:00:00. > :00:00.Two Chief Constables, one major issue - how to deal
:00:00. > :00:10.Hugh Orde says the Historical Enquiries Team should never have
:00:11. > :00:12.been wound up, while the current man in charge, George Hamilton,
:00:13. > :00:14.rejects the criticism and calls for more money
:00:15. > :00:42.Tonight on The View we hear from both men.
:00:43. > :00:45.The failure to deal with the past is a political failure not
:00:46. > :00:48.Tonight two Chief Constables unite in their criticism
:00:49. > :00:51.So what do the politicans make of that?
:00:52. > :00:54.I'll be hearing from the DUP's Emma Pengelley and Sinn Fein's Gerry
:00:55. > :01:14.Also on the programme, with May's election looming,
:01:15. > :01:17.it's a four-way battle for the six seats in Upper Bann,
:01:18. > :01:19.where women candidates are leading the charge.
:01:20. > :01:24.Rick Wilford and Deirdre Heenan are back together in Commentators'
:01:25. > :01:36.There's been deadlock over the outstanding issue of the past
:01:37. > :01:39.for many years, and several leading politicians have told this programme
:01:40. > :01:41.recently there's no chance of agreement on the issue
:01:42. > :01:45.But tonight one former Chief Constable tells this programme
:01:46. > :01:47.legacy has to be sorted out as a matter of urgency,
:01:48. > :01:50.and the politicians have to face up to their responsibilities and secure
:01:51. > :01:56.When I spoke to Sir Hugh Orde, who retired as Chief Constable
:01:57. > :01:58.in 2009, I began by asking him if he believed then
:01:59. > :02:01.that the politicians would have agreed on how best to deal
:02:02. > :02:19.Well, I was naive enough to believe early in 2003 having just taken over
:02:20. > :02:24.that there would be a determined effort by politicians to deal with
:02:25. > :02:29.this very difficult and challenging issue. And sadly, of course, that
:02:30. > :02:33.still has not happened. I said at the Historical Enquiries Team and my
:02:34. > :02:38.ambition was to be part of the wider process. But is why we set it up but
:02:39. > :02:43.sadly no one came in behind us leaving the team to be the only show
:02:44. > :02:47.in town and now sadly even that has gone, so I think we have gone
:02:48. > :02:53.backwards, not forwards. You say sadly that has now gone. You
:02:54. > :02:59.established the HET. It's a remix was to look at mode -- murders. You
:03:00. > :03:06.will of the view that should not have happened. I think it was a very
:03:07. > :03:09.sad decision. I understand why the Chief Constable made that decision.
:03:10. > :03:15.I do not think it had much choice bearing in mind the reports written
:03:16. > :03:25.by Her Majesty -- majesties established, which in my thinking it
:03:26. > :03:30.was flawed. I think it is a complete failure of leadership. I was
:03:31. > :03:33.extremely angry when I heard it had gone and of course, the real reason
:03:34. > :03:39.I was angry was it meant David Evans of the past now had absolutely
:03:40. > :03:42.nothing -- the victims of the past. Nothing had been put in its place.
:03:43. > :03:48.It was a travesty of justice and based on very bad and very flawed
:03:49. > :03:53.thinking. Just to talk a little bit more about that report which you
:03:54. > :03:59.have just criticise, it said the Historical Enquiries Team risked
:04:00. > :04:08.undermining the confidence of those who died in the troubles. -- the
:04:09. > :04:13.families. Do you not accept any of that? It was based on trying to do
:04:14. > :04:16.something fundamentally different to what police services did in the
:04:17. > :04:21.past. It was trying to understand what the victims wanted to know and
:04:22. > :04:25.then doing our absolute and level best to give them some form of
:04:26. > :04:30.resolution in terms of what had gone on when their loved one was killed.
:04:31. > :04:34.What we have now of course is a vacuum because we do not have the
:04:35. > :04:38.Historical Enquiries Team, nor do we have the other bodies that were
:04:39. > :04:41.supposed to the established under the fresh start agreement. We do not
:04:42. > :04:47.have any yet anyway. You said you think this issue has gone backwards
:04:48. > :04:52.rather than forwards since you moved on and returned as Chief Constable.
