Debate contribution: Diabetes Care
Debate contribution by Mr Stewart Dickson on .
- MLA
- Mr Stewart Dickson
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 28 April 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Diabetes Care
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4914172
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I thank my East Antrim colleague Cheryl Brownlee for proposing the motion. It is a very important one. Like others, I can speak from personal experience. My wife is a type 2 diabetic. For her, the constant need to prick her finger and watch her diet has been dramatically changed by the sensor that she wears. It is the most amazing piece of technology that has come out, of that there is no doubt. As others have said, diabetes is one of the most serious health issues of our time, with over 115,000 people in Northern Ireland living with it. That figure rises annually by some 3,000. Every day, more individuals are diagnosed and more families have to learn to adapt to new realities. Every day, the cost to our health service grows. It takes over £1 million to manage diabetes daily, which equates to 10% of our local health and social care budget. Behind those statistics are real people who are living with not just a medical condition but fear, anxiety and huge mental and emotional strain. That is why it is vital that our health system provide more than treatment. It also has to provide support, dignity and fairness. I have to say that I see that from my wife's team in the Northern Trust every time that she comes into contact with it. I am pleased to be the chair of the all-party group (APG) on diabetes. I have had the privilege, and, at times, experienced the frustration, of hearing directly from people living with diabetes, from clinicians and from charities such as Diabetes UK NI. Their message has been constant: promises must become action, and strategies must become services that people can see and feel. We have known for years that proper data is vital. In 2016, we committed to participating in the National Diabetes Audit, which is the audit used in England and Wales, but nothing has happened. Nine years later, Northern Ireland still does not have the infrastructure in place. Without that data, our clinicians and, worst of all, our patients are working blind. We cannot properly plan, properly measure or, importantly, properly improve. Think of where we would be today had that audit been put in place in 2016. I will now put direct questions to the Minister. Minister, will you commit to joining the audit? When can we expect to see it deliver for patients in Northern Ireland? It is true that there has been the same slow progress with technology. Hybrid closed-loop systems are endorsed by NICE and are now recognised across the United Kingdom as a major advancement. They reduce the burden on patients and improve health outcomes and lives, yet, once again, Northern Ireland lags behind in their implementation. Good intentions are not enough. Approval on paper is not enough. Delivery is what matters, and it matters urgently. In preparing for the debate, I consulted Diabetes UK NI, because I wanted to ensure that whatever I said reflected the voice of those who matter most: people living with diabetes and the organisations that support them. Although motions and debates are important, what matters far more is what happens after the words are spoken.
My colleague Danny Donnelly said that Alliance has been consistent in pushing for practical change. We have worked closely with stakeholders, we have listened, and we have acted. Last year, I sponsored the Live Well Hub event at Stormont, which showcased community-based support that is already making a difference. Those who are living with diabetes are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for fairness, services that meet modern standards and technology and care that reflect best practice and not outdated systems and endless waiting. We support the motion because we recognise its important truths, but let us be clear that the real test will not be today's debate; it will be in what is done next. Over to you, Minister. For too long, people living with diabetes have heard commitments. They now deserve to see delivery. If the Minister can get it right, it will not just be the statistics that improve; it will be people's lives.
693 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: 0.02 (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 (0.96).
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | 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 | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.78 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.22 |
| 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 12:28 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.