Debate contribution: Criminal Justice System: Failure to Transform
Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 6 October 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Criminal Justice System: Failure to Transform
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5157591
Read the official Assembly record
Text
This evening has been insightful. There has been insight into the mindset of the Alliance Party. As well as hearing "my Minister", we have now found out that the Justice Minister appears still to be in caretaker mode. If the Member for North Belfast wants to tell her that caretaker season is over, we can now get a Justice Minister who will take control of her entire Department, instead of passing the buck at every opportunity that she gets. The Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland report that was published in November 2024 raises a litany of serious and significant issues, none greater than the delays in the justice system. Ecclesiastes chapter 8, verse 11 reads:
"Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil."
Therefore, I believe that there is a direct correlation between delay and an increase in lawlessness. Despite or perhaps because of 15 years of devolved policing and justice and despite countless strategies, endless policy papers and millions of pounds spent, the report makes it plain that there has been limited improvement. It catalogues systemic failure to deliver. We have a justice system that is plagued by delay at every stage. Criminal cases now take on average 769 days to complete; that is up from 527 days just five years ago. It means that victims wait two full years for justice. Delay is not a neutral matter. It has real and dangerous consequences: victims wait in anguish; witnesses lose faith; and public confidence evaporates. In the midst of that failure, alleged serious offenders who should be held in remand for public protection use the delays to argue for bail. For others, by the time that their case crawls to a conclusion, they have effectively served their sentence already. The perverse outcome is that our justice system rewards delay rather than punishing wrongdoing. That is not justice; it is dysfunction. The report also lays bare how victims are treated. Too often, they are left in the dark and not informed about key decisions or changes in bail conditions. They feel forgotten by a system that was supposed to stand with them. A justice system that cannot deliver for victims is a justice system that fails its most basic moral test. What has Stormont done in response? Another round of strategies, more working groups and more transformation proposals on glossy paper that will never materialise in practice. One of the key problems is that we have a Justice Minister who, when asked about areas within her remit, is only too keen to say that it has nothing to do with her. The caretaker role very much suits this Justice Minister. She fobs off MLAs in the House in a manner not seen in any other Department. She hides behind operational independence as a convenient shield against scrutiny. When Members ask legitimate questions about how her Department functions, she points them elsewhere —
— telling them to contact agencies that sit directly under her Department. That is not accountability.
Absolutely. I trust that that will —
— be taken as an intervention and an extra minute will be applied. That is not accountability, and it is time that the Minister renounced her throne. I will vote in support of the DUP motion because the failures that it highlights are real and serious. However, I must ask this: for all the warm words and all the bluster coming from the Benches about Mrs Long's failures, do you still have confidence in her? Is this another motion and another social media post with no meaningful action? I put it to the DUP and the Ulster Unionists that, if they feel that what they have outlined today is a resigning matter —
— and that there is no confidence in the Minister —
— I trust that they will sign my motion of no confidence, and I thank them for their —
666 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: 0.09 (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).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.87).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.05 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.03 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.08 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.08 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.87 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.74 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.20 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism | 0.01 |
| Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:26 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.