23/01/2014 The View

Tonight, policing the political twist and turns of Northern Ireland.

As Matt Baggott bows out, who will take over the top job at the PSNI. I

am joined by Alan Mains, Pat Sheehan and Jonathan Creek. Plus, Power to

the people. Could the citizens of firm and get to vote on fracking? It

is very difficult for someone sitting miles away saying, we will

track in Fermanagh. Why did Ian Paisley bare his soul in a 2-part

documentary? And we're joined by ever

commentators. One former senior officer described

it as a job he wouldn't touch with a bargepole. Even stocking about the

position of chief constable, the post-Matt Baggott has confirmed he

is stepping down from later this year. First, a brief look back at

the years under Matt Baggott's stewardship.

He was hailed as the man who would oversee a new style of East End

policing. It is a great religion to accept this position and to be

appointed as the chief of the PSNI. However, the threat posed by

dissident republicans was greater than anticipated. Tonight is one of

the most sombre and saddest evenings of my service. Tonight tragedy has

returned. Successes included securing additional funding from the

Treasury to combat the dissident threat and overseeing what was

described as the safest G8 summit ever held. But Matt Baggott found

himself heavily criticised by Unionists and nationalists over the

way the PSNI dealt with flag protests and parades. People have

been identified, we will be knocking on doors. People who have been

involved in an notified campaigns and obstructions. He has not exactly

when he will leave. Potential successors may hope that he does

them a favour and stays long enough to deal with this year's marching

season. Joining me is Sinn Fein's Pat

Sheehan, Alan Mains, a former head of CID and Jonathan Creek of their

hump in Iraq. Is it an impossible job? No, I do not think so. When

asked if he was younger witty ticket, he did not say no. This is a

prestigious and well-paid job. They're looking for the best of the

best, because that is what we deserve your. Is that how you see

it, Jonathan Craig? Yes, and we have to be honest about this. Over the

period of the Troubles, there was never really any difficulty in

filling the shoes of the chief constable's job, so why would it be

impossible now? It has changed because of the policing board. The

chief constable is much more responsible to the police board on

the ground. That might be the case, but I do not see that as a

challenge, I see that as a chance for the chief constable to seek the

assistance of board members. We are not bear to tear him apart, we are

there to hold him to account and also to assist in times when he

needs it. Do you think that that is how chief constables have seen the

policing Board in the past? As a friendly bunch of people there to

help, I have the seen them as people who have put enormous political

pressure on them? You take your chief constables of the time, they

all had their way of policing, and some would say that they were not

accountable. You had the lead chief constable who said that he could not

possibly work in that environment. It is difficult sometimes to strike

the balance and we have lost it in the last few years, with the police

board trying to tell the chief constable how to police. It takes a

very robust chief constable to stand his or her ground. The charges have

been laid at his daughter repeatedly. To be fair, he has taken

the challenge. There have been cases where he just did not know what was

coming at him, the flags for example. That fit his strategy --

that pitted, budget and everything else of course. Do you think that

there will be a strong group of candidates will be put off because

of specific circumstances around this post? If you come from perhaps

outside this jurisdiction, people might be put off by the different

parties, because they can and I are fairly contentious at times with

each other. I think that the people in house, as we have some really

good talent year at the moment, who could possibly take that role and

will certainly be putting their hat in the ring, I feel that you will

have a number of good contenders. As Pat Sheehan says, we deserve the

best. When people weigh up the risk to their own security, the impact of

wringing their family perhaps to another part of the British Isles to

live here, not necessarily, but possibly, the political tightrope

walking, the unrest, do you think that at the end of the day you will

have a short list? I do not see that there will be an issue. We are all

we're of the issues of taking on this job, but it is still one of the

most high-profile policing jobs in the whole of the United Kingdom.

