18/10/2016 Spotlight

hello and welcome to Spotlight special, where our studio audience

put questions to our panel of politicians on the week's main

talking points. How guests tonight are Gavin Robinson, the DUP MP for

West Belfast, the leader of the SDLP, the Sinn Fein Brexit spokesman

in the assembly, John O'Dowd, Mike Nesbitt, the Ulster Unionist Party

do, and the acting leader of the Alliance party, and fully expected

to be elected leader very soon, unless it all goes wrong tonight,

Naomi! I'm sure it won't. That is our panel tonight's Spotlight

special. And you at home can take part. This is how you can get in

touch with your thoughts. Textual, throughout the programme: Texts will

be charged at your standard rate. Or you can phone is: Standard

geographic charges from landlines and mobiles will apply.

You can also e-mail us and to eat your comments to us using the

hashtag SpotlightNI. And you can follow the programme on Twitter. We

are at BBCSpotlightNI. The first question tonight is from Rosemary

Alistair, a PR consultant. Is Hillary Clinton the lesser of two

evils? Well, the election, of course, is on

November the 8th. They are supposed to be the two most unpopular

candidates in the modern history of the American state, Hillary with a

7-point lead currently over Donald Trump in the poll of polls, but it

is far from over yet. Have you been following events stateside?

I have, and I would have to say, I don't think she is the lesser of two

evils. I think she is the better and more qualified of two candidates. I

think ultimately, when you want to elect somebody to the most powerful

post in the country, you want somebody who has the experience, the

gravitas, and the ability to negotiate some fairly complex

issues. She is crooked Hillary, for heaven

's sake! According to Donald. Exactly. Well, the world according

to Donald is not the world I live in, and most of the people I know

would want to live in either. And I have huge respect for Hillary

Clinton, and I suspect that she is fighting a number of issues. When he

had been in politics for a while, you have a record and it will be

held to account for it in the way a fresh face would not be. I think the

second thing is, she has all of the things that anyone who has ever been

president will have. She is tenacious, determined, ambitious,

but when women are those things, it is often seen as a negative, and I

think she suffers greatly from that. I personally think she would be a

great president. I have to say, I do not believe that Donald Trump would

be a great president, but we do not know who will be in the White House,

and he may well prove as all wrong. Good Hillary or Donald of the

groper? Well, it is a matter for the

American people. I believe that Donald Trump's comments about

everybody who is not a white, rich, American are disgraceful, and I

would not endorse them in any way. But the American people will decide

who leads them. If you live there, would you vote

for him? I don't live there.

Oh, come on, everybody has a view. Given his comments, as I am worried

about everybody who is not a white, rich American and a male, I would

not vote for him. But the American people must make these decisions.

The American electoral system, to me, requires radical reform. When

you end up with a constant presidential election campaign

between the two main parties, with very little ideological difference

between them in terms of policy, I think it is worrying for democracy

in general. But we will see what comes out of the other side.

So, Hillary is the lesser of two evils, according to you?

Well, you are trying to put words in my mouth.

You could answer the question. Whoever comes out the other side of

the American election, presidential election campaign, we want them to

have a huge interest in Ireland, in the peace process and the economy

and our future. So there are a lot of things you could say, but I'm not

going to, because I want to ensure that all the parties around this

table, the executive, have access to the most powerful people in the

world, and that we can rely on them to support us if and when we need.

I can as bit, Northern Ireland has something of a special relationship

with Hillary, and all that, but does that blind us to her false?

No, I don't think it should, but if you are looking at one candidate

against the other, what I think is extraordinary is that Donald Trump

has not moderated his views since he became the candidate, and he has not

tried to broaden his appeal beyond a very specific base. But that

actually may turn out to be a very good thing, because that may well be

what costs in the election, and from our point of view...

Wins in the election! I think it is just too narrow a base.

Hillary Clinton is somebody who has invested a lot in Northern Ireland,

not just the Americans, but the Clinton family have invested a lot

in the peace process here. I was with her envoy earlier this morning,

Senator Gary Hart, and naturally being a Democrat, he is incredibly

disturbed at the prospect of somebody like Donald Trump

representing an ideal that is the modern America. So, yes, while

Hillary Clinton has her faults, she has made a mistake and been very

open about it, I think she would be the better candidate, and you would

certainly be a lot better for us here in Northern Ireland.

People have a habit of growing into the office, which is granted to

them. I mean, look at Ronald Reagan, for example. Everyone thought, what

a disaster, a Hollywood actor in the White House. Do you think Donald

Trump, were he to be elected, could become a president people would

respect? No. Donald Trump is not somebody...

Well, he is no Ronald Reagan. I had difficulties with Ronald Reagan. I

new Ronald Reagan, Senator! Exactly. What hears is someone who

has more respect for Vladimir Putin than Barack Obama. That is good

enough for me to understand that he is not a very suitable person.

Well, he respects the strength of leadership that Putin shows. Some

say America needs that kind of leadership.

