Member's statement: Northlands Addiction Treatment Centre, Derry/Londonderry
Member's statement by Mr Mark Durkan on .
- MLA
- Mr Mark Durkan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 28 April 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Northlands Addiction Treatment Centre, Derry/Londonderry
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4913801
Read the official Assembly record
Text
There is palpable outrage across Derry and beyond at the disgraceful decision to cut core funding for the Northlands Centre. It is shameful that Executive parties and all of us stood here in February speaking passionately about the impact of the addiction crisis in the north-west, which is enveloping families and destroying communities, yet, weeks later, core funding for that addiction treatment centre was removed. Furthermore, the £1 million promised for Northlands in 'New Decade, New Approach' (NDNA) remains undelivered. Let me be clear: this is not just about numbers on a balance sheet; it is a lifeline for individuals who are battling addiction. It is a light in the depths of the darkness that so many families have been dragged into. Cutting funding does not just undermine the services and support that they provide, services that they are commissioned to provide by the Department of Health; it undermines the people who depend on them. I speak today not only as an elected representative who has seen the value of the service to my constituents; I have felt the impact of it myself. Lives are not saved by hollow words and empty promises. The individuals who are at rock bottom with nowhere left to turn deserve leadership from the Executive. The excuse of budget pressures does not always hold up. The public's anger is entirely justified when we see how resources are wasted elsewhere. Just weeks ago, I established that, over the past three years, Executive Departments had spent over £5 million on unoccupied buildings and land. Millions are frittered away on nothing while vital life-saving services such as Northlands are left to scrape around and fight for survival. Is that the mark of a functioning or fit for purpose Government whose priorities are in the right place? We hear, time and again, rhetoric about transformation and prevention, but where is the action? It is certainly not in the Programme for Government (PFG), in which, shockingly, the word "addiction" does not appear on any of the 120 pages.
Nobody can argue against, nor have I heard anyone argue against, investing in Northlands. It is not about politics but about people, community and saving lives. We need a Government who do not just talk about doing what matters most but actually do it. People deserve better. People need more. We have called on the Minister of Health to find the money to fund that life-changing and life-saving centre, and we now call on the Executive to do so.
417 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: 0.04 (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 (0.94).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.71 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.24 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:27 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.