Member's statement: Building an All-Ireland Healthcare System
Member's statement by Miss Deirdre Hargey on .
- MLA
- Miss Deirdre Hargey
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 17 February 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Building an All-Ireland Healthcare System
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5394308
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. Building a world-class healthcare system in a new Ireland would give us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink how we care for one another. At a recent health event that was hosted by Sinn Féin in South Belfast, clinicians, GPs and medical experts delivered a clear message: operating two separate health systems on a small island has led to duplication, siloed working and wasted resources. With just over two million people in the North, our current system is under severe strain. We face an ageing population, workforce shortages and an ongoing loss of staff who are moving south because of better pay and conditions. That is not sustainable. To protect what we value in healthcare, we need to a critical mass. Population matters. An all-Ireland healthcare system would allow us to pool resources, reduce duplication and negotiate better prices for medicines and equipment. Crucially, it would allow us to invest more in front-line services; in doctors, nurses and social care. For patients, especially those who live in our border communities, it would mean simpler access. They could attend their nearest hospital or GP surgery without having to navigate complex cross-border systems. We already have good cooperation in specialist services, such as cancer and cardiac care, but we now must plan at scale. Serving a population of over seven million people would strengthen our research, training and retention of staff capacities and ultimately produce better outcomes for patients. Healthcare should never depend on a postcode or income, or on which side of the border you are born. We can take what is good from both systems and design something new. An all-island system with social care at its core would guarantee that care is based on need, not on someone's ability to pay. Everyone across our island deserves the same high standard of care and outcomes.
309 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: 0.09 (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 (0.93).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.98).
- Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.93 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.98 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.59 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.37 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.03 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:51 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.