Well, I don't think Donald Trump is a leader. We should not take this

very lightly. He is somebody who has talked openly and closed about

sexually assaulting women. That is who Donald Trump is, and he is

somebody that will destroy the reputation of America.

Locker room talk? It is not locker room talk to talk

about women like that. He will destroy the reputation of America

and is already doing that, around the world, and that is very

dangerous for here and the world. Hillary Clinton has been a great

supporter of Northern Ireland, a great supporter of our peace

process. But that does not mean she would be

a good leader of America. I think she will be. I don't agree

with everything she does or says, many of her foreign policy, but I

have much more faith in here than that other person, and I don't think

this is funny. This is a very, very serious thing, and I think the

American people will see through it. We should not take it for granted.

If anyone has relatives in America, they should be getting on the phone

to them and telling them what the world thinks of Donald Trump,

because that is very important. Anyone support Donald Trump in the

audience tonight? Go ahead, please. I would like to

know, would you be prepared to work him when he is elected?

Sorry, just a little louder. Will you work with him when he is

elected? Well, I think John O'Dowd said he

would, but what about you, Gavin? I suspect that if he ever wins, we

will work with them -- whoever wins. But I don't think it is a choice, I

think it is a huge dilemma for the people of the United States of

America. I think they're a huge drawbacks with both, but if you

listen to the thereat Barossa T of the campaign of Donald Trump, and

yet he is only seven points behind. All that has been thrown at him, all

the criticism that has been levelled at him, this is not just a small,

narrow base supporting Donald Trump. This is a huge swathe of the

American electorate. Part of me says that is worrying. The other worrying

thing is, Hillary Clinton wins. The last 40 years in the land of

opportunity has been dominated by two families. Had Jeb Bush beat

Donald Trump on the Republican primaries, it would have been

guaranteed that the bar from Barack Obama's eight years, we have had 40

years of uninterrupted control by two powerful families. That does not

suggest it is the land of opportunity that we are led to

respect. But is that partly why Arnold Trump

has attracted the support, because it is seen that he is the to hell

with the rest of you candidate, he is not part of the Washington

bubble, but will do it his way? Absolutely, and I think we're

turning politics on its head in the state, same as in the UK, as someone

said, or across the EU, with many candidates who are to the extreme

right or left succeeding. The other interesting thing is, Donald Trump

and Hillary Clinton have both turned on their head what we recognise to

be Republican and Democratic politics. The Republican party will

be seen as an interventionist party, whereas Donald Trump is an

isolationist. Hillary Clinton is very much an interventionist,

someone who during her time in the state Department took action across

the world, whereas that would not necessarily be the Democratic view,

nor the view endorsed by Bernie Sanders. So both of them are turning

politics on their heads. You a drum supporter?

No! I did want to say, I am American, and I don't want to speak

under half of the American people. We feel your pain.

Yes! It is unfair, but I think there is a lesson here, in that yes, they

are two of the most hated candidates for president, but they were elected

by one third of eligible voters, said two thirds of the American

people said our vote does not matter. Clearly it does, and I think

that is a lesson for the world. That is democracy. Any Trump

supporters? Did you have your hand up? Yes, sir. Go ahead.

You know, in all fairness and honesty, I understand the way people

view Donald Trump. They have got a great deal of disdain towards him,

his comments were very misogynistic, they were vituperative, but they are

just comments. They are just comments, and I am not trying to

placate or excuse them, but when you look back from 1993 to 2001, Bill

Clinton physically abused the presidency of the United States.

Yes, but Bill Clinton is not running for president. I think it is

unfortunate... APPLAUSE

Hillary is her own person, and I are happy for people to attack her

record, but I think to attack her for her husband's behaviour.

They do attack her for her response to that. She is accused of bullying

some of these women. Well, they say that, but Donald

Trump, it is not just words. He has made it clear that he was bragging

and boasting about having assaulted women, so it is not just words, it

is the action that lies behind those words, and for me to say it is

locker room talk or just how men are, actually does a disservice to

most of the men that I know, because they are better than that, in fact.

I wanted to ask you, Mike, because you have been an athlete, a rugby

player, sports man. Did you ever hear talk like that in the locker

room? Not sure I did. No, I don't remember talk like that,

actually, and I know you say these are just comments, but this man is a

politician, and surely our comments define who we are. They reveal our

values, and our thoughts on life. Can you really support that?

Well, you know, in all fairness, again, I am not excusing them, but

he was not really a politician back then, and with regard to attacking

her record... He is a human being. Does that not

tell you about his values as a human being?

Well, certainly does, yes. I want to bring in John O'Dowd

quickly. I think it reflects a broader change

in politics across the Western world, a politics based on fear and

extremism. I was recently in America, in New York, in Manhattan,

and I have to say, I was shocked at the scale of poverty I witnessed on

the streets of New York. In the early morning, when going to the

train station, the shop fronts were full of people sleeping. There are

people in wheelchairs out at night sleeping, people looking through

bins for food. I went for a coffee the afternoon before I left the

airport, and in a plaza just seventh Ave, it was full of poverty.

We'll either of them fixed that, is the question?

Donald Trump and others play on the fears of people who society have

left behind. He talked about immigration and he talks about other

issues and tries to blame are the poverty that has been imposed, the

economic policies he would support. Let us go to our second question,

from a company director. Do you believe that paramilitaries

organisations have a role in a local community groups. This will be

relating to the Charter organisation that has been linked to loyalist

paramilitaries, they got ?2 million of social investment funding to help

promote 300 jobs. A DUP spokesperson said Phil checks had been carried

out and a robust business case made. Martin McGuinness has said it is

cheap point-scoring to talk about the links between money like that

going to groups who have links to paramilitaries but surely people

have a right to know where their money is going and it should not be

going to people with paramilitary links? Should paramilitary groups be

connected with community groups? We should not have paramilitaries

groups on our streets. They should remove the infrastructure from our

communities and allow communities to develop. If there are individuals of

the laws paramilitary organisations who want to contribute to the

community they can do so out with the structures of the paramilitary

organisations. As regards the question and idea specific group I

understand that as Assembly Member sitting on the board of directors,

business people sitting on the board of directors, members of statutory

agencies sitting on the board of directors, former political

prisoners sitting on the board of directors. Former political

prisoners are a reality of our life and many of them have come out of

prison, gone back into their communities, and contributed

significantly to the community well-being and peace building that

has gone on in Irish society so because somebody is an ex-political

prisoner I am not going to label them with another label. But

publicly sever all links. People have information that there is

public money going to paramilitary groups they should bring that

information. The Chief Constable said there is a schizophrenia alone,

there are people who are community leaders by day, but at night they

where a parallel to the barge or carry something on the lapel. He is

not pointing fingers at anybody in particular. He is pointing out there

is a big problem. It is time for a line in the sand. It is time for

sanctions. It is 22 years since the ceasefire. Why on earth are

paramilitary organisation still in existence? I know that the

individuals who properly then, a lot of them are still around. We cannot

expect them all to pop the clogs over the last couple of decades.

They had down the years demonstrated huge energy and commitment in the

most awful week, illegal week, killing, maiming, destroying our

economy, but some of them still have energy and commitment, and I think

as politicians it is a duty to try and encourage them to use that

energy positively for the benefit of the community, and where they do

that, for example in my constituency in Strangford, I will help them if

they are genuine. But if they are trying to use that energy in a

negative way, in terms of controlling the communities... Do

you see evidence of that? Do you know people who are community

leaders by day and paramilitaries by night? I know people who are using

that energy to control communities negatively underlined their back

pockets. There is also the image of drying pitch is damaging our

international reputation. The people who do that need to be told there is

a line and the sand and you are just about to cross it and there must be

sanctions. That is what has been missing for the last 22 years.

Sanctions for those who will not play the game. Arlene Foster threes

of differently, she talked about a fork in the road, she wants to take

people out of society if they are paramilitaries, but also offer

people the chance to change. But surely that fought in the road

should have come a long time ago? Without question but the truth is we

were still, and still do today, have people who are wedded to

paramilitary organisations. Regrettably some are still

benefiting incredibly well from crime, from destroying their local

community. The basis on which the First Minister was talking about was

the fresh start Agreement. For those who want to play a constructive

role, for those who have an ambition to raise aspiration in the local

community where previously there has been none, there will be a path open

to them. We have this Charter NI, the man at the top

is linked to paramilitary organisations. The man you are

talking about is playing an important role in our community. He

is chief executive of an organisation transforming lives in

East Belfast. The answer to the question as, no paramilitary

organisation should be involved in Trinity groups. But when you have

individuals who are prepared to set aside their past, their history,

mistakes that they have made, and want to have a positive contribution

to our society, it is incumbent on all political leaders to make sure

that that space is therefore there. But that does satisfy ourselves with

Republic money is going. The social investment fund is not politicians

doubling money to groups, it is stealing groups made up of our local

community deciding for themselves, what other challengers, and in this

particular case, employment is the genesis of the thrust of the

programme. Saw employment opportunities, what we want to

create, there is an organisation which is great relationships with

statutory agencies, it is renowned for delivering on projects in the

past. Despite the criticisms about the social investment fund and the

many uses it took to get some of these schemes progress, it was

because we were satisfying ourselves about the velocity of the groups,

regarding corporate governance and finance. And having gone through

cheque after check... Let me take Naomi Long first. Go to the stealing

groups. The stealing groups are made up of members of the local

communities who were appointed. The prodigal members are there as of

right but the other members were appointed by Sinn Fein and the DUP.

The management organisations were also appointed by OFMDFM. No other

organisation had a gratuity to bid for this money. This money was taken

from Department of employment and learning and development who were

engaged in deprived communities, engaged in dealing with economic

disadvantage, it is crucial, it is taken away from most apparent in

that responsibility because they would not simply give it to the

people of choice for Sinn Fein and the DUP. That is the history. The

Bottom Line in this there is no paramilitary organisations do not

have a role in community organisations but there are

questions not just report shows but for the police, the Chief Constable

is saying that people are community workers by day and paramilitaries by

night that it begs the question of why action is not being taken on

that. He talks about the need for a pragmatism. I think that is the need

for a restoration of confidence in the rule of law. There may well be

issues around resource. There may be issues around evidence but the

police should be clear that when it comes to them if they are saying

that people are breaking the law they should be actively pursuing

them for that. And ensuring that communities are protectors because

the reality on the ground is that these are not people simply with a

past, a number of these individuals are paramilitaries in the present.

And that is not acceptable. We need to get away from that. I am not

making allegations but individual organisations. I will tell you why.

There are good people who work in those organisations who deserve

credit for what they deliver. But we had to ask questions. We have to

ask. Do you know what? Of course they should have the money if the

bid for it against other organisations in our fair and open

competition, not because they cause the up to the political

establishment. Give us a list of groups that you believe... This has

gone on over many years. It is now up to the political parties... I am

happy to give an example. When Stephen Farry was the Minister for

employment and learning he was approached by the First Minister and

Deputy first bluster and was offered ?7 million for a project to deal

with educational attainment with young people. In Loyalist

backgrounds. In Loyalist backgrounds. The money had to go to

Charter NI, not an open competition, but to that one organisation. He

declined that offer and said that he would run a proper process that any

organisation with the right to dental is good practice at as part

of that Charter NI got a small amount of funding as did other

organisations. I object to due process not being followed and I

object to people getting preferential treatment. Naomi Long

is right, of course people with a past should be involved in the

future. I worked with people with that past every single day. Of

course they should have a future but that does not mean that you continue

to be an active member of a paramilitary organisation. It does

not mean that we can continue to feed young people with drugs and bit

and forced them into situations where they end up taking their own

lives. That is what is happening in our communities. So is the chief

Consul's pragmatism just a copout? There comes a time when society very

hard to see put your guns down, put your drugs away, you are not part of

our society and we will not play due to be part of our society. It is not

good enough. I will not make accusations of individuals. There

are plenty of them. You do not think there is a fine line to be drawn as

people move from one might to another, he one should they be

allowed? I think they have had enough time. We should not throw a

good public money after bad. There are fantastic organisations working

across our communities, many of them are involved with and are led by

people who used to be involved in paramilitary organisations. They

give it up. The decided that I can to do was to move forward. There are

some people who are still involved and are bragging about it and I

getting public money. That leads to stop. It should not be acceptable in

2016. Gentleman in the second row. Regardless of all that.

Paramilitaries well and still do have quite a sweet on communities

within Northern Ireland. What I am asking is how can we get them to act

positively? How can we get them to stop acting negatively? How can you

push them to start acting positively? So they can work with

the community? How can we ever justify giving ?1.7 million to any

of these groups and at time of austerity when our public services

are being absolutely decimated? There are mental health day centres

closing down, nursing homes closing down, we have heard during the week

that children in special needs schools are being deprived classroom

assistants because of lack of funding. This made me wonder what

are the society's priorities. Who do you persuade, force, people who are

still involved in to give it up? They have the choice. The either

abides by what we abide by as peaceful and democratic law abiding

citizens or they do not and they do not it is a matter for George

Hamilton and the police service. It does inject positivity. You would

think money was going to paramilitary organisations. It is

not, it is going to deliver the agencies and our community who are

succeeding in what they do. The first process was for a Dr 's

surgery which sits on the perimeter of short Strand, used by residents

of the Newton Road and the Short Strand community, so investment in

committee health, an important bearing, and I am glad that this

programme was able to support it. Next scheme, in the prison community

Centre. You will know the area and the issues with bonfires in July.

This community has not had investment for 30 years. They got

temporary Portakabins 30 years ago and he litters, ground up, a

community scheme, they are getting a new building for a group that does

not cut ties of paramilitaries but is doing great work in our

community. Other thoughts from the audience? Picking up your points in

respect of investment, I wonder what the panel thinks of the continued

scourge of suicides in our society at a time when mental health funding

is being cut short? That is too much off topic in the time that we have.

Any other points on that? OK. Let us move on to question three which is

from a teacher. I live on the border. He will Brexit affect my

life and prospects? That is a very good question. You could be a

remain, a denier, whatever, there is so much going on, does anybody know

what is really going on? Mike Nesbitt, who will that person's

might be affected by Brexit? Nobody knows. Everything is uncertain. 23rd

of June has opened an era of uncertainty which will last at least

five years, and maybe ten. It depends whether we are going to

remain within the single market, within the customs union. These are

things that we have not answered. But I can tell you that you and

Northern Ireland will be the most affected nation and region of the UK

by this decision and yet our executive is the least prepared. The

UK Government has a new ministry with a set -- with the Secretary of

State for Brexit, Scotland has an advisory panel, even the UUP has an

advisory panel, the executive has nothing. When David Davis came over

to speak to the executive he had to have two meetings. He had to meet

the DUP and Sinn Fein separately. A divided House has no leverage in

negotiations and we have to decide what our policy options? From that

they have to decide what our priorities are. Crucially we have to

figure out whether those priorities complement or clash with the UK's

overall priorities because where they clash we have a huge problem.

