09/03/2014 Sunday Politics Northern Ireland

are the business consultant and commentator Joanne Stuart and the

Belfast Telegraph's political editor, Liam Clarke.

The controversy surrounding the On the Run letters has dominated

politics here for the last two weeks. The Secretary of State may

have announced the scheme is over, but the fallout out from the

"comfort letters" is set to rumble on for months.

So can the First and Deputy First Ministers set aside their

differences this week as they head to America to meet investors and

politicians? We'll hear from Sinn Fein's Alex Maskey in just a moment.

But first, when our political correspondent Martina Purdy spoke to

Peter Robinson on Friday, she asked him how significant the announcement

from the Secretary of State is. The one that is still left to be

dealt with is whether there are ongoing investigations into the

cases were letters have been issued and that is a vital area because

without those ongoing investigations into those cases then largely the

cases are closed. We want that clarification from the PSNI.

The scheme was set to be ended in 2012, what is new about what has

been said. Since 2012 they taken further applications but there

be an important factor. Do you believe what you have been told us

last week you said you were deceived by the government? I happy that we

have inquiry is coming out of our eyes and

have inquiry is coming out of our the outstanding cases, six cases

now. I do satisfy these are off of the table? I do not have to guess at

this any longer that is what we have an inquiry for. It is not just those

six cases because I still have to be satisfied that there are no other

cases and the system. Do not forget, there have been many different

entries into the system. The Irish government put forward under the

terms of the administrative scheme that came through Sinn Fein and the

also came through the prison service and I am still at odds to imagine

how the prison service could have been action in ten cases and what

relevance it would have to the prison service or indeed as I

understand that solicitors have been putting in cases as well. You cannot

be sure that those five or six cases of OTRs are the table? The Secretary

of State has spoken about that but I do not have any knowledge and I

cannot answer that question. The Secretary of State has made comments

that there will be a full inquiry and the Westminster led inquiry and

the Justice Committee inquiry and the Policing Board inquiry and at

the end of that we will know the truth. What about the fact that you

ask for the letters to be descended, they have not been

rescinded? You have decided that? What does rescinding mine? I thought

it meant making it null and void. If you no longer have those letters and

being able to stop anyone from being arrested, from being questioned,

from being prosecuted, they are null and void. I only need one other

Catholic and I asked for it earlier in this interview and that is to

ensure that those letters are not a mechanism to stop further

investigation of the cases, the files must be open and continually

reviewed and updated to see if new evidence can be brought about. Your

meeting Bill Clinton ever this week. How did that meeting go? We had a

very good meeting with President Clinton. He is well known to us and

we have met him many times. He understands the difficulties of the

process and we talked about the difficulties and how we may move

forward to deal with these issues. I made it clear in the Assembly before

that Bill Clinton met us and these were issues that could not be

dodged. They have to be dealt with and whether we deal with them now or

in six months' time, it is still a vital issue that must be resolved.

Everyone was aware that the leaders' talks were carrying forward

the agenda and in my view we have made considerable progress and I

indicated that two Martin McGuinness and David Ford in a meeting that the

three of us attended. We were making good progress and then this came out

and it has derailed the process, especially for the Ulster unionist

Party. In terms of the past, it has stayed the process until we know the

outcome of the judge-led inquiry. Is that why there has been no meetings

with party leaders this week? We were sitting down and trying to deal

with issues relating to the past. One of those key elements was what

form of justice could we get for those who still have not had justice

for the loss of loved ones and that the same time we were uncertain as

to what the outcome of this process would be so that is a factor. It

does not stop us from continuing to talk to those other two areas in

relation to parades or flags and I believe that the work that should

continue. What about speculation that President Obama may be said

that he does not want to meet you and Martin McGuinness in Washington

this week? We have met the president at least half a dozen times and he

is always glad to talk to us and we are all was glad to talk to him and

to indicate the progress we are making and the difficulties we are

facing. We are always making and the difficulties we are

relation to our economy. Meetings are always set up as they have been

in the past. I recognise the president will be very busy with

events in the Ukraine but no one can take anyone and anything for granted

but they are glad to have this meeting. But you are only meeting

Vice-President Joe Biden? We will be meeting him as well, yes.

Peter Robinson speaking to Martina Purdy.

Sinn Fein claims the move to stop the OTR scheme is "another

ill-informed, ill-timed intervention by Theresa Villiers in relation to

the peace process". The party's South Belfast MLA Alex Maskey is

with me now. What does the Secretary of State's

statement on Friday change? Thank you for joining us. Essentially

nothing because this scheme was agreed between the British

Government and the Irish Government as far back as 2001. The process has

been underway throughout all those years and we have heard of this and

last week all of the wide range of examples that this process was under

way and someone may argue they were not aware of any letter but they

were aware of the process being underweight. It has been announced.

