Timothy Gaston
North Antrim · Traditional Unionist Voice · Northern Ireland
“I begin my remarks by putting on record, once again, my thanks to the victims and survivors who have campaigned for many years to bring us to this point today, where the Bill will pass its Final Stage.”
“There is an onus on the Assembly in the next mandate to ensure that the work continues, with a second phase of redress that will consider individualised acknowledgement of the harm and trauma that the birth mothers and adult adoptees experienced.”
“I trust that those who have worked diligently in the background on the terms of reference will reflect the requests of the Committee and those who have given evidence to ensure that they are victim-centred and that truth and justice will be pursued.”
“Throughout the process, the Committee has taken steps to ensure that victims and survivors of religious institutions, state homes and private homes see themselves reflected in the Bill.”
“At a recent meeting of the Committee for the Executive Office, the Migrants' Rights Network complained that, in the second half of 2025, the UK Government increased raids focused on illegal working. When raids increased by 76%, arrests increased by 169%.”
“The revelations that have come to light since dirty Donaldson's conviction and the red flags that his colleagues ignored raise profound and troubling questions for the DUP, but for Sinn Féin generally and Deirdre Hargey in particular to come to the Chamber and pontificate about safeguarding is utter hypocrisy.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,236 lines we hold for Timothy Gaston, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 45.
“At a recent meeting of the Committee for the Executive Office, the Migrants' Rights Network complained that, in the second half of 2025, the UK Government increased raids focused on illegal working. When raids increased by 76%, arrests increased by 169%. What is the PSNI doing to stop illegal immigrants exploiting the porous border to enter the UK and claim asylum? How many buses does it stop each week?”
“I thank the Clerks and officials who have tended very diligently to the Committee. Although the Bill is not perfect, it is a start towards acknowledging the hurt and trauma that has been caused, and the start of ensuring that it never happens again.”
“There is an onus on the Assembly in the next mandate to ensure that the work continues, with a second phase of redress that will consider individualised acknowledgement of the harm and trauma that the birth mothers and adult adoptees experienced. We must ensure, as a collective body and as a society, that the institutions that allowed those systemic failings and that abuse are held accountable and that they acknowledge their role in that shameful period in Northern Ireland's history. <BR /> <BR />I want to record my thanks to the Chair of the Executive Office Committee and, indeed, all members, past and present, who worked on the Bill. I believe that members set aside their differences to come together for the common goal of putting victims and survivors first.”
“I trust that those who have worked diligently in the background on the terms of reference will reflect the requests of the Committee and those who have given evidence to ensure that they are victim-centred and that truth and justice will be pursued. <BR /> <BR />From the get-go — on hearing from the birth mothers — the inquiry should lay the foundations for the remainder of its work. As we proceed into the inquiry, I acknowledge that some progress has been made on ensuring that records have been preserved and are accessible. However, much work still needs to be done to ensure that the records held by trusts will be accessible in a timely manner to those who need them. Today is not the end of the process for the Assembly.”
“Throughout the process, the Committee has taken steps to ensure that victims and survivors of religious institutions, state homes and private homes see themselves reflected in the Bill. I trust that, by insisting that the inquiry takes a modular approach, we have ensured that the inquiry will be able follow the evidence and that, via that route, the institutions and bodies not currently listed in the Bill will be investigated, and that there will be access to redress where the evidence leads. It is only now, as the Bill passes its Final Stage and goes to obtain Royal Assent, that we will see the terms of reference of the inquiry.”
“I begin my remarks by putting on record, once again, my thanks to the victims and survivors who have campaigned for many years to bring us to this point today, where the Bill will pass its Final Stage. To those who started the process and are no longer with us; to those who came to the Committee and gave their very moving personal testimonies; to those who attended the consultation round tables; to those who individually submitted evidence to help shape the Bill; and to those who lobbied MLAs long before I came to the Chamber: thank you for your time, for your patience and, most importantly, for not giving up. Your time and efforts have made a difference. <BR /> <BR />Yes, the Bill before us is not perfect, but it is better than it was when it was first introduced to the House.”
“Such an approach demonstrates a lack of commitment to truth, justice and, indeed, accountability for thousands of innocent people whose lives were devastated by terrorism. <BR /> <BR />I also challenge the Executive Office. The Veterans Commissioner told us on the same day that correspondence about veterans' issues never receive a substantive reply from the First Minister and deputy First Minister other than an acknowledgement, in spite of TEO's being in charge of victims' issues. That situation does not exist when it comes to groups representing the interests of terrorists. <BR /> <BR />My challenge to the DUP is this: what is the deputy First Minister doing to change that scandalous situation to ensure that veterans' correspondence is being responded to, and being responded to in a timely manner?”
