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 30 of 45.
“The site sits directly opposite Spencestown treatment plant — indeed, a stone's throw across the river. The main combined sewer runs along the site boundary, yet Northern Ireland Water refuses connection, citing capacity issues. The infrastructure is there, but, it is claimed, it is overwhelmed. <BR /> <BR />The site owner has commissioned an expensive Northern Ireland Water solutions engineer's report, which I have with me. The two options that are presented are wildly expensive, coming at a cost of £160,000 and £175,000. That is utterly unviable for a small site of 10 houses; indeed, it is a death sentence for the development. My constituent has spent over a year employing his own consultants and chasing every option possible.”
“I welcome the opportunity to share my concerns about how a limping Northern Ireland Water hurts economic growth and stifles investment across Northern Ireland. I will use my time to highlight two examples in my constituency that typify the problem that our economy faces due to an at-capacity Northern Ireland Water network across our country. <BR /> <BR />The first example is the case of a small housing site on the Grange Road in Ballymena. Planning permission was granted in December 2020 for 10 much-needed dwellings in a highly sought-after area. The development cannot proceed, however, because of Northern Ireland Water's stubbornness and the utter failure of successive Executives to properly fund and reform our waste water infrastructure.”
“I thank the Member for his contribution. However, in creating that package, you are taking money from one Department to put it into another. Yes, there are some good mitigations there, but you also have to look at where the money has come from to fund that. When we talk about how great Stormont is, how we need to protect it and how we need more powers in this place because that will solve everything, we must recognise that this place has been up and running but has not delivered. The mess needs to be owned by the Executive parties that sit round that table.”
“My goodness, Stormont would do well to reflect on that advice before dragging Northern Ireland further into greater instability. I fully support Northern Ireland being funded to the level of need, but, when it comes to fiscal powers, my goodness, it is a no from me now and a no for ever. <BR /> <BR />The Member talked about food banks and said that they did not exist 20 years ago. Since Stormont has been here — this wonderful place that would sort out all the issues — what has it done about that? What has Stormont delivered so that people do not need to go to food banks? You are going to say that, if we had greater fiscal powers, we could do this, that and the other. That is fantasy stuff. Stormont has been here, but it has not delivered.”
“The Holtham commission, in considering the devolution of corporation tax for Wales, rejected it because it would”
“I was amazed to be the only unionist to voice opposition in that debate. Beyond that, however, under the protocol, control over VAT and goods has already shifted to Brussels. Goods moving between Northern Ireland and Great Britain are now treated as exports and imports, complete with extra documentation because we are subject to EU VAT rules, not British ones. Far from wanting control of those powers, the SDLP was happy to give them away to Brussels. <BR /> <BR />The supporters of the motion need to answer this: if Stormont takes control of more fiscal powers, who will pay for the inevitable shortfall in the funding of our health system, our roads and our schools? It would not be a Gaston speech without a quote from Professor Holtham.”
“If the SDLP were serious about being the Opposition — we hear about it being a constructive Opposition that always keeps the gloves on — it would recognise that Stormont is fundamentally dysfunctional. Devolving more sensitive fiscal powers to an Assembly that is up and down more times than a yo-yo is not in Northern Ireland's interests. <BR /> <BR />Let us be clear about what is at stake. The idea of devolving corporation tax was frequently discussed years ago, and it has been mentioned here today. In 2014, the Treasury made it plain that cutting corporation tax would slash our block grant by £400 million to £750 million. That would devastate our public services, which are already under significant pressure. More recently in the House, we debated an Ulster Unionist motion that called for an Irish Sea VAT border.”
“It did not take long for the first Member in the debate to turn the blame to Westminster. We heard about Tory austerity and Labour austerity. However, Members always stop there. They do not go on to say that, when the Stormont Executive set the Budget, it is made-in-Stormont austerity owned by Sinn Féin, the DUP, Alliance and the Ulster Unionists. Yes, it may sit outside the camp, but the SDLP yearns for the day when it returns to the Executive table. <BR /> <BR />I appreciate that the SDLP, which tabled the motion, is a nationalist party. I also appreciate that Sinn Fein and Alliance, which are cheerleaders for the motion, are also nationalist parties. In that regard, I understand that the motion fits their long-standing desire to dilute the bonds that bind the United Kingdom together. There is, however, a fundamental contradiction here.”
