Debate contribution: Respite Provision: South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust

Debate contribution by Mr Andrew McMurray on 8 April 2025.

MLA

Mr Andrew McMurray

Party at the time

Alliance Party

Date

8 April 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Adjournment

Heading

Respite Provision: South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4920038

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I thank the Minister for being here. I also thank my colleague for securing this very important debate. Adequate short break provision is absolutely essential. Hearing Members' powerful testimonies of some of the interactions that all of us here have probably had has added to the debate and its poignancy. In February, there were 85 young people on the waiting list for short breaks in the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust area. Only 13 young people receive regular short breaks. Some 72 families are in crisis every single day and every single night, yet they cannot get the relief and rest that they need. When additional funding was announced last October, parents absolutely expected that there would be new respite beds. A constituent of mine who has a young child with complex needs was told that respite beds would become available at Redwood. She was even given a tour of the building and was promised that it definitely would not be turned into a residential home. She heard on the radio that Redwood would be residential after all. I can begin to imagine how crushing that was, because, when speaking to her, I saw that it was incredibly crushing for her. The trust hoped to recover respite beds in Lindsey House and to provide additional nights at Greenhill, but my understanding is that it does not intend to create any new additional respite beds. Even with those very limited plans, our hopes are extremely fragile. I learned today, in a response to a question for oral answer, that only 6% of the £1·3 million that was spent last year to improve respite services actually went into overnight short breaks. That is alarming. In order to make up for that glaring lack of services, the trust will often offer direct payments in lieu of short breaks. Parents then need to make their own arrangements. That is more work for parents who are already at breaking point. My constituent does not currently receive those payments, as she finds it too difficult to manage recruitment and all the admin that comes with being an employer. I have been told by organisations that work in this sector that direct payments are often returned unspent because parents cannot find care providers either. I asked a priority question for written answer about the exact numbers, but I did not get an answer back in time for today's debate. In any case, that shows me that direct payments do not work for parents, who need respite services rather than cash. There are so many things that are wrong with the way that children's disability services are being delivered. I could speak on, but I want to say one more thing. In reading through Committee evidence, I can see that there has been an acknowledgement that, at times, compassion and empathy have been lacking in interactions between the trusts and service users. My constituent has also felt let down by that. Parents do not deserve to be spoken to in a way that lacks compassion just because they ask for the help that they need to care for their child, whom they love so much. I believe that the trust has committed to looking at that cultural aspect of disability services, but change cannot come soon enough.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:22 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