“As a result of evidence given by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery to the Executive Office Committee two weeks ago, we know that requests for assistance sent to an Garda Síochána on Troubles-related investigations are simply being ignored. For Peter Sheridan to reveal that correspondence relating to murders in Northern Ireland with a cross-border element are receiving no responses from the Southern authorities is an astonishing indictment of the Irish Government's attitude towards victims. Dublin cannot continue to demand a seat at the table when dealing with the legacy of the Troubles and simultaneously refuse to assist investigations of terrorist crimes.”
“It ignores the fact that the Irish Republic provided a safe haven from which IRA terrorists were able to operate. It ignores the fact that murderers could escape across the border and evade justice. It ignores the fact that, for decades, terrorists sought to justify their campaign of murder and mayhem by claiming that the Irish constitution gave them a right to wage war in Northern Ireland. It also ignores the fact that, before the widespread importation of Semtex, much of the IRA's explosive material originated in the Irish Republic.”
“I have repeatedly raised in the Chamber and in the Executive Office (TEO) Committee the failure of the Irish Government to play their part in delivering justice for victims of terrorism. To date, Dublin has sought to portray itself as some form of neutral third party whose role is merely to equality-proof proposals that have been brought forward by the UK Government. That position bears no resemblance to the reality of the Troubles.”
“— to happen with anyone else in political life.”
“We all have to look at this as something that requires a victim-centred approach, but there are parties sitting in the Chamber that do that only when it suits. Those who tabled this special Matter of the Day turned a blind eye when it suited them. I think of all victims: I think of Máiría Cahill and those who suffered at the hands of Sinn Féin. The hypocrisy that Sinn Féin has shown cannot be let slide. I pay tribute to the victims of Jeffrey Donaldson. Sadly, I believe that more will come forward as a result of the red flags that were missed. He was allowed to live a double life. I hope that —”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you very much. I take your guidance. <BR /> <BR />Let us look at the red flags that were missed. A victim came forward to the former MP for North Antrim Mr Paisley. The concerns raised were serious enough for Mr Paisley to send a text message to somebody outside his party. My question to the Democratic Unionist Party is this: who else was that text message shared with? Who else was leant on when it came to the leadership race, and was it used then? It is clear from the timeline of events that, back in March 2023, Donaldson was compromised. There needs to be a full and transparent explanation of who knew what, when they knew it and, indeed, when that information was passed among and talked about within the party. <BR /> <BR />I have serious concerns and reservations when it comes to safeguarding.”
“— at other people, who deserve to have the eye directed at them, but they have to look through the prism of what they have done in their past. <BR /> <BR />Today, we heard from Miss Hargey that a victim should not be forced to face their abuser. That is exactly what the IRA did to Máiría Cahill.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, but it is important that we look at those who have brought forward the Matter of the Day. They are more than willing to direct the eye and point the finger —”
“The revelations that have come to light since dirty Donaldson's conviction and the red flags that his colleagues ignored raise profound and troubling questions for the DUP, but for Sinn Féin generally and Deirdre Hargey in particular to come to the Chamber and pontificate about safeguarding is utter hypocrisy. There was not much safeguarding the night that Miss Hargey hid in the toilet as Robert McCartney was being murdered. <BR /> <BR />If there is one thing that we must learn from this sad and vile tragedy, it is that we must listen to victims. I would like to put on record some facts that have been drawn to my attention by two victims of abuse in the past 24 hours. Gerry Adams covered up his father's abuse and ensured that he was given a full republican funeral. He covered up his brother's abuse of his niece for years. Adams knew —”
“Throughout the Minister's summing up, she did not tackle that issue to say how she is following the law when it is clear that she is not following the law as stated in the 1995 rules.”
“Rule 90(1) of the Prison and Young Offenders Centre Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995 states:”
“I thank the Member very much for giving way. I put on record my thanks to you, as Chair of the Committee, for your diligent work throughout the process in setting out the Committee’s position. As somebody who is not on the Committee, I can say that it has certainly been helpful. <BR /> <BR />I listened intently to the Minister’s summing up. I still cannot square the circle.”
“The Minister is misrepresenting it, and she will not take a point of order to allow me to clarify.”
“On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Minister is misrepresenting what my amendment sets out to do. I will repeat it for the record:”
“Those who know better and follow the ideology blindly as they are told to do by their parties and who fail to back the amendment are failing women in our prisons because you are allowing the potential for a biological male to be housed with them, with the risks that that creates. <BR /> <BR />I move my amendment. I am happy to support it, and I believe that, if it is not passed next week, history will remember those who voted for common sense, those who voted on the basis of biological reality and those who were simply too captured by their own ideology and that of the wokery that has captured the left-hand side of the Chamber. History will remember you on these issues.”
