Debate contribution: Breast Cancer: Waiting Times in Upper Bann
Debate contribution by Mr Doug Beattie MC on .
- MLA
- Mr Doug Beattie MC
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 15 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Breast Cancer: Waiting Times in Upper Bann
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4593087
Read the official Assembly record
Text
That is what it is. I thank my Upper Bann colleague for bringing this to the House. It is an incredibly important issue, and she articulated the detail of it extremely well. No doubt, in the debate, we will all mention the same statistics as she mentioned. The reality is that it is not about statistics in many ways: it is real life. It affects real people, and, when those real people get a lump and know that they possibly have cancer, it has a real effect on them as a person and on their families. It affects their health but can also be a financial issue. The reality is that many women are concerned about breast screening and breast cancer services across Northern Ireland. I am concerned, as we all should be. Women's health has been highlighted in recent months in relation to many issues beyond this. I think of the Ladies with Letters and the issues surrounding smear tests and the motions in the Assembly calling for a women's health strategy. I know that there has been a significant campaign to maintain breast cancer services at Craigavon Area Hospital. Women's health is really up there and is incredibly important, nothing more so than breast cancer services and breast screening. Cancer patients and their families deserve so much better than what they currently receive. Far too many people are forced to wait for far too long for a diagnosis and for treatment. Cancer is a disease that does not wait; it often thrives in any periods that delay intervention. The problems are especially bad in breast cancer services. In the three months from April to June 2024, only 11% of patients in the Southern Trust area were seen within 14 days. The target is 95%. Eleven per cent were seen, but the target is 95%. Yet, in the neighbouring Western Trust, that figure was 83%. Southern Trust 11%, Western Trust 83%. It is not acceptable for women in one trust area to have to wait significantly longer to be assessed than women in another trust area, but that is the postcode lottery that women are running at the moment. I welcome the recent announcement of a new regional waiting list for breast cancer assessment, which will enable women to access the earliest available appointment across the Province. That comes back to the discussion about whether people are willing to travel a bit further to get treated more quickly and effectively. The answer has to be, "Yes, I believe that they are". In the modern era, there should be no reason for any patient or individual to have to wait so long for cancer treatment, care, diagnosis or support. There has to be greater collaboration across trust boundaries in order to target funding to equalise waiting times, establish regional pathways and renew the drive for rapid diagnostic centres and clinics that started in recent years. All of that could have happened to a much greater extent if the cancer strategy had been implemented as was originally envisaged. Instead, it suffered greatly in the absence of the institutions, combined with the absence of a needs-based Department of Health budget allocation. There can be recriminations one way or the other — I will leave those up to whomever — but it now falls on the Minister to force through his regional strategy to make sure that women get a better outcome than they do now. I finish by thanking Diane Dodds for bringing the topic to the House. It is a timely and good debate. There is more that we can do as elected representatives to help women access the treatment that they deserve and need.
614 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: 0.03 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.96).
- 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 | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.58 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.39 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| 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.