:00:00. > :00:00.The debate on abortion here intensifies after a High Court judge
:00:07. > :00:10.rules that grounds for a termination should be extended.
:00:11. > :00:13.And tonight on The View, in a new development on the story, we reveal
:00:14. > :00:37.more details contained in the Health Minister's new draft guidelines.
:00:38. > :00:42.We'll hear a range of views on that landmark abortion ruling,
:00:43. > :00:45.and get reaction to the new Department of Health guidelines.
:00:46. > :00:47.Are we a step closer to reaching agreement
:00:48. > :00:52.And as Parliament votes to send RAF bombers to Syria,
:00:53. > :01:01.we debate the impact of the decision with a Labour MP who
:01:02. > :01:04.voted the against air strikes and a DUP Member who backed the
:01:05. > :01:10.And making sense of it all - back in Commentators' Corner, Professors
:01:11. > :01:16.The vote on air strikes in Syria may have been the story of the week
:01:17. > :01:20.across the UK - and we'll come to that later in the programme -
:01:21. > :01:22.but in Northern Ireland, a landmark judgment on abortion marked a
:01:23. > :01:25.significant milestone in the debate on that issue here.
:01:26. > :01:29.And tonight, The View can reveal more about the Department
:01:30. > :01:31.of Health's as yet unpublished guidance for health professionals
:01:32. > :01:35.This programme has seen those guidelines and we'll have reaction
:01:36. > :01:47.But first I'm joined by the Justice Minister, David Ford.
:01:48. > :01:56.This is the first time that you have spoken in detail about Monday's High
:01:57. > :02:00.Court judgment. What do you make of it? It is a complex judgment and I
:02:01. > :02:08.still in discussion with officials as to how we respond. At a policy
:02:09. > :02:13.level it has endorsed the plan is that we put to the executive to
:02:14. > :02:24.legislate in the case of fatal foetal abnormality, that abortion
:02:25. > :02:31.may be permitted. The judge had no sympathy that there would be
:02:32. > :02:37.abortion in the case of disability. And there are complexities in
:02:38. > :02:41.relation to sexual crime, and the judge has made a ruling there that
:02:42. > :02:53.does not fully recognise some of the detail -- some of the difficulties.
:02:54. > :02:58.The key issue is that doctors, staff nurses, midwives, and woman needs to
:02:59. > :03:06.be assured that there is absolute legal certainty as to the position.
:03:07. > :03:14.I am not sure that this provides that legal certainty. That is why I
:03:15. > :03:17.wanted primary legislation on the case of fatal foetal abnormality.
:03:18. > :03:20.Was at correct for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission to
:03:21. > :03:31.bring this before the court to seek clarification? The court has ruled
:03:32. > :03:38.on the basis of that challenge. You said that this is a complex issue.
:03:39. > :03:43.Where does your responsibility as Justice Minister meet the desire of
:03:44. > :03:51.the Minister of health to provide clarity for health practitioners? In
:03:52. > :03:54.2004 the Department of Health was instructed to produce guidelines on
:03:55. > :04:01.the current state of the law. There were draft guidelines circulated two
:04:02. > :04:06.and a half years ago. They were revised. I received my copy on
:04:07. > :04:12.Monday afternoon, after the court judgment was given. They may be a
:04:13. > :04:16.fair reflection of the law that had not been for that judgment. I am
:04:17. > :04:20.still looking at the detail of the guidance. It is an improvement on
:04:21. > :04:23.what we had. In the face of the court decision we have now got a
:04:24. > :04:30.conflicting issue of guidance that seems to be a offbeat, four hours
:04:31. > :04:34.before it was circulated. Are you saying that Simon Hamilton's draft
:04:35. > :04:39.guidelines are not worth the paper they are written on? Depend the
:04:40. > :04:45.current outcome. The attorney is likely to appeal the judgment this
:04:46. > :04:50.week. The Court of Appeal will have to decide. That will decide whether
:04:51. > :04:55.the guidelines stating the law before the judgment this week are
:04:56. > :04:59.accurate or not. The guidelines continue to advise doctors that
:05:00. > :05:05.fatal foetal abnormality is not in itself grounds for a lawful
:05:06. > :05:10.termination. Does that help or hinder you in your desire to change
:05:11. > :05:16.the law on that issue? If that were the case, as I see the court
