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 25 of 45.
“The DUP held the position of power but did nothing about it.”
“My challenge, in my few seconds that remain, is this: dead-end unionists were right. Take the abortion issue: what has this place done? That was the big thing. Stormont had to be here to stop abortion; Stormont had to be here to stop all those issues coming in.”
“The Assembly can debate motions such as this, but unless unionism gets serious, unless it refuses to be party to its own destruction, London will not take one blind bit of notice. <BR /> <BR />The logic is simple: people were promised one thing; they have been delivered another. I am happy to give way quickly.”
“I thank the Member for his intervention, and I look forward with the hope that, in a number of years' time, we will have a Reform Government that will give many Labour MPs their P45 — much to the displeasure of the Ulster Unionist Party, which seems to prefer a Labour Government. <BR /> <BR />I come to this point: the challenge for unionists is to match their actions to their words. As far as the TUV is concerned, there can be no Stormont Executive as long as the protocol exists. If the situation is as bad as you have outlined in your motion, why are unionists still implementing it? The protocol has to go. It is as simple as that. There cannot be a protocol and an Executive: it is one or the other.”
“Stormont has become the instrument of colonial rule and of the protocol.”
“In April 2024, he told the BBC that the sea border would be gone by the autumn. Jim Allister challenged that spin and betrayal and was dismissed as a dead-end unionist by none other than protocol-implementing Mr Paul Givan. It turns out, Mr Givan, that Jim Allister was dead right. The motion exposes the truth. Northern Ireland continues to be governed by laws that we do not make and cannot change. We have an internal trade border that partitions our internal market. Day by day, we are being aligned into an all-island single market, which is a stepping stone out of the United Kingdom. <BR /> <BR />The Murphy review, which was published last week, showed that the Government have no interest in addressing any of those issues. Those who claim to oppose the protocol, yet implement it in Stormont, need to face reality.”
“Where is he today? He is sitting at the table of the protocol-implementing Executive. The DUP went to the public with seven tests for returning to the Executive and claimed success. In February 2024, Gavin Robinson had an article in the 'News Letter' with the headline:”
“It is hypocrisy for the Alliance Party to claim that it is concerned about building a united community while treating unionist concerns with contempt, trampling on the very principle of cross-community consent that it claims to champion. Sinn Féin failed to move the border by the gun or the bomb, but, under the protocol, Larne has become a frontier town, with the border shifted to the Irish Sea. <BR /> <BR />Unionists in the House were elected on a clear mandate on which all unionists were agreed and united: the united unionist declaration that was agreed under the auspices of the Orange Order. The protocol must be rejected and replaced with arrangements that fully respect Northern Ireland's position as a constituent and integral part of the United Kingdom. Once upon a time, Mr Gordon Lyons said:”
“Well, it did not take long. On our first day back, we have already seen the sneering of the nationalist and republican alliance in the House. It has re-emerged after the summer break, all to hide their embarrassment at the decision and the call that they made for the rigorous implementation of the protocol. That is the very action that brought the barriers to the businesses that they rubbish in the House today. <BR /> <BR />The motion is one that all unionists will support and that all democrats should support. It is a nonsense for some in the Chamber to call themselves a Social Democratic and Labour Party, yet back a state of affairs whereby, in over 300 areas, we are subject to laws that we do not make and cannot change.”
“Will the Minister confirm that the cost of the gender identity service is not a one-off cost but an annual cost of over £800,000; that this is only phase 1 of that service and a second phase to involve GPs will result in additional costs to the public purse; and that there are currently no costings in the public domain for medication, surgery and other treatments? Saying that the figures all add up, Minister, does not cut it with me. Let us be honest with the public: how much will the service cost?”
“The same crisis is affecting all sectors of the education system. The principal of a mainstream nursery in North Antrim that is taking part in the standardisation day is faced with a situation where a number of pupils who were referred to paediatrics by their health visitors have still not been seen prior to starting nursery. The waiting list for an ASD referral is three years. The standardisation programme helpline does not know what to do to move forward. Minister, do you? Will you commit to reviewing the funding available to nurseries that are taking part in the standardisation programme?”
“On 28 May, an official told the Executive Office Committee that regulatory divergence from GB was no longer an issue. Deputy First Minister, given the motion that your party colleagues have brought to the Chamber today, do you hold the same view as your official? What does it say about the Executive Office's desire to address the issues that that remark was made in the first place?”
“The Member talks about public confidence. When I made a complaint about a Chair, the previous commissioner said that she could not investigate said Chair. Will the Member ensure that, in order to instil confidence in the appointment, the new commissioner will not take the same view and that every MLA will be treated the same — they will be treated fairly, and no MLA will be above the law — when it comes to complaints being considered in the House?”
