Debate contribution: Tackling Waiting Lists — Investment Plan

Debate contribution by Miss Órlaithí Flynn on .

MLA
Miss Órlaithí Flynn
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
6 May 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Ministerial Statements
Heading
Tackling Waiting Lists — Investment Plan
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4929488

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Minister, I greatly welcome today's announcement. It is brilliant to hear the news about the cross-border initiative, the two phases and the cancer plan. It is all good stuff in the statement. Thank you for listening to Members who lobbied on that.

Minister, you mentioned really positive stuff about the gynaecology waiting lists and mesh removal. Will your implementation plan that will be published later this month include a breakdown of targets and timelines specifically for mesh removal or for gynae more generally? Will the detail of the plan be that specific?

92 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: 0.02 (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 (0.89).
  • 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.01No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.89Yes
Overall judgement0.02At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject0.79
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.15
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.05
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.01
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00

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