Member's statement: Abortion
Member's statement by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 11 February 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Abortion
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4793325
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The abortion stats recently published by the Department of Health show that the number of abortions being carried out in Northern Ireland has increased by a shocking 77% since 2020-21.The number of unborn children being denied a chance of life is up 29% on last year, with 2,792 perishing in the past year. The level of data published by the Department continues to fall well below that released by health authorities in England and Wales. There, information on the socio-economic background of the mother, whether she had more than one abortion and on other matters is provided. In 2024, my predecessor, Jim Allister, received an assurance from the then Health Minister that the situation would change. Why has it not? It is time that we had a properly informed debate on the issue. It is clear from those figures that abortion is increasingly becoming just another form of birth control in Northern Ireland and that the dishonest debate around the matter in the early 2020s, framed around hard cases, did not deal with the real issues created by the legislation. The famous anti-slavery campaigner William Wilberforce said of the great evil of his day:
"you may choose to look the other way but you can never again say you did not know."
There is a tendency in the House to look the other way when it comes to many things. One of those matters is abortion. I noted, for example, that, following the publication of the stats, I was the only MLA to comment on the matter. Could it be that some who say that they are pro-life do not find it expedient any more to say so often? Whatever the reason, they must answer for themselves. I will continue to force people in the House to face the truth, whether that is about the bloody terror campaign that resulted in the Belfast Agreement or the slaughter of unborn children ushered in by the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation etc) Act 2019, which, I remind the House, enabled the DUP to renew its immoral partnership with Sinn Féin.
347 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues
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: 0.61 (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 (0.51).
- 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
- Flagged
- Public interest or divisiveness
- Mixed
Against the published rubric
The statement contains one practical point: the Department publishes less abortion data than England and Wales, despite a previous assurance that this would change. Most of the text, however, is rhetorical escalation rather than scrutiny. It describes abortion as "the slaughter of unborn children" and "just another form of birth control", calls the earlier public debate "dishonest", and questions whether other members' pro-life views are sincere. It then ties the issue to "the bloody terror campaign that resulted in the Belfast Agreement" and an "immoral partnership with Sinn Féin", pulling a social-policy question into a wider communal and constitutional argument.
Public interest or divisiveness
The request for fuller, comparable statistics is a legitimate transparency point that someone on either side of the abortion debate could support. That point is outweighed by language aimed at inflaming the issue and by point-scoring against other members and parties. The closing link to the Troubles and to power-sharing with a nationalist party keeps an identity row going rather than advancing the data question. Both elements are substantial, but the divisive framing dominates the statement's function.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.18 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.15 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.49 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.36 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.55 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.61 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.51 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.01 |
| Adopts it | 0.47 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.98 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:57 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.