:00:12. > :00:14.With Brexit getting the blame for almost everything from disputes
:00:15. > :00:15.over Marmite to delayed infrastructure projects
:00:16. > :00:19.in Belfast, I'll be asking the Deputy First Minister
:00:20. > :00:22.who he thinks is looking out for Northern Ireland's interests -
:00:23. > :00:47.and why he has no faith in Theresa May's government.
:00:48. > :00:49.And what about the way details of that letter from
:00:50. > :01:01.We should know about it. That's not the way it works.
:01:02. > :01:04.Also tonight - it's been put on the long finger for years,
:01:05. > :01:07.but will MPs back plans to cut their numbers by redrawing
:01:08. > :01:08.the political map of Northern Ireland?
:01:09. > :01:11.We'll hear from one MP who's not happy and a former MP
:01:12. > :01:15.Plus - Prime Ministers and Presidents have been
:01:16. > :01:17.delighted to feature, but what would happen if Stormont
:01:18. > :01:22.No room for Marge or Homer, though, in Commentators' Corner.
:01:23. > :01:24.We'll hear the thoughts of Professor Deirdre Heenan
:01:25. > :01:36.The First and Deputy First Ministers will travel to Downing Street
:01:37. > :01:39.on Monday to take part in a meeting of the Joint Ministerial Council.
:01:40. > :01:42.Top of their agenda will be the fallout from Brexit -
:01:43. > :01:44.an issue that dominated our news headlines yet again today
:01:45. > :01:48.after the Sinn Fein Minister, Chris Hazzard, warned
:01:49. > :01:50.that the decision to leave has jeopardised the future
:01:51. > :01:54.Earlier today, I spoke to the Deputy First Minister,
:01:55. > :01:57.Martin McGuinness, at Stormont Castle, and I asked him
:01:58. > :01:59.why his party colleague had suggested the funding might not be
:02:00. > :02:02.forthcoming when the UK Government has made it clear it will underwrite
:02:03. > :02:11.existing projects until at least 2020?
:02:12. > :02:22.What will have to ascertain is that the Chancellor is prepared to give a
:02:23. > :02:26.commitment past 2020. That is the issue for the First Minister to take
:02:27. > :02:30.up with the British Government. I know there is always a tendency when
:02:31. > :02:35.stories like this crop up to read into our motives. That is a big
:02:36. > :02:41.mistake. This is a straightforward case of the convocation being the
:02:42. > :02:45.commitment from the Chancellor after 2020. This project goes beyond that
:02:46. > :02:52.date and that presents a real pub the eMac problem. We received a
:02:53. > :02:57.statement saying that the Chancellor made clear that structural forms
:02:58. > :03:01.were signed until a point when the UK believes the European Union and
:03:02. > :03:09.will be fully funded by the Treasury even after we leave. So there should
:03:10. > :03:12.be no doubt, even after we leave? Well, early clarification... Is that
:03:13. > :03:16.not the clarification you are looking for? No, we need to speak
:03:17. > :03:23.with the British Government about the peripheral source for late 2017,
:03:24. > :03:27.20 18. There is no guarantee that the Europeans are going to ground
:03:28. > :03:34.that money, given the reality that by 2019 the British Government will
:03:35. > :03:42.exit the European Union. But of course, the UK Government at that
:03:43. > :03:45.point would overrated anyway. Is this not actually more to do with
:03:46. > :03:50.Sinn Fein and their policies and priorities? The reality is they are
:03:51. > :03:55.using Brexit as a smoke screen to cover its own policies rather than
:03:56. > :04:02.the York Street interchange. That is the fact, isn't it? I haven't even
:04:03. > :04:07.mentioned Brexit in the cause of this interview. But Chris Hazzard
:04:08. > :04:14.mentioned it. Let's be clear about this. The fourth flagship projects
:04:15. > :04:23.are not ones that Sinn Fein has. The ones that the Executive has, the a
:04:24. > :04:28.five ASICs that are the flagship projects that we are determined to
:04:29. > :04:36.see implemented in the ten ahead. But you said you wanted to see this
:04:37. > :04:42.project happen? I absolutely do. We will establish over the next while
:04:43. > :04:46.whether it can be funded. You just read a statement I wasn't aware of
:04:47. > :04:51.before I sat down to do this interview. We will exploit that in
:04:52. > :04:58.the future. On the wider issue, you said that James Brokenshire cannot
:04:59. > :05:09.be trusted to negotiate on Northern Ireland's behalf on this issue. Why
:05:10. > :05:13.not? Let me be clear, I spoke with him at an economic conference and I
:05:14. > :05:18.spoke to the BBC afterwards. The BBC put it to me and asked me the
:05:19. > :05:23.question, did I trust James Brokenshire? And I said, given the
:05:24. > :05:30.behaviour of the Conservative Party in the run-up to the referendum, the
:05:31. > :05:34.infighting within the party, the shenanigan, the confusion, I do not
:05:35. > :05:38.trust the British Government. The question was then bit to me again,
:05:39. > :05:43.did I trust James Brokenshire? I said, he is a member of the Cabinet,
:05:44. > :05:48.I do not trust the Cabinet. We get on well, we have completely
:05:49. > :05:52.different ideological beliefs, but we have been nothing other than
:05:53. > :05:57.civil and gentlemanly and our conversations with each other. Yes.