:04:53. > :04:57.What do you make of the political effort to try and actually deal with
:04:58. > :05:02.this difficult issue? When the deputy chair of the pleasing board
:05:03. > :05:08.set up a review with some very, very sensible thoughtful people who
:05:09. > :05:14.undertook what can only be described as a con presence of review --
:05:15. > :05:19.policing board. I thought it was an excellent way forward because it
:05:20. > :05:22.recognised how complex the issue was and one size would not fit all. I do
:05:23. > :05:29.not think politicians need to do any more than show some leadership, work
:05:30. > :05:32.together, com offensively together, to say we really need to look at
:05:33. > :05:38.that report again, take the best bits, there were some issues when it
:05:39. > :05:42.was reported and see if we can use that to actually drive this process
:05:43. > :05:49.forward -- comprehensively. At the moment, I am certainly not seeing as
:05:50. > :05:51.a casual observer of the issue any real determined leadership from
:05:52. > :05:57.across the political spectrum to make something happen before
:05:58. > :06:00.tragically the next generation will all be dying without understanding
:06:01. > :06:04.better what went on to their loved ones doing the troubles. You
:06:05. > :06:12.mentioned in the past it was hijacked by one recommendation and
:06:13. > :06:15.left on the shelf to gather dust. I refer the macro suppose you are
:06:16. > :06:20.referring to the one-off payment of ?12,000 to victims and a lot of
:06:21. > :06:24.people, a lot of politicians, were not happy about bad recommendations.
:06:25. > :06:28.Are you saying they should be a degree of cherry picking? The big
:06:29. > :06:34.that make sense to most people should be commended and the bits
:06:35. > :06:40.people do not like should be left out? Once you start that process,
:06:41. > :06:43.you will get no agreement. The only reason that recommendation was in
:06:44. > :06:47.there was because so many people that gave evidence to the review,
:06:48. > :06:50.many of which were of course held privately, indicated that would be
:06:51. > :06:56.some thing that would -- that was important. It did not suit anybody
:06:57. > :07:00.to acknowledge that fact. I recommendation put in all the right
:07:01. > :07:06.reasons was then used to not implement anything. My sense is a
:07:07. > :07:12.short, sharp focused review would deliver a starting point that is
:07:13. > :07:15.decades ahead of anything else currently on the table. And we have
:07:16. > :07:21.not got time to stop at again. That would just be another political
:07:22. > :07:24.manoeuvre to keep this on the very long-term sort of agenda, rather
:07:25. > :07:28.than facing up to the issue, showing some leadership, getting the bulk of
:07:29. > :07:32.the shelf, having a quick conference around it, what do we drive forward,
:07:33. > :07:37.what do the families need and doing it quickly. It looks like the
:07:38. > :07:42.sticking point at the moment is disclosure by the British government
:07:43. > :07:45.and Republicans at the Northern Ireland Office do not seem to be
:07:46. > :07:49.able to reach agreement on how that should the and could be managed. Do
:07:50. > :07:54.you see a way that could be resolved? The only way is that
:07:55. > :07:59.politicians collectively show some joined up leadership in how they
:08:00. > :08:04.want to deal with this issue. It is not for an ex-police officer to
:08:05. > :08:09.advise them. Disclosure is a hugely complexes you but these processes
:08:10. > :08:12.are around what people can see and what they cannot see, they need a
:08:13. > :08:16.political solution rather than a legal one. If we hide behind the
:08:17. > :08:21.law, all we will see in the future will be more and more demands for
:08:22. > :08:25.more inquests, more public enquiries, more reinvestigation is.
:08:26. > :08:29.There simply are not the resources for any of that to happen so it is
:08:30. > :08:32.the sort of reality check and political leadership will resolve
:08:33. > :08:37.that issue if they wanted to be resolved. It is not look like the
:08:38. > :08:47.British government wants to engage with the notion of disclosure. It
:08:48. > :08:50.was made clear that the MoD is not the main forward with the kind of
:08:51. > :08:53.information that it should be coming forward with. It is not making any
:08:54. > :08:58.kind of commitment to give information to victims families that
:08:59. > :09:02.it has an obligation to do. Exactly. But is why it needs to be dealt with
:09:03. > :09:06.by political leaders and the leaders of those organisations that hold the
:09:07. > :09:10.information. I think there will come a point where this just needs to be
:09:11. > :09:13.put out on the table. Of course there will be issues of balance and
:09:14. > :09:17.concerns about putting far more resources into the actions of the
:09:18. > :09:20.state than the actions of terrorists and all those sensitivities will
:09:21. > :09:24.emerge, which is widely politicians from all sides who represent all the
:09:25. > :09:29.communities need to sit around the table and come up with a solution.
