Debate contribution: Diabetes Care
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 28 April 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Diabetes Care
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4914157
Read the official Assembly record
Text
If we were to spend £1 million a day to give our children free sweets, I am sure that there would be absolute outcry — maybe not from the children, but from everybody within the health sector. In Northern Ireland, however, we spend in excess of £1 million every day to manage the consequences of diabetes, and the outcry is, at times, somewhat muted. It is not a distant crisis; it is a crisis that we face right now. It is present today, and it impacts on the people whom we represent. I support the motion and thank the proposers for tabling it. Diabetes is not just a clinical diagnosis but a deeply social condition. It can be shaped and worsened by poverty, inequality and decades of missed opportunities in public health. When we talk about type 2 diabetes, which accounts for about 90% of cases, we are not talking only about blood sugar levels but about the food on somebody's table, the heating in their home and the streets and community services that are around them. That is why those in our poorest communities are twice as likely to develop diabetes. That is a fairly stark reality and tells us that this is not just about educating people on what to eat and what not to eat. There are many other underlying issues that we need to address. It is not just a healthcare failure; it is social injustice. The cost of inaction is staggering: as I said, diabetes costs us £1 million every day. Those who live with diabetes know how difficult it can be to manage. There have been other experiences. I have family members with type 2 diabetes who sometimes have to go through the fight of staying off certain types of food, and it is never a polite response that comes back the way. It is important that we use the opportunity that is available to us all, whether that is education or tackling the social injustices in our community. It is up to us, as legislators, to stop managing diabetes after the damage is done. We must move much more quickly towards a preventative model whereby we stop people from getting diabetes. Of course, that will mean investing in a diabetes prevention programme. I remember back to the time of the Bengoa discussions. Bengoa talked about this type of thing: the idea that, if you stop people from getting sick, they will not have to use the health service. At that time, there was a suggestion that one of the greatest things that we could prevent is diabetes, because the impact that it has on our services is absolutely massive. As we go forward, that is only going to increase. unless we do something. I appreciate that there will be discussion amongst the Executive parties about, "If we want to change something, you need to give me the money to do it, and, if you don't give me the money to do it, I can't do it", but we have to analyse those decisions. I want to see an Executive that analyse all the decisions that they have to take and prioritise the ones that they can do.
Of course, the Executive will not be able to do everything, but, if they prioritise what they can do — what they can fund — on transformation of our community as well as of services, I am pretty certain that, when it comes to health services, trying to change the outcomes for people with diabetes will be up there. I have gone off the script that was in front of me, so I will finish by saying that the technology that has been talked about is critical. We can see the devices that people have in the community. Anybody who has them talks about their transformational nature and the effect on their life. Given the difference between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, it is important for those devices to be rolled out as far as possible. We need to use and embrace technology in order to help people, and it is important that we fully support that effort. I welcome the motion. I hope that the Executive can get beyond the discussion about money by finding transformation funds that could be used to look properly at how we can reduce diabetes in our communities and therefore help people to lead better lives.
737 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: 0.03 (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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.54 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.40 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.04 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:28 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.