Member's statement: Ambulance Response Times: South Down
Member's statement by Mr Andrew McMurray on .
- MLA
- Mr Andrew McMurray
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 10 February 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Ambulance Response Times: South Down
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5435183
Read the official Assembly record
Text
In the first instance, I pay the utmost respect and give thanks to the Ambulance Service. Its staff are highly trained men and women who answer the call to a ream of incidents across the country, often coming across the most challenging and distressing of incidents. The figures that I will highlight do not reflect on their commitment or their work but rather on the wider systemic issues facing our health service. Too often, those staff spend their time dealing with the challenges of handovers at hospitals, rather than responding to calls in the community. The Northern Ireland Ambulance Service has set a target of responding to category 1 calls within an average of eight minutes and responding to 90% of calls within 15 minutes. Those targets are regularly missed across South Down. In the Mournes district electoral area (DEA), there was no calendar month in which an average response time was recorded that was within the 15-minute target, and, in Slieve Croob, there was only one month in which the average response time was within 15 minutes. The Mournes and Slieve Croob are rural in nature, but, even in Downpatrick DEA, where the county town lies, there were only two months in which response times were within the 15-minute target. For one of those months, the time was 14 minutes and 59 seconds. Crotlieve had seven months in which the average response time was over the 15-minute target. Those were just the average response times to category 1 calls. The maximum response times are extremely worrying. A response time of four hours and 38 minutes was recorded in Slieve Croob.
In the Mournes, there were four months in which response times of over one hour were recorded. One of those was two hours and 34 minutes, and another was three hours and 15 minutes. A category 1 call is defined as dealing with a life-threatening condition, such as cardiac arrest, severe bleeding, unconsciousness, convulsions and fitting. When those are taken into consideration, the waiting times are extremely concerning, not just for the casualty but for those who are generally attending to them. As is so often the case when there is an issue in the statutory sector, the voluntary and community sector steps in. In that regard, I must mention agencies such as Slieve Croob Community First Responders, Mourne Mountain Rescue Team and the RNLI, which very often attends to a casualty if the Ambulance Service cannot. We need to increase the workforce capacity in the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service, finalise the ambulance handover protocol for Northern Ireland, improve measures to ensure better flow of patients through A&E departments and out of our hospitals, and improve capacity in our communities and care system.
454 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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.02 | 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 | 0.95 | 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 |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.97 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:33 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.