Debate contribution: South West Acute Hospital, Enniskillen
Debate contribution by Mr Colin McGrath on .
- MLA
- Mr Colin McGrath
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 24 February 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- South West Acute Hospital, Enniskillen
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5404887
Read the official Assembly record
Text
As in any discussion on a topic such as this, I will start by acknowledging the surprise in the room, which is that I am not from Fermanagh. That does not mean that, as an SDLP representative, I will not stand up for the people who are fighting this campaign. I live in the town of Downpatrick, which, in some ways, is not dissimilar to Enniskillen. One similarity that my constituency has to Fermanagh is that it is mostly rural. One consistency — I think that this is becoming a bit of a pattern — is that rural communities are being left behind in healthcare generally, but specifically in emergency healthcare treatments. It seems that emergency facilities, whether surgeries, emergency departments or other facilities, are becoming more urban based. That is fundamentally unfair to those of us who live in rural communities. I welcome the opportunity to have a debate about rural provision in the SWAH. The SWAH covers communities across Fermanagh and Tyrone, as well, indeed, as in parts of Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan. The fear for the debate is that we could lapse into talking about North/South or British/Irish issues.
We should not go there, because, when you are sick and need emergency treatment, you want to get to the nearest facility as quickly as possible. The fundamental point is that it is not good enough that people in Fermanagh have to travel to Altnagelvin for emergency surgery. A journey of two and a half hours for anything emergency is just ridiculous. It is counterproductive to say to somebody, "You can get emergency treatment, but it's two and a half hours away".
There is another concern for people who live in rural communities, especially those in Fermanagh. The journey can take two and a half hours once the ambulance arrives, but the ambulance has to get to them first. We know that, at the moment, through no fault of the dedicated paramedic staff or those in the Northern Ireland Ambulance Service, the Ambulance Service is not able to respond to people in rural communities in a timely manner. I do not know what it must be like for some people who need emergency surgery and ring for an ambulance. They may think that it will take an hour to get to them, but it could take two and a half hours. Then, when they arrive at hospital, they have to be triaged. If they have gone via the SWAH, by the time that they get to Altnagelvin, they have to be triaged a second time, which adds more time to a service that is supposed to be an emergency service. We invested in the hospital, and it was built, but we were then in a scenario in which the services were removed. I am sure that people feel that the trust is doing a good job in its own way, but it is using statistics to try to prove to people that the decisions that it wants to take are the right ones. I wonder whether they are. I reflect on figures from some of the experts, such as CHKS. We keep hearing about a risk-adjusted mortality index (RAMI), which is a measurement that we are supposed to just accept and say, "Well, the RAMI score's grand, so let's shut down the emergency surgery and forget about it". However, that independent organisation, which analyses the information, is not so sure: it says that it does not show a statistically significant change, and that it needs a longer period of time to assess the data. It talks about the average length of stay. There is no change in the average length of stay. When it comes down to it, it is about that old saying about pounds, shillings and pence. It is about simply putting everything into one centre because that makes the service easier to run. That is not fair on rural communities. Minister, we need somebody to stick up for rural communities. There are parallels in my constituency of South Down. People in rural communities are frightened that, at their moment of need, the health service will not be there for them. We need to do all that we can collectively — north, south, east and west; across the Executive; and those of us in the Opposition — to serve the people whom we represent right across the constituencies, not just those in parts of them. Key to that are places such as the SWAH being able to deliver the services that they were built to deliver. I hope that we will see the change that we need, and that we will keep the campaign going. I thank Helen, Jimmy and all the team for keeping it on our agenda.
793 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: 0.05 (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 (0.94).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.85).
- 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 | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.85 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.09 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.06 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.45 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.33 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.17 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.04 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:03 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.