:05:17. > :05:23.decision contradicts that, if that were the case, it certainly would be
:05:24. > :05:27.clarified by what I have proposed to legislate in that area of fatal
:05:28. > :05:32.foetal abnormality. Because when this issue became covered I made
:05:33. > :05:36.promises that I would address that. It is a complex process to get a
:05:37. > :05:41.consultation document date. But he consulted over one year ago. We
:05:42. > :05:48.produce recommendations. It went to be executive. It has been sitting
:05:49. > :05:53.and waiting. But because it now goes on the agenda, it should be on the
:05:54. > :05:56.agenda for next Thursday's exhibited beating and that will establish we
:05:57. > :06:00.are in policy terms. Just to be clear, it is your intention to have
:06:01. > :06:05.this matter discussed at the next executive meeting next Thursday? I
:06:06. > :06:10.put a paper to the executive on the 1st of June. It has not been
:06:11. > :06:14.discussed because it is not be put on the agenda by the First Minister
:06:15. > :06:19.or Deputy First Minister but I have invoked the procedure which insists
:06:20. > :06:22.that goes on the next Thursday. I wonder what you make of some
:06:23. > :06:27.comments that were made by Simon Hamilton on Tuesday on radio
:06:28. > :06:31.Ulster. He said he had some concerns about the issue of constitutionality
:06:32. > :06:36.with judges making laws. Is that concern that the judge might
:06:37. > :06:42.interpret the issue in line with human rights law which would take it
:06:43. > :06:46.out of the hands of you as the Minister and ultimately the
:06:47. > :06:52.Assembly? Is that an understandable concern? The judge has exercised
:06:53. > :06:56.what he sees as his duty in following through on the Human
:06:57. > :07:00.Rights Act and the obligations that we have under the European
:07:01. > :07:04.Convention. That is the position he has taken. That is a position that
:07:05. > :07:08.does stand in law that judges interpret the law. The question is
:07:09. > :07:12.whether that has provided the legal clarity which is needed by the
:07:13. > :07:16.professionals and women who might be affected, or whether we need primary
:07:17. > :07:20.legislation. That is a context issue as to how we get the balance right.
:07:21. > :07:26.You can understand people watching this, some people seeing, nothing
:07:27. > :07:31.seems to be clarifying anything. There seems to be different views
:07:32. > :07:35.being expressed, competing rates, competing interests, competing
:07:36. > :07:39.opinions. It is hard to pick away through that needs. It is extremely
:07:40. > :07:43.hard. That is what the judge tried to do with that ruling on Monday and
:07:44. > :07:46.clearly he has not satisfied everybody but what he has said.
:07:47. > :07:50.There are complexities which deal with not only the issues he has
:07:51. > :07:55.given his judgment on, but he that your leads to other aspects of the
:07:56. > :07:58.law including how we take European Convention rights into domestic law.
:07:59. > :08:04.Whether we have primary legislation readily accept judge rulings. Stay
:08:05. > :08:11.with me. I want to broaden the discussion.
:08:12. > :08:16.You described Mondays development as a landmark ruling Andy torn ginger
:08:17. > :08:23.but you still see the need for a proper clarity and support. Are
:08:24. > :08:30.closer to getting that today? I think we are all stop first of all I
:08:31. > :08:35.wanted 25,000 mothers in Northern Ireland to feel that the advice they
:08:36. > :08:41.are getting from professionals and politicians, but that is good honest
:08:42. > :08:46.advice, fair advice, and that all their problems can be sorted out
:08:47. > :08:51.within this island. I want to regain the confidence and trust of our
:08:52. > :08:55.trust managers, the Department of Health, most of the politicians, and
:08:56. > :09:05.the judiciary. The two things that happened this week are putting us on
:09:06. > :09:11.that road. Mr Justice Horner has changed the tone. It is
:09:12. > :09:16.compassionate and humane. Very knowledgeable and in line with
:09:17. > :09:21.thinking of previous judges. I was comfortable with that. Are you
:09:22. > :09:26.positive about the guidelines that the Minister has published two
:09:27. > :09:32.fellow members of the executive, but not to the public at this stage,
:09:33. > :09:36.that that this programme has seen? You have had sight of him as well.
:09:37. > :09:44.Do they help to clarify some of these context issues which are I do.
