13/03/2014 The View

Tonight, he was Tony Blair's adviser on Northern Ireland, he has been

described as the key architect of the peace process and he has been

credited with and went for the on the runs policy. We speak to him

about peace, the past and political deadlock. Is it ethical to send MLAs

to learn about ethics. I think it is important we meet

people involved in lobbying in the US, where they have had regulation

on this issue for some time. I don't see the benefit of members going to

talk about a document that is online.

How we shenanigans of House Of Cards compare with our political system.

The thing is that the House Of Cards invariably collapses.

We are joined by Paul McFadden and Alex Kane in the studio.

You can join in the debate on Twitter as ever.

Violence could very well re-emerge as a character escapes --

characteristic of daily life. That was the stark warning from Richard

Hass in Washington this week. How poor are the prospects for continued

peace? Jonathan Powell was Tony Blair's chief of staff during the

negotiations that led to the Good Friday agreement and he said some of

the on the run letters provided to put Republicans. I asked for his

reaction to the Richard Hass comment. I have read what he said

and it seems extremely sensible. Unless you tackle the deeper

problems of sectarianism, you will have albums again and you will not

have solved it. -- violence against. The peace process is not like a

fairy story. There is a bigger problem that has to be addressed by

politicians afterwards. He also said that while things have

improved, and clearly they have improved, this place still has a

long way to go before it can set an example and others will want to

emulate. I agree up to a point. I think there

is a great magic about the fact we managed to reach agreement in

Northern Ireland and I have met many people interested about what lessons

they can learn both from the mistakes we made and successes we

had. That is not to say the peace agreement solves everything. There

are the problems of politics, violence and there is a problem of

sectarianism. Richard referred to the peace walls. There were fewer of

them when we signed the agreement and there are today so there are

problems. There are not least flags, parades and the past.

He tried to tackle those outstanding issues that still hadn't been

resolved. He failed. I think failure is harsh.

He tried extremely hard, he put his soul into it and I think he deserves

a huge amount of credit for doing that. He wasn't that far off an

agreement that it was the political parties who were not prepared to

sign up. The blame belongs to the political parties who weren't

prepared to find a solution. It is interesting, on the issue of

whether or not we are a model for peace building elsewhere. He says

much of the world looks to Northern Ireland as a model of peace building

but all this is premature. Mature? Hard-hitting stuff.

I think you've was being sensible. He was making the point that the

peacemaking was not easy. It was nine years before we actually had

the Good Friday agreement and the institutions up and running. There

is a stage that comes after that and it is very difficult. It means

generations of hatred has to be put behind you and we haven't found a

way of dealing with the past or dealing with the symbolic issues,

like the flags and the parades. It has to be tackled by the politicians

in Northern Ireland. But there is still a dangerous

vacuum in Northern Ireland, do you accept that? I don't accept that.

There is a government with the political parties in Northern

Ireland and it is their duty to find a solution. There is another problem

in Northern Ireland and that is that the loyalists, the people who feel

like they have been left behind by the peace agreement and they didn't

do as well out of it as the republican communities. I think some

of that resentment is coming out in this issue of flags and parades.

There is no one who represents them. David Ervine was a sad loss and his

departure led part of the community to not having a voice. That has led

to the continuing troubles over the flags, parades and being able to

deal with the past. That is an interesting point which

leads me neatly onto the issue of on the runs, which has been a huge

issue here in recent weeks. It has been reported that loyalists are

struggling to contain their anger over the letters, especially after a

75-year-old man was arrested yesterday over a bombing that killed

15 people. You understand how they feel aggrieved with 200 letters, as

they see it, protecting people from prosecution. Of course they would

feel aggrieved if they felt like there were letters offering amnesty

to Republicans but it is this leading to say that.

We never managed to find a solution to OTR. It was an the table at

Weston Park and it was on the table at the negotiations that followed

but we couldn't find a satisfactory solution. The legislation failed.

