06/03/2014 The View

And that's it for now. Good night. Hello and welcome to The View.

Tonight: The controversy that won't go away, as the row over OTRs takes

another twist. What about those coping with the fallout? I want my

day in court. I want to look the person that murdered my father the

eye. I'll be asking politicians why a

judge-led inquiry isn't enough for a Westminster committee. And where

does the political row leave victims and survivors?

Also tonight: A century after the suffragettes, men still rule the

political roost. Is it time for parties to discriminate in favour of

women? I'll be joined by MPs Naomi Long and Michelle Gildernew.

And with their views on all of that and more, in Commentators' Corner

tonight are Paul McFadden and Alex Kane.

And, as ever, you can join the debate on Twitter - that's

@BBCtheview. Tonight there's another twist in the

row over letters sent to suspected On The Run republicans. The Ulster

Unionist MLA Danny Kinahan has claimed that an individual in

Northern Ireland is using an On The Run letter which, as in the John

Downey case, has been sent by mistake. The letters issue has

divided victims and comes after the Policing Board, the Government, the

Northern Ireland Select Committee and now the Justice Committee have

all announced they are investigating the affair. Stephen Walker reports.

Over 200 of these letters are in circulation. Some came from the

Northern Ireland office, others by Downing Street. # by Tony Blair's

chief of staff. John Downey was sent one in error. Now there is fear is

this is not an isolated case. Danny Kinahan was a friend of one of those

killed in the Hyde Park bomb. He claims another letter has been

sent by mistake. There may be at least one letter that has been

issued wrongly in northern Ireland. It may be that that letter has been

used to stop prosecution or in defence of someone in a criminal

court in Northern Ireland. Do we know every case of every letter?

Does the Justice Minister Noel? -- does the Justice Minister Noel?

Are there live cases where people are trying to rely on a OTR letter?

I do not know. I want nothing to do with the scheme. Is it possible that

someone going through the system at the moment may be relying on a OTR

letter? It is possible, but ask the Northern Ireland office, do not ask

the Department of Justice. Ulster Unionist Party now tabled questions

on this issue. A spokesperson for the Director of Public Prosecutions

said it would not be appropriate to comment because they are On The Run

scheme is now subject to a public inquiry.

The letters row has divided the victims and created tensions in

victims groups. Last week there was a resignation

from the victim 's forum. If you are innocent why are you On

The Run? I know I have not done anything wrong. Therefore I do not

need a letter. It is ironic that we have had talks of dirty deals and

dirty peace. The letters row has shone the

spotlight. What happened is in the past and I

do not believe there will be prosecutions for a number of

reasons. Mainly pragmatic and legalistic reasons. That does not

take away from the pain that people are suffering. I cannot say that

enough. I do not want to trivialise that pain. But I do not believe it

will happen. It is time that society mature enough to embrace that word

sorry and to clear the decks completely once and for all.

This man was shot and killed by the Army in 1971. His Dr thinks those

responsible must be pursued. I want my day in court. I want to

look the person that murdered my father in the eye and as them why

and as a man was murdered. -- and ask them why an innocent man was

murdered. Has the fallout from the John Downey

case change things? The difficulty has been the heat and

the noise around these discussions. For victims reading shock headlines

about amnesties is highly irresponsible. That's not what they

are at all. This road has done more than divide opinion. There have been

threats of resignation. A series of inquiries. Our political blame game

about who knew what and when. The letters may be all about our past,

but their content is dominating the present.

I'm joined in the studio by the Victims' Commissioner, Kathryn

Stone, and the Ulster Unionist MLA, Tom Elliott - and from London by the

DUP's Ian Paisley. Your party colleague Danny Kinahan

has raised this issue of another error involving these OTR letters.

How concerned are you? Everyday is bringing something new in this

debate. It is important that we get to the bottom of it. It is important

that we every opportunity to try to speak to the Public prosecution

service. And indeed the secretary for the Department of Justice. The

UK Government have a lot to answer in this and we need to hear from

them. Whatever inquiries are required must take place. It is key

that the Secretary of State apologises to the victims. It is the

victims that have been at the wrong end of this situation. She must

apologise to the victims on behalf of the UK Government. You are a

member of the Justice Committee. What kind of investigation do you

want to have in your committee? We want to talk to people locally to

see what involvement was. Why not leave it to the Select Committee or

the judge let inquiry? We want to take evidence from these people

locally, particularly the Minister of Justice and his permanent

secretary. But he does not know anything about it.

We need to hear from them. There may be information that is helpful to

the victims. Ian Paisley, your party says it is

happy with the judge let inquiry, but your Select Committee at

Westminster says it needs to have its own investigation. It is not a

question of either or. On Saturday of last week the party leader said

that he wanted all of these inquiries including a Select

Committee inquiry. I welcome the fact that we have managed to achieve

a judge let inquiry and a Select Committee inquiry. I understand the

Policing Board is also conducting this. We are getting the spotlight

being shared into every single book and cranny so as we can get truth

and transparency. If you get those things you will have made process --

progress. This judge let inquiry will report

before May. Our inquiry will be longer. Because it is not enough. It

is not what Peter Robinson asked for. That is not true. Let us put

this in the context of British politics. The investigation into the

murder of Stephen Lawrence has taken 18 years to get a judge let inquiry.

It took my party 48 hours to get a judge led inquiry. That shows that

my party is making progress on this issue. We will use every institution

to our advantage and to the advantage of all. Today we had the

announcement of a public inquiry into the killing of Stephen

Lawrence. That is not what Peter Robinson got. That tells us that

when the Prime Minister wants to have a public inquiry he will

announce it. You should stop dancing on the head of this particular

needle. You are hurting the victims. Unionism is coming onto a single

page. Even my old adverse of these are congratulating myself it

committee for doing this. I welcome that. This is now moving to

searching for truth and transparency. The Secretary of State

will make it clear tonight that this scheme is now over. The note given

is gone. What those On The Run or Mac have in their pocket is add

beaten docket. They cannot count on those letters any more. We are

coming after them. We thought there were five outstanding cases and we

heard today there are six. Every time we think we know what's

happening, something emerges to we didn't know the full story. You're

making my case, that's why we need this enquiry. Our enquiry is dealing

with 12 terms of reference, which will go into things in the past,

things current, things we believe that will occur in the future and

why we need to look at those issues. Tom is right, this is a changing

feast because we've started to uncover and look under the stones.

What is calling out is not at all pretty. How do you know that the

letters aren't worth the paper they are written on? Last week when I

asked the attorney general in the house, had this established case

law? He made it clear he didn't believe it had because it was an

error in procedure. That is what had occurred in the Downey case. What we

now have is no longer promised notes given, but an indication that the

promise given has been broken. That changes the goalposts considerably.

It means the lawyers and the courts will have to take that into

consideration. The government has said the scheme is over. I will come

back to you in a second. I will hear from Katherine Stone in a second.

Ian Paisley Jr says he's glad that you've agreed with him and are on

the same page as him tonight. Is that where you are, because you've

said you think the DUP has been entirely outmanoeuvred by the select

committee at Westminster, you can't have it both ways? I think Peter

Robinson has been outmanoeuvred. I'm glad the select committee has taken

on a much more in-depth investigation. It will hopefully be

able to bring up much more than the judge-led enquiry can, because

obviously it is seen it isn't enough. Lawrence Robinson, whilst

you didn't go so far as to say that, he was clear this morning that he

thought his enquiry would be much deeper, more in-depth and would get

more information and have that opportunity... I want to see as much

information as possible, out of that, that's why I'm pleased the

select committee has taken that on. Ian Paisley Jr says he believes the

government has now confirmed that the scheme is over. Is that your

understanding, do you welcome that? I welcome it if the scheme is over.

I'm calling for the Secretary of State to say that the scheme is

over, but most importantly to apologise to victims. The letters

that are out need to be rescinded. Ian Paisley Jr has said the

government has confirmed that. If they have rescinded the letters, I

fully welcome mat and support it. We will have to see precisely what it

means. In the midst of all the political squabbling we've seen in

the past ten days, the victims find themselves caught in the crossfire.

How are they feeling tonight? I think that people I've spoken to

have expressed anger. They've expressed feelings of betrayal,

revulsion. I think listening to the conversation and listening to a

number of conversations between politicians and others in recent

days, people are very confused will stop we hear about enquiries,

judge-led reviews, we hear about investigations, all sorts of things

are happening that lead people very confused. And who do they trust and

who do they believe? You have accused the Secretary of State of

addressing the concerns of victims too late over this particular issue.

What do you make of what we've just heard from Ian Paisley Jr, that his

understanding is the government has confirmed the scheme is over, what

will that mean to victims? We have to wait to hear specifically what

that means. It is open to interpretation. The scheme being

over doesn't necessarily mean that the letters have been rescinded. It

might just mean that no further consideration will be given to

outstanding cases. We need to wait to hear what is going to be said.

