Debate contribution: Excess Deaths Linked to Long Emergency Department Waits
Debate contribution by Mr Mark Durkan on .
- MLA
- Mr Mark Durkan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 20 April 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Question for Urgent Oral Answer
- Heading
- Excess Deaths Linked to Long Emergency Department Waits
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5493760
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I asked the Minister some questions for written answer on this issue a number of months ago, and the answer I got back was, "The Department does not retain the data to be able to answer this question". That begs the question — this is not my question here; I will come to it — about whether there is an issue with collating data or sharing data. There is a real question about transparency. I caution the Minister about pointing to a minuscule reduction in the number of deaths compared with the previous year as some measure of success. The sad fact is that there are people who, despite being really sick, do not want to go to an emergency department for this very reason. Given the links with overcrowding and long waits — I have raised the issue of Altnagelvin ED many times —
Do we have a geographical breakdown of those deaths?
154 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: 0.04 (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 (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 | 0.94 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | 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 | 0.99 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:26 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.