Debate contribution: Children’s Hospice: Funding
Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 14 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Children’s Hospice: Funding
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4590255
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I begin by commending the Members who tabled this motion on a very important matter and, indeed, the Alliance Party for its sensible amendment. The Northern Ireland Children's Hospice does vital work that is, sadly, often overlooked by this place. It is left to community, grassroots organisations to raise the money that is essential to keep it operating. I think, for example, of an event in which my party colleague Alderman Stewart McDonald is heavily involved in my constituency. In recent years, Stewart's beloved Ahoghill Thistle FC has run a gala ball in aid of the Children's Hospice. I will give this year's event a small plug: it will take place on 2 November in the Galgorm, and everyone here would be made very welcome. Over the past four years, the annual event has raised an incredible £34,000, with last year's event raising over £13,000 alone. I note with regret, however, the shortfall in statutory funding, which has failed to keep pace with inflation, as noted in the motion. I support the amendment, which is very much in line with the NHS's stated objective of providing a cradle-to-grave service for us all. In fact, without providing palliative care as a core Health and Social Care service, we cannot say that the NHS provides what its founders promised. Without a doubt, the Health Minister will cite pressures on his budget, but the Department of Health is failing the whole hospice sector, including the Children's Hospice, not just when it comes to funding but on an even more basic level by failing to produce an up-to-date palliative care strategy. The production of a strategy does not require any great financial outlay. It does, however, show that the Department has a long-term vision and plan for the sector. It is a sad reflection on the priorities of our society when there is a live debate about assisted suicide, yet those who care for people at the end of life are completely forgotten about. Will the Health Minister, when he is summing up today, confirm when he will publish an updated palliative care strategy? Those coming to the end of their life need to know that they are loved and appreciated. There is a real risk that what is being discussed in the media and, soon, in the Commons could result in the work in the palliative care sector being devalued to the point where assisted suicide is seen not so much as a choice but an expectation. While the Assembly will today hear many fine words about the Northern Ireland Children's Hospice, I want to make it clear that the invaluable work that it does is not just appreciated with a nod during a debate such as this but is recognised as an integral part of the whole health service in Northern Ireland. I trust that, today, the House will send a strong message of love and compassion for the children who, sadly, find themselves in need of hospice care. It can do that best not merely by agreeing the motion in the Order Paper but by the Minister making a commitment that will be reported in Hansard that he will soon bring forward a palliative care strategy.
535 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 (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
- 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 | 0.04 | 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 | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| 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 | 0.41 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.37 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.08 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
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.