Debate contribution: Dental Services: Fermanagh and South Tyrone
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 25 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Dental Services: Fermanagh and South Tyrone
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4815561
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Member for raising the issue, another health issue to do with Fermanagh and South Tyrone. I am delighted, as the SDLP and Opposition health spokesperson, to support the Member, because there are unique attributes to a large rural constituency and access issues are much more difficult. It is a good and proper that the Member highlights those. Needless to say, the principles that the Member talks about for Fermanagh and South Tyrone are pretty much the same across the board. As health spokespersons and members of the Health Committee, we regularly meet the British Dental Association and our local providers. One of the senior practising members of the British Dental Association has a practice in my town. Through conversations over the years with her, I get updates about what dentists face. Underpinning most of it, of course, is finance. Regrettably, we are almost sleepwalking towards a two-tier system in which those who have money can afford to go private and those who do not cannot afford to go private and so rely on National Health Service providers. However, most dentists say that they cannot exist by simply providing National Health Service dentistry, because the money just does not come back. It costs them money to provide that service. More and more dentists are opting out, which means that it is more difficult to get access. Of course, there are then overall financial issues, such as the National Insurance rise that is coming in. That will impact massively, because the system of our health service is based on providers almost being independent of the Department and government but contracted to deliver the services. That means that they are seen as private businesses. They will have to find the money for the National Insurance lift, which will push so many practices over the edge, especially if they are reliant on NHS dentistry. People tell me all the time that they hate going to the dentist, but I never get complaints about the service. A good service is being provided. If people have pain and can access the service, they get treatment. That tells me that there is a good system with good practitioners. However, all roads lead back to money. The Minister's hands are pretty much tied. He has made that point over and over again. If the budget that he is given is not enough to deliver services, it is unlikely that he will be able to provide a resolution. A conversation needs to take place between the Executive parties on where the budget goes or what transformation will be prioritised to free up money in the future. I know that there was an oral health strategy. It was one of those 10-year strategies. I am not sure where that is. I remember talking to some practising dentists who said that they were looking for updates on it. They were looking to see whether it could be tightened up, funded out and action planned. I do not know whether that has happened in the intervening period, because it has been a few years, but it certainly looked at things like service delivery for children and young people so that they do not lose their teeth or have bad oral hygiene from a young age. Another issue raised with me was about older people living in care homes and residential homes. There used to be dentists who went into such places to help out where they could, but it was felt that that had to go on the back-burner because of the lack of funding. Is there an update on that? We need to help those who do not ordinarily reach out for help. It is one of those things: you speculate to accumulate. If you spend money and try to assist people with their oral hygiene, it will not cost money to fix the problems afterwards. I would love to say that as somebody who has never had a tooth extracted or a filling in my life, but I am afraid that I am guilty of all those things. I will sit down quite worried about what Nuala McAllister listed as all the foods that you are not supposed to eat, because that has just cut out my dinner and supper this evening. I will have to find something else.
722 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 (0.92).
- 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 | 0.03 | 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 | 0.92 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.82 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.09 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:02 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.