:09:30. > :09:32.It will certainly not happen without clear joined up political
:09:33. > :09:38.leadership. But we have got a new First Minister, Arlene Foster, who
:09:39. > :09:42.in one of her first remarks suggested that outstanding legacy
:09:43. > :09:46.issues will have to wait until after the election. Does that demonstrate
:09:47. > :09:51.to you the kind of political will and drive that you say we need to
:09:52. > :09:54.see? One thing I learnt in Northern Ireland is there is no such thing as
:09:55. > :10:00.good timing. If something happens, you have to deal with it. You cannot
:10:01. > :10:03.wait. And I think dealing with the troubles absolutely fit that
:10:04. > :10:08.category. It cannot wait any longer and the reason for that is not some
:10:09. > :10:12.legal process or some legal intervention is that the families
:10:13. > :10:17.who want to know what happened are getting older by the day. I remember
:10:18. > :10:25.very clearly right at the beginning of my time there, one case, the case
:10:26. > :10:30.of Hegarty, a young lad killed way back in the 70s, we got to a point
:10:31. > :10:34.where we felt we could give the family some really important
:10:35. > :10:41.information but by then a degree, they had passed away. I do not think
:10:42. > :10:45.that is the right way to look at it. We need to give people some peace as
:10:46. > :10:49.they get older Randall passing away. And that challenge of delivering a
:10:50. > :10:54.resolution is still dominating the agenda for the current Chief
:10:55. > :10:58.Constable, George Hamilton. I caught up with him just
:10:59. > :11:00.after today's meeting of the Policing Board,
:11:01. > :11:03.and I began by asking him if he agrees with Sir Hugh that it's
:11:04. > :11:18.time for our politicians to show The pasta such a strong and toxic
:11:19. > :11:25.political issue. Has that strong predictor leadership been absent,
:11:26. > :11:28.honestly, in the last of months or years as a mark I'm not good to make
:11:29. > :11:30.any progress on this, we are not going to collectively make rollers
:11:31. > :11:34.on this by pointing a finger of blame at each other and saying where
:11:35. > :11:38.the good leadership is and the bad leadership, what I would say is what
:11:39. > :11:41.make sure that the police of its makers latest role in helping this
:11:42. > :11:45.delivery solution but I think we all know that a criminal justice
:11:46. > :11:50.solution to dealing with the past is less and less likely as time goes
:11:51. > :11:53.past. So what I am keen to do is see the likes of the infrastructure that
:11:54. > :11:58.was proposed in the Stormont House Agreement actually made real. And I
:11:59. > :12:02.accept we need to get political consensus and agreement around bad
:12:03. > :12:04.for it to happen but I think that is the best hope for is for the future
:12:05. > :12:10.and actually bringing some closure and finally -- finalising the herd
:12:11. > :12:13.and trauma and Rosyth people are suffering. Is there not a response
:12:14. > :12:15.with the only politicians to get on with it now and get this issue
:12:16. > :12:20.resolved because you have said yourself it is a toxic issue. Well,
:12:21. > :12:27.Beagle good we get to a resolution the better. Significant progress has
:12:28. > :12:31.been made. It has been listed in for us and it must be even worse for the
:12:32. > :12:36.families and for victims. And of course we need to get a political
:12:37. > :12:39.solution to this. Police service, the Court service, the judiciary and
:12:40. > :12:43.not gone to resolve this issue because there are many facets to it
:12:44. > :12:45.and I think there is a well articulated in the infrastructure
:12:46. > :12:50.that is proposing the Stormont House Agreement. In the absence of that
:12:51. > :12:53.agreement, it must be hugely frustrating for you just as it is
:12:54. > :12:59.fascinating for the families but hugely frustrating for you to be
:13:00. > :13:01.caught like a piggy in the middle. The past is the present for those
:13:02. > :13:06.that are suffering and grieving so we cannot dismiss it as it is in the
:13:07. > :13:09.past. But for me there is a huge challenge, Ada Lanner around
:13:10. > :13:14.balancing resources between policing yesterday and policing today and
:13:15. > :13:18.tomorrow. OK, what makes this pedigree difficult of courses your
:13:19. > :13:24.critics might say that you are at least partly responsible for the
:13:25. > :13:30.vacuum that currently exists. Hugh Orde clearly not happy that the HET
:13:31. > :13:36.was stood down. That is a decision you took. The vacuum is your fault.
:13:37. > :13:39.I think the institutions within the Stormont House Agreement form the
:13:40. > :13:42.basis of what he was talking about in terms of sending bigger to
:13:43. > :13:46.actually deal with the past. It started off in the right fitting but
:13:47. > :13:52.there were problems as we developed, public confidence in the work of the
:13:53. > :13:55.HET. Hugh Orde said in his piece that this was a different approach
:13:56. > :14:00.and I think that was to be welcomed at the time. There was to be victim
:14:01. > :14:03.centred and answer questions for families. All of which is important
:14:04. > :14:07.but actually under the police act, my responsibilities to collect
:14:08. > :14:11.evidence, conduct investigations and to bring offenders to justice.