Some officers relish that challenge and it is a challenge for them to

take on a position like that. They do like to see change take place

under their readership. Matt was no different to any other chief

constable, in fairness to him he did see change take place under his

leadership. If Matt Baggott had come to the Policing Board in two

months's time asking for an extension, would Sinn Fein have

supported him? Matt would have had to make a pitch to us and explain

why. Surely that is demeaning? Not at all, that is what happens. I

think it is important that we point out that policing is independent.

The chief constable is independent and has operational and pendants, so

what that means is that he is not directed by politicians to carry out

an operation, he is independent. But the problem in the past was that the

lack of accountability was a poison at the heart of leasing, that is why

the Policing Board is necessary. Let us move onto another story that has

today. These enormous sums of money that has been paid by police to

officers who said that their hearing was damaged during service. You have

said that that is an acceptable. There is a fundamental principle

that if people are injured in the course of their work then they are

entitled to compensation. In this case, most of these police officers

have received very generous pensions, many received a generous

severance under... How's that relevant? Something might be legal,

but it may not be ethically or morally right. It would be

interesting to find out also how many of these officers who received

Injury On Duty rewards have come back through the door under the

retire and rehire scheme. That is something we will look into. A total

of ?135 million has now been paid out, are you saying that none of

that should have been paid? What I am saying is that it is in stark

contrast to the experience that victims and survivors have in

getting money from the Government. Police, prison service have recently

been given generous payments. Some of the victims groups in my

community have to jump through hoops after hoop to get any form of

compensation. Legally, it may be justifiable, morally and ethically

it is wrong. Is that how you see it? Not at all. The reason why we had to

carry guns in the first place was pretty obvious. We were the only

police force in the UK. Those are the reasons and that is why. We had

to do that to defend ourselves and the community, let us get that into

context. Secondly, personally myself had to go through that, regardless

of myself, -- regardless of what I get, it is nobody's business. You

have gone through having to carry a weapon, having to fire it, you are

saying that you have also gone through the compensation process? I

make no apologies for it. That was a substantial amount of money

presumably. I will not comment on how substantial. We gather the

figures have been substantial. Collectively speaking it is a

phenomenal some. But it could have done in a different way without

questioning the medical evidence. How do you respond to the fact that

it is morally and ethically wrong? With the greatest respect to Pat,

that is rubbish. If he wants to throw something to the victims to

say, that is a different debate. I think it is a bit rich listening to

Sinn Fein coming on and talking about morals and ethics. Where were

the morals and ethics that led to the police officers having to carry

arms in the first place? The 30 or 40 years of murder and mayhem that

was on the streets. I will also see this to you, there is a

responsibility on the board, to be quite honest with you, the health

and save the of those officers was not properly looked after when they

were being trained in firearms. That may be an historic issue, but it is

an issue that we have to pick up the pieces of. Finally, what about where

the board was on all of this when these decisions were being made? You

are responsible for how the Chief Constable spends his money. ?135

million, were you asleep on the job? Far from it. We have challenged many

of the figures that have come in and the way that many of these officers

are being paid. But there has been a gravy train culture that has been

there for many years and it is time for that -- time for that train to

pool into the station. We have to leave it there. Thank you very much

for joining us. Local referendums are common enough

in town halls in England, but only something that we could see here?

Councillors in Fermanagh have asked whether it could be possible to hold

a referendum on fracking. The G8 should Fermanagh off to the world.

-- showed. It also gave protesters a platform and unlike previous G8

summits, the majority were not against global capitalism or Third

World debt, for many, their concerns were closer to home, like plans to

extract gas using a controversial method old hydraulic fracturing, or

fracking. Some are prepared to go a step further. They have asked the

council to look at the feasibility of holding a local referendum to

gauge opinion on fracking. People believe their voices are not being

heard, decisions being made far away from the canning software fracking

will happen. It is easy for people many miles away to see letters frack

Fermanagh, when they will not be affected by it daily. To give space

for that to be heard is important. The idea would be to have the ballot

on the same day as the European and local government elections in May.