“— it is very relevant to the debate. I am simply comparing what happens in Westminster with what we see in Stormont. Indeed, the case that I mentioned was not referred to the Commissioner for Standards, but, instead, to an insider: the Assembly's head of Legal Services. Unsurprisingly, when he delivered the report to the Assembly, it exonerated the First Minister. He could only do that by not interviewing a single person about the case, including journalists who knew that McMonagle had acted as a Sinn Féin press officer.”
“Thank you very much, Principal Deputy Speaker. As I was saying, the House, sadly, decided to look with importance to the interests of Members' wallets instead of seeking a higher standard of Member conduct. That does nothing for the standing of the Assembly in the eyes of the public. I trust that Mr McEwan will learn from their expectations and from where his predecessor fell short. <BR /> <BR />I draw to the attention of Members what happened last week in Westminster, where there were questions about Angela Rayner's tax affairs. She was rightly referred to the ethics adviser, because it was recognised that that was the person for the job. What a contrast with what we have at Stormont. Let me remind the House of the Sinn Féin paedophile scandal around Michael McMonagle.”
“I preface my remarks by noting that the legislation under which we appoint Mr McEwan was only recently amended by the House. It was not, however, amended to tighten the rules on Members' conduct or to guarantee that the Commissioner for Standards would always investigate alleged misconduct — oh, no. It was amended to lay the foundations for a substantial MLA pay rise. We could have tightened the rules, but, sadly —.”
“In plain language, that threatens supply chains and discourages GB suppliers from continuing to serve Northern Ireland. What steps have the Executive taken to prepare for the expected supply chain disruption?”
“On a point of order, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. Today marks the beginning of the most dramatic expansion yet of the "Not for EU" labelling regime under the Windsor framework. On 5 June, the Government, in paragraph 5.11, stated:”
“Minister, why are the details of the 2025 budgets and grants not available in this statement or even in the communiqué, and where can MLAs find them? As of this morning, I could not find them on the website. Will there be a further opportunity in the Assembly to question you properly about the matter? After all, the Assembly is here to hold Ministers such as you accountable, especially when it comes to the spending of public money.”
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Under Standing Order 20C, questions for written answer should be answered within 10 working days. Through a freedom of information (FOI) request, I have established that there are multiple examples of draft replies being prepared by officials for the First Minister and deputy First Minister and then sitting on their desks, awaiting political sign-off, for 50, 100 and even 270 days. That is not the fault of civil servants. The problem in that office sits at the top. Transparency is being evaded. What action will you take to compel Ministers to fulfil their obligations to the House, and will your office undertake to study the FOI material that highlights the problem?”
“They do not get to choose which questions they answer or when. It is not a private office; it is a public Government. If the Executive Office will not respect the Assembly's procedures, then we turn to you, Mr Speaker, to assess it. Scrutiny is not optional. Transparency is not up for negotiation. The public, who foot the bill, have the right to know how their money is being spent.”
“Not 280 days, not a year — 10 working days. That is not a suggestion, it is a Standing Order of the Assembly that is routinely being ignored. <BR /> <BR />The answers to hundreds of questions for written answer on spending, foreign engagement, equality and civic engagements have been buried. Assembly Members from every party have to chase replies for months. Often, when an answer finally appears, it is just a sentence or two with the same excuse: there is no joint agreement. It is time for some joint accountability. <BR /> <BR />When Ministers dodge questions, they are not just being evasive; they are breaking the rules of the House. The Speaker has rightly said that not answering a question for written answer for a year is clearly not acceptable. Ministers are not above the Assembly.”
“The Assembly is supposedly built on the principle of accountability. Ministers are meant to answer to the House, not ignore it, but we are witnessing a calculated culture of obstruction, silence and secrecy from the Executive Office. We now know that the First Minister and deputy First Minister blocked the release of information about their £54,000 trip to Washington in 2024 for over a year. The flights, hotels and taxis were all racked up from the public purse but were hidden from the public record. Civil servants prepared answers to questions for written answer that were ready to go, yet they sat on the desks because Michelle O'Neill and Emma Little-Pengelly refused to sign them off. It is deliberate, it is political, and it is a disgrace. <BR /> <BR />Let me remind the House of Standing Order 20C, which states:”
“I understand that a previous law change has allowed landlords to split houses into three, which, in turn, in Ballymena, has allowed a number of HMOs to fall by the wayside, because they no longer fall into the category of a HMO. Minister, what steps will you take to tighten the law and to ensure that councils are responsible for the HMOs in their area?”