:14:12. > :14:14.Clearly in doing that we want to do it in a way that is sensitive and
:14:15. > :14:19.informative for families but that was the problem. The HET did not
:14:20. > :14:29.have a firm grounding of what its purpose was and it moved over time.
:14:30. > :14:37.You think you were backed into a corner and had no choice? In my
:14:38. > :14:46.view, the confidence in the HET as a result of the report was ebbing
:14:47. > :14:49.away. Not just within the nationalist and republican community
:14:50. > :14:58.but with the Unionist and loyalist community. Even police families who
:14:59. > :15:06.have lost loved ones during the Troubles. We have replaced that with
:15:07. > :15:17.a more clear focus on the review and investigation. Your request for a
:15:18. > :15:26.special committee was refused to investigate the activities of the
:15:27. > :15:30.agent Stakeknife. They will not set up a specific committee but they
:15:31. > :15:35.will deal with it as business as usual. My view is that it is bigger
:15:36. > :15:41.than that. What do you do? Hopefully negotiate with a fellow police
:15:42. > :15:45.constable from England or Wales to oversee and set the direction in the
:15:46. > :15:49.control of this investigation. It is so controversial and toxic that I
:15:50. > :15:52.think it needs practical independence of external leadership
:15:53. > :16:00.and indeed the investigators and teams working on it must be at arm
:16:01. > :16:03.'s length from the PSNI. There has been speculation that the
:16:04. > :16:13.investigation could cost ?25 million over five years. I think that is
:16:14. > :16:17.probably conservative. Probably about ?7 million per year. When it
:16:18. > :16:25.gets up and running at full tilt. More than ?30 million. Where does
:16:26. > :16:29.that money come from? The policing resources are a matter for the
:16:30. > :16:36.politicians saw it either needs to sit with the Department of Justice.
:16:37. > :16:41.David Ford said it is not his responsibility and it is an issue
:16:42. > :16:47.for the Secretary of State. I have a significant budget that is reducing.
:16:48. > :16:50.If I get to the point where I am unable to staff, there is a
:16:51. > :16:54.responsibility on politicians to meet that gap. I am asking for
:16:55. > :16:58.underwriting rather than a check up front. When we get to a point with
:16:59. > :17:05.an operation of this scale, costing this much money, I will need some
:17:06. > :17:16.political cover around the reason sing. Between various bodies, it is
:17:17. > :17:21.a matter for them to sort out the politics, not my job to referee it.
:17:22. > :17:26.Can we talk about the issue of disclosure. The Secretary of State
:17:27. > :17:31.has a problem of onward disclosure with national security. Her concern
:17:32. > :17:38.is seen to be at odds with Republican demands. Can you see any
:17:39. > :17:44.way of that being resolved sooner rather than later? I have serious
:17:45. > :17:47.considerations to make around disclosure and I often get
:17:48. > :17:51.criticised for taking time to do it or sometimes not disclosing
:17:52. > :17:56.material, but that is because lives are at stake, and other sensitive
:17:57. > :18:00.information is at stake that is not suitable for release. There must be
:18:01. > :18:04.a way to work through this with some sort of arbitration which does not
:18:05. > :18:08.diminish public confidence in the institutions and infrastructure
:18:09. > :18:13.being built. Can you see there could be circumstances where information
:18:14. > :18:16.needs to be in the public domain, which could be embarrassing for
:18:17. > :18:19.yourself or predecessors, but is part of a bigger victory that
:18:20. > :18:26.resolves these huge outstanding issues? It would be the right thing
:18:27. > :18:30.to do. I think embarrassment is never a good enough reason to
:18:31. > :18:38.withhold information. That is a given. I wouldn't have wanted to
:18:39. > :18:40.withhold information because it would be personally, professionally
:18:41. > :18:47.or organisationally embarrassing. Not a good enough reason. Hopeful,
:18:48. > :18:53.confident that before your time is up as Chief Constable, this issue
:18:54. > :18:57.that you have described as toxic, will have been resolved and that
:18:58. > :19:02.toxicity will have left of the wider political landscape? I hope so but I
:19:03. > :19:08.can't say that I am confident or 100% certain. It is interesting that
:19:09. > :19:15.the first Chief Constable on your programme tonight thought it would
:19:16. > :19:18.have been resolved earlier. I hope that we can get resolved in the next
:19:19. > :19:23.few years but it has been an intractable problem and it will need
:19:24. > :19:25.a lot of compromise and brave decisions on all sides to move it
:19:26. > :19:26.forward. Let's hear now from two
:19:27. > :19:29.of the politicians who are both involved in trying to resolve
:19:30. > :19:31.the outstanding legacy issues, the DUP's Emma Pengelly
:19:32. > :19:35.and Sinn Fein's Gerry Kelly. On the programme tonight we've had
:19:36. > :19:38.a former Chief Constable and the current incumbent making it
:19:39. > :19:41.clear that these outstanding issues have to be resolved
:19:42. > :19:58.by the politicians. The DUP are determined to build a
:19:59. > :20:02.better future. We have to have compounds of way of dealing with the
:20:03. > :20:05.past. I believe we have a set of proposals on the table further
:20:06. > :20:09.negotiations of the Stormont House Agreement and the first start deal
:20:10. > :20:20.that can do that. But you have failed so far. 13 years after, it
:20:21. > :20:25.has not been resolved. There is a great deal of agreement. The DUP
:20:26. > :20:29.went into these negotiations with key principles, no amnesty for
:20:30. > :20:33.terrorists, no rewriting of the past, just as must be available to
:20:34. > :20:39.all victims and survivors and we believe those proposals do add.
