Debate contribution: Waiting Times
Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .
- MLA
- Mr Mike Nesbitt
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 13 January 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Waiting Times
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5316250
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I am listening. Last Wednesday, I spent a few hours in an ambulance. We visited patients, and we took them to a couple of emergency departments. I listened carefully to the crew talk about their issues, and, indeed, during one handover period, I was able to talk to other crews. I was also able to talk to crews who were waiting for a handover in those emergency departments. I am listening, and I am aware, but the Member should know that the solution is not easy. The Member has been to London, and we are hoping to adopt more of the London model. We are, by and large, bringing down wait times, but that is not to say that there are not examples of people waiting far, far, far too long. I met an elderly woman who was waiting in an ambulance outside one of the EDs last Wednesday. If that is uncomfortable for me, what is it like for her? What is it like for somebody in their 80s who has several very serious conditions to lie on a trolley in the back of an ambulance, unable even to get into the hospital? The problem, which I discussed as recently as yesterday in a meeting with the chief execs of all five geographic trusts, is community capacity. We do not have enough community capacity. There are patients who are clinically, medically fit for discharge from our acute hospitals who are still in beds in those acute hospitals because we do not have beds in care homes or packages of care to send to them in their homes. We all agree on that, and we all agree that the fix could take five years or more.
286 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 (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | 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 |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.65 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.31 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.04 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:17 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.