While not opposed to testing local opinion on fracking, one veteran

councillor says there are other ways of going about it. There should be a

local way, interviewing 100 people, or 300, whatever, which will be a

lot cheaper. And more likely to happen, because I do not think it

will happen, because I do not think government will allow it to happen.

I cannot see them devolving that power to Fermanagh District Council

to give in to the request a proposal made by Sinn Fein. Elsewhere,

Scotland is gearing up for its own referendum on independence in

September. It is not uncommon for referendums to be held by local

authorities in England. That is a precedent for a council holding one

here in Northern Ireland. This is about the closing of recreational

facilities... The council organised a referendum around the issue of

Sunday opening. We got fantastic feedback and the majority of people

said that they wanted facilities opened. It gave us the opportunity

to take on the view of the public and open facilities. If the same

thing arose, and the discontent within the community that there was,

it would be useful for public representatives to run a referendum.

The theory is attractive. That is according to one academic who has

studied the effect of referendums. If you think democracy is to do with

the will of the people, especially if you think it is not something

that simply happens once every five years, people spending half an

putting one tech beside one political party, then forgetting

about it for four or five years. If you think democracy is ongoing, in

between elections, then referendums, or direct Odyssey, is one way of

trying to ensure that citizens are included. -- direct democracy. But

on a practical level, is there is scope for holding a local

referendum? So while this idea for a referendum on fracking has been

raised in Fermanagh, what do the authorities make of it? The Northern

Ireland Office is responsible for parliamentary, European and local

government elections, as well as referendums under an act of

Parliament, but not a local referendum and it says in general

one like that suggested in Fermanagh would not be legally binding on the

government. The Department of the environment oversees local

government. It says there is nothing specific in legislation that allows

for a council referendum. If a council was to hold one, it may have

to get the permission of the environment Minister to spend the

money. And after hearing all of that, it's aim is the proposal comes

back to Fermanagh and the messages, if you want the referendum, go

ahead, but you are neuron. Council officials will issue a report on the

feasibility of the proposal to the full council next week and will not

comment until then. But one man says he will be surprised if officials

are enthusiastic about progressing the idea further. There would have

to be a great deal of authenticity. That is a big problem. And what are

you left with? You are left with an opinion. And that opinion, whether

it is effective or not, is open to question. If all the hurdles were

cleared, a countywide referendum could cost around ?100,000, a place

Fermanagh councillors may have to decide if it is worth paying for one

side of the fracking debate to score a moral victory over the other.

Accusations of assassination with word and deed and calling the MP for

North Belfast a cheeky sod. There's been some very unparliamentarily

language on the lips of the Paisley family this week about former party

colleagues. But then again, when families fall out, they tend to do

so in spectacular fashion. And as the First Minister, Peter Robinson,

said at his recent party conference, the DUP has close family ties. I

think that there's a tendency on the part of the media to look at the

Democratic Unionist party as if it is any other political party it is

not. It is a special creation, a family more than a political party.

You do not have the backstabbing that you have in other parties.

There is always support, we have a good relationship. Relationships and

family were a theme that Mr Robinson returned to today when our political

editor Mark Devenport asked him about the situation facing Ian

Paisley Jnr in the wake of the documentary. I gave him advice as a

father, rather than as a party leader, or as First Minister, and I

do not think you should see or do anything that makes his relationship

with his family any more difficult, an important one to keep,

particularly at this stage of their lives. You do not think this will

affect his future in the party? It will not, and not any relationship

with me, and I hope gets that message and is not put under

pressure by people like yourself. So, where does all of that leave the

DUP now? Joining me are Professor Jon Tonge, the author of a

forthcoming book on the DUP. And the man Lord Bannside chose to spill the

beans to. Eamonn Mallie. Amen, first of all, any regrets? From me? Not at

all. It was an extraordinary experience. What about the

experience of Lord Bannside first of all since the programme was

broadcast. Did he expect the reaction? These people have been

around a long time, taking the brickbats, stones, abuse over the

years, so I do not think this came as a surprise. And you spoken to him

since Monday? Yes, at least three times, he does not regret anything,

and I think he is relieved, and glad he had done it. So he is not sorry

and he does not think his legacy has been spoiled by saying what he said?