“<BR /> <BR />Yes, there was plenty of tough talking and plenty of grand declarations, but, when it came to it, this was the result: a largely blank page with the sole signature of the TUV MLA for North Antrim. That is shameful. It is a blank page that gives Sinn Féin a blank cheque to act as it pleases. I tried to do something about it; others will have to answer why they did not.”
“Some in the House like to speak grandly about unionist unity. Often, they point to my party and claim that we are the obstacle to it. However, here was the test; indeed, here was the opportunity. All unionists — DUP, Ulster Unionists, TUV — agreed that the Sinn Féin Minister's actions were controversial and provocative and amounted to poking the loyalist community of Sandy Row in the eye. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see it. The Sandy Row community — already ignored when it came to the demolition of the Boyne Bridge and already punished by the effective sealing off of businesses around Grand Central — will now have Irish language signs imposed on it by Sinn Féin. Where was the unionist unity when it truly mattered? Unionism will rightly ask, "What did you do?".”
“Before the House rose for Easter, I placed a petition in the Business Office. It was a simple petition to refer the Infrastructure Minister's decision to impose Irish-language signage at Grand Central station to the Executive for a cross-community vote. I regret to say that not a single Member of the Assembly added their name beside mine: not one. That was despite the leader of the DUP promising that his party was "putting down a marker" on the issue. It was despite the Chair of the Infrastructure Committee describing the decision as "undoubtedly controversial". It was despite the deputy First Minister saying that it was a controversial decision that had not been brought to the Executive. To avoid anyone in front of me feeling left out, I say that the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party reminded us over recess of:”
“Thank you very much for taking my intervention. Will you outline what the money that the Treasury gave to Stormont has been spent on?”
“The Assembly may not like to acknowledge that there is a culture of wastage here, but I have no such problem pointing that out. I also make the point that there could be cuts made to UK Departments, which I would positively welcome. A few fewer bureaucrats in the NIO would be no bad thing. <BR /> <BR />To finish, and to bring me back to the point that Mr Buckley raised, I believe that money that is allocated to Stormont to offset employers' National Insurance increases should have been spent on doing that. Going by the Executive's past form, if Westminster were to allocate money for businesses to offset those increases, there is absolutely no guarantee that it would be passed on to them for its intended purposes.”
“Of that, 1·45% — equivalent to £3 million — was to cover employers' National Insurance rises. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council increased its rates by 3·99%, and 1% of that, or £820,000, was to cover employers' National Insurance increases. I therefore ask Members to ask themselves this: does this place always have the interests of voluntary sector organisations, which we say that we are concerned about, at heart? <BR /> <BR />Let us look at some of the expenditure. Where was the concern about public money when £54,000 was spent on a four-day trip to Washington last year? Do the Executive care for those who are on the minimum wage when they spend £1,000 a week on photographers? What about the £36,000 a week spent on hospitality? If we are going to complain about others, we need to make sure that our own house is in order.”
“Thank you very much, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I appreciate Mr Buckley's intervention, but I am trying to concentrate my remarks on the fact that we got that money to offset the rise in employers' National Insurance contributions. Yes, we have talked about helping businesses and the voluntary sector to offset pressures that they may face, but it was decided that the money that we received for employers' National Insurance contributions would be better used for other things. In this case, that is wrong. <BR /> <BR />Take councils, for example. Each council in Northern Ireland put its rates up — that increase was not the only contributing factor — and, as a result, the burden was passed on to the ratepayer. Belfast City Council put its rates up by 5·99%.”
“The Finance Minister's response was that Stormont had made the decision to reprioritise that money towards other things. It is one thing to want to defend that decision, but for him to come to the House and ignore the fact that £146 million came here because of the changes made to employers' National Insurance contributions is downright misleading. <BR /> <BR />Since coming to this place, I have struggled to process why, instead of using the additional moneys that were received in Barnett consequentials for their intended purpose, the Executive have, time and time again, reprioritised those moneys towards other things in order to ensure that they can put the "Made in Stormont" stamp on them. Apparently, the Executive know better.”