:20:40. > :20:46.There she is not between Sinn Fein and the DUP. The issue of disclosure
:20:47. > :20:51.is between Sinn Fein and the Secretary of State. Has the DUP
:20:52. > :20:58.dealt with this matter properly? No question of political failure on the
:20:59. > :21:06.part of the DUP. We negotiated detailed proposals with better
:21:07. > :21:10.investigations, for a new body to be set up, and we negotiated additional
:21:11. > :21:17.funds from the British government to do that. It is ready to go as soon
:21:18. > :21:24.as we get the green light. So it is over to Sinn Fein to get the issue
:21:25. > :21:32.resolved quickly. So it is your fault, Gerry Kelly? No. What is
:21:33. > :21:37.missing from the discussions as Theresa Villiers. When you say a
:21:38. > :21:42.plague on all your houses, it doesn't deal with the political
:21:43. > :21:46.difficulty. The DUP stayed out of that part of the argument the whole
:21:47. > :21:49.time. They said it is discussion between Sinn Fein and the British
:21:50. > :21:53.government, but they came back into it at the end when the issue was
:21:54. > :22:00.around Theresa Villiers having a veto. She said publicly that the
:22:01. > :22:05.British government would give full disclosure, then when the
:22:06. > :22:15.legislation came, there is a veto that she has. This is like pass the
:22:16. > :22:20.parcel. She said it is your fault and you see it as Theresa Villiers'
:22:21. > :22:28.fault. I said what is missing here is Theresa Villiers. The point I am
:22:29. > :22:32.trying to make is that if you want to understand the problem then
:22:33. > :22:37.understand. We went through negotiations, a litany of stuff, and
:22:38. > :22:44.all parties made substantial advances. We have the architecture
:22:45. > :22:53.and everyone is agreed. A number of times one of the issues was around
:22:54. > :22:57.Article two of the EC HR, the risk of life. No, everyone is in
:22:58. > :23:03.agreement. It has never been an issue. A number of people have said
:23:04. > :23:10.that. Theresa Villiers hides behind it. She is saying she wants a veto
:23:11. > :23:17.to say what can and cannot be given to families. Let me give you an
:23:18. > :23:23.example. You don't have to theorise are anything. The person in charge
:23:24. > :23:29.of public records has tried on multiple occasions to take public
:23:30. > :23:32.records and give them to the families. But as Theresa Villiers
:23:33. > :23:40.done today? She is trying to prevent that. We didn't ask Theresa Villiers
:23:41. > :23:43.to be here. What she has said repeatedly is that she has taken the
:23:44. > :23:48.time to sit down and talk to victims to try to find out how they want to
:23:49. > :23:52.see this issue resolved and she says it is perfectly possible that the
:23:53. > :23:57.outstanding disagreement between herself and Republicans can be
:23:58. > :24:03.resolved. I agree but where is the resolution? She is talking to
:24:04. > :24:08.victims and survivors. We have been doing it all along. We put forward
:24:09. > :24:16.an absence paper which said clearly why not give the same power that the
:24:17. > :24:23.ombudsman has two the director? Or if you're not happy with that, and I
:24:24. > :24:27.think George Hamilton mention something similar, put up a panel
:24:28. > :24:33.which can decide what is in the interest of national security or
:24:34. > :24:40.not. You suggested it is the fault of the Republicans. They have heard
:24:41. > :24:43.Gerry Kelly. He says it is the fault of the Secretary of State. But we
:24:44. > :24:50.are still sitting with the same problem unresolved. One thing
:24:51. > :24:56.suggested was bringing Eames-Bradley from the shelf and having a review
:24:57. > :25:02.to see if the best parts of it could form a mechanism to drive us
:25:03. > :25:09.forward. I think those comments show that perhaps Hugh Orde has not been
:25:10. > :25:14.entirely engaged throughout the Stormont House Agreement. There is a
:25:15. > :25:18.great deal of agreement. There is an unreasonable position by a small
:25:19. > :25:26.number of families in terms of the definition of full disclosure. It
:25:27. > :25:30.was mentioned that the party leader said this would not be resolved
:25:31. > :25:39.before May. That is not from a lack of commitment from the DUP. You say
:25:40. > :25:44.you want to see it resolved now. She said this on a number of occasions.
