Debate contribution: Breast Cancer: Waiting Times in Upper Bann
Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .
- MLA
- Mr John O'Dowd
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 15 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Breast Cancer: Waiting Times in Upper Bann
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4593078
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Deputy Speaker. For the record, I speak as an MLA for Upper Bann. I thank Diane for bringing the topic to the House. It is an important subject. I have no doubt that the Minister shares the concerns of all Members about the waiting times and lists for breast cancer treatment, whether it is in the Southern Trust area or on a broader scale. I am acutely aware of the financial pressures that all Departments face and of the impact that decades of underinvestment and austerity have had on our public services. When you cannot deliver cancer services in a timely, effective and efficient manner, regardless of whatever else is going on in Departments, that is the measure against which we all must measure ourselves and say, "Well, if we cannot do that, there is an issue not only for the Minister of Health and the Department of Health but for the entire Executive and Assembly and our entire society". There are challenges and opportunities ahead. The Minister's announcement of an urgent review of how regional breast cancer services are delivered is welcome news, but it also brings a challenge to local elected representatives: we should not have a knee-jerk reaction to the contents of the consultation, the engagement around the consultation or proposals that may flow from it. As long as that review has at its centre an equitable, accessible and effective service, if those goals can be achieved, we have to be open to new ideas. We, as political leaders in our communities, have to give leadership on some of those matters. When researching for today's discussion, I noted that, since the return of the institutions, a number of questions have been lodged by Members with the current and previous Health Ministers. A response to one of my colleagues stated that the Southern Health and Social Care Trust was given recurrent investment for a third consultant to be appointed to Craigavon Area Hospital's breast cancer services. The date for that was June 2024. Does the Minister have information about whether that appointment was made? Was the trust successful in making that appointment, and, if so, has it had any positive impact on challenging the waiting lists? I also note that non-recurrent funding for additional capacity from the independent sector was made available to the Southern Trust during the same period. Has that had a positive impact on the waiting lists? As Mrs Dodds said, the issue primarily impacts on women. Men can have breast cancer as well, but, for anyone who has discovered a lump on their breast and is waiting for their first appointment, surgery or whatever it might be, it is a frightening experience. It is only right and proper that we, as political leaders, ensure that they have the right services. Even before someone gets to their first appointment, they have to get access to their GP. That goes back to the primacy of primary care in the health service. Rightly, today's focus is on acute services, as it often is, but being able to get access to a GP quickly after that worrying moment of discovery is vital as well. We need breast services. The regional formula that the Minister will come forward with has to be based on equitable, accessible and effective delivery. For our health service to be truly effective, access to primary care is key in all these things.
570 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 (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- 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 | 0.03 | 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 | 0.95 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.50 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.40 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.10 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:26 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.