Debate contribution: Programme for Government 2024-27
Debate contribution by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 3 March 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Programme for Government 2024-27
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4826299
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank the Members who have spoken so far. A lot of the debate seems to be about health, and that needs to be recognised, because health and dealing with the considerable issues that we have should be the number-one priority of the Executive and, indeed, the Assembly. Some of us sat in Hillsborough Castle quite some time ago — it was well over a year and a bit ago — listening to the conversation and debate about the importance of developing a Programme for Government that puts the priorities of the people of Northern Ireland first, and it was very clear then that health was going to be the number-one priority. We all know what has happened since, given the numerous debates that we have in the Chamber when the Health Minister is invited to implement one particular idea or another, a new programme or a new development. I will be honest: the Health Minister would really like to be able to do that degree of transformation. The issue is that there is no money for it. Indeed, time and time again, when the Health Minister has been fighting his corner in the Executive, he has been turned down. We have to recognise that, if we are to prioritise health, we should make it the number-one priority in what we are trying to do. However, the reality is that we have a Budget, and we need to be able to operate within that Budget. The question of where that prioritisation lies is the fundamental question that all the Executive parties need to address. It is important that we use the moneys that we have to be in a position to support our health service, where help is needed. That includes in mental health, in MDTs and in making sure that we have mega-clinics. It is about making sure that we are actually doing things to start driving down waiting lists. A lot of those things are already happening. If any MLAs have had opportunities to talk to the health trusts to see what is happening in various places, they will know that things are happening and are improving. However, there are some things that we need to make a commitment to. We are talking about transformation. There is a transformation fund. Shortly, we are going to hear about a — I do not know whether it will be an interim or an actual — transformation board that is looking to bring in extra money to help make changes. Some of that may go into digitisation, and some of it may go into other areas. If we are serious about health being the priority in the Programme for Government, as we have always said, we need to invest a lot of that transformation money in making sure that the health service works. The Department of Health has a plan to do that. It needs the support of the Northern Ireland Executive to make it happen.
Yes, Colin. Over to you.
The Member not only makes a very good point but absolutely puts his finger on the issue that we have with health. Health should be the priority. We know that the Department of Health needs to make efficiencies — we have to. Mrs Dodds is normally in here berating the Health Minister at every available opportunity about not making enough efficiencies. Health has to be improved. We need to be able to deliver, and we need the resources to do that. We know, particularly when we look at things such as transformation and transformation funding, that some of that funding should be sent in the direction of Health and should be ring-fenced. That is an important piece, and I would like the First Minister and the deputy First Minister, in their winding-up remarks, to comment on what we are going to do about transformation. The other issue that I have a concern about — I have quite a few concerns — is transformation and the transformation process. We seem to have imported a cuckoo into the nest. We seem to have imported the NIO into the centre of the Executive in the transformation board process. That raises these questions: what role does the NIO have in the devolved settlement in Northern Ireland, and what role does it have in the Programme for Government? Does it have a veto role in the transformation process? What is it lining up to do? That is another question that I would quite like the deputy First Minister to comment on when she is making her remarks. It is an important issue that we need to be aware of. What role does the NIO have in the devolution settlement, and what role will it have in the transformation funding? That is key. There is no doubt at all that successful Programmes for Government are linked to deliverables. Those deliverables include the Budget, budget lines and legislation. I do not want to go around sounding like my learned friend from the Opposition, but where is the legislation that is linked to these issues? Where are the budget lines? We, as a party, have said time and again, for many years, that the Programme for Government has to be linked to deliverables. Again, there are no real deliverables in this document. There are ideas in it; there are, let us say, head marks for us to aim to; and there are some, but not many, targets, and we need to look at those to try to improve upon them as well. We need to make sure that we start attaching real deliverables. If we do not, how will we explain to the Northern Ireland people what we are trying to do? We have heard various laudable statements in here. I do not think that the Civil Service, when it produced this document, did not produce a laudable statement within it, but where are the deliverables and where are those linked to the outcomes that the people of Northern Ireland need? That is the appropriate thing that we need to do. It will come as no surprise that, even though we have real concerns about the Budget, funding for Health and the commitment of the rest of the Executive parties to make sure that Health is given the priority that is needed, the Ulster Unionist Party will support the Programme for Government. We have signed up to it; it was important that we signed up to it. Health is the number-one priority — it must be the number-one priority — and that needs to be lined up.
1,099 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: 0.08 (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 (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.94).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.25 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.08 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.94 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.05 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.01 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.50 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.40 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.10 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:07 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.