There was never a deal on OTRs and people who say there was our

misleading. But Unionists will say that you never got an aboveboard

deal that we could see so you did a side deal with Sinn Fein that

guarantees clarity for these 200 OTRs and Unionists say they knew

nothing about it. There was no deal on OTRs, as we

said. The letters say they are not pardons, not amnesties, and they

tell people who are not wanted that they are not wanted. This was not a

deal. It was letting people know they weren't wanted to come back.

How can Unionists say they didn't know about it?

You will have to ask them. Maybe we judge who is doing the

prime ministers enquiry will go into that but I'm not here to make

trouble for the politicians. You say in your book that the DUP

said they could accept the implications they made on OTRs as

long as Tony Blair wrote to Ian Paisley, saying that these were

agreed during Trimble's work. How does that tie in? That was written

in 2008 and I don't want to go into new suggestions about who knew what

and when. The book was based on my diaries and

the Number ten papers for the decade we were in government but I don't

want to start casting aspersions and blame. What we want to try and do is

get politicians focused on solving some of these problems of the past,

not beating each other over the head with them. Peter Robinson's response

is that it is nonsense. He said he wasn't aware of the

arrangements and the DUP was against the idea of people being released

after two years in prison. Why would they accept this arrangement for

OTRs? He said the assertion doesn't make sense.

That's fine. You have to ask him about that.

I know you say you stand by it but he says it's nonsense. My response

is I stand by the book which is based on contemporaneous diaries and

the Number ten papers and that is what is reflected in the book.

I am saying what happened at the time as recorded at the time.

Can you understand the particular concern over the issue of royal

pardons for Unionists. There were 13 issues, is tooting -- including for

the man responsible for the bombing that killed two people. You accept

that is difficult for Unionists to swallow?

I think anything to do with the pass and crimes of that sort is

difficult. If you remember how difficult it was when we aggrieved

the two years that people would be released after the Good Friday

agreement. People would like to choose the bits they like about the

peace agreement and not the bits they don't like. In the end, they

are compromises between people who have differing views. That was the

point of the Good Friday agreement and the point of the negotiations

that followed. It is difficult for both sides. Tony Blair said in his

memoirs, he would often stretch truth part breaking point in order

to get an agreement in the Northern Ireland peace process.

Is this an example of that? It is not. There are other examples

of destructive and the unity -- constructive ambiguity. But not on

OTRs. Because we never came to an agreement and we have never got

language on it into any agreement. But there was still an

administrative scheme. You say there was never agreement,

there was never legislative agreement but the issue was dealt

with. It wasn't and that is the point.

There are still people wanted for crimes who can't come back to

Northern Ireland because they would be arrested. This was raised in the

case of John Downey and the reason the judge dropped the case because

the police had made a mistake. Not because of an amnesty but because

the judge failed to reflect the fact the Metropolitan police wanted him.

It was not an amnesty. They were letters telling people they were not

wanted they can come back. -- couldn't come back. What do you

make of the enquiries into the scheme?

We have one in Westminster, a select committee enquiry, we have one

instalment, we have David Cameron's judge led enquiry. To those help our

understanding or hinder it? I think David Cameron was sensible

to save the peace process by agreeing to it and it was a

pragmatic move. In Northern Ireland I notice that people want enquiries

on their site but not the other side. It is another aspect of this

pick and choose agreement. They want to look into a grievance they have.

But what the other side wants. It is not surprising it is difficult in

Northern Ireland because even the truth and reconciliation process in

South Africa is awed by many in South Africa to be inadequate, both

from the Nationalist party point of view and the ANC point of view. It

is always difficult to deal with the past. And you don't feel like you

have anything to fear from the four enquiries, investigations that are

just getting underway? I have given evidence in ten

enquiries so far in my career and I'm always willing to give more

evidence. Do you expect to be giving

evidence" Mac I don't know but -- to be giving evidence" Mac I don't know

but I am prepared to do it again. Do you think Tony Blair may be

called to give evidence to the select committee?