:09:45. > :09:49.David Ford suggests that they are not terribly helpful at this stage.
:09:50. > :09:53.We are used to that. Everybody having their opinion. But I strongly
:09:54. > :09:57.feel that for many decades we worked under caselaw in Northern Ireland.
:09:58. > :10:03.That case law is the envy of many countries in the world because it
:10:04. > :10:05.puts the woman at the centre, the mental and physical health of the
:10:06. > :10:15.woman at the centre of all decisions. That is a positive
:10:16. > :10:18.future. In a couple of sentences, from your understanding of what is
:10:19. > :10:24.in these draft guidelines, what do you make of them which a Mac they do
:10:25. > :10:28.give good help to the workers on the ground. They should give confidence
:10:29. > :10:33.to the mothers that the advice they will be getting will be good advice.
:10:34. > :10:41.They are not perfect. I would like to see statutory law that we are we
:10:42. > :10:47.are. Let us use them for a year. See how they work on the ground. With
:10:48. > :10:55.confidence all round, from trusts, from mothers, doing everything in
:10:56. > :10:59.Northern Ireland, I think this is does lead the way forward because
:11:00. > :11:08.the centre should be the mother, the life of the mother is sacred, foetal
:11:09. > :11:15.life is also seated. -- is also seated. You do not think there is
:11:16. > :11:24.need for new legislation? I did not say that. I do not see that
:11:25. > :11:35.happening but I am not a politician. These guidelines give us something
:11:36. > :11:40.that will give us confidence. Merely Lewis, a lawyer, you take an
:11:41. > :11:45.interest in this issue. Let us stay with these draft guidelines. You
:11:46. > :11:50.have had belief sight of some of the details. As far as you know what you
:11:51. > :11:56.know who you think they help to move us towards greater clarification or
:11:57. > :12:00.not? The difficulty is the relate to the position before Monday. We had
:12:01. > :12:05.the court case on Monday which moves the situation along somewhat. We now
:12:06. > :12:09.have a situation which goes beyond the guidelines. The situation we
:12:10. > :12:15.have is that the judge has declared that aspects of the law in Northern
:12:16. > :12:18.Ireland is not compatible with the European Convention of human rights
:12:19. > :12:22.so he is opening the door for abortion for fatal foetal
:12:23. > :12:28.abnormality and for sexual crime situations. He seems to have taken a
:12:29. > :12:34.somewhat strange position because on the one hand he did not want
:12:35. > :12:38.abortion for severe malformation yet he was happy to have it for fatal
:12:39. > :12:42.foetal abnormality. Yet some of the conditions he was describing fall
:12:43. > :12:49.into the same category in a sense. It is hard to be 100% accurate. I
:12:50. > :12:52.agree. That is part of the problem with the guidelines. The guidelines
:12:53. > :12:57.took so long over the years. It is difficult to be accurate. You are
:12:58. > :13:02.talking about the judge making a ruling which seems to have been a
:13:03. > :13:06.game changer in your opinion. But the judge wants people to come back
:13:07. > :13:11.to the court later in December. In a sense this is an interim ruling. We
:13:12. > :13:18.are in a holding pattern. Yes, absolutely. Not only that. A holding
:13:19. > :13:21.pattern within the case and also in a holding pattern if the case is
:13:22. > :13:24.appealed and remotely back to the guidelines you are talking about. I
:13:25. > :13:29.emphasise that those guidelines are in draft. I do not know what'll
:13:30. > :13:35.happen with the executive. They may be changed again. Maybe Ford can
:13:36. > :13:39.answer that. We will come back to the minister in a second. Les
:13:40. > :13:45.Allamby, it was your organisation which took this judicial review in
:13:46. > :13:49.the first place. You now have an opportunity to come back with some
:13:50. > :13:53.clarification to Mr Justice Horner on the night of December. Are you
:13:54. > :13:58.going to make a submission and if you are can you give us any sense of
:13:59. > :14:01.what might be in it? Yes. We have to do evidence of mission along with
:14:02. > :14:05.other parties by the ninth. They will be a hearing on the 16th of
:14:06. > :14:09.December. The important thing to emphasise is that what the judge has
:14:10. > :14:16.said at the moment is that there are two options. He can read down the
:14:17. > :14:21.legislation in terms of the Human Rights Act. Which means? In a
:14:22. > :14:30.natural, interpret the existing legislation, the 1861 act in a way
:14:31. > :14:33.that allows terminations in the case is that he has ruled about, sexual
:14:34. > :14:39.crimes and fatal foetal abnormality. Then it doesn't need