“Minister, the agricultural targets contained in the draft climate action plan will destroy our agri-industry, with its reduction targets for livestock of 22% in dairy cattle, 17% in beef cattle and 18% in sheep, pigs and poultry. Minister, what steps are you taking to protect the industry that you are meant to champion and to protect food security, or are you happy to stick the boot into the industry, along with the other mad environmentalists?”
“It remains the case that Intertrade UK has no independent offices; no budget; no staff, apart from those seconded from the NIO; and no website that people can be directed to. Does the deputy First Minister agree that the current footing for Intertrade UK is a poor parallel to the bloated body that is InterTradeIreland? Deputy First Minister, what are you doing to address that disparity?”
“I will also ask about the discussion of mother-and-baby institutions, Magdalene laundries and workhouses. One of the major problems with previous legislation was the failure to build in a statutory requirement for institutions to contribute to the redress scheme. Why was that obvious shortcoming not addressed in the legislation brought before the House last week, or have we still not learnt the lesson of the need to build in a statutory requirement for upfront payments from institutions?”
“It wants free rein for its terrorist-supporting sympathisers — the terrorists in Hamas.”
“Do not attach yourselves as bedfellows to Sinn Féin and its terrorist-supporting actions. My goodness, you are saying that you could not support the motion if mention of the arms were taken out. If you remove the arms and remove the support for Israelis, and what will happen? The anti-God alliance will surround them. That is what Sinn Féin wants.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I will bring my remarks back to some of the phrases that we have heard today. We heard phrases such as "human rights"; "war crimes"; "crimes against humanity"; "ethnic cleansing"; and "death, destruction and devastation". My oh my, does that not sum up Sinn Féin and the IRA and what they bestowed on this country for years. I hear Ms Hargey chuntering from the sidelines. She is the woman who was in the toilet when Robert McCartney was murdered. My goodness, they like to turn their face. They do not like to be reminded of what we had. <BR /> <BR />The loss of innocent lives is wrong. I must come back to this point: it is absolutely in Sinn Féin's DNA to bring forward a motion such as this, but I challenge the SDLP and the Alliance Party. Please, oh please, reflect on your position.”
“The motion speaks of war crimes, yet its genesis is in a movement that planted bombs in pubs, shops and hospitals across Northern Ireland. When Sinn Féin and its Members are compared —.”
“Yes, Mr Speaker. <BR /> <BR />We move on to the targeting of paramedics and aid workers. Gerald Tucker, a 37-year-old hospital porter, was murdered — shot — as he left the hospital morgue at the Royal because he was an off-duty UDR man. The motion's signatories condemn the denial of humanitarian aid, yet, to this day, Sinn Féin denies the families of the disappeared even a grave to weep beside.”
“Absolutely. Mr McGuigan has laid bare the fact that he wants us to turn away from what his party has supported in the past. <BR /> <BR />We are talking about condemning the bombing of hospitals, but let us remember that on 2 November 1991 the IRA bombed Musgrave hospital. Two were murdered, and 10 were injured, one of whom was a five-year-old girl.”
“Absolutely. I am comparing those who have tabled the motion, and I am judging them and testing the claims that they have made.”
“Sinn Féin speaks about emotion and the orphans of Rafah, but it had no tears for the orphans of Enniskillen. <BR /> <BR />The motion condemns the bombing of hospitals —.”
“The lofty words, strong language and phrases are designed to stir the conscience, but, when I look at the signatories to the motion, what do I see? I see the name of Pat Sheehan, a Member who would have us believe that he cares about international law, humanitarian principles and the wounds inflicted on civilians. Let us test that claim. He is a man who bombed a cash and carry — not a military base or a government facility but a commercial business. He is a man who went on hunger strike alongside Thomas McElwee, who burned a young woman to death in a shop not in a war zone but in my constituency of North Antrim. The House is now being lectured by him on the sanctity of civilian life. Sinn Féin wants to talk about the psychological and emotional wounds suffered in Gaza. What about those inflicted at Claudy and La Mon or on Bloody Friday?”
“The hypocrisy of Sinn Féin knows no bounds. There is no mention in the motion of the terrorist attacks on 7 October. There is no mention of the years during which the Israeli people have suffered at the hands of the anti-God alliance from the countries that surround them. There is no mention of the abuse that Jewish people have suffered and continue to suffer across the world. Every country has a right to defend itself against terrorism and to fulfil its obligations to protect its people and innocent lives. <BR /> <BR />When a motion comes before the House, it is worth checking who has signed it. Today, we are asked to support a motion that condemns war crimes, attacks on civilians, the use of starvation as a weapon, the bombing of hospitals and the traumatising of innocents. I have no problem with any of that.”
