Member's statement: Independent Remuneration Board

Member's statement by Mr Timothy Gaston on 22 September 2026.

MLA: Mr Timothy Gaston
Party at the time: Traditional Unionist Voice
Date: 22 September 2026
Type: Member's statement
Business: Members' Statements
Heading: Independent Remuneration Board
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5739113

Text

Just last week, the remuneration board announced that it proposes to increase the basic MLA salary from £67,200 to £69,216 at the beginning of the next mandate, potentially to be followed by annual increases of up to 3% a year thereafter. The announcement comes just months after MLAs' salaries rose by almost 27%, from £53,000 to £67,200. Within hours of the announcement, Michelle O'Neill was at the microphone, describing the latest proposals as "grotesque". She claimed that the issue of wages was not on Sinn Féin's agenda. Sinn Féin likes to portray itself as the party that stands up for the working class, often citing British austerity, but if that rise is so grotesque to Sinn Féin now, where was it when the legislation to establish the independent remuneration board came before the House? The Bill to set the wheels in motion for the rise was sponsored on behalf of the Assembly Commission by none other than Sinn Féin's Sinéad Ennis. At Final Stage, Sinn Féin told the House that establishing the board was not merely the right thing to do but the:
"necessary thing to do". — [Official Report (Hansard), 16 June 2025, p9, col 2].
Sinn Féin supported the Bill yet now cries foul. Only Mr Carroll and I opposed the setting up of the board. We even warned that this was always going to happen. I warned that the legislation was a vehicle by which MLAs would receive a substantial pay increase without openly having to vote for it. That warning was dismissed by MLAs. The board then awarded MLAs a salary increase of over £14,000. My amendment at the Bill's Consideration Stage that proposed a proper 12-week consultation before the Assembly Commission introduced further legislation on MLA salaries and pensions was voted down by MLAs. To Sinn Féin, the DUP, the Ulster Unionists, the Alliance Party and the official Opposition, the SDLP, I say this: you cannot build the machinery, turn the key to operate it and then express horror when it produces the very outcome that was predicted all along. The five establishment parties in the House deliberately created the system, decided its powers and voted it into law. Public services face cuts, and patients wait years for treatment, yet, five months into the financial year, the Executive remain without an agreed Budget. MLAs' most basic responsibility is to agree a Budget. There is no Budget, yet there is time to ensure that there is an MLA pay increase.
That is why this place is out of kilter with the working public.

427 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.12 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.76).
No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
Question	Probability	Met?
Identity framing	0.08	No
Sectarian or communal antagonism	0.06	No
Cultural grievance politics	0.02	No
Dog-whistle messaging	0.19	No
Controversy escalation	0.07	No
Legitimate policy scrutiny	0.76	Yes
Overall judgement	0.12	At or below not-flagging threshold

Context and attribution (stance)
Option	Probability
No identity-based framing (chosen)	0.97
Reports or questions it	0.00
Criticises or condemns it	0.00
Adopts it	0.03

Subject area (top five)
Subject	Probability
No identity-related subject	0.80
Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations	0.11
Another identity-related subject	0.07
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty	0.01
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues	0.01

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 16:23 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification