Debate contribution: St Andrews Agreement: 20 Years On

Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on 13 October 2026.

MLA: Mr Timothy Gaston
Party at the time: Traditional Unionist Voice
Date: 13 October 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Opposition Business
Heading: St Andrews Agreement: 20 Years On
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5789577

Text

There is an old proverb that says, "Time proves all things", and, my oh my, when one looks back at the St Andrews Agreement, is that not the truth? Consider what was said about the St Andrews Agreement and how it was mis-sold to unionists. Twenty years ago to this very day, the then DUP leader, Dr Paisley, issued a statement that deserves to be aired in the Chamber. He stated:
"Delivery on the pivotal issue of policing and the rule of law starts today. Everyone who aspires to sit in positions of power in our province must, by both word and deed, demonstrate their unequivocal support for the laws of the land and those whose job it is to enforce them."
How has that worked out over the past three weeks? The pivotal issue that Dr Paisley refers to was Sinn Féin's support for policing and the rule of law before the DUP would even consider sharing power with Sinn Féin. Just last night, in the Chamber, DUP Member after DUP Member got up and stated the obvious. I agreed with the speeches that they made, but each one of them stopped short before they got to the crux, before they got to the lever that they have at their disposal, and before they could pull the lever and say that Emma Little-Pengelly must resign from office because the DUP cannot share power with Sinn Féin because Sinn Féin does not support the rule of law. Sinn Féin showed yesterday that it has nothing but contempt — still — for the rule of law and for the courts of this land, and that happened simply because Sinn Féin did not like one decision that went against it in the past 28 years.
I am happy to give way to Mr Martin.
I do not accept that, for this simple reason: just because one side is lawless and has shown its true colours does not mean that those on this side of the Chamber, who have the power to remove the other side from office, should continue to sit on their hands, do nothing and let them away with it. Sinn Féin will continue to laugh and continue to be lawless because it knows that the DUP does not have the backbone or the guts to do something and put Sinn Féin out of office. You have all the consequences and are talking about the levers, but you simply will not pull them.
Let us move on and look at what the then deputy leader of the DUP said about the St Andrews Agreement. Twenty years ago, he issued a statement in which he contrasted the Belfast Agreement with the St Andrews Agreement. What was the difference, according to Mr Peter Robinson? He said:
"The Belfast Agreement allowed those who continued terrorist activity and criminality into government. The DUP have forced republicans, kicking and screaming, down the road of ending paramilitary and criminal activity. The Belfast Agreement destroyed the Royal Ulster Constabulary and decimated policing moral. The St Andrews Agreement requires republicans to openly support the police."
How is that going today, Democratic Unionist Party? How is that going for those whom you prop up in government? How is that going for you today? I will respond to Mr Martin, whose compliment I appreciate. Applying your logic, you will turn a blind eye to anything and everything that Sinn Féin does and will continue to prop it up in government. It is in government only because you hold the deputy First Minister post. I agree with Carla Lockhart — I only wish that we had more Carla Lockharts to sit on that Bench — who has the audacity or temerity to stand up and the courage of her convictions to point out that the way to wipe the smile off Sinn Féin's face, show it up and bring it to task is to evict Michelle O'Neill from office. The Executive would trundle on; the only thing that we would notice is that the First Minister would not have to come to the Executive Office Committee. That would be the only consequence. If the First Minister were to be removed from post, the Executive would continue. However, you will not even do that because you are too scared of the Ulster Unionists. They would not give you any cover to pull Emma Little-Pengelly out of office. On the one side, you are looking at the Ulster Unionist Party, and, on the other, you are looking at the TUV. My challenge to the DUP Members sitting on those Benches is this: find your inner Carla Lockhart, speak out and represent your community. It is time that unionism got off its knees, grew a backbone, held the republicans and the SDLP, who have joined forces with the new Chief Constable of the Garvaghy Road, to account and put them out of office. Unionism is watching, and, so far, it has seen you do absolutely nothing.

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

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

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

Challenge this classification