“Thank you very much, Minister, for your intervention. I will sleep better tonight, knowing that you are not holding anything against me. <BR /> <BR />I will draw my remarks to a close finally. To avoid being sidetracked, I am not minded to take any more interventions. <BR /> <BR />I know that there are Members sitting on the Benches to my left who acknowledge and agree with biological reality and the common-sense position that the amendment takes. It is time for them to find their courage. It is time that you followed your convictions. It is time that you found the courage to step away from the ideology that has captured your party and the whole left of the Chamber.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Burrows, for that timely intervention. That is a real-life example of something that took place, and it is an example of the dangers that can arise from the Minister not following —.”
“That is not guidance but law. The law has not been amended, so that law stands. The Justice Minister is not fulfilling and following that law, so she is leaving the Prison Service open to a judicial review. Why should we have to wait for a court case to be taken, as has happened in Scotland, for the Minister to act? I presume that it is because I am the one who tabled amendment No 97, and it is about her dislike for me. That is why she has decided not to back the amendment and, indeed, will instead wait until somebody takes a judicial review, which will cost the public money. That is shameful.”
“I will sum up and bring my remarks to a close, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The law clearly states:”
“The Minister has not tried to challenge me on that. She has not got to her feet to say that I am wrong in pointing that out. It is obviously correct then that that indeed is the law. I can find no provision that redefines the word "woman". Let us take this because that is exactly where we are at. This is the law. It is what the Prison Service should be following, and I am gravely concerned that, in the current system, the guidance that the Minister is following is based on ideology. It is not based on law, and, on that basis, I believe that it is dangerous. My amendment is clear. It sets out a provision where, for a man who pretends to be a woman and does not want to go to a male prison — a men's prison — there is that individualised opportunity. That risk-assessed —.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will continue with the train of thought that I was on. If the Equality Act does not apply, I ask the House this very simple question: what provision of Northern Ireland law permits a biological male — a biological man — to be treated as a woman for the purposes of rule 90? Rule 90 has never been changed and states:”
“In the Minister's intervention, she said that my view can be disputed. The Minister talks about the Scottish judgement as not being relevant. She talks about it as not being relevant because it relies on the Equality Act 2010, which does not, generally, extend to Northern Ireland. Therefore, let us step that through. Let us assume for a moment that she is right. Let us assume that the Equality Act is entirely irrelevant in this debate. That does not solve —”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />I remind the House of recent polling that has been carried out by LucidTalk and the 'Belfast Telegraph' in the aftermath of the Supreme Court judgement. It found that around 99% of TUV voters, 94% of Ulster Unionist voters, 93% of DUP voters, 58% of Sinn Féin voters, 57% of SDLP voters and 47% of Alliance supporters agreed with the UK Supreme Court ruling that sex is binary. What we have heard from the contributions today defies what the general public want their representatives to do. That is something that the parties in the House will not be able to get away from.”
“If that person does not want to be part of the men's wing, that is up to them, but they certainly should not be allowed to go into a women's prison. That is what the law states, and I can see nowhere in any legislation that has been brought before the House where there has been a change to that definition. <BR /> <BR />Let us get back to the Supreme Court judgement, which refers to a person's sex being based on their biological sex, so a man is a man, and a woman is a woman. What someone is born with should determine how they are housed in prisons. I say again that my amendment includes a proviso that allows a man who wants to pretend to be a woman and does not want to abide by that law, reality or logic to be housed in separate accommodation.”
“That is the reality that we are faced with. Yes, we hear all the good chat about risk assessments, but the law is the law. If we go back to operating the law, no man should be allowed in a women's prison. As I said, the guidance that I have gone through consists of a number of pages but cannot get away from or around that reality. <BR /> <BR />We have situations in which a man who claims to be a woman can say, "Oh, I have to be housed in a women's prison". They are then taken and have an absurd risk assessment carried out. That could, indeed, become reality, but the law is very clear, as is my amendment, that, if such a situation were to arise, it is up to the Prison Service to accommodate the man who is pretending to be a woman in their own space.”
“I look forward to tomorrow's Executive Office Committee, when we will have the Equality Commission in front of us. That —.”
“Not only does it defy logic and common sense; it defies the law on the basis of guidelines that were never brought before any legislative Chamber and were, I suspect, written by one or a combination of several lobby groups. I appreciate that the Alliance Party is happy to outsource responsibility for its decisions to lobbyists, but that is not how the Chamber should do business. Will the Minister read out the list of organisations to which the guidance on transgender prisoners was outsourced? The same thing was done when it came to increasing the minimum age of criminal responsibility. I am sure that that list would enlighten the Members who are here tonight. Even if that is not produced today, the Minister can expect me to table questions or submit FOI requests on that matter. <BR /> <BR />Mr Deputy Speaker —.”
“The five pages of guidance cannot get around the fact that that is the law. That is what the Prison Service should be operating from. The current guidance that is operated for prisoners in Northern Ireland takes five pages to try to get around that, but the truth is that it does not get around that point in rule 90. One document is guidance, and the other is law; the former cannot supplant the latter. <BR /> <BR />I tell the House plainly that, if my amendment is voted down today, it will not be the end of the matter. If my amendment is voted down, and the Northern Ireland Prison Service continues to blindly disregard the law, the Prison Service will, I believe, continue to be acting illegally.”
“Towards the beginning of my remarks, I quoted from the Prison and Young Offenders Centre Rules (Northern Ireland) 1995 — the document that I am holding. It is not guidance; it is law, and it is clear. It is as clear as the corresponding legislation in Scotland. For the benefit of the House, rule 90(1) states:”
“With respect, Deputy Speaker, I am referring to the guidance that is currently in operation, and, on that basis, I feel that it is very relevant to my amendment. However, I will take your guidance, and I will move on.”
“Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. I am making reference to the guidance on the care and management of transgender prisoners. I am purely trying to get out of the Minister and the Department what role the discredited Stonewall had to play in the creation —”
“I ask the Minister directly: in June 2022, when the current guidelines came in, what was the role of Stonewall? How captured is your Department? The Scottish Prison Service relied on information that Stonewall provided as gospel, but when it was examined by the Scottish courts, it was found not —”
“That is exactly what the current system operating in our prisons does. Ironically, a TUV amendment gives more consideration to the rights of those who identify as transgender than the current guidelines do to the rights of women. <BR /> <BR />I will draw the House's attention to one final point in Lady Ross's judgement. In paragraph 149, she notes comments from the equality and human rights impact assessment that was carried out by the Scottish Prison Service to defend a policy that, as I have noted, is strikingly similar to the one that pertains to Northern Ireland. It is worth quoting again from the judgement. It states:”
“I invite the House to consider paragraph 174 of her judgement, which states:”
“Lady Ross accepted that those who claim a transgender identity have rights that should be respected, and I do not challenge that. My amendment does not challenge that. It respects what Lady Ross said. Significantly, however, she found that the Scottish Prison Service guidelines went beyond those rights in placing biological men in female spaces.”
“I pay tribute to the Bill Office. I confess that that element of the amendment would not have occurred to me, but it occurred to Bill Office staff owing to their professional expertise. I have made provision for those who do not accept that they conform to the gender binary to be accommodated in prison, but the amendment builds in a careful proviso: it stipulates that ensuring their welfare or dignity must not come at the expense of women. I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but, clearly, the official in the Bill Office who assisted with the amendment could lay claim to that title. I say that, because paragraph 181 of Friday's judgement in Scotland states:”
“The transgender person is given primacy over those with whom they serve in prison. Interestingly, the Scottish guidance did the same in that it built in provision for a risk assessment. Did that remove women's legal right to their own space in prisons? I bring Members back to paragraph 179 of Lady Ross's judgement: arguing the like of that constitutes a misstatement of the law. <BR /> <BR />I draw the House's attention to paragraph (3B) in my amendment:”
“That was the Dillon judgement. Where is the anchor in relation to housing men in women's prisons? <BR /> <BR />Let us look at the practice in Poland, an EU member state that has not been captured by the trans agenda. Put "transgender women" in the female prisons there and see what answer you get. <BR /> <BR />In a previous debate on the matter, some Members put much weight on the fact that a risk assessment was carried out in relation to transgender prisoners. I read the guidance in preparation for the debate. The word "risk" is mentioned only twice. Tellingly, on those occasions, it addresses the risk to transgender prisoners. The risk of transphobic harassment and transphobic hate crime is mentioned in paragraph 7. Only in paragraph 9 is the risk that a prisoner might pose mentioned. That comes as an afterthought.”
“I remind the Minister of the argument that activist organisations such as the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission hid behind, which was that article 2 of the Windsor framework means that the situation is radically different in Northern Ireland, or so they claim. That was blown out of the water by the Dillon judgement. I turn the House's attention to paragraph 157 of that judgement, which applies specifically to Northern Ireland and the extent to which article 2 can be applied:”
“So that is in conflict with the requirement. It is a misstatement of the law. <BR /> <BR />The reality could not be clearer as to what faces the House tonight, with the providence that that judgement happened last Friday and the amendment is being debated tonight. Has the Minister sought her own legal advice on the robustness of the guidance that she currently operates? I presume that she has not. Is she just waiting for someone to take a judicial review of the guidance?”
“"Must" and "shall": there is not a lot of difference between those two words. Yet, currently, the Northern Ireland Prison Service has guidance that disregards that. Let us consider paragraph 179 of Friday's judgement and see what it said about similar guidance.”
“I will remind the House once again that our parallel rule 90(1) reads:”
“She was clear. She drew attention to rule 126 of the Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 2011, which is remarkably similar to our rule 90(1). Rule 126(1) states:”