You have lost me already, it is so complicated! You are wanting special

treatment in Northern Ireland and the assembly yesterday, but it is

really nonsense. Why should Northern Ireland have special treatment?

It is not nonsense. I live on the border too, on a city surrounded on

three sides by the border. I think we'll remember how those of us who

voted to remain on the -- felt on the morning of the 24th. People in

our city were devastated, because we understood the real detrimental

effect this would have on all others. Anyone who tries to tally

there are real great opportunities from Brexit, they are not telling

you the truth. We are facing a very, very difficult economic time and a

very difficult political time as well ahead.

But you can't deny that there may be some opportunities?

But I don't know what they are. Well, we had the Northern Ireland

Food And Drink Association saying that while there were certainly

problems for the food industry, there could be opportunities for

exports to England, because you would not have the problems of the

euro or the single market. The English market right there for the

taking. Our job is to make sure we get the

best possible result of the people here who are so badly affected by

it. I want us to remain as members of the EU. We are still fighting to

do that. But that is a lost battle!

Just let me finish. At the very least, we need to have access to the

single market, we need to have the ability to move around this island

and move around the European Union as freely as we need to, because

people are telling us, everybody is saying, to reason they said it

today, in the letter we eventually got out of the executive, thank you

very much for that, by the way - Theresea May is is telling us we're

not going to return to the borders of the past. No one is saying about

largely look like. Because in my view, this referendum is about

immigration, therefore, the British nation will have to control their

borders. They should not be allowed to do it on the island of Ireland.

If they want to do it, let them do it at airports in Britain. That is

where this is going. We need to maintain the freedom of movement and

freedom to trade within the European Union.

Couple of questions, was there a separate meeting with David Davis?

He had four meetings in Northern Ireland, with various ministers.

He met with the First Minister, he met with the finance minister, he

met with the economy minister, and he met with the agriculture

minister. He had four separate meetings.

But not one meeting that Sinn Fein and... There was no meeting which

involve members of the DUP on Sinn Fein to discuss policy?

What the British government did get whenever the opposition parties were

running around, chasing their tails, they got an agreed position from the

Northern Ireland executive. Are you incapable of reading the

letter? Was published. It identifies five areas of concern.

No vision. While many were saying we want to

see this happen, the UK is leaving the EU, and for as long as you go

around saying this disastrous, this is going to be catastrophic, and so

on, there are some of us... We said that before the referendum

as well. There are some others in politics or

want to make sure the Northern Ireland succeed. There are some in

politics here, recognising that there are issues in Northern Ireland

and issues with our relationship with the Republic, have a job of

work to do, and I am pleased that not only are we committed to that,

Sinn Fein are committed to that, CBI yesterday, very important statement

from them, and the Food And Drinks Association, saying it is not the

result they wanted, but here is what we can do for Northern Ireland, so

we're saying, small businesses affected by regulation, what did

they say yesterday? We would like to have equalisation and harmonisation

of regulation that the good of business. Now we have the ability,

let's get rid of the regulations and red tape. We had this letter...

People in England voted to leave. Happily through positive engagement,

the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has said it is not known to

happen. You wanted to happen. You seem wish

it so. Do you want it to happen?

You wanted to happen. You argue for a Brexit. How is it going to work?

All right, let's widen the discussion to the other panel

members. John O'Dowd, Theresa May has responded to the letter of the

First Minister and Deputy First Minister. She has basically said, we

feel European, but it is all up for discussion. She wants to encourage

low energy prices, structural funds, and not to have a hard border, but

no idea how to go about any of it given to put that question to

ton-macro too, because I agree with you.

It is quite clearly Conservative Cabinet, and Mike has said this, and

I want to expand on this point, the Conservative Cabinet do not know

what Brexit means. In fact, there is internal feuding

considering within the Cabinet, well sourced media reports now suggesting

that the Chancellor Mr Hammond is either going to resign or be sacked,

because he has identified that the issue around access to the European

single market is crucial to the economy of these islands. Your

question once know how Brexit will affect them. No one around this

panel or anywhere else knows the definite, and that itself can cause

an economic shock. But I do know this. Your petrol and diesel costs

have risen by ?27 a month. Your home heating costs have risen by almost

?60. Anyone who is on family tax credits as a result the rise of is

going to lose up to ?140 a year as a result of the rise in inflation. So,

thus far, the impact of Brexit is going to be negative, it is going to

impact on peoples incomes, peoples outgoings in terms of shopping and

their household budgets. So, what are we going to do about Brexit?

Well, it is very difficult for the executive to organise a response

when those who are monitoring Brexit in the Westminster have not got a

clue what is happening, what way this is going, or how it is going.

You should be kicking down the door of number ten!

