Member's statement: Religious Education: Supreme Court Judgement

Member's statement by Mr Timothy Gaston on 24 November 2025.

MLA

Mr Timothy Gaston

Party at the time

Traditional Unionist Voice

Date

24 November 2025

Type

Member's statement

Business

Members' Statements

Heading

Religious Education: Supreme Court Judgement

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5253925

Read the official Assembly record

Text

The judgement by the Supreme Court was the final stage in a calculated assault on the foundations of the controlled sector of education. It is often forgotten that the controlled sector did not emerge out of thin air; it is the product of what used to be the school system run by Protestant Churches. That system was handed over to the state following Lord Londonderry's 1930 Education Act. Churches were promised that the schools would retain a broadly Christian ethos. Church and state recognised that there was a duty to, as scripture puts it:

"Train up a child in the way he should go".

Now that ethos has come under attack. However, it is vital to underline one critical fact that seems to have been lost in much of the commentary: the law has not changed. Article 21 of the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 remains. It requires that religious education (RE) in controlled schools must be:

"undenominational ... based upon the Holy Scriptures".

The judgement did not strike down that legislation. The law still mandates that the foundation of RE in Northern Ireland is scriptural and Christian. That reflects the historic, cultural and moral foundations of our education system. Christian teaching has shaped our schools, our law and our society. It is no accident that the law requires RE to be firmly rooted in Holy Scripture. The Bible is not one optional voice among many but the bedrock of moral order. There is a misplaced notion that schools must move towards a neutral or multifaith model. Regrettably, that information has even come from some who claim to represent the interests of faith in society. There is no such thing as religious neutrality. Religious institutions that claim to take no view on the existence of God are in fact teaching that his existence is irrelevant. Our schools should always teach morality, right and wrong, but it is impossible to do so without acknowledging God as the source of that morality. If that happens, the moral framework is severed from its roots. The task now falls squarely to our Education Minister. He must reaffirm the statutory requirement that RE be taught on a scriptural basis and ensure that collective worship in schools retains its Christian character, as required by the law.

382 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Qualifying Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)

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

Qualifying

Public interest or divisiveness

Mixed

Against the published rubric

The statement engages with real law, noting that Article 21 of the 1986 Order "remains" and asking the Minister to reaffirm it, which is a legitimate policy position on religion in schools. But its framing is a grievance. It calls the judgement "a calculated assault" on a sector it traces to "Protestant Churches" and says the Christian ethos "has come under attack". It does not engage with what the ruling decided about the rights of families who do not share that faith. Its claim that morality cannot be taught "without acknowledging God", and its dismissal of neutral or multifaith models, carry an implied message that non-religious people lack a moral foundation and a rightful place in shared schools.

Public interest or divisiveness

Some of the text addresses a genuine question for the Department, namely how RE and collective worship should be delivered after the ruling. Much of it, however, presents a court decision protecting the rights of non-religious families as an attack on one tradition's heritage. It also contests whether a neutral or inclusive approach can have a place in controlled schools. Both the substantive and the divisive elements are significant.

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:48 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.

Challenge this classification