some stage in their lives, and for many families who receive the devastating news that their child has a terminal illness, their worlds are shattered. That news can come at any time: during pregnancy, after the birth of their child or later in a child's life. It throws parents and families into a whole new scenario that many of them could never have imagined and many subsequently struggle to navigate. The role of the Children's Hospice in the North is therefore vital for the hundreds of babies, children and their families who are cared for each year through its antenatal, inpatient, community, social care and bereavement services. Therefore, any dilution or reduction in those services has significant ramifications for those families who rely heavily on their support whilst they are dealing with their child's diagnosis, coupled with the financial, social, emotional and psychological impacts that come with having a child or sibling with a life-limiting illness. Palliative care should be viewed as a quality-of-life treatment. The specialist palliative care provided by the Children's Hospice should be non-negotiable for the children and their families when it is needed. I visited the Children's Hospice on several occasions over the past year and saw at first-hand how critical the service is for those who will, unfortunately, need to use it during their young lives. The importance of the provision of palliative care has been agreed as a priority for the Health Committee, and we intend to launch our inquiry into palliative care in the coming weeks. That important piece of work will include an exploration of the funding models for hospices. For the Children's Hospice specifically, the abrupt decision of the Department in June 2023 to end funding that helped to provide invaluable respite to children and families is one that it has worked extremely hard to manage. It has consistently ensured that it was as self-sufficient as possible, with a large part of its financial income coming from charitable donations. However, with a hugely challenging economic climate, along with cuts to its non-recurrent funding, its ability to continue to deliver those full respite services has become unsustainable. Palliative and end-of-life care should not be a "would like"; it should be a necessity. It is something that we really must move to secure, especially for babies and children, through some of the most difficult times of their lives. The Assembly recognises the enormity of the budgetary situation, and we will continue to fight for the funding that we are entitled to and deserve to deliver those public services. However, we must not be penny wise and pound foolish. The value of the provision of the excellent palliative care that is delivered by the Children's Hospice goes much further than just a bed. We must give all the children and their families the highest quality of care at that time of their lives and support them through all stages of that difficult journey.
553 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: 0.02 (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).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.59 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.37 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.03 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
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.