Debate contribution: Health and Social Care: Data Definitions

Debate contribution by Mr Mike Nesbitt on .

MLA
Mr Mike Nesbitt
Party at the time
Ulster Unionist Party
Date
24 March 2026
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Oral Answers to Questions
Heading
Health and Social Care: Data Definitions
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5463209

Text

I absolutely do. The Member is maybe suggesting that some of the reduction in waiting lists is not through activity beyond validation: maybe or maybe not. Validation is a very important and necessary process. By the end of the financial year, which is a week or more away, I want to know not that we have exceeded the Programme for Government target of 70,000 but how we have exceeded it. I want to see it broken down by appointments, diagnoses and procedures. That, by necessity, will involve knowing the numbers trust by trust. I was not aware of the experience that the Member had with that trust, but I would like to rectify that as we come to financial year end.

121 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.90).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying 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

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.02No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.02No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.90Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
No identity-related subject1.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00
Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:16 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification