Gaston demands answers after BBC revelations show Stormont canteen costs rose to more than £530,000

North Antrim TUV MLA Timothy Gaston

Fresh questions have been raised over spending at Stormont after newly revealed documents showed the refurbishment of the Assembly’s Blue Flax canteen cost almost £200,000 more than originally budgeted, prompting sharp criticism from TUV MLA Timothy Gaston.

The final bill for the renovation of the canteen at Parliament Buildings came to £530,532, according to documents obtained by BBC News NI through a Freedom of Information request.

The Blue Flax restaurant, used by assembly members, staff and visitors, underwent renovation works last summer. The project included builders’ works, doors, floor finishes, joinery, furniture, appliances, lighting, and mechanical and electrical installations.

The scale of the final cost has now triggered political reaction, with Mr Gaston accusing Stormont’s political establishment of ignoring cheaper alternatives while households across Northern Ireland continue to face financial pressure.

Gaston: “A sense of disbelief and outrage”

Responding to the BBC’s revelations on Friday, 3 April, North Antrim MLA Timothy Gaston issued a strongly worded statement.

Mr Gaston said: “When I uncovered the fact that over half a million was spent on the Stormont canteen there was understandably a sense of disbelief and outrage from the public who find their own budgets under pressure and are constantly told that the money isn’t there for frontline services.”

He continued: “The documents obtained by the BBC reveal that the project didn’t just cost significantly more than its original budget but that this happened despite officials explicitly recognising the need to control spending.”

Mr Gaston said the internal documentation showed officials were aware of mounting costs and had actively explored ways to reduce expenditure.

“The internal paper makes clear that the Assembly Commission was operating under budget constraints, that inflationary pressures were known and that a so-called ‘value engineered’ approach was being pursued to optimise costs. It also shows that multiple lower-cost design options were deliberately developed to allow savings to be made.”

He went on to question why those alternatives were not taken forward.

“Yet, in full knowledge of all of that, Sinn Fein, the DUP, Alliance, the UUP and SDLP made the decision to proceed with the most expensive design option and the most expensive finishes available. Officials sourced options which would have saved the public purse money but the political establishment dismissed them out of hand.

“There is therefore a fundamental question - as cheaper alternatives were identified, priced and available why were they rejected?”

Costs rose well beyond original budget

Internal Assembly papers show the project began with an estimated budget of around £350,000, approved in 2022.

A later paper, dated May 2025, revised that estimate to £441,000.

Separate commission minutes indicate the estimate later rose again to £463,000, a significant increase on the original business case.

As part of a new tender process, contractors were asked to submit a “value engineered design”, with several finish options because of ongoing budget constraints.

Despite that, documents show officials recommended more premium fit-out options, including:

• new fitted booth seating

• “reeded timber panelling”

• upgraded wall finishes

The exact price difference between the premium and more basic alternatives was redacted in the released paperwork.

BBC News NI reported that when it approached the contractor for clarification on the cost differences, the firm said it could not discuss the matter without permission from the client.

Wider criticism over spending priorities

Mr Gaston said the issue went beyond a simple refurbishment project.

“At a time when families across Northern Ireland are under real financial pressure, the public will rightly see this as an other example of MLAs feathering their own nest. The revelation coming off the back of a 27% pay rise will do nothing to restore faith in Stormont which was already held in low regard by ordinary working people.”

He added: “This is not simply about a refurbishment. It is about priorities, judgment and a culture within Stormont of entitlement and willingness to take the taxpayer for a ride.”

He concluded by calling for those involved in the decision-making process to publicly account for the spending.

“There needs to be a clear and transparent explanation as to why cost saving options were not taken. The members of the Commission from the Executive parties and the SDLP need to face the public and explain themselves.”

Criticism has also come from outside the TUV.

People Before Profit MLA Gerry Carroll said the restaurant had needed upgrading, but said there were serious questions over the level of spending.

He said the canteen “needed a lick of paint and a bit more” but that there were “huge questions” over the final figure.

Mr Carroll added that while workplaces should have facilities that are comfortable and fit for purpose, “we’re seeing £200,000 being spent when it doesn’t need to be spent” at a time when public services remain under severe strain.

Assembly Commission acknowledges concerns

The Assembly Commission, the body responsible for the management of Parliament Buildings, is made up of representatives from Stormont’s five main parties.

According to commission minutes, members were first advised of the initial £350,000 estimate in February 2022, with a formal business case approved in October that year.

The minutes show that when the projected cost increased to £463,000 in May 2025, the rise was approved by senior officials.

It was also noted that the commission “had not been previously advised of the increase compared to the original business case”.

Members reportedly agreed that “communications around the project could have been stronger and that this should be reviewed for future projects”.

In a statement issued following the controversy, the Assembly said the commission “understands concerns about the costs”.

It said a number of issues had contributed to the increased spend, including inflationary pressures and rising material costs.

The Assembly also defended the procurement process.

It said: “In terms of supplier selection, the assembly chose the lowest-cost bidder and within that bid, there were a number of finish options.”

The statement continued: “A competitive procurement process was carried out to select the most appropriate supplier to carry out the refurbishment project, guaranteeing the best balance of quality and economy.”

“This procurement process was carried out in line with public sector procurement principles.”

Refurbishment defended as part of wider strategy

Stormont officials also said the Blue Flax restaurant had not undergone a major update for decades.

According to the Assembly, the facility had received only a minor refresh in 2008 and had not been substantially updated since 1998.

The statement added that the refurbishment forms part of a broader effort to improve public engagement with Parliament Buildings.

“Our new engagement strategy aims to increase understanding and enable participation in the work of the assembly, including bringing more people to Parliament Buildings,” it said.

“This requires us to maximise the use of our space and having modern, fit-for-purpose facilities is an important part of that.”

The revelations are likely to keep pressure on the Assembly Commission in the days ahead, with renewed scrutiny over how public money is being spent inside Stormont at a time when wider public sector budgets remain under intense pressure.

---

At a glance:

• Stormont’s Blue Flax canteen refurbishment cost £530,532

• Original budget was around £350,000

• Revised estimate later rose to £441,000, then £463,000

• Premium options including booth seating and timber panelling were selected

• TUV MLA Timothy Gaston has accused Stormont of “taking the taxpayer for a ride”

• The Assembly says inflation and material costs contributed to the increase

• Officials say the lowest-cost bidder was chosen through a public procurement process