Debate contribution: Tackling Waiting Lists — Investment Plan

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on 6 May 2025.

MLA: Mr Mike Nesbitt
Party at the time: Ulster Unionist Party
Date: 6 May 2025
Type: Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business: Ministerial Statements
Heading: Tackling Waiting Lists — Investment Plan
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 4929466

Text

I thank the Member for her question. The waiting list reimbursement scheme is just one of a number of mechanisms, as I outlined in my remarks. It is part of a cocktail that will involve using HSC capacity and the independent sector to expand. I point out to the Member that the budget for the waiting list reimbursement scheme is £10 million, which means that there is up to £205 million to be used in HSC and the independent sector. I agree that there is an equity issue: you have to be able to afford the treatment outside our jurisdiction to be able to claim the money back. To be clear to Members: we reimburse only what the cost of the procedure would have been under HSC; it does not cover travel or accommodation, including that of, say, a partner. However, it is a good scheme. If you had seen my mailbag over the past 11 months, you would know that nearly every Member has called for the reinstatement of the cross-border scheme. That is being done according to the will of the House.
I thank the Member for the question. He is aware that I have campaigned on mental health issues since being elected a number of years ago. I am aware that we are yet to address that. I assure the Member that the fact that my remarks did not cover that area does not mean that it will not be covered or that I have in some way lost interest in it. I recognise the fact that it is a very important area, and we will seek to do what we can on it over the next 11 months.
I thank the Member for his question. I mentioned the SWAH. I also want to see a significant amount of the money being invested in the Causeway Hospital and Daisy Hill. I say to Members that no hospital will close on my watch. We need every square yard — every square metre — of available HSC space not just to deal with the unacceptably long waiting lists but for a great number of procedures. The theory and principle behind separating emergency and elective surgery are sound: it means that there should be a minimum number of cancellations and maximum efficiencies and productivity. I look forward to updating the Member with more detail on what part of the £215 million will go to the Causeway Hospital.
I thank the Member for his comments. In response to his question, I cannot guarantee the spending of the £10 million, because it will be spent whenever people come forward and ask to be included in the initiative. This will never happen, but, were nobody to come forward, the £10 million would have to be reallocated. I imagine that we will not have any particular difficulty in spending the £10 million during this financial year, but we shall see.
I thank the Member for her question. As I said, this is an opportunity to reassure communities, not least those in Enniskillen, Coleraine and Newry, that their local hospitals are here to stay and that they have specific roles. In the case of the South West Acute Hospital, it is important to stress that there are not only two uncommissioned theatres but two uncommissioned wards and that, as an elective overnight stay centre, it is therefore in an ideal position to start to do a lot of good work in tackling waiting lists, if we can get the workforce together to utilise those theatres and wards.
That is certainly my intention.

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

Assessment

Not flagged

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 (0.86).
No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.04	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.02	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.01	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.05	No
Controversy escalation	0.03	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.86	Yes
Overall judgement	0.03	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
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 area (top five)
Subject	Probability
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits	0.58
No identity-related subject	0.42
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials	0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations	0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy	0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:25 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