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 9 of 45.
“I think that it is safe enough to say that I will be finished within the seven minutes, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker.”
“— in number in the weeks and months ahead.”
“That over-the-top response from the police was what created the two nights of protest seen at Ballygawley roundabout. I have no doubt that, unless action is taken by those in Westminster and here in Stormont, those protests will grow —”
“That is why we saw such strong public support for last week's protests. Anyone who spent a few minutes on social media would have seen the level of appreciation and support for those taking part. <BR /> <BR />Farmers are the backbone of our rural and wider economy. Time and time again, they go above and beyond, responding to the needs of their economy. They clear trees after storms, they clear roads after heavy snowfall, and they help during flooding. They work long hours, often for below minimum wage, to produce high-quality produce that feeds our nation. The police response last week to the Sydenham bypass protest was heavy-handed and excessive. Think of it: driving on a dual carriageway with no minimum speed limit merited the police visiting the homes of the drivers that evening to impose £100 fines and three penalty points.”
“Thank you very much, Principal Deputy Speaker. <BR /> <BR />The fuel protests that we have witnessed over the past week did not appear overnight. Tension has been building for many months as a reaction to government overreach. For many ordinary working people — the alarm clock workers who keep our economy moving — enough is enough. The rising cost of fuel is the final straw, adding to the already significant pressures on businesses, with the UK's having the highest industrial energy price and endless red tape. Today, working men and women are watching closely to see whether the Labour Government and the Executive are prepared to take action to ease those burdens. There is a growing belief that the Government want to save the planet for future generations but fail to realise that they are killing this generation in the process.”
“By way of contrast, there is a vague commitment to support Coleraine. I ask this of all the Executive parties today: where is that support? You cannot blame London when the reality is that that power is devolved. Prioritising the expansion of one campus has left Coleraine as the poor relation. Rather than washing their hands of the matter, the Executive must provide the funding required by Ulster University. Last week's news was the result of policies pursued by the Executive. This is not about a funding crisis at Westminster; it is about a political choice taken at Stormont.”
“The Sinn Féin Minister cannot blame the Brits when this has happened on her watch. <BR /> <BR />In the current Programme for Government, the Executive committed to working:”
“Regardless of what some Members in the Chamber may claim or how they try to spin it, the public know the uncomfortable truth for the Executive: higher education has always been a devolved issue. It therefore simply will not wash for Stormont to try to pass the buck to Westminster on the matter. <BR /> <BR />For years, nationalist politicians have campaigned for the focus of attention to be on Magee, resulting in Coleraine being neglected. Let us look at the facts. Even in the aftermath of the devastating news for Coleraine's Ulster University, a spokesperson for the Department said that the expansion of the Londonderry campus remained "a clear ministerial priority". That is something that the whole Executive cannot wash their hands of. It is a Belfast issue, not a London issue.”
“There was nothing about the full tank of milk until it was pulled out of you, Minister. A clear cultural issue exists at AFBI. Will you now sit down with Dougie Beattie of GB News and answer his questions, or will you continue to hide from GB News and shy away from scrutiny of the issue?”
“That was a statement by a Minister who has finally put up the white flag and acknowledged the well-founded concerns that have been raised about AFBI. There was no apology for spreading slurry during the closed period, nothing about blowing slurry and Bovaer milk into the forest and nothing about the full —”
“— if the House continues down the dangerous route of going after net zero.”
“Absolutely, and that shows us the folly of the net zero zealots and the green-welly brigade in this place. I am absolutely astonished that they are being propped up and cheered on by the Ulster Unionists in the House today. We need to get our priorities right, and going after the fantasy of achieving net zero will cripple industries that put food on our plates. Food security will be put at risk —”
“Oh, £3 million. That Climate Commissioner would therefore get more than any other commissioner located within the Executive. That shows us the folly of the priorities.”
“This place wants to prioritise £1 million to give a war chest to an environmental zealot with 15 staff to ravage our agriculture industry.”
“Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. I will try my best, but I believe that the two are linked. <BR /> <BR />I will move on to page 27 of the draft Northern Ireland climate action plan. It states that there will be devastating cuts to our agrisector as a result of delivering a reduction in the number of livestock by 2030. We talk about tinkering with the figures. With what figures would the Ulster Unionists like to tinker? Is it the 22% reduction in dairy cattle, the 17% reduction in beef cattle or the 18% reduction in the sheep, pig and poultry sectors? Those are all very live issues. Shall we talk about the Climate Commissioner that this place so desperately needs? That is a million-pound cost at a time that we do not have money to fund basic front-line services.”
“Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I heed your ruling. <BR /> <BR />I will respond to Mr Kearney's remarks. He failed to take my intervention when he was pointing out all the problems. When it comes to climate change and cleaning up our environment, what is his party's Minister doing? She holds the portfolio in the Department for Infrastructure, which is another zealot-controlled Department that is doing nothing but blaming everyone else. I see that the Agriculture Minister is to make a statement on the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) after the debate on this motion, and serious questions remain about what has been happening at that facility outside Hillsborough when it comes to meeting basic environmental standards.”
“Absolutely. Not 1 square metre of tar has been laid, yet thousands of acres of land have been destroyed in the process. <BR /> <BR />Let me return to talking about our Agriculture Minister. He remains the man who lets Northern Ireland Water off the hook. Mr Kearney did not take my intervention earlier when I wanted to point out to him —.”
“There is no greater champion of green ideology than the Agriculture Minister, however.”
“We do not need to prioritise cycle lanes while potholes litter our roads as people try to get to work. We do not need green tape restricting the developments that are necessary to drive our economy forward. <BR /> <BR />As one thinks of that issue in the round, I am reminded of a biblical proverb: "Physician, heal thyself". Let us talk about the 200,000 tons of sewage that is discharged into Lough Neagh each year or the 20 million tons of untreated sewage that enters Northern Ireland's waterways each year.”
“<BR /> <BR />The reality is that even those opposed to the motion complain about the outworking of the very policies that they advocate. Who among Sinn Féin opposes the A5? Who among the SDLP or Alliance opposes the A5? Surprisingly today, who among the Ulster Unionists now opposes the A5? You need to ask which wing is speaking, because the deputy leader seems to be on a different page from the Chair of AERA Committee. The legislation that they pushed for and the green policies that they championed have torpedoed that project and destroyed thousands of acres on the way through. <BR /> <BR />Green ideology has resulted in the legal paralysis of all future infrastructure projects. All too often, it is the very infrastructure projects that the green lobby brigade in the House are so keen on.”
“At its heart, the motion is about putting the public and public services ahead of ideology. Every pound spent by the Executive on green ideology while they chase the fantasy of net zero is money diverted from struggling front-line public services. Every road project delayed or scrapped, be it the A5, the Enniskillen bypass or, basically, any major project that you care to mention, impacts on ordinary people in the here and now. Ask any man or woman on the street what they expect from government and what our priorities should be, and no one will say, "We need to prioritise net zero". They want to go about their lives. They want basic infrastructure to be able to do that. They want to cut red tape. Net zero targets get in the way of all of that.”
“Can the Minister give an assurance that all the money that her Department spends to address this scourge on society is being spent on biological women, or is some of it being diverted to men who pretend to be women? Does the Minister realise that this is not a culture war issue but rather something that deeply concerns more than 50% of the population in Northern Ireland?”
“Once again, I say that you have introduced this private Member's Bill. You have chosen to elevate Irish above the rest of the sectors. You do not have a response to that, apart from saying, "Oh, why do you not bring those plans forward?". Do we then bring plans forward for each sector? Is it not up to the Education Minister to bring a plan to the House that puts everybody on a par with one another and on an equal footing, instead of what Mr Sheehan is trying to do? It will be no surprise, because of what he is attempting, which is to prioritise Irish-medium education above all other sectors and make it a special case, that I will not support the legislation moving to the next stage.”
“I am happy to give way. Point me to those plans.”
“I have no problem with the Irish language, but I have a problem with what, as the Bill eloquently shows and exposes, Sinn Féin and nationalism are trying to do, which is to put Irish above English. That is what it is all about. In response to the junior Minister, where are the workforce plans for the rest of the sectors?”
“I am not the one who has introduced a private Member's Bill; Mr Sheehan is. Where is that request for the rest of the sectors? That is why I say that it is discriminatory. Today, the House must decide whether it is content to move from supporting sectors in principle to designing and directing one sector above the others.”
“Where is that request for the rest of the sectors?”
“The hostility that you talk about exists because the Irish language has been weaponised against unionism. You can put your fingers in your ears and close off unionist concerns, but Irish creates a chill factor. There are polls that back that up. <BR /> <BR />You talk about discrimination, Mr Sheehan: that is exactly what the Bill creates by prioritising Irish-medium education over all other sectors. There are challenges in all sectors in education. You sit on the Education Committee: you should know that. I sit on a board of governors. I am acutely aware of the problems that exist in all sectors in the education system. What you want to do in your Bill is not to bring Irish-medium education up to the same level but to elevate it above every other sector.”