:25:45. > :25:48.A small number of families. In saying that she is dismissing the
:25:49. > :25:55.nationalist and republican families who have suffered death from state
:25:56. > :25:59.forces. It is quite erroneous that there are a small number of
:26:00. > :26:04.families. We spoke to those families and we did not come up with these
:26:05. > :26:10.issues on our own. They have to be represented. You must take them into
:26:11. > :26:15.consideration and Theresa Villiers will find this out if she is going
:26:16. > :26:24.to see all the families that if she dismisses them, she dismisses...
:26:25. > :26:30.They are being badly advised about what is doable. If anybody believes
:26:31. > :26:35.that the British governed or any national government will simply say
:26:36. > :26:42.they are handing over national security issues to a third party,
:26:43. > :26:46.that is unrealistic. If the ombudsman has the power, why do they
:26:47. > :26:51.not trust the new director to have that sort of power to make those
:26:52. > :26:55.decisions? If the Secretary of State has a problem she can take it to
:26:56. > :27:01.court. Martin McGuinness said last week that the trick is to find a
:27:02. > :27:07.resolution which the victims' families can live with. Can Sinn
:27:08. > :27:10.Fein change its position on national security and still meet the needs of
:27:11. > :27:19.the families? That might be the solution. From the families' point
:27:20. > :27:24.of view when we look at it, national security cannot be used as an excuse
:27:25. > :27:31.not to bring forward information about any criminality connected.
:27:32. > :27:36.From the British part of you, they argued that they couldn't give out
:27:37. > :27:43.anything which will endanger life. We agree. The third one is from the
:27:44. > :27:49.British point of view, being able to show the techniques we use now, and
:27:50. > :27:56.I there is some way of dealing with that. We asked them to tell us what
:27:57. > :28:00.they meant by that. Your party leader has said on this programme a
:28:01. > :28:05.few weeks ago, the issue will not be resolved on this side of the
:28:06. > :28:08.elections in May. Why not? We don't believe Sinn Fein and the Secretary
:28:09. > :28:16.of State will resolve it. We want them to. Arlene Foster is trying to
:28:17. > :28:19.be realistic. We are not in the business of giving victims and
:28:20. > :28:24.survivors false hope, but we want this to get resolved, and now. Sinn
:28:25. > :28:30.Fein need to get this thing resolved. The DUP are not outside of
:28:31. > :28:36.this process. They are agreeing with the British position, so you cannot
:28:37. > :28:46.wash your hands. So release the money. We are involved in it and so
:28:47. > :28:47.are you. At least we have aired the issues.
:28:48. > :28:51.During this year's Assembly election we'll witness a whole series
:28:52. > :28:53.of fascinating political battles - none more so than in Upper Bann
:28:54. > :28:55.which includes Portadown, Lurgan and Banbridge.
:28:56. > :28:57.The seat encapsulates the battles within unionism and nationalism.
:28:58. > :28:59.The constituency's also notable because the four largest parties
:29:00. > :29:01.have all selected women candidates, as our political correspondent,
:29:02. > :29:20.Stephen Walker, has been finding out.
:29:21. > :29:27.It is a constituency that takes its name from the river but politics has
:29:28. > :29:35.never float quietly here. The area contains place names that were once
:29:36. > :29:40.associated with conflict. Those who represent this place at Stormont
:29:41. > :29:46.Arriva unionist or nationalist and the battle for power here has often
:29:47. > :29:52.been quite heated. Upper Bann has six MLAs, to DUP, Ulster Unionist
:29:53. > :29:57.Party one Sinn Fein and one SDLP. This year the parties have all
:29:58. > :30:02.selected high profile wearing. Dolores Kelly is an SDLP MLA.
