Debate contribution: South West Acute Hospital: Future of Services
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 9 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- South West Acute Hospital: Future of Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5086877
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the opportunity to talk on this important issue. I thank Deborah for securing the Adjournment debate and wish her all the best in the days, weeks and years ahead. I am absolutely certain that she will be watching, and she is probably saying, "At the end of the debate, I will be able to click this off, and I will not have to make the two-and-a-half-hour journey back down home to Enniskillen", and that will bring her a bit of joy. What, however, does that say to us about journeys that people have to make? I commend the people from the Save Our Acute Services campaign for making their way up here. We could, however, multiply by 20 the number of people here to get the number of people across Fermanagh who have to travel up to Altnagelvin in Derry every day to access services, visit family or get treatment. That is not a short journey to make. The journey from places such as Belleek and Newtownbutler all the way up to Altnagelvin takes up to two and a half hours. Sometimes, our rural community gets forgotten about when it comes to health services. For city dwellers, that journey is the equivalent of living in Belfast and having to go to Dublin to get treatment. Nobody in Belfast would accept that. There is no way that, if they were to need emergency treatment, in that moment of their life when it is a matter of life or death, people would be sent all the way down to Dublin. Similarly, there is no way that people in Dublin would be sent all the way up to Belfast. Travelling that distance would not be considered acceptable, yet it is what we are asking people in Fermanagh to do. It is the same in my constituency. Although the same distance is not involved, what has happened with Downe Hospital is similar. A rural community up into the Mournes and down into Kilkeel is left to make massive journeys that nobody living in the city, with two or three hospitals on their doorstep, could ever comprehend making. What we are asking for is a bit of equality. It is about spreading the services in a way that recognises that people do live in rural communities and should be able to access some of the services that they require. As a result of the debate, I hope that the Western Trust will recognise that it is not acceptable for people to make emergency journeys of that length. I hope that the issue can be revisited and checked out. Downe Hospital in my area is a great example of another important aspect to be considered. When the anaesthetist is removed, emergency surgery cannot be performed. When emergency surgery is removed, the emergency department is suddenly not viable. When the emergency department is removed, many other aspects of the hospital are suddenly not viable. That is why the issue is critical to the people in the Public Gallery and to the constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone, because, if it does not have all aspects of a fully fledged hospital, what happens is that it gets chipped away, and then we will be back here time and time again to make the arguments for other elements of the service. I know that we are pressed for time. I have made the points that I wanted to make, and I know that we all want to hear from the Minister, so I will leave it there.
590 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 (0.93).
- 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 | 0.07 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.05 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | 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 | 0.79 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.17 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.02 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| 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.