Well, walking in on Monday. The first Deputy First Minister...

Forcefully! Settle yourself.

The first Deputy First Minister, I am meeting him on Monday.

The start of the negotiation process with the British government as to

how they respond to Brexit. Our position is quite clear, the vote

should be respected and we should be allowed to remain within the EU.

That should be what is happening as a result, if democracy means

anything, and that has to be the outcome of what we're going.

Well, it will not happen, will it? I'm not so sure that there isn't a

possibility of special treatment in Northern Ireland. We are a special

situation here already, in terms of how we are treated, our

constitutional arrangements under the Good Friday Agreement. The EU is

an incredibly fragile organisation despite the fact that it is

enormous, and it can reach accommodation for many oddities

around its borders and how it handles things. So the idea they

could come up with special arrangements for Northern Ireland is

not beyond cup retention. But then Scotland and Wales would

want them! England would want them! The reality of the situation is that

we are unique in terms of our current position, so to expect that

to continue is not unusual. I have to say, in terms of what

people know and don't know, there are some things we do know. We know

that it took been learned three and a half years to exit the European

Union. -- Greenland. And with due respect to them, their only interest

is fish. So by comparison, we have a very complex set of negotiations to

undertake in two years, so we know that we are up against a ticking

clock. We'll soon know, with all due respect, regardless of what Theresa

May has written on her knowledge and letter back to the First Minister

and Deputy First Minister, we know what her responses. She set up a

Brexit Cabinet did not even bother Secretary of State for Northern

Ireland on it, so she has as good as told us that the British government

will do what they wish to do and we can lump it. Now, I don't think that

is a good message to be sending to the of Northern Ireland. It will

affect you at the border, particularly, because whether people

like it or not, if we are going to have a differentiation in markets,

you will have customs controls. That is unavoidable. If you are going to

control immigration, you have to have immigration controls. Whether

those are hard or soft controls, we do not know, but those controls have

to exist. I want to go to the floor here.

When food costs rise and we get inflation, we know that banks

control inflation by raising interest rates, so you will pay more

for your food, and more for your mortgage.

The gentleman here. I want to know, does Brexit make it

more likely or an unlikely for unemployed people like myself to get

a job. That is a good question. Let me go

around everyone. The lady asked if that would affect

her at the border. It is already affecting us now. Inflation has gone

up. It will affect the Good Friday Agreements, with freedom of

movement, and does that mean that people with an Irish passport living

in the north of Ireland are going to have to show their pass but when

they want to go down to Dublin airport to go on holiday, for

example. This gentleman in the middle here?

My question is directed more at Mike and Gavin, particularly in light of

the well made comments that have been made and the need for Northern

Ireland to get as good a deal out of this, and I think perhaps more

salient Lee, Naomi's point about where the power in this really lies.

Why are you ruling out an all Ireland Summit?

And the lady at the back here? A few minutes ago, it was asked what

the opportunities were for Brexit, and Mr Eastwood replied he did not

know. So why on earth should we listen to him on Brexit?

I didn't argue for Brexit. That is why I don't know what the

opportunities are. In a second.

Does Brexit mean that the proposal for a reduction in corporation tax

is now dead in the water? Very, very quickly then, and

deployment, employment of this young man here.

These issues, employment, corporation tax, which are resolved,

and we will have to to the bottom of those. The point I want to make is,

it you said if we have a special status, England, Wales and Scotland

were wanted. That is fair enough. But so will the Czech Republic,

Hungary and Romania. Don't think the rest of the EU nations will sit

around and think, we will give the UK a better deal and we are giving

ourselves. Your party leader has said she will

not take part in the all Ireland Forum, as it would lead to

grandstanding. Why not? Is that not a very sensible approach, if there

is so much confusion? The summit is going to go ahead. It

is up to Kenny, whoever he wants to speak to an invite. But the notion

we need and Kenny, to engage on our behalf with civic society in

Northern Ireland, is a nonsense. We have nothing to gain from attending

this, because we are fully engaged in the North-South ministerial

council and the British Irish council, both in the DUP and Sinn

Fein and the northern Ireland executive. We have nothing to fear.

We have got time for this discussion.

Why does the minister for agriculture not engage with the

Parliament in this? Let's just stop it right there,

because we could go on all night, and there are other topics to cover.

That go to our fourth from Belfast. My question is for the gentleman

from the DUP. My gentleman was killed -- my grandfather was killed

in 1871, in the highest meeting, which we walked out on, he says that

the buck stops with them and Stormont, so I just want to know why

his party leader is refusing to give funds to all victims of the

Troubles? OK, this is the case of the legacy inquest, of something

like 56 potential inquests involving 90 or so deaths. Michael's

grandfather was killed in Bally Murphy in 1971 in two days of

shooting by the army. Three days. I do beg pardon. The Secretary of

State says the job of the assembly to do it, but Arlene Foster Saturday

singers that. Why? It is not that she has set her

face against it, she would not allow time for it to be discussed.

There are funds a lot of legacy matters.