I have no idea. You will have to ask him.

Have you spoken to him about this issue since it came into the public

domain? No. Thank you for joining us on the

programme. Good night.

Should the taxpayer still be funding expensive trips to Washington by our

politicians or should we call time on our love affair with Saint

Patrick 's Day in the US capital? The Ulster Unionist leader

questioned why five members of one is the committee need to be there to

study ethics that he is there himself as chair of the committee.

Gareth Gordon looks back on our long association with the folks on

Capitol Hill. For two decades, Washington in March

has been a magnet for Northern Ireland politicians. Everybody in

the peace process has been to the White House as guests.

Among the first was a young Gary McMichael, then leader of the Ulster

Democratic party. Unionism was looking at the Irish-American lobby

and saying, what has it got to do with them? Regardless of whether it

was anything to do with them, they have an influence. They were hearing

one side of the story. The other part of the community would not

engage with them. No longer in politics, he now runs a charity

which addresses the impact of alcohol and drug abuse. You haven't

got that level of political imperatives today. We are in a peace

process which is unstoppable. It is not going to falter at the point

where it collapses. We have an administration, in fact successive

administrations, which are less interested and less engaged in

Northern Ireland. It is important to remain engaged and maintain the

relationship. It has got to the point now where attendance at these

events is something that has become more of a formality. They were not

politicians but few people from Northern Ireland have had as much

impact in the US capital as the sisters of Robert McCarty. They went

for three years but turned down a subsequent invitation because they

felt their work there was done. What do they do when they go over there?

Pretend everything is grand? I sure they arch rang to get business. But

the Americans are not stupid. -- I am sure they arch rising to get

business. If you are going to access the White House on our behalf and

you are going to get paid, tell us what you are therefore and what you

intend to bring back. Of course, the days of the annual exodus from this

building to Washington every March are long gone. But still it is a

hard habit to break. This year, the exodus includes five members of the

assembly's privileges committee, free from the DUP and one from the

Sinn Fein and the Alliance. They are reviewing the MLA's code of conduct.

We open it up to as many people who can go as possible. It is a valuable

trip to make sure we understand the issues around ethics in the US. If

we want a radical code that is fit for purpose, we need to go outside

of the UK and Ireland. Will some people question whether it is worth

the money? We think it is worth the money in terms of going to

understand the issues around the world. We are going to minimise the

cost as much as possible. But this is the first trip this committee has

taken. It is important to meet the people involved in lobbying in the

US. They have regulation over this issue. Lasted, members of the

Stormont committee clashed over how many of them should go to

Washington. -- last year. I will not be going to Washington because I see

no justification for sending five people when in previous years two

seemed adequate. Mike Nesbitt says the stands committee should have

reduced the size of its delegation. It is a code of honour like this for

the US house of representatives, which I have just printed off in

this building. I'm not sure what the added value is in spending all that

money. Three of the five who are flying out all in the same party.

Why isn't one sufficient for foreign travel? That is the movie apply. But

he is travelling to Washington this year. I am going to represent the

whole of the office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister.

That is something that has been done down the years and has a track

record of working and providing a benefit. I don't see the benefit of

three members of one party going to joke about document that is

available online. It will work out less than two dozen member. That is

in keeping with previous records. -- less than ?2000. To actually have

some conversation, I think when George Mitchell was here, he found

having a meal together, it was much better. The crack was better. They

could play to a dialogue that is meaningful. The recent visit by

former President Clinton and Richard Haass' appeal this week are

reminders that the US maintained an interest in our affairs. Fans of the

Washington have it seemed guaranteed their fix for good while yet. --

fans of the Washington habit seemed guaranteed.

The first and deputy first ministers are of course in Washington tonight.