:30:03. > :30:07.Jo-Anne Dobson sits in the assembly for the UUP. Carla Lockhart is
:30:08. > :30:12.running for the DUP with Catherine Seeley Stannington Sinn Fein. Carla
:30:13. > :30:18.Lockhart works for the sitting DUP MLA Stephen Hunt tray but she
:30:19. > :30:24.defeated him in a selection process and now wants his job. Was it odd
:30:25. > :30:29.being selected ahead of your boss. Stephen has decided at this stage to
:30:30. > :30:32.take a look at his own business interests and I therefore will be
:30:33. > :30:37.putting my best foot forward and delivering for the people of Upper
:30:38. > :30:43.Bann. How does Carla Lockhart view her female rivals? Men should be
:30:44. > :30:48.there on capability and not just on a token female but I figured is
:30:49. > :30:51.quite trailblazing for two. Catherine Seeley is hoping to make
:30:52. > :31:00.history by taking a second seat for Fein. We are very much focused on
:31:01. > :31:05.getting two seats, not allowing the other parties to get on. Do you
:31:06. > :31:09.think a second seat is there? Absolutely. I would not be sitting
:31:10. > :31:14.here otherwise. We came so close in the previous assembly election. That
:31:15. > :31:19.was back in 2011 when two of Sinn Fein 's candidates outpolled BS TLB
:31:20. > :31:27.on the first count but the party only took one seat. Sinn Fein will
:31:28. > :31:31.have two manage it very carefully. We got quite a good first preference
:31:32. > :31:36.but the transfer did not come to them the last time. They will have
:31:37. > :31:43.two split their vote 50-50. In 2011, Sinn Fein came close to taking
:31:44. > :31:47.Dolores Kelly seat. I know that Sinn Fein through the kitchen sink at
:31:48. > :31:51.this constituency five years ago. They brought canvassers up in their
:31:52. > :31:53.droves from the South of Ireland and said there would be a third
:31:54. > :31:59.nationalist seat which is not the case. I think people are now astute
:32:00. > :32:03.and know that Sinn Fein 's real intent is to topple the SDLP from
:32:04. > :32:07.this constituency. I will not be the candidate that allows that to
:32:08. > :32:11.happen. We'll Sinn Fein did -- succeed or can the SDLP Triumph? The
:32:12. > :32:18.last time people here went to the polls was last year 's general
:32:19. > :32:23.election. Then the DUP secured 33%. The Ulster Unionist Party 28% of the
:32:24. > :32:30.vote. Sinn Fein got 25% and the SDLP got 9%. Dolores Kelly was the SDLP
:32:31. > :32:36.'s candidate in last year 's general election. She admits the results
:32:37. > :32:40.were not good. People came out to vote for me last year knowing that I
:32:41. > :32:44.was not gone to win that election. I have a lot of experience in this
:32:45. > :32:49.constituency. I have been proud to represent this constituency now for
:32:50. > :32:53.over 13 years and I intend to serve the people of Upper Bann for another
:32:54. > :32:55.five years. Vote management is not just an issue for Sinn Fein. It
:32:56. > :33:00.isn't the Ulster Unionist Party consider. Are there three Ulster
:33:01. > :33:06.Unionist Party scratchy Mark know, there are not. There never were and
:33:07. > :33:09.there never will be. I think we are offering the electorate choice, a
:33:10. > :33:16.fantastic choice and I am much looking forward to taking to the
:33:17. > :33:21.doorsteps. Is there really room for a third Ulster Unionist? Absolutely.
:33:22. > :33:26.Upper Bann is steeped in austere and is and I am running alongside a
:33:27. > :33:30.fantastic team. Like Dolores Kelly, Jo-Anne Dobson ran in last year 's
:33:31. > :33:33.Westminster election where there was much tension between the Ulster
:33:34. > :33:43.Unionist Party DUP will retain the seat. It is going to be an
:33:44. > :33:50.intriguing battle. There will be two DUP, two Ulster Unionists and the
:33:51. > :33:53.third one, win a ticket. -- winner take it all. I believe it will be a
:33:54. > :33:59.dogfight between the last two women, Doris Kelly and Catherine Seeley of
:34:00. > :34:04.Sinn Fein. This constituency is always worth watching. The election
:34:05. > :34:06.may be three months away but Upper Bann is already making headlines.