“Day and daily, we hear complaints in this place that Northern Ireland is being treated badly by the UK Government and that the problems pertaining to everything lead back to London, although the Labour Government are an absolute gift to those who want to make that point politically. A cynic might say that it is easy for an Assembly with no tax-raising powers — thank goodness for that — to blame Westminster. I want to look at how we act, however. <BR /> <BR />The motion draws particular attention to the rise in employers' National Insurance contributions. What it does not highlight is the fact that Northern Ireland got £146 million in Barnett consequentials to offset that rise in the public sector. Yesterday, the Deputy Chair of the Finance Committee touched on that issue.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Buckley. I hope that, throughout my speech, I have shown that I do not believe that the Climate Commissioner will bring anything to Northern Ireland. I do not think that they will bring any benefit. I believe that they will bring only bureaucracy and more headaches for business and our agri-industry. I am very happy, at the end of the debate, to be the only one in that position, though, hopefully, the DUP will divide the House on this, and I certainly will vote against the establishment of this commissioner. It is not the right time, there is no need for the post, and that £1 million would be better spent elsewhere.”
“As we have already heard, we have a UK-wide oversight body that is in charge of all this. Why does Northern Ireland think that it knows best? It will create an empire of 15 additional staff, who will put bureaucracy above and beyond what there already is. I certainly do not believe in that. It is not the best use —.”
“I hope that that is a commitment and that, when the new commissioner is in place, they will not challenge that. <BR /> <BR />The people who are best placed to look after our environment are our farmers. They have done that very well for the past number of years. No farmer wants to damage the landscape; they want to have the most efficient landscape in the best shape possible and to have the best produce. I will take no slight to the agriculture industry in this place. Indeed, at every opportunity, I will stick up for the farmer.”
“The net zero Bill, which was rushed through this place at the end of the previous mandate, basically put a knife through a lot of our agri-industry. In years to come, our stock numbers will be slashed. I have no doubt that the commissioner will add an extra burden.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. You raised a very good point about the Dáil and the conduct of its Members. You would not get that in Stormont. <BR /> <BR />We all hear well and good about the commissioner and what they are going to do. I will make a point that I made at Committee: once the commissioner is in place, there will be extra bureaucracy for businesses. Mr Butler is the Chairman of the Agriculture Committee. My goodness, once the Climate Commissioner comes into place in Northern Ireland, they are going to have a devastating impact on our agri—.”
“Once again, I ask the Member this: what difference will that commissioner make here in Northern Ireland?”
“Members, we all have a responsibility to steward our environment and pass it on to the next generation in a better shape.”
“Whether it be on budget or powers, it seems as though some commissioners are more equal than others.”
“When I compare that with section 3 of the Identity and Language (Northern Ireland) Act 2022, I discover that, unlike the Climate Commissioner, the Commissioner for the Ulster-Scots and the Ulster-British Tradition will have no powers to make recommendations and no powers to commission research or publish material pertaining to his or her office.”
“What was her budget to highlight her work and to look out for victims outside of Northern Ireland? Was it anywhere close to £1 million? Absolutely not. I would like the First Minister, when she is summing up, to pick up on that point. <BR /> <BR />Furthermore, I will contrast the proposed powers of the Climate Commissioner with those of the proposed Commissioner for the Ulster-Scots and the Ulster-British Tradition. The Climate Commissioner, who will take up office should the regulations pass, will, according to regulation 4, have powers to:”
“Who has examined the case for a Climate Commissioner against the impact that a commissioner will have on the climate? I dare say nobody. I put it to the House that, for the money involved, there are many more worthy causes that should be placed ahead of having a Climate Commissioner. <BR /> <BR />I will also explore some fundamental, factual issues with commissioners. At the Committee for the Executive Office, we were told that the suggested annual budget of £1 million was based on what one would expect a commissioner's office to cost. The Executive Office Committee has recently been looking at issues related to historical childhood abuse. We have a Commissioner for Survivors of Institutional Childhood Abuse. From what I have seen, she is doing a very good job and is an excellent fit for the role. Does she have a budget of £1 million?”