They have been reacting to those comments that Northern Ireland is at

risk of returning to violence. Our political correspondent, Martina

Purdy, is in Washington, too. She has been talking me through what

they have been saying. They're both expressed appreciation for the role

that Dr Haass had played. They have tried to reach up, Myers on flags

and the past. Mr McGuinness said they owe him a debt of gratitude. --

they have tried to reach a compromise. Perhaps Mr Robinson went

a bit further than the Deputy First Minister. He said Dr Haass' comments

were unhelpful. Martin McGuinness said he remained optimistic that

there would be no return to conflict. He said he based this

assessment on the fact that ministers were committed to peace

and prosperity in the Stormont executive and people on the ground

were working with the police. He said that dissidents wouldn't be

allowed to drag us back. I also interviewed Doctor Alistair

MacDonald, who is here in Washington. He has played a role in

the smart eyes-macro multiparty talks. -- in those multiparty talks.

He thinks it is a call for Northern Ireland to get back on track. You

have been talking to lots of people. Is there any sign of breakthrough? I

spoke to Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness at length this morning.

Peter Robinson was very upbeat about the prospects for political

compromise on these issues. We come from different political

backgrounds. Of course there are going to be difficulties along the

way. Look on the difficulties we have already overcome. We will

overcome the ones we are facing at the present time. We will outline to

the vice president the progress that has been made by party leaders over

the last number of weeks. I believe it is tantalisingly close in some

areas. Hopefully, as soon as we get the enquiry at other way and we get

results as to what the are, we can move onto the issues of the past.

Account of the way. -- get the enquiry out of the way. We have to

conclude a deal on vital issues to do with victims and identity. What I

expect to hear from the vice president is the same message of

President Clinton. We are in an election cycle. We are facing

European and local government elections. Elections are not

conducive to political compromise. I think that is why most observers

aren't optimistic that a deal is close. How would you say the trip is

going, given that there is obvious disappointment in Washington at the

lack of progress? They had been in California for a trade mission

trying to invest in jobs back home. They were both upbeat about their

experience there. They had a range of meetings with creative

industries. They had a good meeting with HBO and also with Seagate

technologies. Peter Robinson said he would be disappointed if there was

not a substantial outcome from this. Sources say there could be a

positive announcement in the weeks ahead. They both arrived here

upbeat. They have to be mindful that when somebody of the calibre of

Doctor Richard Haass is warning people we are at risk of returning

to violence, it makes it more difficult to sell Northern Ireland.

Is comments that Northern Ireland might no longer be a model for

conflict resolution if we don't address the innate -- alienation and

division, those are strong words. That makes it difficult to sell

Northern Ireland as a place to invest. But they are upbeat. They

had a good trade mission to California. They opened the new

investor office in San Francisco, which was attended by the mayor. The

men are due to visit the White House tomorrow, we know. We also know they

are meeting Joe Biden when they are there. What about the President?

There is still some significant actors available. Peter Robinson and

Martin McGuinness will be meeting Joe Biden. It is their first formal

meeting with him. They are going to be meeting him in the White House.

Joe Biden has taken a close interest in those talks. The ministers see

that as a good sign that the administration is still very focused

and that they still have excellent access here. There will be a lot of

attention on whether President Obama drops into the meeting. Even though

he is very busy with the crisis in Kiev, I think it will be a sign of

some discontent if President Obama doesn't call in to see our ministers

personally, even though they have met him eight times already. They

say they Joe Biden is very significant. In the past, for

example, they have met the chief of staff. The fact that they are

getting that access in the White House shouldn't be taken for

granted. And of course, the vice president is due to make a major

speech to Irish-Americans tonight. Joe Biden is being honoured with a

peace award by the Ireland funds. You are going to see the elite of

Irish America gather. Based on what the White House said this week, that

Joe Biden would be speaking to Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness about