I'm sorry, she has set her face against it. She would not allow

it... There is an unresolved issue about

national security. But she has set her face against it.

Until that is resolved, I suspect there will not be movement on this

issue. There is an unresolved issue with national security. The British

government have challenged since then. -- challenged Sinn Fein. He

says repeatedly that it ends with Arlene Foster.

Explain the background. I appreciate you adding that.

I assume what you want to do is go through an inquest situation and get

answers. And unless the national-security

issue is resolved, you will not get the answers from that process. I

have met with, I assume, relatives of yours, people involved with the

campaign about that massacre, and I did so when I was in Belfast City

Council. I know there is pain, and I know there is pain right across

society amongst victims, throughout, your community, my community, and

the community of Northern Ireland in which we live. Until that is

resolved, I don't see there being progress on the issue.

But on the specific matter, the whole thing could be cleared up in

five years, it is said, these 56 cases, but until it gets started,

nothing will be done? Until the British Government 's move

on the position they have on national security there will be no

answers forthcoming. You could lose years going through the process and

should you not get the answers you say get the end of it you will be

asking. That is the outstanding impediment to progress. That is one

that is going to have to be resolved. The Government is saying

it is the responsibility of the Assembly. And if Sinn Fein --... You

are the ones raising the objections. On behalf of the families and we are

happy to do that. National Security Council used to block access to the

truth. Every state will have national security interests and what

we have said to the British Government is that there should be

independent monitoring of national security issues. When there is a

dispute between the body and the British Government you bring in

independent bodies to adjudicate on where and how those national

security interests are dealt with, or they are set aside. But the issue

of funding being released to these families should go ahead because not

feel these cases will be around national-security. The Lord Chief

Justice said that he would be able to deal with the outstanding cases

within five years, the British Government should release the

funding and enter into discussions and negotiations about resolving

this so-called national security issue. Mike Nesbitt, it said one of

the reasons there is reluctance on the Unionist side is because the

predominant number of cases are alleging security force killings and

therefore it is a rewriting of history and a sense according to

some of the DUP, or a new interpretation of history, is that a

valid argument? That would not be my concern. From whatever faction of

society you came from it is simply wrong and it is unjustifiable to

have two weeks for more than 40 years for some process to establish

the truth. My difficulty is, we talk about having no hierarchy of

victims, that is good, but we have a hierarchy of investigation, so at

the moment the victims Commissioner reckons that over 1000 people who

have lost loved ones during the Troubles have had nothing because

the historical investigation team has been disbanded. All they did was

review the file. It was not a new investigation. They just looked at

what was held in box files. That goes all the way up to very

expensive public inquiries. If you have a hierarchy of investigations

you inevitably have a hierarchy of victims and that is our concern.

These legacy inquest would establish a hierarchy? Just having different

processes means there is a hierarchy. We felt, imperfect as it

was, that we should have finished the previous process. Republicans

made clear at the Starbuck postdocs that they wanted the option to see

two families -- at the Stormont House talks that they wanted the

option. We go back to the issue of holding up of funding for legacy

requests, cannot be cleared in five years? The Lord Chief Justice has

done a good piece of work. I sat in the court during some of the

proceedings to figure out how it could be moved forward. He said he

can deal with the specific part of the legacy of our past in five years

if the money is available. Michael and his family have waited for 44

years to even get access to the truth. 46 years. To even get the

opportunity to get that beard and a court. That is not good enough. I do

not think any of us from whatever side... Do you think linking the

legacy inquest to national security disclosure is acceptable? No, any

organisation whether paramilitaries or state should be coming forward

with the truth, nothing should stand in their way. Society and victims

need this. Secretary of State should release this money anyway. He should

not be giving Arlene Foster Peter Wanless. That is what has happened.

