Debate contribution: Woodlawn House, Dungannon: Post-19 Adult Respite Provision
Debate contribution by Mr Colm Gildernew on .
- MLA
- Mr Colm Gildernew
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 14 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Woodlawn House, Dungannon: Post-19 Adult Respite Provision
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5181286
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I thank the Minister for attending the Adjournment debate. It is a really important debate, Minister, and I will give a bit of the background to put it in some context. Woodlawn House is the respite centre for adult learning disability in the Southern Trust. When I first became an MLA, significant issues were ongoing in that sector, with underspends and money going back. I worked with your colleague Robin Swann in our respective roles in Health and got at least a partial resolution to that issue. However, ever since, there has been a long-running saga of incidents with the centre. I underpin my remarks by saying that many of the families who badly need the respite are dealing with very complex loved ones, and that they themselves are now much older and really struggling in that context. A number of years ago, one of the issues that arose was a complete closure of Woodlawn, as a result of a person from children's disability needing to use the facility. All the families fully understand the need to meet other people's needs. However, that created a significant level of disruption, off the back of the underspend that I spoke about. It also led to the Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority putting in a change-of-purpose request for the facility, which has never been fully addressed. Families feel that that is now detrimental to their care needs. On my way home from this Building on a Wednesday or Thursday, I have had families ring me to say that respite, which they had scheduled and agreed would happen on the Friday night, was being cancelled. That is just devastating for them. I do not even know what to say to them in those circumstances. I emphasise that neither I nor any of the families believe that that is to do with the staff. The staff do their absolute best. However, a series of complications and complexities have created a difficult situation. There has been a turnover of staff and management, and the pressures keep falling back on to the families. I am told that many families currently have reduced hours. One family, to whom I spoke today, was supposed to get four weeks this year but has only had two. Another family to whom I spoke recently was due to get in the region of 60 days in an allocated period but got only one third of that. It is really difficult. Families might get a phone call today or tomorrow and be told, "You can take some respite in two or three days' time. If you don't take it, it's gone". Therefore, they cannot plan, arrange holidays, have proper breaks and all the rest. I have raised it many times with the senior team in the Southern Health and Social Care Trust. I have met senior team members individually. Every time that I have met them, they have said, "Listen, we think that we have this problem reasonably well cracked. We're recruiting extra staff. We think that we have the management stabilised". We always accept that and say, "Hopefully, that is the case", because, like the families, we are really desperate for a solution. However, the problem continues to rear its head, and families continue to be let down. I am really concerned. One of the regrettable things is that, if any one of those situations were to break down irreparably, the cost would be so much greater than the cost of supporting the carers in the way that we do now. I get a clear sense, Minister, that you are aware of the issues and that you are concerned about them, especially given your focus on shift left, which I very much welcome. I have learnt, in the past few hours, that the Department is holding a consultation in Newry next week and that some of the families will be at it. I appeal to your staff to listen and talk to those families. I am also asking, which is my key purpose today, for you, Minister, to take a personal interest in this to see whether we can find a resolution.
I think that we actually need to over-recruit staff to some degree, to ensure that the cover is there. I know that, with all the budgetary problems, that is easier said than done, and I am not gainsaying that. However, a number of families here are being desperately badly let down, and I am concerned about them becoming burnt out. I think that, in certain situations, some of them have suffered burnout, and I am very concerned about that. I am asking the Minister to take a personal interest, to work with the Southern Trust, work with families and meet with families if he can. I know that the Minister's senior staff will be meeting some of them in the near future. Families in some situations are afraid even to engage, in case they get reassessed out of what they already have. They are in a very precarious position in that sense. I very heartily invite the Minister to come to Woodlawn House. I will go along with him to speak to staff, residents, service users and their families, if that is possible. Thank you, Minister.
883 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).
- 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 | 0.03 | 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 | 0.96 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| 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 13:37 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.