Member's statement: Transparency in Government
Member's statement by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 3 March 2025
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Transparency in Government
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4825710
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Last month, we learned that the Information Commissioner's Office had ruled that the councillors behind the illegal call-in to stop the flying of the Union flag at war memorials in the Ards and North Down Borough Council area will not be named. My message is simple: if public representatives are not prepared to be named when it comes to their decisions, they should not be entrusted by the electorate to make those decisions. Transparency and accountability are essential to build public confidence. Allowing those councillors' names to remain hidden further erodes the electorate's trust in their elected representatives. I will also highlight some facts about the Executive Office and its commitment to respond to FOI requests. In the aftermath of a meeting of the Executive Office Committee for which the First Minister was provided with questions in advance, and during which Mrs O'Neill was shielded from further questioning by the Chair, I lodged two FOI requests: one asking for all information relating to the meeting between the First Minister and the Chair of the Executive Office Committee and another requesting information relating to the decision to request that meeting. That was in November 2024. I was promised a response to my first FOI request by 16 January 2025, and my other request has simply been ignored. More than three months later, TEO has not provided any of the requested information. It is important to remember that FOI requests should be dealt with within 20 days. Whether at the level of the councils or the First Minister and deputy First Minister, it is time for there to be openness and transparency throughout government in Northern Ireland.
275 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.22 (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 (0.79).
- Subject area: Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials.
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.04 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.24 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.52 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.46 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.22 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.79 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.07 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.10 |
| Adopts it | 0.04 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.98 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.02 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:03 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.