Cross-border health cooperation ‘natural’ and ‘logical’

With few exceptions, cross-border health collaboration has been “minimalist and often project specific”, says Ulster University’s Deirdre Heenan, who argues that Covid-19 cooperation has not extended beyond “window dressing”.

From the earliest days of Covid-19 in Ireland, the absence of an all-island approach to dealing with this global emergency has been identified as a critical issue. We share a single island, are one epidemiological unit, and therefore cross border cooperation is not only natural, its logical.

Throughout the last year, it has been asserted ad nauseam that ‘this virus doesn’t respect borders’ and ‘the disease does not discriminate’, but has this led to significant policy action? Despite the broad acceptance that thinking in terms of narrow political allegiances or identities would only prolong this crisis and deepen the impact on every community, to date collaboration has been extremely limited.

Both governments have continued to plough their own furrow with little more than lip service paid to working collectively to fight this common scourge.

In March 2020, the outgoing First Minister Arlene Foster slammed the Taoiseach for lack of cooperation with Stormont over Coronavirus. She claimed that he did not brief the Northern Executive before announcing school closures and Belfast officials learnt of the new regulations through the media. The Irish Government pointed the finger of blame at the Executive, suggesting some were more interested in slavishly replicating Westminster policy, rather than developing a bespoke all-island response.

“The regular and repeated calls for further collaboration and cooperation have not been accompanied by any detailed plans, cost-benefit analysis, feasibility studies or robust data to support an all-island approach.”

In April 2020, the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the North and the South was broadly welcomed and viewed as a significant step in the right direction. In the face of this existential threat, it appeared that constitutional politics would rightly play second fiddle to public health considerations. The MoU acknowledged a compelling case for strong cooperation, including information-sharing and, where appropriate, a common approach, but at best it has made a marginal difference.

Practically, it has translated to regular Zoom calls between the Chief Medical Officers and some sharing of data. Window dressing and a far cry from the integrated, single-epidemiological coherent response to Foot and Mouth Disease (affecting livestock). Substantial differences in regulations, restrictions, data analysis and messaging pose practical challenges, cause confusion and are completely illogical on an island the size of Ireland.

The debate on the divergent responses to Coronavirus, coupled with the spectre of a border poll has pushed comparisons between the two healthcare systems into the spotlight. Prevailing wisdom in the North suggests that the health and social care system here is superior to the South’s HSE, but the reality is much more layered and complex.

Significantly though, the ability to make robust comparisons about health outcomes across the island is fraught with difficulties. Providing healthcare services commands one of the largest allocations of public funding on both sides of the Irish border and there are persistent concerns over the efficiency and effectiveness of these systems. Theoretically, closer cooperation could deliver economies of scale, value for money, opportunities for clinical specialisation and facilitate the sharing of knowledge. Over the past two decades health has been identified as a key area for increased cross-border working.

To date though, with the notable exceptions of the All-Island Congenital Heart Disease Network and the North West Cancer Centre at Altnagelvin, the approach has been minimalist and often project specific. Joint EU membership enabled cross-border healthcare activity in Ireland. Co-operation and Working Together (CAWT) was established in 1992, its mission ‘to improve the health and wellbeing of the border populations by working across boundaries and jurisdictions’. Through this vehicle significant work has been done to enhance cross-border collaboration in health service delivery. Indisputable benefits have been achieved, providing access to services for communities within the border region, largely on a south-to-north basis. However, in most instances in these initiatives funding has been time-limited, and services have not been mainstreamed.

The North South Ministerial Council (NSMC) established under the Good Friday Agreement agreed six formal areas of cooperation, for which common policies and approaches are agreed but implemented separately in each jurisdiction, including in health and accidents and planning for major emergencies. In response to the health emergency, the 24th plenary meeting NSMC was held in July 2020, the first since before the collapse of Stormont power-sharing in 2016. It gave a commitment to do ‘everything possible’ in coordination and collaboration to tackle the virus. It was agreed that an early meeting of the health sectoral group would be convened to review responses to the pandemic. At its meeting on 2 October, 2020, the sectoral group agreed to review its existing health work programme. No time frame nor objectives were agreed for this review.

The Health Minister is legally required to provide a statement to the Assembly on this meeting, to update on progress and allow for scrutiny. To date no statement has been presented, nor is one scheduled in the Assembly business timetable. If this is how a priority is treated, one wonders how the Government treats things that it doesn’t view as important.

“Both governments have continued to plough their own furrow with little more than lip service paid to working collectively to fight this common scourge.”

Recently, the deputy First Minister, Michelle O’Neill, suggested that ramping up cross-border health provision could help to reduce Northern Ireland’s “dire” waiting lists. Whilst there can be no dispute that they are dire, this is empty rhetoric.

Given that the Executive has yet to formulate a strategy for dealing with waiting lists which are currently 100 times that of England, this is a useful deflection. The regular and repeated calls for further collaboration and cooperation have not been accompanied by any detailed plans, cost-benefit analysis, feasibility studies or robust data to support an all-island approach.

Meaningful change in the all-island health agenda will not happen without a major policy imperative. There is an absence of any agreed strategic framework for health and social care systems to underpin cross-border cooperation, a situation exacerbated by the apparent lack of political will, north and south, to commit to all-island cooperation on an agreed plan of work.

Currently, there is a complete lack of momentum in this policy area. The pandemic has raised difficult questions about the extent to which both governments have lived up to commitments to developing cooperation across the island.

The new €500 million Shared Island Unit provides a unique opportunity to address the long-standing issues around cooperation in health and reflect on the Covid-19 response. A comprehensive programme of research and development could provide the evidence to identify interventions that would be to the ultimate benefit of all of the citizens on this island.

Given the similar social, economic and political pressures faced by both health care systems coupled with a pandemic that has steamrolled the country, it is an opportunity that we can ill afford to miss.

Deirdre Heenan is a Professor of Social Policy at Ulster University and Senior Associate at London’s Nuffield Trust.

Show More
Back to top button