Debate contribution: Statutory Duty of Candour

Debate contribution by Miss Órlaithí Flynn on 11 November 2024.

MLA

Miss Órlaithí Flynn

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

11 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Statutory Duty of Candour

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4667995

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

The motion and the amendment seek to create a culture of transparency and accountability in the North's health and social care system. By establishing a legally enforceable duty of candour, we will take a critical step to ensure that every organisation and individual in our healthcare system is open and honest about any shortcomings. This is not just about a policy change but about building a foundation of trust and integrity. A statutory duty of candour is ultimately about protection: protection for staff, patients, families and our wider communities. Such a duty ensures that cases of abuse, negligence or mistake are brought to light, investigated and addressed transparently. Families and staff deserve that assurance. That point is important because of the genuine concerns of our Health and Social Care workers that have been raised throughout the debate. As MLAs — elected representatives — we represent people who work in the Health and Social Care service. We have family members who work in Health and Social Care, and we have MLAs who have worked in Health and Social Care. It is about finding a balance. How can we have conversations to allay those workers' fears in tandem with giving families complete security and confidence that they will never go through what other families have gone through? It is a fine balance. This evening's debate may be a good beginning of a conversation. There are differing views among Members, and it is good that the Minister is taking forward the work on candour through the Being Open framework. We had a presentation on that at the Health Committee the other week. It is really good that that work is taking place, but it may be a sign that many more conversations have to be had. I know that those conversations will take place as part of the consultation, but, again, it is about how we strike a balance for Health and Social Care staff and patients and their families, who come from our homes and our constituencies, so that everyone is included in the conversation. We are all speaking on behalf of both sides, and the challenge is to find the right method and the right legislation that makes everyone feel protected and safeguarded. I think that it was Gerry who mentioned the culture of fear around speaking up for Health and Social Care staff. That was mentioned a few times. Again, the big question is "Why?". There is a big wrong there. Pat mentioned cases that involve senior managers and executives in trusts and Health and Social Care settings. Why are those staff feeling that fear? Why is there that culture of people being too afraid to speak out when they see someone intentionally doing wrong or harm? In 99% of cases, the harm is unintentional, which leads to another important question: we can legislate, but why do our Health and Social Care staff feel a sense of fear when they want to speak up about something that, they think, has gone wrong? That signals that there is a legacy somewhere in the structures and management of our health and social care system that has let some of that fear fester. We need to focus on those conversations alongside any legislation that we introduce. The motion is not about blaming the staff; it is about how we protect staff and patients. They need to be treated equally. It has been asked how, if we are not going to build the foundation of trust in the health and social care system, we will instil confidence in our health and social care workers to communicate what has gone wrong with their managers and feed that up the line. There was a conversation in the Health Committee the other week about getting to a place where there is trust, openness and transparency. That way, when there is a serious adverse incident —

— ideally, it will not lead to a situation like the ones that the families in the Public Gallery have had to endure. Those situations are what we are trying to prevent.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:35 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