“Here, we have deflection. I was hoping that the Bill sponsor would come in to alleviate some of my concerns, but, no, Mr Baker decides to rise to deflect from the questions and concerns that I have raised. <BR /> <BR />Sinn Féin is deliberately, in the Bill, trying to elevate one sector over the others. Mr Baker, where is the legislative framework for SEN staff? I know that you are passionate about that issue. The Assembly went into recess a number of weeks ago, so where is the legislative framework? Why is not contained in your mate Mr Sheehan's Bill? Where is an equivalent duty placed on the Department for all the education sectors? I am happy to give way to the Bill sponsor.”
“Where is the statutory workforce plan for the controlled sector? I am happy to give way.”
“It sets direction; this Bill sets instruction. Therefore, a question arises: if it is right to legislate to that level of detail for Irish-medium education, why is it not right to do so for the rest of the education system?”
“The Bill wants us to move from planning to accountability mechanisms in law — accountability, but only for one sector. <BR /> <BR />Clause 5 completes the picture, because it requires the Department to review and update the plan at defined intervals. That is not simply a one-off exercise; it is a rolling statutory planning cycle being imposed for one sector and one sector alone. <BR /> <BR />Let us be clear about what the Bill does. Under clause 1, the Department must produce a plan. Under clause 2, the Department must include specific workforce detail. Under clause 3, the Department must consult in a prescribed way. Under clause 4, the Department must publish and report. Under clause 5, the Department must repeat the process. That is precisely what the Integrated Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 does not do.”
“There must be an assessment of the current workforce, an assessment of future need and proposals to meet that need, not for all schools and not for every child but just for Sinn Féin's special category of school — schools in the Irish-medium sector — which, as the Bill shows, it wants to elevate above all others. <BR /> <BR />Clause 3 then requires the Department to consult specified bodies in preparing that plan. Again, that is not general good practice; it is a statutory consultation tied to a single sector. Where is the equivalent legal requirement for controlled schools, maintained schools, special educational needs and integrated schools? Again, they are treated as secondary at best, not worthy of consideration in the Bill. <BR /> <BR />Clause 4 requires the Department to publish the plan and report on its implementation.”
“The Bill is not about fairness. It is a Bill about special treatment and elevating one section of our education system above others. In light of the provisions in the Bill, let me spell out why I say that. <BR /> <BR />Clause 1 places a legal duty on the Department to produce an Irish-medium education workforce plan. The only legislation for our schools that even comes close to that is the Integrated Education Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. Let us look at what that Act states. It requires the Department to "encourage and facilitate" integrated education, but it does not require a workforce plan. <BR /> <BR />Clause 2 of the Bill sets out what the plan must contain.”
“If the money continues, which the motion acknowledges, and there is a future scheme, I want to see better value for money being delivered in the projects selected by local authorities.”
“I thank Mr Dickson. Yes, I acknowledged that PEACE PLUS has supported some good organisations and delivered some good projects, but we are talking about €3·39 billion here, Stewart, not £5·1 million. That is a small proportion of what has been allocated. I want to see value for money. I want to see that money being spent right, but what have we got so far? The money has been plunged into border counties, and the fact that they are still the most socially and economically disadvantaged causes me great concern. That, to me, rings the same alarms bells as were rung by Communities in Transition. Just because you are throwing money at certain projects does not mean that you are delivering results. It does not mean that you are getting outcomes and value for money. We need to pay greater attention to this.”
“— but, sure, it is time well spent as long as the "Remoaners" get the opportunity to big up their Europhile credentials. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to give way to Mr Dickson.”
“In essence, therefore, the motion is, like most of the non-binding motions we debate in the Chamber, pointless. The Assembly is simply being asked to rubber-stamp something that has already been agreed by the EU and the British Government —”
“If you were to take that spend and spread it across the whole of Northern Ireland, it would amount to around €1,800 per person, yet here it was focused on the border communities, which, by the programme's own admission, remain the "most economically and socially disadvantaged". <BR /> <BR />Regardless of whether or not one wants to face that point, it is worth noting that the motion acknowledges that we have an:”
“I know that that will not concern many Members in the House, who are never too concerned about value for money, but surely even the Northern Ireland Assembly must see the issue here. After €3·39 billion of spend, the area remains the most economically and socially disadvantaged today. Granted, the period from 1995 to the present day is a reasonable length of time, but €3·39 billion is an eye-watering sum. At what point do you question whether there is value for money in what is spent on those projects? Yes, PEACE PLUS has delivered some great projects and supported some great organisations, but how can those targeted areas still be the most economically and socially disadvantaged today after that type of spend?”
