Debate contribution: South West Acute Hospital: Future of Services
Debate contribution by Mr Tom Buchanan on .
- MLA
- Mr Tom Buchanan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 9 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- South West Acute Hospital: Future of Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5086865
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I also welcome the people from Fermanagh and thank them for coming today. I know something of the journey that you have to make when you come to Stormont. We are glad to see you. I also pass on my best wishes to my colleague Deborah. I wish her the best in the days to come. Given the nature of the debate and the wide-ranging aspect of it, it is somewhat disappointing that we do not have anyone from the Alliance Party or the TUV in the Chamber to take part in the debate. I rise to express my deep concern and disappointment at the temporary removal of emergency general surgery from the South West Acute Hospital. That decision has significant implications for the health and well-being of our community, particularly for those who rely on emergency surgical services. Given the wide, vast rural area that it is, it is of deep concern that those services have been temporarily removed and have not been returned yet to the SWAH. The SWAH services a large rural population right across the constituencies of Fermanagh and South Tyrone and West Tyrone. The hospital's emergency department is a vital lifeline for many, providing critical care and treatment in times of greatest need. However, the removal of emergency general surgery services undermines the hospital's ability to provide comprehensive care for the patients in that large rural community. The decision to temporarily remove the services was a result of staff shortages or other operational challenges. However, such a decision should not have been taken without, first of all, a clear plan being put in place to mitigate the impact on patients and the local community. The people in the south-west quarter of Northern Ireland who are serviced by the South West Acute Hospital deserve much better than that. They deserve a healthcare system that is reliable, accessible and of the highest quality. The temporary removal of that vital service falls far short of that standard. I urge the Health Minister, who I appreciate has an extremely difficult job to do, not only to review the decision but to work with the Western Trust and the hospital management to have the emergency general surgery restored as soon as possible. I also call on him to ensure that a comprehensive plan is put in place so that patients receive the care that they require without undue delay. We have heard today from other Members about the extra travel time for patients and the detrimental consequences that that can have for them and their health. Therefore, we cannot allow this situation to continue. As elected representatives representing rural constituencies, we cannot allow the situation to continue. Minister, the decision highlights the need for a long-term strategic plan to address the staffing shortages and operational challenges that are facing our health system today. We need a sustainable solution that prioritises the needs of the patients and ensures that our hospitals are fully equipped to provide and deliver high-quality care. I remember back to 2009, when the work on the South West Acute Hospital began, and 26 June 2012, when it opened.
Prior to that work commencing, there were, for a few years, discussions about the delivery of acute services in the west of the Province, what those would look like and how they would be developed.
At that time, we were given assurance after assurance and guarantee after guarantee in meetings that the South West Acute Hospital would be a fully acute, fully equipped hospital that would work across the trust with the hospital in Omagh and the hospital at Altnagelvin and that it would be utilised to its full potential in order to deliver the best quality of service for the people in the area. To date, however, two theatres have still not been utilised. The hospitals in Enniskillen and Omagh have not been allowed to achieve their full potential. That is a retrograde step and something that the trust has allowed to happen instead of seeking to get people in —.
OK. Sorry. Our only other concern is that we must fight to keep the hospital's fully acute status. There was a problem some time back with the neonatal unit, and we had to fight to keep that unit in the hospital and —.
716 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 (0.96).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | 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 | 0.93 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.04 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:05 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.