:34:07. > :34:09.Stephen Walker on what's shaping up to be one of several intriguing
:34:10. > :34:13.And let's hear what our commentators make of the latest twists and turns
:34:14. > :34:16.in the political world, and it's great to see two
:34:17. > :34:18.old friends re-united tonight - Professors Rick Wilford and Deirdre
:34:19. > :34:36.Emma Pengelley 's remark that it was a matter for the Secretary of State
:34:37. > :34:39.and Sinn Fein to resolve and we will stand back is absolutely an
:34:40. > :34:41.abdication of the leadership and political response ability. I think
:34:42. > :34:46.that the remark you made about Martin McGuinness a week or so ago
:34:47. > :34:51.saying that if it is families can put up with what is being proposed
:34:52. > :34:56.then that is good enough for us. I think that may be a way of mediating
:34:57. > :35:03.what may be a very difficult decision. We really are in a
:35:04. > :35:07.quagmire and it will take the wisdom of Solomon to sort this one out.
:35:08. > :35:14.This pass the parcel and point the finger. I do not worth the
:35:15. > :35:20.intervention was helpful. He is not a independent -- independent...
:35:21. > :35:24.George was quite measured in his response but quite clearly was not
:35:25. > :35:27.pleased with what had been said and perhaps felt it was a criticism of
:35:28. > :35:31.what he has been asked to do. What is clear is we need an integrated
:35:32. > :35:37.coherent approach to solve this. It is not just a police issue nor a
:35:38. > :35:42.criminal justice issue. It isn't in that needs critical leadership as
:35:43. > :35:47.well. I actually think it is a fool 's errand. I think George Hamilton
:35:48. > :35:52.said it himself. I think the most that people can hope for an believe
:35:53. > :36:01.is achievable really is to have a set of truths from the various...
:36:02. > :36:07.Over the period. There are lots of tributaries. Maybe people feel if
:36:08. > :36:13.the risk or the threat of Colonel Justices removed, in effect an
:36:14. > :36:17.amnesty, then those charities will be free to throw. We have talked
:36:18. > :36:20.about a fresh start and we have to accept that the stories coming out
:36:21. > :36:24.on a daily basis, scathing attacks on defence institutions, are eroding
:36:25. > :36:36.confidence and be blah saying a plague on all our houses. Who can
:36:37. > :36:41.you trust? I am not dispensing with the justice notion altogether
:36:42. > :36:43.because I think if it could be created whereby perpetrators and
:36:44. > :36:48.victims and families can come together in some sort of if you like
:36:49. > :36:52.rest are true justice situation context then maybe the truths will
:36:53. > :36:57.become more apparent and maybe people will feel free to speak. Is
:36:58. > :37:02.it naive to hope for some kind of resolution this site of an election?
:37:03. > :37:05.I think the answer you got is clearly that is not going to happen.
:37:06. > :37:11.You can see why that is would expect that to be the case. If the
:37:12. > :37:14.politicians are serious about is resolving this issue, that ought to
:37:15. > :37:20.be a possibility. But if we say it will not be possible beside the
:37:21. > :37:23.election, then we going to a recess. The victims are again saying they
:37:24. > :37:27.are being used as political pawns coming up to an election. How
:37:28. > :37:34.serious are they about resolving this issue? What we are doing here
:37:35. > :37:39.is using the past... We should be using the past to remind us what is
:37:40. > :37:42.happening. The past is defining us. Realistically, I think it is to ask
:37:43. > :37:49.ourselves a very pertinent question which is what is achievable. And
:37:50. > :37:52.acceptable. And if they ask themselves that question, rather
:37:53. > :37:54.than chasing kites, I think that is the road to nowhere. Thank you both
:37:55. > :37:57.very much indeed. That's just about it
:37:58. > :38:00.from The View for this week. Join me for Sunday Politics
:38:01. > :38:02.at 11.35 here on BBC1. But before we go, at Stormont this
:38:03. > :38:05.week, Members had been practising their best puns
:38:06. > :38:07.for a debate on pigeon clubs but, whatever it is about pigeons,
:38:08. > :38:24.the MLAs weren't the only ones Today an amendment sought to include
:38:25. > :38:29.pigeon racing... Come on. Passed by the assembly today and it will give
:38:30. > :38:37.Mr Swanson then to tweet about. I hope he does not repeat that. He did
:38:38. > :38:45.fly off to America and we do not hear a tweet about him since. It is
:38:46. > :38:49.ridiculous. Wondering whether Communications in my old party are
:38:50. > :38:56.by way of pigeon carrier. Really not very nice. We will let this one fly.
:38:57. > :38:57.We think the policy does have wings and those clubs should get their
:38:58. > :38:58.rates cheap cheap.