Debate contribution: Inquiry into Access to Palliative Care Services
Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on .
- MLA
- Mrs Diane Dodds
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 2 December 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Committee Business
- Heading
- Inquiry into Access to Palliative Care Services
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5272215
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I am glad to have the Health Minister's acclamation, completely.
It is a real privilege to discuss the report. The DUP is unashamedly a pro-life party. While we are debating having better and more palliative care services in Northern Ireland, MPs in Westminster are debating assisted suicide legislation. It has never been more important that we provide palliative care for everyone in Northern Ireland. I thank all who have contributed to the report, particularly those who have lived experience of palliative care who have spoken of their journey with their loved ones. I also thank the indomitable Christine Campbell, who makes the point that she is "living" while availing herself of palliative care. I know how difficult it is to speak of such issues, and we owe those people our thanks. Thanks are also due to the sector: the hospices, Marie Curie and all those too numerous to mention. I probably should not mention anyone, because I will always leave someone out. They go over and above to provide in times of need and at such a difficult time. Thanks also to our clinicians; to those who provide specialist palliative care; to GPs, who provide the huge bulk of the service at home, helping to fulfil the wishes of the vast majority to die at home in a familiar place, surrounded by their loved ones; and to district nurses and specialist palliative care nurses. We really appreciate your efforts. Committees write many reports, and many reports are just accepted by Ministers with a gracious thank-you but remain on a desk somewhere in a Department and are not actioned. We need this report to be different, Minister: we need this report to be actioned. I heard some conversation earlier about the fact that the report could prove to be a good pathway for palliative care in the future. We really need to see some progress on that. Some of the key issues that were apparent from evidence that the Committee heard were inconsistencies in provision across Northern Ireland; the need to appoint a clinical lead for palliative care, Northern Ireland being the only part of the UK without one; a sense from families of a lack of information and a need for improved communication; and a lack of out-of-hours support beyond 9 to 5, particularly when it comes to pharmacies and access to medicine and pain relief. I will focus first on the need for consistent and sufficient funding for palliative care services in Northern Ireland. Trevor McCartney from the Northern Ireland Hospice outlined the importance of that in his speech at our launch event today. Hospices are currently not funded for the specialist services that they provide. Beds in a hospice are not general medical beds but a specialised service to individuals who are at the most vulnerable time of their life. They are individuals with complex medical needs who can be cared for only in that setting. The importance of recommendations 1 to 3 in the report cannot be overemphasised. Our health service should provide, as a fundamental right, access to equitable palliative care services in Northern Ireland. That needs to be statutory commitment. Recommendation 3 is for 100% funding for all hospice services, with an initial 50% of the actual cost of care to be provided in 2026-27 and a sliding-scale increase over the next five years until that 100% funding has been reached, is important. We recognise the public's generosity towards local hospices and our volunteers' phenomenal fundraising, but that should be for top-ups and bringing in extra services, new initiatives, research and so on, rather than for the core service.
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
615 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: 0.07 (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 (0.93).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.96 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.07 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.05 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.83 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.10 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.03 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.02 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:07 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.