“Well, the net zero fanatics in the House were warned about the dangers that their Climate Change Act posed, but they chose not to listen. Will the Minister assure the House that no attempts will be made by either her or her Department to exempt the A5 from the Climate Change Act? Does she agree that, in order to move forward with the project and, indeed, others, the only option is to repeal the entire Climate Change Act?”
“Will the Member confirm that, while the changes to the Stormont toilet policy were made after consultation with the widely discredited trans lobby group Stonewall, there was no consultation with parties that are not represented on the Commission, even though we and our staff use those facilities?”
“That is news to me and a lot of ones in the Chamber. Sinn Féin has a history of erecting posters on the billboard at that roundabout; maybe that is why the Minister is reluctant to provide a time frame for its removal. My understanding is that the billboard is on Department-owned land: on that basis, how can anybody but the Department apply for planning permission? How do you square that with your Pledge of Office? How do you plan to take action? If it is your Department's land, obviously, your Department would have to lodge the planning application. Sinn Féin has used the billboard in the past. Surely, you are not applying for permission for a Sinn Féin billboard.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Taking your advice, I will close by saying that there is nothing compassionate or liberal about ignoring the issues. The situation is being actively exploited by smugglers, traffickers and criminal gangs. I urge the Minister to act by securing dedicated enforcement funding, insisting on cross-border action and stopping criminal gangs from exploiting our border and communities.”
“Absolutely. I appreciate the Member's intervention. The problem with the LCM today is that it does not look at the root causes. That is why we have ended up in Northern Ireland with the problems that we have seen over the past number of weeks. <BR /> <BR />The motion may be limited, but the problem is not: Northern Ireland is being used as a back door into the UK.”
“— Mr Speaker, I will, but I encourage the Minister to look at the 2021 census data. Furthermore, ask yourself this: with no border checks, records or enforcement, how could any other form of data exist?”
“— to justify concerns about immigration in the area.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I will do so, but I highlight a recent article in 'The Telegraph', which exposed how Albanian crime gangs openly advertise a safe route into the UK via Dublin, charging £4,000 per person. When contacted, the PSNI failed to comment. Meanwhile, in Ballymena's G3 area, over 52% of residents have arrived here within the past decade, many via the Republic, bringing sharp demographic change and raising community tensions. The Minister tells us that there is no data —”
“Last week, 'The Irish News' reported that the guards are carrying out bus checks near the border. What equivalent checks and efforts are being made here in Northern Ireland? Traffickers are exploiting that weakness —.”
“The legislative consent motion covers just nine clauses of a 90-page Bill. Those clauses deal with trailer data, crime prevention orders and qualification fees. However, it completely sidesteps the issue that matters most for Northern Ireland: the open land border with the Irish Republic. Clause 2 empowers the new border security commander to set UK-wide strategic priorities, yet there is no mention — not a single line — about the land border or illegal immigration into Northern Ireland. That omission is not a technical oversight; it is a political failure and a refusal to confront reality. When the Bill was before the Commons, Jim Shannon MP secured assurances from the Minister that the PSNI and the guards would cooperate on border threats. Is the Justice Minister willing to give those same assurances to the House here today?”
“Minister, last week, 'The Telegraph' carried a story about Albanian gangs encouraging people to enter the UK illegally via the open border with the Republic. When will the PSNI be a physical presence on the border, like the guards, to prevent those crime gangs exploiting that weakness in our security?”
“Let us show our constituents that their needs are our priority. We cannot bury our heads in the sand any longer. As a priority, waste water infrastructure needs to be sorted out, but, at the same time, we need to look at issues such as immigration and the illegal HMOs that are operating in society. They are driving up rents and preventing people from getting houses. Those are issues that people do not want to discuss, but they are issues that the people of North Antrim — my community — have sent me here to raise in order to represent them, because they are issues that are prevalent in North Antrim.”
“In Northern Ireland, we are housing asylum seekers in hotels at taxpayers' expense while failing to build enough social homes. That fuels tensions in our community. In response to a recent question for written answer, the First Minister and the deputy First Minister told me that 300 asylum seekers are currently being housed in such accommodation. The Assembly must act. The recent unrest has shown that we need to take the issue seriously. I call on the Executive to deliver a clear plan, to increase funding for social housing to meet the waiting list need, to resolve Northern Ireland's waste water infrastructure issues as a priority and to reform HMO regulations in order to prioritise safety and local oversight. <BR /> <BR />Every citizen who has paid into the system deserves a safe, affordable home.”