“Nothing. That is OK. I gave you the opportunity. <BR /> <BR />If the UK were fortunate enough to have the most excellent Climate Commissioners in all four nations, what would be the impact be on global temperatures? I say to all the climate alarmists and all those with facts and figures that, once again, I am prepared to give way. Ms McLaughlin, you are smiling. Anybody? Officials were not able to answer those questions in Committee. MLAs? No? I will therefore move on. Unless and until those questions can be answered, this project has to be considered questionable. <BR /> <BR />Yesterday in the House, the Minister of Finance told me that he would have to examine the case put forward by the Chief Constable for the PSNI to get more funding.”
“— will give way. Take to your feet. Do you want to come in, Mr Blair?”
“Is that an intervention? I have no idea, Mr Blair, whether you are —.”
“No? Nobody has taken me up on that one, so I will move on to my next question. What change to global temperatures will there be if he or she is the most successful commissioner that we could possibly have?”
“I am here to talk about Northern Ireland. The Member talks about 1°C, but he fails to take into account the mass amounts of sewage that are being deposited into Lough Neagh. That also creates blue-green algae and has a big effect on the quality of our drinking water. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to my next question. How are we to assess the success of the commissioner?”
“As I said in the House last week, Ms McLaughlin — indeed, she was in the Chamber at the time — I recognise where the economy is going, so I make no apology for championing North Antrim and championing Wrightbus to deliver new buses, but, my goodness, we have not heard anybody come up with a fact or a figure today to tell us what the benefits of having a Climate Commissioner will be. <BR /> <BR />My second question is —.”
“We have heard in the debate that we have a body that can oversee and look at these issues. Mr Butler denies the fact that climate changes come and go.”
“Mr Butler, we have changes in climate. My goodness, we had the medieval warm period. Was it a renegade step that the Vikings did not come forward with a climate commissioner to sort out all their problems? The Thames froze. These are natural cycles.”
“I contrast that with other important bodies, such as Intertrade UK, which has an independent budget of zero and an independent staff of zero. No one used the appointment of a Climate Commissioner as a reason to get this place up and running, but some unionists claimed that Intertrade UK was in that category. <BR /> <BR />I will ask those who champion climate alarmism four fundamental questions. A number of Members have, rightly, made interventions, so if any of them want to make an intervention to answer my questions as I go on, I will be happy to give way. <BR /> <BR />Can you provide any data on the impact of climate change on Northern Ireland? I look to Mr McGuigan, Mr Stewart, Mr Butler and Mr Blair: does anyone want to give me that detail?”
“Going by the debate so far, I have no doubt that the regulations that are before the House will be approved, but I welcome the fact that, after I raised questions on 19 March, DUP colleagues joined me in making similar points the following week in Committee. <BR /> <BR />Regardless of the motive, there are good reasons for opposing the regulations. Northern Ireland will be the first region in the UK to have its very own Climate Commissioner. When I look at all the things on which we fall behind, I have to ask why we are taking the lead on this. Importantly, the Executive Office Committee has received evidence that the commissioner will require a budget of around £1 million per annum. It is estimated that the commissioner will have 15 staff.”
“After that, it will be too late, and every unionist in the Chamber will have to answer why they did not join me in doing something about it. In the words of Hamlet:”
“The polling which I have referenced in the Chamber shows that the Irish language has a chill factor for people from a Protestant background, including Alliance voters. Fourthly, in contending that her remit involves overseeing the delivery of public transport services, Minister Kimmins effectively concedes her overreach, because imposing the signage on a station is clearly neither overseeing the delivery of public transport nor compatible with the arrangements that afford such functions to the arm's-length body. Translink is not being allowed to operate as an arm's-length body if the Minister is involving herself in the minutiae of operational decisions. <BR /> <BR />I have established with the Business Office that my petition to refer the matter to the Executive remains open to receive signatures until 28 April.”
“The Minister cites Translink's decisions to have bilingual signage at Newry and on some Glider services as justifying her imposition of Irish language signage at Grand Central station. In doing so, she acknowledges that it is for Translink, not the Minister, to make such operational decisions. The partnership agreement that governs the relationship between DFI and Translink makes that clear. Secondly, while the Communities Minister may have statutory responsibilities in respect of language, Minister Kimmins has none. That means that her decision was a cross-cutting one that required Executive approval. Thirdly, the money spent on this is immaterial: what matters is the social impact.”