:14:40. > :14:43.new legislation to go to Stormont. Then my own view about the
:14:44. > :14:47.guidelines as they would have to reflect the law. The alternative of
:14:48. > :14:53.that cannot be done, with the what is called a declaration of
:14:54. > :15:01.incompatibility. Then it would be putting the ball in the court of the
:15:02. > :15:08.Assembly. My view on that is since the Human Rights Act came end, a
:15:09. > :15:11.small number of the clinicians of incompatibility in the Westminster
:15:12. > :15:16.Parliament and Westminster has always remedied that legislation and
:15:17. > :15:22.I would expect the Assembly to do the same. If it did not, we would be
:15:23. > :15:27.into unknown territory, and of course we would be an position where
:15:28. > :15:33.further legal action would no doubt be taken. And there is the right of
:15:34. > :15:38.appeal. While an appeal goes on you are again in a position of trying to
:15:39. > :15:41.determine what do you do in that interim position. The only thing I
:15:42. > :15:46.would say about the guidelines is that they must reflect the law. The
:15:47. > :15:53.important thing for me is not just in terms of human rights, but also
:15:54. > :15:57.in terms of where we are, we need clarity for both clinicians, women,
:15:58. > :16:01.for all those who are involved in this, so that the issue of whether
:16:02. > :16:04.you are criminalised critiquing a particular action is no longer the
:16:05. > :16:09.case in these particular circumstances. I will come to the
:16:10. > :16:14.Minister in a second. On the issue of primacy, do you have a sense
:16:15. > :16:19.about where primacy lies in this process? You raised the issue of the
:16:20. > :16:25.potential for appeal. Mr Justice Horner referred to his expectation
:16:26. > :16:28.that his ruling will be appealed. And we know that the Attorney
:16:29. > :16:34.General is looking into that at the moment. Like anything else we need
:16:35. > :16:39.to wait until the dust settles and see them whether the clock does not
:16:40. > :16:44.start ticking for an appeal until we get the issue of beating down or a
:16:45. > :16:48.declaration of incompatibility sorted out. I am sure that will not
:16:49. > :16:54.take long. Then the clock ticks. We have waited 150 years since this
:16:55. > :16:58.legislation has come in. It is important that we try and get some
:16:59. > :17:04.clarity as quickly as we can but it is the clarity that we need. In
:17:05. > :17:10.terms of the issue about the role of the judge, in terms of the
:17:11. > :17:13.executive, legislature, independents are traditionally, those are the
:17:14. > :17:17.pillars of the constitutional framework and it is appropriate for
:17:18. > :17:25.judges to do all that judges are assigned to do.
:17:26. > :17:34.Some might disagree because we have an elected Assembly. I come back to
:17:35. > :17:39.primacy. Where does pregnancy like? He has set out the options from a
:17:40. > :17:43.judicial point of view but it is not clear which of those is actually
:17:44. > :17:49.going to happen, whether we have a reading down or a declaration of
:17:50. > :17:53.incompatibility. There could be an appeal process and Mary has raised
:17:54. > :17:57.the issue of the primacy of the democratic process. The new chart a
:17:58. > :18:02.path through this for people who are watching this scratching their
:18:03. > :18:08.heads. Frankly, tonight, you cannot chart a path through. It is not that
:18:09. > :18:12.easy to see primacy. We can talk about the pregnancy can democratic
:18:13. > :18:19.institutions in creating law. The courts have the rights to interpret
:18:20. > :18:21.laws. That includes -- that includes the international obligations of
:18:22. > :18:28.pre-existing law as well as current law. That is where the complexity
:18:29. > :18:32.comes in. In an ideal world, the legislature was where everything
:18:33. > :18:36.will be dealt with in detail. I have had a paper sitting with the
:18:37. > :18:40.Executive for six months, that is not an indication it will be dealt
:18:41. > :18:47.with easily. I am trying to get it done. It is obvious we do not live
:18:48. > :18:53.in an ideal world and out of the 108 MLAs, a significant number of them
:18:54. > :18:57.would not want the kind of change if they were asked to vote on it, would
:18:58. > :19:02.not support the change that Mr Justice Corner would like to see in
:19:03. > :19:07.his judgment in the High Court on Monday. That is a reasonable thing
:19:08. > :19:14.to Assen, isn't it? It has potential. There is the possibility
:19:15. > :19:20.that a free vote, there might be a bridge the in of legislating in
:19:21. > :19:27.cases of feudal paparazzi -- VTOL abnormality.
:19:28. > :19:35.Our own consultation showed there was no clear-cut, easy views. There
:19:36. > :19:38.was an understanding from those involved, the relevant professionals
:19:39. > :19:52.as to how we could work on fatal faecal abnormality. What strikes
:19:53. > :19:58.you. -- foetal. We were not happy with the term. There is no textbook
:19:59. > :20:06.that I know of, no doctor knows exactly when a foetus is going to
:20:07. > :20:15.die. We are all fatal. The life of the few minutes can be as perfect as
:20:16. > :20:23.a life of 60 years. I am really concerned because we are talking
:20:24. > :20:26.about fatal foetus abnormality. It is not mentioned in the new
:20:27. > :20:33.deadlines and it is not a medical term. I am impressed by the idea
:20:34. > :20:39.that it is not a medical term so why is it the basis of the judgment?
:20:40. > :20:45.Fatal foetus abnormality is described as a ground for abortion.
:20:46. > :20:56.He's talking very much about respect for the woman and the baby. We only
:20:57. > :21:07.have to look at Baby Corp. 74 hours. -- hope. We made it clear in section
:21:08. > :21:15.16 we are not happy about that. It is a fallacy. Final point. If I can
:21:16. > :21:19.go back to primacy. The UK Government and Northern Ireland is
:21:20. > :21:24.signed up to international covenants including the European Convention on
:21:25. > :21:28.human rights. The idea of primacy. We have international human rights
:21:29. > :21:33.laws and standards, this case is about whether the current law meets
:21:34. > :21:41.those standards. The judge independently has said, no, they do
:21:42. > :21:44.not in certain circumstances. It is the elected body that is governed
:21:45. > :21:47.that is covered by those international standards and have
:21:48. > :21:56.been signed up to buy politicians. It is important to remember that. We
:21:57. > :22:01.have effectively heard the different opinions on a complex issue. It will
:22:02. > :22:10.be fun to -- fascinating to see how it unfolds. Thank you very much.
:22:11. > :22:13.Now, the UK's bombing of Islamic State targets in Syria is underway,
:22:14. > :22:16.and last night's vote which authorised that action was the
:22:17. > :22:19.climax of a marathon day in the Commons, when those for and against
:22:20. > :22:22.the bombing had their say. We'll continue that debate in a moment,
:22:23. > :22:25.but first here's a flavour of the arguments, beginning with one of the
:22:26. > :22:32.Conservative MPs critical of the plan to launch airstrikes.
:22:33. > :22:39.By themselves, they cannot achieve what we have been told is the game.
:22:40. > :22:47.The reduction and removal of Isis. That is the failure. We should help
:22:48. > :22:52.our allies and help our allies by destroying Isis, by doing it
:22:53. > :22:55.properly and not by symbolism. I am not among those who in arguing
:22:56. > :23:02.against the government is saying that it creates a bigger risk of a
:23:03. > :23:04.terrorist threat in anybody's constituency in the near term. I do
:23:05. > :23:10.not think it makes a difference one way or the other of a threat that is
:23:11. > :23:16.real and alive. I do think there is a severe risk of leading what we are
:23:17. > :23:23.trying to fight by feeding a wider agenda of radicalisation. By
:23:24. > :23:30.adopting the role that the jihadist 's playbook actually craves, a house
:23:31. > :23:34.like this to adopt. We are here faced by fascists. Not just the
:23:35. > :23:38.calculated brutality but the belief that they are superior to every
:23:39. > :23:44.single one of us in this chamber tonight. And all of the people --
:23:45. > :23:50.all of the people we represent. They hold us in contempt, they hold
:23:51. > :23:53.values in contempt, our belief intolerance in contempt, our
:23:54. > :23:59.democracy, the means by which we will make our decision tonight, in
:24:00. > :24:01.contempt. What we know about fascists is that they need to be
:24:02. > :24:06.defeated. Hilary Benn and a flavour
:24:07. > :24:09.of the speech which won him a round of applause last night
:24:10. > :24:12.from both sides of the House. And with me now are the Labour MP,
:24:13. > :24:14.Kate Hoey, Kate Hoey,
:24:15. > :24:17.you voted against the air-strikes but how close did you come to being
:24:18. > :24:28.persuaded to vote the other way Hilary Benn made a brilliant speech
:24:29. > :24:34.just like his father would have made but probably making the opposite
:24:35. > :24:39.point of view. I think we had a brilliant to debate all day. People
:24:40. > :24:44.thought about it very seriously. I had decided by that morning that I
:24:45. > :24:50.was probably going to be voting against and he did not change my
:24:51. > :24:54.mind. It was a brilliantly delivered speech it did not really change the
:24:55. > :25:00.issue for me which was whether this was actually going to solve the
:25:01. > :25:08.problem which we all are opposed to, the terrible things going on by the
:25:09. > :25:12.so-called Isil, the state. Hilary Benn making that speech, getting up
:25:13. > :25:21.laws whilst Jeremy Corbyn was sitting there with the poker face,
:25:22. > :25:26.not a flicker of emotion. It was unusual. I have been 27 years in
:25:27. > :25:30.Parliament and I have not seen a situation where your leader makes an
:25:31. > :25:34.opening speech seen one thing and the end speech by the Shadow Foreign
:25:35. > :25:39.Secretary saying the opposite. That is the reality of how the Labour
:25:40. > :25:46.Party is at the moment. The case in her view was not made for military
:25:47. > :25:52.action in Syria. Why do you take the opposite view, why do you think the
:25:53. > :25:57.case was made? We are already doing in Iraq what we are going to do in
:25:58. > :26:01.Syria. Effectively, there is no border between Iraq and Syria at the
:26:02. > :26:09.moment. I am left wondering why we are taking action against these
:26:10. > :26:12.terrorists the few miles one way, and in the opposite direction when
:26:13. > :26:19.the same atrocities are cunning, people are being killed, we are not
:26:20. > :26:23.doing that. The primary persuasive argument to me was the threat to our
:26:24. > :26:27.own country. I have had briefings from the national security council
:26:28. > :26:34.in recent days and I have seen the evidence, clear and compelling
:26:35. > :26:37.evidence. There is a unit based in Raqqa in Syria with a named
:26:38. > :26:42.individual at its head detecting these attacks against four European
:26:43. > :26:46.countries, specifically France, Belgium, Germany and originated
:26:47. > :26:51.kingdom. The United Kingdom is top of the list. Therefore you have to
:26:52. > :26:57.ask the question as I asked myself, do we wait until they come for us?
:26:58. > :27:02.Or do they at least try to diminish the capacity to attack us? I am not
:27:03. > :27:08.saying that the air strikes will prevent an attack on the UK. I do
:27:09. > :27:12.not believe it will. We have to degrade Isil's capacity to do what
:27:13. > :27:17.we have been doing. That means taking on the leadership when it is
:27:18. > :27:23.based and located. Does that worry you? What I would say, Iraq is
:27:24. > :27:29.different because they were asked by the Iraqi government to come in and
:27:30. > :27:34.bomb. There is a huge grin force of support on the ground. Everybody
:27:35. > :27:39.yesterday from different angles felt that bombing is only part of a
:27:40. > :27:44.strategy. And that overall view of what is going to happen next was not
:27:45. > :27:49.decided. What is going to happen in Raqqa? The leaders are going to make
:27:50. > :27:54.sure that the civilians are where the bombs are falling and they will
:27:55. > :27:58.be somewhere else. Many of the terrorist outrages have been not
:27:59. > :28:06.necessarily planned in Raqqa but planned by home-grown terrorists. If
:28:07. > :28:11.I thought it would help I would have supported it. I think it is too
:28:12. > :28:14.early and we need to get that overall political view of who are
:28:15. > :28:19.our enemies and who of all these different groups on the ground are
:28:20. > :28:23.going to be there to support us? That is the big concern, by taking
:28:24. > :28:28.the action that was taken, a shopping after the vote was passed,
:28:29. > :28:35.the UK has made itself more of the target. Citizens at home even more
:28:36. > :28:43.in peril weren't before the vote took place. Does that not concern
:28:44. > :28:46.you? I do not accept that premise. I have seen the evidence, there have
:28:47. > :28:51.been seven planned attacks in the United Kingdom, all of them thwarted
:28:52. > :28:56.by the diligence of our security services. Some of those attacks have
:28:57. > :29:04.been directed by the Isil readership in the Syria. The UK is a target.
