Debate contribution: Birch Hill Centre for Mental Health

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on 18 November 2025.

MLA

Mr Mike Nesbitt

Party at the time

Ulster Unionist Party

Date

18 November 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Adjournment

Heading

Birch Hill Centre for Mental Health

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5244992

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you to everybody who contributed, particularly Mr Kearney. The debate reminded me of one that we had in early October when Sinn Féin tabled a motion on the mother-and-baby unit. Believe me: my approach to Birch Hill and the mother-and-baby unit is the same. I want them — I want them tomorrow — but I also want the imaging academy that Mr Dickson referred to in the previous debate, plus a host of other capital projects. We have 14 so-called partially committed capital projects on the books. I cannot commit to any of them at the moment. I will come back to that. Mr Kearney knows that I had no prior sight of his speech. I listened to it intently. I could have delivered just about every word of it myself. I visited Holywell with the fabulous Petra Corr, the Northern Trust's mental health director, who showed me round. As well as visiting the current facility, I saw in Holywell — I am sure that Members are aware of this — two-dimensional designs for Birch Hill, as well as a mock-up of a bedroom. They are absolutely gold-plated. The design, which will put Birch Hill within the confines of Antrim Area Hospital, is magnificent and is so in keeping with the modern way that we are talking about. The proposals for Birch Hill include 134 inpatient beds, 72 acute beds across four wards and a 20-bed inpatient frail or mentally infirm ward. The proposals are even future-proofed: if there is an excess of demand for beds on an ad hoc basis, the second lounge is designed in such a way that it can be turned into a short-term bedroom space. More important than the physical is the ethos. It has changed so much. It will focus on the ethos of a recovery-orientated approach in keeping with the mental health strategy. The model adopts a more holistic approach, with principles centred on empowering the individual to take as much responsibility as possible for their own well-being. It will be trauma-informed, recognising the individual's life experiences and the consequent impact on them. There is a purposeful inpatient approach. It is a model that will continue to be developed and embedded throughout the existing wards, ensuring that a patient's admission is appropriate, purposeful, therapeutic and safe. My point is that Holywell is not just falling apart physically — we never really see the benefit of expenditure on repairs because, once we have done one repair, we go on to the next one, as though we are painting the Forth Bridge — but it is out of date. As Mr Clarke said, it used to be called something else; a term for the inpatients that I would not dare to use in 2025. It was built at a time when the societal and governmental attitude to people with mental health or neurodevelopmental issues was, "Get them out of sight, lock them away and forget about them". We would not even dream of doing that today. What I like about it is not just the modern design; it is the fact that the ethos is about a model that allows teams to focus on engaging the patient meaningfully and engaging the family, the key stakeholders, the GP and community mental health teams, which are so important, and communicating expected dates of discharge and ongoing treatment. As part of the service model review and development, the trust has started to engage in accreditation to the Royal College of Psychiatrists quality network standards for each service type to ensure that Birch Hill will have its care and service provision benchmarked against the best in the UK. That will enable the medical staff to deliver care that is high-quality and time-bound. Adopting that proactive model of care will help to reduce the length of stays through maximising clinical efficiency, optimising health outcomes and effective utilisation of resources. In short, it will ensure that a patient's stay on any ward is meaningful and adds value to them and their future. Mr Kearney seeks clarity from me. This is the one area where I diverge a little. You are asking the wrong Minister. If you want clarity, you should ask the Minister of Finance. Following the announcement of the outcome of the UK-wide 2025 spending review, which happened in June, the Department of Finance commissioned a Budget exercise to determine the capital budget for Northern Ireland's Departments for the years 2026-27 to 2029-2030. It is not possible for me to commit, as Members have asked me to do, to funding for any new capital projects today, because that is dependent on my capital allocation from the Budget process and the identification of sufficient additional recurrent funding to meet any additional resource costs associated with those projects. The trusts and other Department of Health arm's-length bodies (ALBs) have identified capital funding requirements of around £3 billion over the next four years. That is more than £1 billion higher than what I should expect the level of capital funding to become. On that basis, inescapable pressures tend to take priority. As I said, Birch Hill is one of the partially committed projects, but there are 14 such projects. I assure Members that I have looked at the list of 14, and Birch Hill, the mother-and-baby unit and the imaging academy are all at the top of it.

Yes.

I thank the Member for the intervention. The short answer is yes. We are looking at repurposing or divesting ourselves of property, as appropriate. That process is under way. Mr Clarke said that he had submitted a question for written answer in September. I have already emailed my private office to say that I would like that expedited. Sometimes, it takes longer than anticipated to get the answers to certain questions, but, when we have reached the point at which we should have responded, we should at least say, "We are sorry that we have not responded, and here is why". That is something that we, as a Department, need to take on board. As to the value of the sale of Holywell, I do not know the answer. Mr Clarke may be more familiar with the price of property in South Antrim. Again, I will ask the question and revert to him on that. I would just caution one thing, because he mentioned the sale of Holywell. The Member may remember that, some years ago, the Ministry of Defence "gifted" the Executive some former military bases on the basis that we were getting the land for free. Well, we did not get it for free. There was a lot of work, not least decontamination, that needed to be done, so I question whether it is as straightforward as decanting to Birch Hill, selling Holywell and recouping its full value. I do not know. Mr Kearney opened by throwing it to me, so I will finish by throwing it back to him. If he can have influence with the Finance Minister and the Finance Minister can ring-fence the money required for Birch Hill, we will proceed, because I want it built.

Yes.

I started by agreeing with the Member, but now I fundamentally disagree with him. I need the money. I do not have the money.

1,218 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:02 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.

Challenge this classification