Debate contribution: Gaza: Action to End Forced Starvation
Debate contribution by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .
- MLA
- Mr Matthew O'Toole
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 9 September 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Gaza: Action to End Forced Starvation
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5086491
Read the official Assembly record
Text
We debated the appalling genocide and criminal actions of the Israeli state in Gaza just a few months ago. Since then, thousands of innocent Palestinians, including hundreds of children, have died. Let us put that into some context: more than the entire loss of life during our three-decade conflict has been lost in just a few months in a tiny strip of land about the size of the Ards peninsula. When I hear people talk in the Chamber — I want us to approach the subject with seriousness, given the seriousness of what we are talking about — I sometimes wonder whether people quite appreciate the gravity of what we are living through when they say that we should, for example, "inject balance" into our remarks or, indeed, that what we say here does not matter. I sometimes wonder whether they think about themselves 10, 20 or 30 years hence, having had the opportunity to be elected representatives at a time when a genocide was happening. I wonder whether they and others will look back and reflect on their record when they had a platform in this Chamber, even if it was —.
Respectfully, I will give way in one moment to the Member.
I wonder whether they will look back and reflect on what they said and whether they used their words, their platform and their mandate to stand against an appalling, depraved genocide that was happening in our times — in our lives — and that was facilitated by states, including the UK, which has been a long-time ally of the state of Israel. I sometimes wonder whether people will look back then. I will give way to Dr Aiken.
I am afraid —.
Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I say this with the greatest respect: Dr Aiken has come to the Chamber on multiple occasions and said the most disreputable things on the subject. I do not want to get into a back and forth with him, but I think that he will look back and reflect on some of the statements that he has made in here. I hope that he thinks about the wisdom of those remarks. As I said, I do not want to get into a back and forth, because the subject is too important. To cover his point specifically, do I think that the UK Government are credible on the subject of Israel and genocide? Of course I do not. They have spoken out of both sides of their mouth. They have been mealy-mouthed. The current Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, said that Israel had the right to blockade food, water and aid from Gaza. The Prime Minister said that, so do I think that his former Foreign Secretary and his Government are credible on the issue of genocide? Obviously not, Dr Aiken. On the recognition of Palestine as a state, that is another example of where Mr Lammy will be on the wrong side of history, because, a few months ago, he pathetically and shamefully said, with great aplomb and apparently expecting praise, that the UK would, with conditionality if Israel did not do certain things, recognise the state of Palestine, giving a genocidal state — members of whose Government have said that they effectively want to wipe out the Palestinian people — the final say over whether a Palestinian state is recognised. All that I am saying today is that they should look back on the statements and read the words of Israeli Government Ministers. Read what they have said and then come back to the Chamber and repeat some of what you have said over the past while. I genuinely do not want to get into a back and forth across the Chamber. The most important thing is that we in the Chamber, even though we are on the island of Ireland, which is many miles away from Gaza, have a voice, and we have the ability to stand against an appalling genocide. Everybody has a voice, be it through a social media account or the ability to stand and participate in a protest, as people have done on numerous occasions on this island, including yesterday when Mothers Against Genocide stood outside the front of this Building. People should use their voice and stand against the appalling actions of the Israeli state. On 22 August, the UN World Food Programme, the World Health Organization and others said that half a million people were experiencing famine in Gaza. Half a million people, which is a quarter of the population, in a space the size of the Ards peninsula were experiencing famine. Four days later, Israel bombed a hospital. Innocent people were obviously killed, because that is what happens when you bomb hospitals. Then, when people went to rescue those who were trapped and dying under the rubble, Israel bombed the hospital again. A grotesque, genocidal war is being visited upon innocent people in Gaza. I do not minimise and have never minimised what happened on 7 October. The response, however, from the state of Israel has been indescribably disproportionate and immoral. I do not know when it is going to end, because I fear that the world order is collapsing, with a grotesque lawbreaker in the White House who seems happy to allow genocide to happen. That is why it is so important that those of us who have a voice use it. We will, of course, support today's motion. I welcome the fact that the matter has been brought back to the Chamber, and it should continue to be brought back to this Chamber and every Chamber in every democracy around the world that cares about decency, humanity and human rights. We support the motion.
956 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: 0.19 (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 (0.65).
- Subject area: Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers.
- 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 | 0.32 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.11 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.17 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.18 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.24 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.19 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.65 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.10 |
| Adopts it | 0.25 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers | 0.45 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.23 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.19 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.04 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.03 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:02 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.