:29:05. > :29:08.Let us not kid ourselves. The attacks in Paris happened before
:29:09. > :29:14.France began the air strikes in Syria. France was attacked before
:29:15. > :29:19.this. The UK, I have no doubt will be attacked. Again the question is,
:29:20. > :29:25.and we have asked our security ad buys us, our military leaders this,
:29:26. > :29:30.what is the view on the best course of action to take? I sat and
:29:31. > :29:34.listened to the army commanders and I have listened to the security
:29:35. > :29:38.services giving the briefing in Privy Council format and they are
:29:39. > :29:44.very clear, all of them without exception and reservation have
:29:45. > :29:48.recommended this cause of action. I agree with Jeffrey, even if we were
:29:49. > :29:54.not going to bomb that they would be safe, we have all had these
:29:55. > :30:00.briefings. I do not think so. I do not think it will make any
:30:01. > :30:03.difference in that sense. I feel very strongly that the 70,000 people
:30:04. > :30:09.on the ground that are now supposedly going to come in and help
:30:10. > :30:17.take over the territory if we bomb in Raqqa, they are not there. It is
:30:18. > :30:22.a hugely... Everyone accents it is a hugely complicated situation with
:30:23. > :30:28.Russia now involved and Turkey also bombing the Kurds who are supporting
:30:29. > :30:32.us. It is such a nightmare situation, to simply look like we
:30:33. > :30:37.had to do something because of what happened in Paris, I do not accept
:30:38. > :30:40.that. You have both talked about the standard of the beat in the Commons
:30:41. > :30:48.yesterday. It was not just Hilary Benn who was impressive. -- the
:30:49. > :30:52.arguments. You said during your contribution that you wanted a
:30:53. > :30:56.personal apology from the Prime Minister reportedly referring to
:30:57. > :31:02.Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters as a bunch of terrorist sympathisers.
:31:03. > :31:06.Do you think he was to you? I think he made it apparently in a very
:31:07. > :31:13.crowded meeting this party when he was trying to browse them. If they
:31:14. > :31:17.voted, they would be voting with a bunch of terrorist supporters. I
:31:18. > :31:21.think he was referring to Jeremy Corbyn and probably John McDonald. I
:31:22. > :31:26.do not think he was referring to me or his Tory MPs. He should not have
:31:27. > :31:36.said. I think he is regretting it. I expect I will get a personal
:31:37. > :31:42.apology. You do? I do. I said in my speech a private personal apology.
:31:43. > :31:46.Will you let us know? Do you think the Prime Minister stepped over the
:31:47. > :31:49.line? I think it marks where unfortunate but they were made in a
:31:50. > :31:53.private meeting. I have known cave for years and out of all the
:31:54. > :32:00.parliamentarians I know, I hold her in the highest respect. I have
:32:01. > :32:04.helped her get up in the House of Commons and condemn terrorism in all
:32:05. > :32:08.unequivocal terms. Kate is someone I have the highest regard for. I do
:32:09. > :32:24.not think he meant it in the way that he did but it was a silly
:32:25. > :32:28.mistake and one of those things. He did get a majority of the Shadow
:32:29. > :32:34.Cabinet which was surprising. To be honest. I think there are some
:32:35. > :32:37.people put in my party who dislike and are angry about Jeremy Corbyn
:32:38. > :32:41.being a leader that they will do anything to bring him down. I am
:32:42. > :32:45.prepared to give him some time provided he does not say anything
:32:46. > :32:48.about Northern Ireland. What are the chances of that? Probably not very
:32:49. > :33:01.high. Very slim. Thanks, both.