He was was emphatic that he wanted his version of history, his story

told from exactly as he saw the world. Even though it is, as we have

seen, in touch sharp contrast to the views of the current party leader,

his successor Peter Robinson? Mr Paisley was not coerced, was not

forced, and all the nonsense about him being senile ab blown away --

have been blown away, he spoke with great Wasilla -- he spoke with great

clarity. And you have spoken with the baroness, is she also happy?

They do not seem to be unhappy with anything. I have woken with several

members of the family every day since the programme has gone out.

They are quite relaxed, they expected the abuse to be directed at

them in the media, but they were very adamant that they were going to

put before the public their version of history. And how they felt they

had been cheated by the church and by the party. So just to be clear,

more a case of Lord Bannside and the baroness wanting an opportunity to

get it off their chests, rather than you persuading them? That suggestion

is a little mischievous. The bottom line is I had no knowledge of what

had been going on beneath the radar, beneath the water, when I embarked

on this. I can any other practising journalist, we had heard reports

about the 12 Apostles and those of whom I speak, they know who they

were, the dissidents at a certain time, we have heard reports of

positions that alleged certain things, but no certain knowledge

when I embarked upon this. It was only through deep research all of

this came to the surface. An Professor Jon Tonge from Salford.

Were you surprised first of all that the family took part in the

programmes? Yes, because the DUP has been good at keeping its problems

internal. Clearly short-term embarrassment for the DUP, but not

doing them any harm. And since Ian Paisley step-down, current

membership joined since. And the DUP was already moving to become a post

Ian Paisley party. And even when he was leader, the party wanted to

become post Paisley. The DUP have their views on the people still

voting for the Ulster Unionist Party, who will not bother, because

they still see it as a party of Ian Paisley. It is more in sorrow than

anger that Ian Paisley has said what he said. And what he has done is

exposed himself as a billy no mates, falling out with such a vast range

of figures right across the spectrum. Even his own party. It was

appointment to view television. What did you make of the programmes?

Fascinating television. They could not have been better, and great

credit to Eamonn Mallie to get Lord Bannside to speak so freely. But in

party terms, the DUP wants to move on. Although they did not force Ian

Paisley out, the one not rules that allowed a coup to take place in

quite the way Ian Paisley said, but people glad to see him go, because

the DUP wants to move on, to become a more normal centre-right party.

The largest angle the nomination within the DUP is the free

Presbyterian Church. And the type of member joining in recent years, far

less is that tendency. It will take a generation, possibly two, or that

to be phased out. But the DUP wants to move on to a more normal liberal

Craddick party and offer a stout defence of the union, but an

economic case, rather than an ethnic case, we have the DUP wants to go.

Some people thought Ian Paisley would be a barrier to that, because

of his historical legacy. Do you think this has damaged Ian

Paisley's political legacy? All history judge differently? Yes,

because he will be seen as the man who fell out with everyone, even

turning on his own party. People wanted to hasten his exit, not being

able to force might, although he went out, albeit with some

encouragement from the leadership. The DUP hasten the process of it no

longer being seen as a party of Ian Paisley. Wanting to hoover up the

votes of people voting for the UUP. Thank you very much. Is that how you

see it? Is Ian Paisley now billy no mates? I am not in his own everyday,

do not know who is ringing him, -- not in his home. At some of the

things he has said are nonsense. But he just said it was a fantastic

programme. It is going to change history, the obituaries will have to

be rewritten. What you disagree with? Practically everything the

professor said, Ian Paisley did not voluntarily leave the Democratic

Unionist party -- the Democratic Unionist Party. It is nonsense to

suggest he walked away. The dogs in the street know he did not walk

away. We're does this debate go from here? It seems that our two

diametrically opposed positions on what happened. In your version of

events, their version of events, is that the matter over and done with

now it is in the public domain or will this affect the DUP in the

future? It is virtually impossible. We can pontificate, but the public

will judge, this is a democracy. Every critic in the land rubbished

Mrs Brown's Boys, dismissed it, then it was Top of the Pops at Christmas.