“I rise for the third time in the Chamber to raise the issue of the imposition of Irish language signage at Grand Central station. I do so, Ms Hunter, not because of a coloniser mindset, but because I believe that Northern Ireland is big enough to accommodate identities that are not Irish. While the issue was raised under "any other business" at the Executive on Thursday, the media have noted that Ministers were surprised by the deputy First Minister's robustness at the press conference. Be that as it may, I welcome the acknowledgement by yet another senior figure in the DUP that the Infrastructure Minister's decision is controversial and should go before the Executive. <BR /> <BR />When does the point come when I will welcome not just words but actions? On Friday, my party leader made four points about the issue.”
“In Northern Ireland, we had an Executive led by a First Minister who operated under the mantra of "Do as I say, not as I do". We operated under a lockdown philosophy that has left a generation scarred by a mental health pandemic. Yes, medicines play a vital role in the health of our society, but government should never again step over the line and try to force a medicine on people through coercive tactics. I trust that we have learned many lessons from how we dealt with the COVID pandemic. <BR /> <BR />I would be obliged if the Minister could address in his summing-up the matters that I have raised on the consultation.”
“While the majority of the 1,181 responses agreed, a significant minority of 379 or just over 32% did not. I noted that many raised concerns that, with flexible consent provisions, participants might be unaware of what is being investigated and of the available options. That runs contrary to some of the comments that Mr McGuigan made on behalf of the Health Committee. <BR /> <BR />There were many requests for clear guidance and definitions to ensure clarity about what would be required and the different consent options available. Some contended that the guidance should be developed with suitable patient and public involvement to provide flexibility while continuing to provide assurance on safety. Since COVID, many people have rightly started to question what they are told by the Health Department and by those throughout government.”
“There were 1,214 responses, of which 380 — 31·3% — agreed; 660, which equates to 54·4%, disagreed; and 173 had no opinion. The main concern of individuals and organisations was that the removal of the listings would reduce transparency and introduce a deviation from international standards. <BR /> <BR />Question 17 of the consultation asked:”
“I have great reservations about the regulations. I say that because, having read the summary of consultation responses, I believe that profoundly serious issues about the regulations have been raised. <BR /> <BR />Question 22 of the consultation asked:”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will continue with my remarks. Although I regret the fact that the Bill is not wider in its scope and will not even, I believe, provide scope for tabling amendments that would address the threat to unborn babies, I welcome the fact that it does address an important issue. Shame on those who brought us back to Stormont, however. The price certainly was not worth paying for the installation of the Executive Formation Act. <BR /> <BR />In closing, I welcome the fact that Members across the House today, by the very act of voting in favour of the legislation, will be accepting, whether they care to acknowledge it, the central tenet of the pro-life argument, which is that an unborn baby is just that: an unborn baby.”
“I thank the Member for her intervention. I feel a moral duty to speak out for the life of the unborn. I am pro-life, and I will take the opportunity in my brief remarks to make some of those points. <BR /> <BR />I remind the House that the floodgates on that tidal wave of the slaughter of the innocent opened only because of the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2022, which is the legislation that brought us devolution for two years.”
“It acknowledges that, although they may not have become any of those things, they would still have been loved as a daughter, a sister, a wife, a mother, a son, a brother or a father. <BR /> <BR />The fact that the Bill acknowledges all those things is right, just and good, but — here we come to the uncomfortable truth contained in the Bill — if all those things are true of the child who, sadly, is stillborn, they are equally true of the 8,093 babies who have been aborted since our abortion laws were changed.”
“The title of the Bill is the Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill. Throughout the Bill, the word "baby" is used. In the Bill, a baby is never referred to as anything else. For example, it is never referred to by the cold term "fetus", nor should it be. I put it to the House that the language used in the title of the Bill and its clauses is an acknowledgement of the personhood of the unborn children who tragically never get a chance to live outside the womb. It acknowledges their value. It acknowledges their potential to have brought love and joy into the world. It acknowledges their potential to have contributed to society and to have grown up to become a great leader, a great writer or a great scientist.”