What this demonstrates is so many victims have been denied access to

justice over the years, across the peace in Northern Ireland. What this

demonstrates is the victims who feel they've been denied even the

opportunity to access justice. That is what is so shocking for people.

It's an experience that is common across all communities. What was

really refreshing was to hear people today, at the Victims Forum, talking

about their sense of loss, their Barisic mint, their injury, their

psychological injury and they have a shared, lived experience of those

things. What they want is truth justice, they want an

acknowledgement. Some people want reparation, some people want their

day in court. We have to make these processes start from what victims

want. Let's go back to Ian Paisley. Can you clarify that for us. You've

said that the Secretary of State has said that the letters don't stand,

there will be no more cases was the phrase you used. Can you clarify it

for us? Does that mean that the letters that have been sent out,

almost 200 of them, will be rescinded, or does it simply means

there will be no new cases, or that any cases that are still being dealt

with in the system won't be pursued? I understand that the Secretary of

State was telling an audience in Belfast that the scheme is over.

That means that the promissory note given is broken. That is what any

court will have to consider when ever a future case comes before

them, because judges will ultimately have to interpret this. That is why

I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has made it clear

the scheme is over. That's why I believe these terrorists have in

their pockets no longer a promissory note, no longer the letter but a

beaten docket. I welcome what was said by Catherine this evening. I

also think a protocol needs to be established that means dealing with

the past does one thing, it puts victims first. When I became a

minister in 2007, the first action I took was to trouble the funding

given to victims and victims groups, to put in place a capital scheme to

help victims. Then my colleagues addressed the issue of trying to

amend the definition of a victim. That momentum has been lost because

of things like this On The Run scheme. We must put them front and

centre again. Your party leader read out a letter, his predecessor, your

father, had written to Tony Blair seeking clarification that no

concessions were being made to OTRs at the time. Does your father feel

let down by the way the Blair government handled this issue?

Everybody knows my father is very capable of speaking for himself.

I've no doubt that we believe that lies have clearly been told. That is

why we are so exercised about this. It was delicate enough trying to get

a negotiation process in place and then trying to get an outcome, let

alone sworn enemies to ultimately share power. This has damaged that

and we must try to rebuild it for the benefit of our people. A

sentence from each of you. Where are we tonight, it seems that things are

moving on apace? They are, but we will hear more revelations. Over the

next weeks and months, we will hear more revelations about this. People

will be shocked by what they hear. What does that mean? I think people

will hear more information coming out that they weren't aware of. That

is the difficulty. We've heard so much in this last week that people

weren't aware of, within our community, the political world and

the victims' world. The final foot from you. All politicians seem to

agree on one thing, and it's that victims are at the centre of this.

Victims would like to see some actions to support the words that

have been spoken. This might be a career limiting move, but when

politicians are taking chunks out of each other on the television, it

might be worthwhile thinking about the impact of those shouting and

squawking at each other and just think about the impact of that on

victims and what that is doing to them. Thank you all very much. Now,

is it getting tougher for women to get involved in politics? It's more

than 100 years since women in Britain and Ireland took to the

streets in their thousands to demand the right to vote. This Saturday is

International Women's Day, and one of its aims is to increase the

number of women participating in political life. But recently

concerns have been expressed about women leaving politics. Four Tory

and seven Labour women MPs have said they'll be standing down at the next

election. The Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, has

expressed his alarm at the apparent trend. Can I say I echo entirely

what the minister has said. This House is losing far too many

outstanding members and far too many outstanding female members. Joining

me are two women who are swimming against the tide, the Sinn Fein MP

and former Stormont Minister, Michelle Gildernew, and hot off the

plane from London, the Alliance MP, Naomi Long. Welcome to you both. How

tough is it? It's not an easy job, despite what people say. But I don't

think it's more net # difficult necessarily for women to get the

opportunity to do the job. I think there are things that could be

changed to improve the conditions, not just for women but all people

involved in politics. For me, the key thing is to try to get more

women feeling it's something they can do. I think it's important we

give women the opportunity and encouragement to step forward to

make their contribution. Despite the claims from the parties here and

across the water that they want more women involved in front line

politics, it doesn't seem to be working. Why not? I would argue it

is working. At Westminster hour representation is 100% female. Our

biggest issue, we don't sit on our laurels on this, our biggest issue

in Alliance is getting more women to come forward. Women do

proportionately better at selection but for internal party posts and

also for public representation than men. The issue is we can't get

enough women who are willing to come forward. But they often don't hear

that positive message because it's drowned out by the negatives.

Politics is bruising, difficult and it will only change as more and for

women join and change the culture. But we need to encourage women who

want to change society to believe that politics is the way to do that.

I want to see talented people, male and female, see politics as a way

forward. Unfortunately, the way some of our politics, particularly in

Northern Ireland but not exclusively, isn't particularly

conducive to encourage people to come forward. Michelle, you don't

take your Westminster seat but you do travel back and forward to London

on a regular basis. You were a minister at Stormont and before that

you check the health committee. How tough has it been for you? I think I

found a huge difference between... When I was elected was before my

family were born and before I was married. During the 14 years I was

in the assembly I've had three children. I found a huge difference

between how I was able to get on before and afterwards. Now I

wouldn't change them for the world and wouldn't be without them, but it

is a lot more, located. You often do a days work before and work because

at the end of the day, our most important job is as a mother. That's

the role I enjoy, I enjoy both my roles, but the role of a mother does

throw up some difficult complications. One of them is travel

and one of them as early mornings and another is late nights. It's

getting that worklife balance. It's difficult. You can get a phone call

to say your child has been sick at school. That's the same for women no

matter what role in life they are involved in. It's also the same for

men. Whether being a female or male politician, that challenge is

exactly the same. There are quite a few male MPs who find life at

Westminster pretty unappealing to. There are quite a few women who are

outstanding and they are also men who said they are not standing. I

agree, politics is difficult no matter what your agenda is. When I

first moved into the assembly it was an absolute bearpit. Some of the

other women were among the most unkind to other women. It is

definitely not easy. If we are not dealing with a level playing field,

so we take a professional in social workers. The vast majority of social

workers are women, but the vast majority of social workers' managers

are men. Because women have to take time out of work, both for maternity

leave and are having their babies, for those phone calls that come in

the middle of the day to say your child is sick. Is it time for

positive discrimination? I believe it is, I believe we need quotas. I

want a society where we don't need quotas but at the moment, and don't

forget Sinn Fein has the highest proportion of female politicians of

any party on this island, we have quotas, 50-50 representation. We do

strive. Sometimes it is difficult to get women to put themselves forward.

In which case quotas are an irrelevance. What's the point in

having a quota? You have got to diagnose the problem before you find

the solution. We cannot encourage enough women to come in. We have to

diagnose our own problem. We are trying to do that. Trying to present

role models. Also, deal with the cultural issues. There are different

challenges. Those should be seen as parental responsibility, not woman's

responsibility. We need to look at things like shared parental leave.

We need to look at things. Politics is more successful when women have a

role. Why is it so bad in Northern Ireland? In the Welsh Assembly 47%,

Scotland 33%, House of Commons 20%, the assembly 14%. Why is it so bad?

It is partly to do with the confrontational nature of our

politics. Some of the challenges we face may not exist in other areas.

It can be difficult for families, the work life balance. Sometimes you

get to the point where you ask if it is worth it. Until there is a level

playing field in society we will need positive discrimination. Thank

you both very much. W from Paul McFadden and Alex Kane.

-- let as here from. What are your thoughts on what Ian

Paisley told us? We have not had confirmation. The Secretary of State

said the scheme is over. Does that mean that 187 people will be told to

tailor their letters. I do not think that'll happen. Peter Hain said on a

number of occasions last week that a deal had been struck with Sinn Fein.

If that deal is now and void, it will be Sinn Fein are threatening to

resign. Oddly enough the DUP are complaining. But now Sinn Fein may

decide to resign. Presumably if it is over and the letters are no

longer of any value there will be a huge reaction to that from

Republicans? There will be hell to pay if that is the case. It is also

a deal that involves another Government. I would love to know

what this means in terms of the status of the letters. I would not

be so sure that Ian Paisley is correct. Tom Elliott says there is

more to come. He said there is a lot more that people will be astonished

with whenever it find its way into the public domain. There will be a

lot more. That is the hallmark of this process since 1988. -- 1998. If

one side of the deal is killed off, Sinn Fein will be arcing at the

moon. I feel sympathy for the police service. They were caught in the

middle. It is a symptom of political failure.

A few tweets on the big showdown in City Hall.

right hand is doing. Thank you both very much indeed. Join me for the

Sunday Politics on Sunday. Now we leave you with highlights of

the showdown at City Hall. me to a tire myself in my Linfield

scarf for this occasion. I am wondering if it is appropriate for a

member to be wearing a football scarf. There is no provision for me

to influence members on what they can or cannot wear in the council

chamber. You should resume your seats. The chair has given the

ruling. I am ordering you to resume your seat. Do not obstruct me. He

dear you address me? Where are we?