Arlene Foster now has a veto. It has been going on for months. They

should take it back on the specific issue to deal with the concerns of

the families from Ballymurphy and the other families caught up. Is

that a good President? Start taking back bits of devolved power? That is

not the issue. Do we hold up a process which we know could get

resolution for the families who are beating for inquests on the basis

that we are feeling other families? I do not think that there's much of

a way to handle an issue that has caused such pain. The legacy

inquest, and what the Lord Chief Justice had offered, was a solution,

a partial solution, to a political failure to deal with the past in a

comprehensive way. What they offered was a time bound cost its proposal

that would allow us to deal with this set of inquests. I think it is

madness that we do not continue to do that and get these cases dealt

with. There will be people, and we have got to be honest about this,

who will never know the truth about what happens to their loved ones,

who may never even be able to locate there remains, who may never know

why those things happened, but that is not a good reason to deny those

who could reach the truth the opportunity to get it. Just got a

question for Gavin, he did well earlier with the question for

Michael, but why is it continually stated that anybody murdered by the

British state is not innocent? Can you answer that? What is it you are

asking? We are going to move on. Let us move to our fifth question which

is from a student from Belfast. With the change in public opinion is time

that abortion reform is to Northern Ireland? This is based on the latest

opinion poll which shows 72% of people agreed that abortion should

be legal if it is the result of sexual crime, 67% thought it should

not be a crime, 73% of DUP supporters said it should be allowed

if it was a result of rape or incest, 69% of SDLP supporters said

it should be allowed if it was a result of rape or incest. As opinion

changing? Opinion is changing. Is it time for reform? It is past time for

reform and that is why proposals were bought Ford's to try and deal

with one aspect, around fatal foetal abnormality. Difficult decisions

have to be made by women regardless and they had to make them an short

time in order to be able to exercise any kind of control in those

difficult situations so the time for reform has come. Fatal foetal

abnormality, rape and incest are reasonable grounds to seek an

abortion but the law needs to catch up with the reality, women are

purchasing online drugs, putting their lives and health at risk, not

knowing what they are taking, not doing it with supervision, and

putting themselves at risk, and as a society we need to find a response

which is compassionate, to deal with the reality. We talk about there

being no abortion in Northern Ireland but that is. It is

underground orators exported. I want to deal with what these figures

indicate. Do you think that you are increasingly out of step with the

electorate? 69% of SDLP supporters support abortion efforts as rape or

incest. This is a sensitive and difficult issue. It is particularly

difficult for the families and the women who are going through it and

we should approach at understanding that. I come from a Catholic

background. I went to a catholic school. I am not surprised by these

figures. I believe that people from my community are discussing this and

talking about it and are challenged by it, especially by the hardest of

cases. Are you leading the way? What we are doing this we have supported

and push for a things to come into place because that is what doctors

asked us to do. Doctors asked for a change in the law and you blocked

it. We did not. Doctors asked us for a change and guidelines which made

it impossible for doctors to do the job. We also have supported the

working group which has now reported to the two ministers. We look

forward, we are committed to looking at the report and responding to stop

what is your own review? The SDLP is a pro-life party, we do not want to

see the 96 to seven act coming into Northern Ireland, I do not think

there is a popular support from that. If you change the law there

can be unintended consequences. Do you support a change in the law? Let

me finish. That is why we have to allow the working group to have that

report publisher on matters that could then. Our fear of the last

time was that a change in the law could be overreaching, it could have

led to the extension of the 1967 act. We need to satisfy ourselves

that would not. The party has come to this from my compassionate and

sensitive position and we will discuss this issue when it comes

around. We will not play politics with women or their families but who

will stand by the physician that the 9067 act should not come in.

Are you out of step with your own support? No, I do not feel that I

am. The figures that you are talking about, less than 1000 people. That

is a fairly standard pool. Less than 100 people who identified themselves

as supporters, there is no way of verifying that. It is important as

physical readers we truly engage in this issue and that we are

sensitive. Personally I am pro-life. In any circumstance? I have

supported exclusion zones outside clinics because I do not think it is

appropriate for people who are abused in those situations because

it is an incredibly difficult case. But it is right that the working

group, and was established not to avoid as has been suggested election

considerations, this is something that is sort important it should not

be put onto a Justice Bill, it requires proper consideration. We

have proper consideration now through the working group. It is

reported to the Health Minister and the justice minister. It will then

be brought to the executive. Whether it suggests that the should be

legislative change or it can be dealt with by guidelines, the first

guidelines were struck down. Comments were made. This is an issue

that has had a lack of clarity for a considerable number of years and I

hope we're now getting to a point where we can engage in what the

clarity could be going forward. This debate is not about the extension of

the night insisted seven act, that is a diversion. -- the 1967 act. I

am not aware... It is characterised as reducing abortion on demand. This

debate is about specific circumstances and distressed woman

were given promises before the police debate that they would

support... That is not true. It is on the record. It is not on the

record. It is not true. You can take that up with those who put it on the

record. Where given promises that they would deal with specific issues

around fatal foetal abnormality. There is also the issue of sex

crimes and abuse of women. That is the issue at hand and we do support

in those circumstances termination of pregnancy. It is not about the

needs of doctors or politicians. It is about the needs of the women

involved. Very quickly. I am not surprised by the results and I am

not sure it presents a big shift because when I took up a position in

favour of changing the law for fatal foetal abnormality and sex crimes it

seemed there was a groundswell. I am not going to look you in the eye and

say either you must abort or you must go full-term. But as a choice

that you had to make and that has to be an informed choice because you

are going to live with consequences of that decision. And if you do want

to go full-term we do not have hospice support. At the end of the

is to do with the women who are pregnant and I think that backstreet

abortions, that are still going to happen, do you not think a change in

the law will help us? Thank you. There is also a lack of

modernisation in Northern Ireland. We are so stuck in the past. Looking

at the politics of the past. We do not focus on modern issues including

abortion, mental health and gay marriage. At this only moved on and

started busting to what people are saying, listen to these surveys, and

realise that the majority of people want action taken. What is your

view? Make a brief comment. 833 women from Northern Ireland

travelled to England for an abortion. There we must leave it for

tonight. Thank you to our panel and our audience and to you at home for

watching. Good night.