Debate contribution: Relationships and Sexuality Education and Healthy Young Adult Relationships
Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 14 January 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Opposition Business
- Heading
- Relationships and Sexuality Education and Healthy Young Adult Relationships
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4736699
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I will be brief. I want to address how violence against girls is dealt with within relationships and sexuality education. Given the history of the issue in Northern Ireland and the position of parties on the matter, it will come as a surprise to some that the House has had to wait until my contribution to hear anyone highlight the world's biggest killer when it comes to girls: abortion. It is estimated that, in 2024, some 14 million children were issued out into eternity before they could even be born. In many countries, abortion means that girls are vastly more likely to perish than boys. It is shameful that there is not more openness on the issue. In October last year, I asked the Health Minister to detail the number of abortions that have been carried out since the change in legislation and for the figure to be broken down by health and social care trust. He still has not answered. Tellingly, no other MLA has asked that question. The last MLA to get a reply was Jim Allister, who was told in May 2024 that the figure stood at 8,490. If Members are concerned about violence against girls and want to address it in a motion about RSE, the motion should attack the fact that RSE must, by law, teach pupils how to access services that result in the end of life.
233 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Not flagged on a second assessment, because Jev’s answers did not settle it. The reasons are given below.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.63 (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).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.75).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The answers did not meet either automatic 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.
Second assessment
Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works
- Verdict
- Not flagged
- Public interest or divisiveness
- Mixed
Against the published rubric
The contribution takes a strong pro-life position, calling abortion "the world's biggest killer when it comes to girls" and criticising the statutory requirement that RSE teach pupils "how to access services". It is framed as an argument about the content of RSE law and access to abortion figures, not as a contest between communities or identity groups. It does not portray pro-choice people or any section 75 group as dangerous or illegitimate. The jabs that others have not raised the issue ("Tellingly, no other MLA has asked") criticise other members' priorities rather than attacking a group's identity.
Public interest or divisiveness
The text engages with a real legislative question: what RSE must teach under the current regulations. It also follows up an unanswered written question on abortion numbers by health trust. However, it uses a debate on violence against girls to reframe the topic around abortion in emotive terms ("issued out into eternity") and to score points against other parties. That makes it combative, but it remains an argument on a contested policy rather than hostility towards a group.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.30 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.10 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.37 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.50 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.45 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.63 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.75 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.25 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.99 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:50 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.