:33:02. > :33:03.A lot to talk about in Commentators' Corner tonight where
:33:04. > :33:19.I'm joined by the two Professors, Do they help or hinder the
:33:20. > :33:23.discussion? What came out in the discussion is how complicated the
:33:24. > :33:30.issue is and how emotive. We are not sure if it is a legal issue, a
:33:31. > :33:40.social policy issue, should be the High Court judgment or the legal
:33:41. > :33:44.judgment? It should be down to our democratically elected Assembly to
:33:45. > :33:55.make these decisions. I welcome the guidance. They do seem more liberal
:33:56. > :34:00.in torn. Simon Hamilton is saying that medics should be able to use
:34:01. > :34:09.discretion. He is saying that information should be available. He
:34:10. > :34:11.is trying to move the debate on. Interesting to hear that fatal
:34:12. > :34:19.foetal abnormality is not a medical term. It is astonishing because it
:34:20. > :34:25.has such -- it has played such a part in the debate, but the
:34:26. > :34:39.professor is clear that it is not a medical term. Can you pick your way
:34:40. > :34:43.through the minefield? I cannot. Seeing that it is not a medical
:34:44. > :34:52.condition has lobbed a grenade into the debate. I do not have a problem
:34:53. > :35:00.with judges interpreting the law. The tone of the draft guidelines is
:35:01. > :35:08.more gentle than was the case with the guidelines from Edwin Poots
:35:09. > :35:14.earlier. There is a bit of space for people in the medical confession to
:35:15. > :35:31.exercise medical judgment. I was heartened that the professor said
:35:32. > :35:42.that case law. People should not run away with the idea that what Mr
:35:43. > :35:49.Justice Horner said is specific. It is a narrow judgment laid down.
:35:50. > :35:53.Ultimately it is a woman's right to choose. It is a matter of choice.
:35:54. > :35:59.There is nothing compelling in what he has said. He is trying to clarify
:36:00. > :36:09.the law in relation to what now is not a fatal foetal abnormality --
:36:10. > :36:15.not a medical condition. Let us move on to Syria.
:36:16. > :36:18.The David Cameron get it right? I do not think he did. I watched the
:36:19. > :36:23.debate yesterday. It was fascinating. But the arguments
:36:24. > :36:28.seemed to boil down to something has to be done. But I do not think you
:36:29. > :36:32.should go into war without an exit strategy. We do not have that
:36:33. > :36:36.strategy. I listened carefully to what Geoffrey talked about seeing if
:36:37. > :36:40.we do not do this, they will come for us. I do not feel safer today. I
:36:41. > :36:46.do not know of people in Northern Ireland feel safer. I feel more of a
:36:47. > :36:51.target. In the past we know that bombing does not work. Do we not
:36:52. > :36:55.learn anything? If anything will cause radicalisation surely it is
:36:56. > :36:59.this type of action? Why is it that the people who will be killed, the
:37:00. > :37:04.innocent people who will be killed are collateral damage, but they are
:37:05. > :37:10.victims in Paris? Was it a good day for a parliamentary democracy? On
:37:11. > :37:16.balance it was. References have been made to the speech by Hilary Benn.
:37:17. > :37:20.It has been described as a Victorian speech for a digital age. There was
:37:21. > :37:28.a motion and passion in it. There was not much evidence. I think war
:37:29. > :37:35.should be the last resort. Jeffrey saying we are doing it in Iraq, let
:37:36. > :37:40.us do it in Syria, he is privy to information that we are simply not,
:37:41. > :37:45.but what I do not believe is that Isil-Daesh, however that is
:37:46. > :37:50.defined, I do not think it presents an existential threat to the United
:37:51. > :37:57.Kingdom. If there was to be a terrorist incident like that in
:37:58. > :38:02.Paris or wherever else Daesh has been exhibiting its offal behaviour,
:38:03. > :38:08.I do not think that presents an existential threat. More effort
:38:09. > :38:11.should be made on a diplomatic path rather than a bar like one.
:38:12. > :38:13.Thanks, both. That's it from The View for this
:38:14. > :38:17.week. Join me for Sunday Politics at 11.35 am here on BBC1. And we leave
:38:18. > :38:21.you with the life and times of Sammy Wilson, who this week ruled himself
:38:22. > :38:24.out of the DUP's top job. But for some reason we don't think he's
:38:25. > :38:27.likely to disappear quietly into the night. From everyone in the team -
:38:28. > :39:11.going to go and tell. This will be the shortest speech in
:39:12. > :39:15.this place, I can tell you. I was afraid I might have an
:39:16. > :39:24.Alistair MacDonald moment. Here are. Look at that.
:39:25. > :39:29.The night and gold. Sammy Wilson, not really leader of the DUP.