building peace and prosperity in Northern Ireland, I think that is a

theme he will be touching upon tonight. The catchphrase in

Washington this weekend is finish the job. That is what President

Clinton said last week. Let's see what a night's commentators have to

say about that annual pilgrimage to the states. Paul McFadden and Alex

Kane with me. Welcome to you both. Paul Connew Jonathan Powell. He

stands by the comment in his book. -- Paul, Jonathan Powell. He stands

by it. I won't repeat them. He came across as slippery character. He

says, there never was a deal on on the runs. But it seems there was a

deal. We have had the letters, Royal pardons, all sorts of information

fed back. Unless I misunderstood, even John Downey said he thought

that his arrest was a breach of agreement with the British

government. Something seems to be happening here. Did it up -- add up

for you, Alex? It was bizarre. All the way through this, it is clear

there has been a deal. Last Friday the Secretary of State said she

should have apologised to the First Minister and the rest of the

executive for not having informed them. Then he says there is no deal

and welcomes the four enquiries. Why the unique even one enquiry it

doesn't make sense. -- why do you need even one enquiry? It doesn't

make sense. The on the runs have never had their positions clarified.

Is it dancing on the head of a pin? It is waltzing on the head of a pin.

You can't say there is no deal but there might have been for the on the

runs who didn't ask. The ones who did ask have been given a letter and

told they could come and go across the UK. By any definition, that is a

deal. According to Richard Hass, we are not a great example of peace

building. Is that right? I have the feeling that we have

politicians going back to Washington for a number of years, getting a

royal treatment, sitting at the top table. I get the feeling they are

being told there is no such thing as a free lunch. I think there is an

expectation on the politician is at the highest levels in America that

they deliver. There are reasons that people expect politicians here to

deliver as well, with the announcement of job losses. People

have been applauding politicians for working together on trying to save

those jobs, albeit unsuccessfully. There is a certain expectation in

the states that at politician will finish the job. Do you think it was

imprisoned for the first Minister and the Deputy First Minister to

have that amount and made when they were out of the country?

The jobs? They must have known it was coming. Paul's first the

politicians were working together but all they have done is trotted

out a series of pointless statement saying this will affect people 's

lives but no response, no attitude about how they are going to replace

those jobs. It is all the usual. I think it is crocodile tears.

Peter Robinson says Richard Hass's view about a return to violence also

says we are tantalisingly close to agreement on flags, parades and the

past. I find that very unlikely. In

defence of Richard Hass, I think it is unlikely that the peace process

is unstoppable. Richard Hass is not here to spin.

Alex Robinson is 3000 miles away from the deal. It is dead here and

it was dead there. It has recently been announced that a third series

of the House Of Cards is to go into production.

The antics of Francis Underwood, lies, manipulation and even murder

paint a bleak picture of political life but how does it compare to our

own house on the Hill? If you had a programme or a drama

based on this place, it might be somewhat on the tedious and boring

side. Is it compare to hear? I couldn't possibly say. All the

intrigue and plots and Canada plot that go on, this place has nothing

to Coronation Street in terms of gossip.

-- counter plots will stop I don't think it is as interesting as the

House Of Cards but we do have some of the big characters.

The good thing about the House Of Cards is that it invariably

collapses so bring it on. No surprises to hear Jim Allister

said that. You worked in Stormont for a while. How did visitors is

politics in Stormont? -- duplicitous? Thing here is leaked

within ten seconds of it happening. I wish it was because often it is

accompanied eye something being done and people doing it with a purpose

but they just bitch about each other for no reason.

If that how you see it? I don't think there is that clever

intrigue. I don't think our politicians are sophisticated enough

to prep with that. I will probably get nailed for saying that but I

don't think it is the kind of thing we saw in the House Of Cards. I saw

the first version. The American version is very good

too. Someone has contacted us through Twitter. It is from the

fictional character Frank Underwood. This is an account with 25,000

followers. Jarrod is a real congas meant and he is wearing horrendous

getup. There is something sinister about that. It is weird that someone

who is anonymous gets that many followers that you can be as

horrible as you like when you are anonymous.

I can sign up and just be nasty. We have got to leave it there. That

is it from us for today. Join us at 1135 on BBC One on Sunday. Thank you

very much.