The Democratic Unionist Party has spoken out against Mr Paisley, that

is democracy, and the people will decide. None of us can tell at this

time will happen come the elections. Fascinating stuff. Not sure how you

managed to bring Mrs Brown into this. I much prefer your

documentaries. Did you watch it? I hated! -- I keep it. That is what

they all say. -- hate it. Let us see what our experts say.

Quite a lively debate. Deidre, did you watch the programme open mode

like the rest of those? I was, and I was struck by what Eamonn Mallie

said about the family having no regrets. But the world and his wife

were criticising it, feeling the programme was counter-productive,

that Mr Paisley and his wife delivered a self-inflicted blow to

their legacy. One thing coming out of it is he is so unaware of what is

going on in the wider world, that he is without blame, everyone else is

to blame, DUP, the church, and a huge amount of heart and

disappointment within the DUP about how they have been detected, and Mrs

Paisley comes out as a formidable woman. I loved her saying, I may

make jam, but it does not mean I do not have an opinion. Many would say

she is the power behind the throne. And interesting that the bonobo

greats -- that there were no regrets, but is he billy no mates?

Cutting himself permanently apart from the party and the church?

Everything has been mired in controversy, as it always has been

with his career right from the very first, a controversial figure,

divided views, he was either pushed off he jumped, I suspect it is

somewhere in between, that he was teetering, and a determination

within the DUP to move the party on. To carve out territory for itself.

Paisley had his uses pragmatically when he was First Minister, and

important that he was during that period, but will he be like the

ghost of Banqui? -- Banquo? Ponting Peter Robinson? I do not think so.

Many people have firm opinions about the legacy of Ian Paisley before the

programme, and I am not sure many views will be altered, other than

the fact he is a man clearly licking his wounds. Weird as it leaves Ian

Jnr? -- we're does it leave Ian Jnr? That is a difficult one. Peter

Robinson's remarks were slightly condescending when addressing Ian

Jnr, like he was a father figure, rather than as leader of the party.

I do not think it will damage election prospects in Northampton.

But a cold house for Ian Jnr? For a time, I think so. Maybe a storm in a

teacup? Maybe we move on? I think we move on, it will have a short-term

impact, will it affect DUP electorally? I do not think so. Ian

Jnr, Peter Robinson's remarks were quite double-edged, but I do not

think it will have a long-term impact. The DUP wants to move on, to

modernise, the bat on has moved on and Mr Paisley is seen as the past

and has little impact in Belfast. And the final word about Matt

Baggott going. No great surprise. The easy to get a successor? It is

still a plum job one of the main teaching jobs in the UK. Along with

The Met, for example. It is an attractive proposition, if a

challenging job. Matt Baggott is trying to move the PSNI from

policing apart from the community to fleecing becoming heart of the

community. -- to policing. The big conundrum will be have -- do we have

to go outside, or could we be mature enough to pick someone indigenous?

Who will find out soon enough. That's it from The View for this

week. Join me for Sunday Politics at 11:35pm here on BBC One.

Our hearts were broken for Ian. That was the first time I heard Ian

preach, it was amazing. I think the Assaf and eight it him. -- I think

they are fascinated him. MUSIC: "Stand By The Me".

And as spirit arising from some the other MPs. -- nasty spirit. His name

was cleared by the authorities, everything that was said against him

was proved to be false and there was no sleaze, he never brought any, his

wife never did anything wrong.