Debate contribution: The draft Period Products (Department of Health Specified Public Service Bodies) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 20 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- The draft Period Products (Department of Health Specified Public Service Bodies) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4744201
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I beg to move
I am seeking the Assembly's approval of the draft Period Products (Department of Health Specified Public Service Bodies) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2024. I am pleased to be able to introduce the regulations as part of a journey that began with the introduction of a private Member's Bill by former SDLP MLA Pat Catney in October 2021. That Bill was subsequently enacted as the Period Products (Free Provision) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, which created a legal right of free access to period products in hospital premises in Northern Ireland for all those who need them. The Act places importance on respect for dignity and aims to remove financial barriers to accessing period products, when they are required. Period products are not a luxury item and should be available to everybody who needs them. Period poverty is a massive issue in our society. Women often struggle to afford sanitary products and find themselves using unsuitable products as a result. Patients and staff of health trusts and visitors to their sites are there to receive care, provide care or visit individuals who are availing themselves of that care. In those instances, people should have access to the period products that they need. I am glad to be able to address that issue through the regulations. As I said, period products are not luxuries; they are essentials for all those who menstruate. They often cost a significant amount of money, and, as a result, some individuals are forced to go without them, which should never be the case. Such products should be available to all those who need them, and there should be no stigma around their provision. For anybody who is unable to obtain those items as and when they need them, there is damage not only to their physical well-being but to their mental well-being, so we need to do everything that we can to remove what is, in fact, a gender inequality. I am proud to be able to bring the regulations to the Assembly and, in a small but hopefully significant way, break down barriers and remove some of the gender inequality in our society. I will now speak to the draft regulations. Members will be aware that all Departments must specify the public service bodies that will have duties under the 2022 Act. The Department of Health has specified the following public bodies, and liaised extensively with them on how the regulations will be implemented at their various premises: the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust; the Northern Health and Social Care Trust; the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust; the Southern Health and Social Care Trust; and the Western Health and Social Care Trust. The Act allows for the Department of Health to provide descriptions of persons and premises in order to allow its implementation to be operationally effective but stay true to the spirit of the Act. Significant consultation has taken place with the trusts to ensure that the regulations can be operationally effective across the vast number of health trust premises while staying true to the intention of the legislation, which is to provide free period products for those who need them. The trusts have undertaken their own consultation exercises with product users, and I thank them for their continued cooperation and support. There are other arm's-length bodies that have not been specified in the legislation, such as the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service (NIAS). However, those bodies operate voluntary schemes, even though they are not bound by the regulations. The cost of implementing the regulations in the specified bodies is estimated to be approximately £1·5 million per year across the five trusts. However, as the level of usage remains unknown, especially in high-footfall premises, that is an estimate. The cost of implementing the regulations should be considered against the backdrop of a hugely stretched Health budget, which is being pushed further still by the legal requirement to implement the regulations. That is not to take away from the significance of the regulations, which I am pleased to present to the Assembly. This is a significant step forward in the fight against period poverty. I thank the Health Committee for its scrutiny of the SL1 for the regulations. I will leave it there, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.
715 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 (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
- 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 | 0.08 | 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 | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.80 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.20 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:46 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.