Debate contribution: Maternity and Children’s Hospital: Delays
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 26 November 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Maternity and Children’s Hospital: Delays
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4677419
Read the official Assembly record
Text
It is worth reminding people that the Executive have overseen the outsourcing of healthcare to the private sector and the spending of millions on expensive agency and locum services. The Executive handed back £92 million of unspent money to the Treasury, a sum that is almost identical to the projected final cost of the maternity hospital. Professor Renfrew's report on midwifery services talks about the need for "radical" system-wide change. Radical system-wide change is needed not only for maternity services but for our whole health and social care system. It is needed not to serve the project of counting pennies and cutting budgets but to bring a change that must start with our workers — those who deliver and support transformative, life-saving care in hospitals and the community — at its heart. They deliver high-quality care despite the cards being stacked against them in a crumbling health and social care system that has been damaged by decades of underinvestment. Ultimately, we will not be able to tackle waiting lists or make our health and social care services truly sustainable until we start treating our workers fairly. It is not fair that healthcare workers are once again being forced to beg for basic pay parity, despite politicians in this Building promising them that they would sort that out. It is not fair that healthcare workers clock on to shifts when there are dangerously unsafe staffing levels day after day. They cannot deliver high-quality care until we make our health and social care system a rewarding and safe environment in which to work. The solution to our workforce recruitment and retention crisis is not to reconfigure our hospitals in the name of transformation. That usually means shutting down services and units, which leaves patients unable to access basic healthcare in their local community. Executive parties frequently talk about the need to make difficult decisions when it comes to the reconfiguration of primary care, without considering the wider socio-economic context or the impact on patients. Members of the Health Committee recently heard that patients in the Western Trust are missing scheduled appointments for surgery because they cannot afford the cost of travel or to take unpaid time off work. I remind Members who advocate for closure under the guise of transformation or reconfiguration to heed that point and to maybe think twice about their proposals for our health service. Executive parties also talk about the need for investment in early intervention, prevention and community care, when, instead, trusts are being encouraged to make efficiency savings. That is complete doublespeak from Departments and Ministers. People are told that reform and transformation are not about saving money, but that is what they look like to many patients, to workers and, certainly, to me. The solution to our recruitment and retention crisis lies in recognising the value of our workforce, paying workers properly, giving them fair terms and conditions and stopping the tide of privatisation by ending the reliance on agencies. It is time to get on with the job at hand and finish the maternity and children's hospital.
513 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 (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.04 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.62 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.20 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.16 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:36 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.