“That is startling. It also talks about how:”
“It was included in the briefing pack that was produced by the Assembly Research and Information Service ahead of this "interesting debate", as Mr O'Toole said. That document contains a startling fact on page 6:”
“The Assembly has been back for less than a day, and here we go again, debating another non-binding motion in praise of the EU. The only thing that the motion sets out to achieve is to show that the "Remoaners" yearn to outdo each other in who can be crowned the chief Europhile. My goodness, when I look around the Chamber, I see that five rigorous implementers have turned out for this "interesting debate", as Mr O'Toole put it. We have heard from those who lauded the £1 billion worth of funding that was allocated to 145 projects from the 2021-27 scheme so far, but one does not have to dig very deep before discovering some problems that lie behind the glossy spin and warm words of Mr Kearney as he opened the debate. <BR /> <BR />In advance of the debate, all Members received a copy of a document entitled 'PEACE PLUS At A Glance'.”
“<BR /> <BR />That is where I rest my case today, and I hope that, in the Member's winding-up speech, he will give us some information from his party colleague the Finance Minister, if he would like to join us, to confirm to the House how much we got from the HAF scheme in England, where that money went and why it was prioritised to other Executive target areas and not to what you are championing here today. I agree that we have to do something about holiday hunger and child poverty, but what is the best outcome? Is it your Member's Bill or is it to recreate what they have in England? I look forward to the Education Minister's summing up when, hopefully, he can give us some more detail on that.”
“I need to have assurance as to where the money is coming from and what other areas in Education are going to be cut. I used my Member's statement this morning to call on the Education Minister to look again at applications for pupil allocation numbers for non-statutory playgroup provision in North Antrim and, indeed across Northern Ireland, so it would be hypocritical of me to come here today and say, "Yes, we need to do this" while I am challenging the Minister to put more money into people allocation numbers for non-statutory settings.”
“No, no, no; where did the money go that was allocated to Northern Ireland through the Barnett consequential for that scheme? Why has Sinn Féin not already delivered that in the Executive? The Bill that you are proposing is to tackle a problem that we already have money for. Do you agree? Money was sent here from Westminster for a similar scheme, but we have chosen to channel it into other things. That is a question that every party around the Executive table has to answer. How much did we get based on the pilot scheme in England, and what did we choose to spend that money on? I urge the Member to look at that scheme and try to replicate it, if possible, if the Bill is passed today and moves to the next stage. <BR /> <BR />That is a very important issue for me if I am to support the Bill going forward.”
“When I came into this place, the window had already closed, but you are detracting from the point that I am trying to make. I admire what you are trying to do with the Bill. All I am trying to point out to you is that there is a pilot scheme in England. You have lifted what was rolled out during the extraordinary time of COVID, and it is quite admirable that you have brought that to the House, but what I am saying to you is that a pilot has been rolled out in England, and I believe that that would be a better value-for-money alternative here in Northern Ireland. That is what Mr Martin asked. I believe that the £20 million would be better spent on a parallel Northern Ireland scheme. <BR /> <BR />Mr Sheehan talked about spending priorities and the curriculum — reform, I think, was the term that he used.”
“I do not have intel on what the Executive have done with that money. I cannot account for it, but it is a question that the Executive can answer. How much money came to the Northern Ireland Executive because of that pilot? What was that money spent on? When that money came to the Executive, what was more important than feeding kids? That is what we have heard here today. Money was allocated from that scheme. It came to the Executive, and somebody prioritised that it was spent on something else instead of having a Northern Ireland version of the scheme that you referred to. <BR /> <BR />I am happy to give way.”
“Here is the big question: the money from the scheme that was rolled out in England came here to the Executive, but what did we do with it? Where is the Northern Ireland version of that scheme? <BR /> <BR />I am talking about the priorities that we have in the Executive. If we had been following what England was doing, we would already have a similar scheme rolled out here in Northern Ireland. To be fair to the Bill sponsor, we would not require this Member's Bill to enact what has taken place through the pilot in England. Therefore, let us look at the Executive. Let us look at the Finance Minister. When that money came across, where was it divvied up and sent to? What was that money spent on? That would be a better version and a more productive outcome. Like you, Mr Baker, I am a Back-Bencher.”
“That brings me to my point. The money from that pilot has been sent to the Executive. I am trying to point out to you that I believe that would be a better scheme to roll out to Northern Ireland. Mr Martin talked about the £20 million and how we get the best return for that. This, to me, is the solution. That scheme has gone through the pilot, albeit we have not got the figures for how it has worked in England, but, to me, that could be the blueprint for what we do here in Northern Ireland. It is not a dig at the Minister. I am not saying that I am against giving out money to help children to ensure that they do not go hungry during holidays. I am saying that that is a better route to go down and a better scheme.”