We know that all of the parties were aware of this process so why did

they not bother to find out whether there was a letter or a phone call

or how was this information to be translated to the people who had

sought clarification? It does not change anything.

So the Secretary of State is correct when she said these letters will not

amount to any amnesty or get you out of jail? That is correct? No one

ever claimed anything different. Only politicians who try to make

more out of it than what it was. That is the irony of all of this.

They are worth a lot on two bases. The letter is clear in number of

individuals who wants to come home and

individuals who wants to come home clear them on the fact that there

was nothing against them. The word cleared could be misinterpreted. It

cleared the status. Anyone could go forward today, it is the legal

entitlements, to go forward today and asked for clarification and say

that this particular scheme, anyone has the right to look at it. It is

important for two reasons, on the good faith, all of the recipients of

the letters are able to rebuild their lives. The second, an

arrangement was reached by both arguments as far back as 2001 and

any resistance to that would be poor.

So, was Ian Paisley right when he said on Thursday night that what

OTRs now have in their pockets are a "beaten docket"? He's right when he

says those individuals know "we're coming after them" as he put it? Ian

Paisley has said a lot over the years. His comments are totally

irrelevant to me. So you had a deal and the British

Government has now broken that deal? He was happy that the British Prime

Minister is looking at this inquiry. But Peter Robinson seems to be happy

one day and not the next. What does he really want? Peter Robinson and

others have created a storm and they do not know where it will end up and

they may end up regretting creating this storm, they have created a

crisis. Let us be clear, a crisis was created that did not need to be

met. It would have been better to be is this other one. They say that

this was a side deal that they knew nothing about and would never have

been agreed to. Rosett -- misrepresent the truth.

They have welcomed the fact that there are four inquiries. We have

had a number of announcements. Is Sinn Fein prepared to co-operate

with the multiplicity of inquiries which are happening - Westminster,

Stormont, the Policing Board and David Cameron's judge-led inquiry?

Will the party give evidence? Will you encourage republicans to

give evidence? We will have to look at that. People will make their own

judgements. We will be party to that. We will see how these

processes unfold but the reality is there is an outstanding issue of a

number of OTRs which was an agreement between two governments

which is why we have said that Peter Robinson's announcement does not

amount to a lot. What is very clear is that both governments made this

announcement, a joint announcement so they came to the agreement. It

was not Sinn Fein who conjured up the process. The process was reached

between the British Government and the Irish Government and that is

where we are. Would you envisage members of the

Sinn Fein party attending the Select Committee? We will have to see how

it goes. We have addressed some of those divisions in the past. Our MPs

attend Westminster on a regular basis and we have spoken to a select

group before. I would not rule it out. But people need to wait and see

where we want to go with it. Alex Maskey, thank you.

Much to discuss with our guests of the day, Liam Clarke and Joanne

Stuart. What did you make with the comments from Theresa Villiers and

the comments by Peter Robinson, we are on this? Theresa Villiers set

out the position of the government formally but it does not change

much. My understanding is that charge at the moment, that is what

the letters are saying. They will now be checked to ensure that there

is no mistakes that of John Downey where there was evidence and there

will be a search for new evidence and if that is brought in then

people can be questioned, charged and the old evidence used against

them. Not coming from this from a political viewpoint but a wider

civic society viewpoint, argue heartened that we now have four

investigations looking at this, does that help us understand what

happened and where the confusion came about, what precisely the

position is on OTR or are in danger of simply making it even more

impossible to work out what happened the more we examine and re-examine

the facts? I think there is a bit of both the, Mark. No one is under any

illusion as to the difficulties that are going to come up as we move

through the peace process. And it is basically how we deal with them.

Having these inquiries enables people independently to look into

what happened and what the situation as an provide that clarity is very

important, but from a civic society and business perspective, it is the

length of time that these inquiries can take and also it is making sure

that it does not derail any of the progress that we're making, June,

particularly on the likes of the Haass talks. The Deputy First

Minister and First Minister go to LA tomorrow to meet the Vice President

of America. How do they achieve anything and fly the flag for

Northern Ireland, forgive me, when they have these difficult domestic

issues? It is about mood music going to America. Peter Robinson talked in

terms of the Cold War with Sinn Fein. Diane Dodds would be the sole

candidate? That is correct because there is a Cold War on but it is

hard to talk in those terms and still have a productive relationship

with government. I do not see the government breaking down but we are

getting into the position where other, it is not healthy.

