Debate contribution: Road Infrastructure: Ballykelly and Kilrea
Debate contribution by Mr Timothy Gaston on .
- MLA
- Mr Timothy Gaston
- Party at the time
- Traditional Unionist Voice
- Date
- 27 January 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Adjournment
- Heading
- Road Infrastructure: Ballykelly and Kilrea
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5345618
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. The debate focuses on issues in East Londonderry, but North Antrim is ideally placed, as it runs into East Londonderry. I thank Cara Hunter for securing the Adjournment debate, as it gives me the opportunity to raise the issue of the Kilrea Bridge, the closure of which on 20 September has had quite an impact on my constituents and local businesses. We have heard in the debate that the bridge has been partially reopened, with a full reopening to heavy vehicles scheduled for the middle of February. The full closure of the bridge has severed the ties between East Londonderry and North Antrim and stopped a lot of trade passing over the Bann. The takings for one business in my constituency, a small retail offering located on the Craigs Road, have dropped by £800 a day. For a small business, that is a massive drop in sales. To date, as far as I know, no Department has stepped forward to say, "Listen, we're taking responsibility for this. We're going to compensate you for the drop in sales". Likewise, on the Kilrea side of the closure, many businesses tell me that they have dropped by 50%. That impacted on them the whole way up to Christmas, and it will leave a lasting impact on their viability. Take, for example, the renowned Kilrea Livestock Mart: it lost all of its trade from County Antrim because of the closure. I want to focus the Minister on what she will do about this. What is the plan? The bridge is a listed structure. It was built in 1883. It is outdated, and it is only a single track. My goodness, given the amount of traffic coming across it each day, we must look in the long term at a new bridge. We have a bridge in Portglenone and a bridge in Agivey. What happened when the Kilrea Bridge closed? All of the traffic had to go on each side, which brought the town of Portglenone in my constituency to a standstill on many days. Yes, DFI had to put in temporary measures to stop on-street parking, but the knock-on effect of the Kilrea Bridge closure was gridlock in Portglenone. Many commuters and many people who live in the town were put out by that. We must look to the future and press the Minister on what she will do about this. I want the old bridge to be retained, but you have to focus on putting in a new bridge in Kilrea that meets the needs of 2026 and into the future. The interface between County Antrim and County Londonderry cannot be left in its current disarray. Who is to say that the structural defects will not come back in the near future? I want to hear from the Minister today on her short-, medium- and long-term plans. The long-term plan must be a new bridge at Kilrea to ensure that, if the defects come back, we are already in the planning phase. Indeed, if you are planning a new bridge, I want to know the time frame within which you see it being in place. It is over to the Minister. The people of North Antrim and East Londonderry want to know your plans for the bridge.
549 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: 0.03 (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 (0.95).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | 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 | 0.99 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 14:22 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.