An attempt to tighten Northern Ireland's human trafficking laws

shouldn't be controversial. But a move to tie it to a ban on paying

for sex at the same time is proving to be just that. Opponents say such

a move would be counterproductive and not enforceable. And then

there's the position of the PSNI which has moved from not supporting

the proposal to not opposing it. So what's going on? Here's our

political crrespondent, Gareth Gordon.

This dementia in and exploitation Bill is making its way through the

Assembly. It is not being an easy journey. -- Human Trafficking Bill.

Most of the controversy has been quite by Clause six which makes it

illegal to pay for sex. At one point even the police thought this was a

bad idea until a senior officer appeared before the Stormont

committee which is going through the Bill line by line. We're not opposed

to cause sex and we have qualified support because of the consequences

that may flow and we have talked about this at some length will stop

we have looked at the vulnerability of the prostitutes. The supporters

of the bill said this about turn by the police was a vital breakthrough

but the opponents claim nothing has changed. When the PSNI comes out and

says emphatically that this is not a good piece of legislation, they then

get worried as to whether it was the place to actually get involved so

all the police are doing as saying, listen, you make the laws and we

will implement them, but in terms of are happy and do they think it will

be effective? All of the discussions I have had suggested it is

counter-productive and ultimately it is not necessary or doing a good

service to the people be trying to help. They say they do not object to

the inclusion of Kos sex but that does not represent an endorsement.

They also talked about the relationship that sex workers would

have with the PSNI. -- Clause six. relationship that sex workers would

The sponsor of this bill says they require nothing of the kind. Most of

my opponents and those opposed to this bill have kept pointing to the

fact that the police are not supporting us. From last week that

particular argument has been destroyed. It is support for Clause

six. We can play about with semantics and say it is this, that

and the other, at the end of the day they are supporting this clause and

why should women be used as a commodity? In this enlightened age

have we not moved far beyond that? Have you brought pressure on the

police? How could we do that? The police have changed their mind. That

is up to them. But absolutely, I welcome what they say, very much so,

and it was unfortunate that some of the stuff that was coming out from

the police before that was not good. I regret that but I accept that that

was where they were on the issue and I am delighted they have changed

their position. The Justice Minister opposes this new clause and regrets

the way that prostitution has come to dominate the debate over the

humans in Bell. By focusing so much on prostitution and we are taking

away from some of the other issues of human traffic and, the forced

labour and issues of domestic servitude and even organ harvesting,

all those issues that are ignored because they focus on prostitution.

Prostitution is not entirely dependent on human trafficking and

it is not solely about prostitution. Lord Morrow says the bill is

gathering support today by the but what will Sinn Fein do. Sinn Fein

already backed a campaign that calls for an end to sex trafficking and

prostitution and the South, so does that not inevitably mean the party

will back a similar change and the North? It is one thing to endorse a

campaign that has brought this courses, one which is paying for

sexual actions. This does not take account of the impact this will have

on people working in the sex trade and we think this will impact people

who will then receive bad consequences. We do not know the

scent of prostitution, we have not heard from those who are it will

impact. The decision that Sinn Fein beaches will have a huge bearing as

to whether this controversial Human Trafficking Bill will ever become

legally binding. Gareth Gordon reporting.

Now for a look back at the political week in 60 Seconds, and the

Secretary of State was at the centre of not just the On the Runs

controversy. Here's Mark Devenport. The Secretary of State said a mental

health charity would not be compensated for money spent on its

Hillsborough cottage shop. They always knew the terms that they were

allowed to go with. OTR has remained on the agenda at

the DUP took comfort from a speech by Italy's abilities. They have a

beating docket in their pocket and that changes the game considerably.

Those On the Runs tonight have squeaky bottoms because they know

they cannot count on those letters any more, we are coming after you.

President Clinton returns and asked us to get the job done. You have

inspired the world and you must finish this.

Scowling over a scarf at City Hall. Is it appropriate for a member to be

waning a football scarf? I ordered you to remain seated. You are

choosing to defy the ruling of the chair!

Mark Devenport reporting. Let's have a few final thoughts from Joanne

Stuart and Liam Clarke. It was International Women's Day

yesterday and it remains a challenge to get women engaged in politics and

taking up their seats in the boardroom. Are things improving?

They are getting better but they have not gone far enough. We still

have issues and the private sector and the public sector and nearly 50%

of women are