:05:58. > :06:02.This was a story that was created by the BBC. You also said that these
:06:03. > :06:05.people do not have the best interests of the people of the night
:06:06. > :06:09.that hard. These people being members of the Cabinet, James
:06:10. > :06:14.Brokenshire. Do you seriously believe that? I do not believe that
:06:15. > :06:19.they have the best interests of baby but denied that hard. Either
:06:20. > :06:31.deliberately trying to disadvantage as? They have. Deliberately? The
:06:32. > :06:34.infighting of the Tory party has created massive problems for
:06:35. > :06:43.Scotland, for ourselves, for Wales and last Currie left us in never
:06:44. > :06:51.never land. We are in limbo. Can we not trust them to act in our best
:06:52. > :06:59.interests, can we trust the Deputy First Minister and the First
:07:00. > :07:03.Minister? The two of you do not agree on issues. You and Arlene
:07:04. > :07:08.Foster are pulling in opposite directions. Given that we have been
:07:09. > :07:12.through a referendum on we were on different sides, the DUP for the
:07:13. > :07:18.leave and asked for remaining, in the aftermath of that, we were able
:07:19. > :07:21.to agree a joint letter. You do not agree on the validity of the
:07:22. > :07:27.results. I have to deal with the outcome of the result. Do you accept
:07:28. > :07:34.that the UK is leaving and Northern Ireland as part of the UK? I was
:07:35. > :07:38.involved in 14 meetings in Brussels with some very influential people
:07:39. > :07:43.who will be at the heart of these negotiations and their position is
:07:44. > :07:47.clear, their priority is to keep the 27 countries committed to the
:07:48. > :07:49.European Union together and the British Government and the issues
:07:50. > :07:56.they are presenting I'm not a priority for them. That does present
:07:57. > :08:00.problems for us in terms of our politics, social interaction and in
:08:01. > :08:07.terms of how we continue to develop our programmes for Government, the
:08:08. > :08:11.economy. You famously with Arlene Foster wrote to the Prime Minister
:08:12. > :08:18.outlining your concerns about Brexit and we wondered when, if the Prime
:08:19. > :08:24.Minister would reply. This issue came up in the house on Monday.
:08:25. > :08:27.You're taking Executive office questions. When you're answering
:08:28. > :08:32.those questions, did you know that the Prime Minister had in fact
:08:33. > :08:39.replied to your joint letter the previous Friday? I was aware that a
:08:40. > :08:44.reply has come several days previously. Had you seen the reply?
:08:45. > :08:51.I had not seen it, I was aware that it existed I was also aware it had
:08:52. > :08:58.been delivered. I wanted to speak to Arlene Foster. Used it up as Deputy
:08:59. > :09:03.First Minister and you have not read that letter. You must have known he
:09:04. > :09:06.would be asked about it. Arlene Foster is First Minister, I am the
:09:07. > :09:12.deputy. If we received correspondence from the British
:09:13. > :09:16.Prime Minister, we have the right to sit down, consider the contents of
:09:17. > :09:19.that letter, given it had only arrived several days previously and
:09:20. > :09:26.at the weekend, and have a composition about that. After
:09:27. > :09:32.Question Time in the Assembly, the First Minister and I were due to
:09:33. > :09:36.meet with James Brokenshire. We have our own process to go through.
:09:37. > :09:42.Nobody should be in any doubt whatsoever that the content of the
:09:43. > :09:47.letter would have been released. A great deal was made about the delay
:09:48. > :09:51.and her reply, I think the MLAs think it is very odd that you did
:09:52. > :09:57.not put it out any public domain that she had replied a little bit
:09:58. > :10:00.sooner than you did. With respect to you, and you're a great journalist,
:10:01. > :10:04.there is a tendency within the media and some of the more extremes within
:10:05. > :10:08.the media to believe that if I get a letter from someone, they should
:10:09. > :10:13.know about it and hour later. That is not how it works. We are not
:10:14. > :10:20.going to dance to that tune. Know, but I'll think what is confusing
:10:21. > :10:23.this issue is that at least three M L A is referred to the fact that
:10:24. > :10:29.Theresa May had apparently not responded to your joint letter in
:10:30. > :10:34.the house on that Monday afternoon and you did not correct them. You
:10:35. > :10:38.did not say, actually, that letter has been received and you will hear
:10:39. > :10:43.about it. You carried on as if you had received no letter. That was not
:10:44. > :10:48.the case, because you'd have just told me the letter had arrived. What
:10:49. > :10:53.is wrong about that? That chronology is right. I have looked at Hansard
:10:54. > :10:57.and that is right. It was mentioned during the course of the debate from
:10:58. > :11:02.Brexit. Nobody in your team mentioned that to you? That three
:11:03. > :11:07.MLAs had directly refer to the fact that the letter had not been
:11:08. > :11:10.received? I was aware that it came up during because of the Brexit
:11:11. > :11:17.debate, but I still make the case that the first and Deputy First
:11:18. > :11:21.Minister have the right to consider the contents of a very serious
:11:22. > :11:25.letter from the British Prime Minister, to talk about it amongst
:11:26. > :11:30.ourselves and not how to dance to the chin of the media are indeed
:11:31. > :11:34.three MLAs. Does not go to the heart of the issue of transparency and
:11:35. > :11:37.openness within the Executive and that other politicians think it
:11:38. > :11:42.looks like you were trying to conceal something? That is rubbish.
:11:43. > :11:50.We are talking about opposition politics. We are talking about
:11:51. > :11:55.people who from the get go, first of all, saying that they weren't going
:11:56. > :11:59.to take ministerial positions, added eating their responsibilities to the
:12:00. > :12:02.Good Friday agreement, but that is a matter for themselves. And have now
:12:03. > :12:08.taken up the position of almost criticising every single thing that
:12:09. > :12:14.you do. For the money for troubles related inquest to be released from
:12:15. > :12:18.the British Government, the need to be a joint request from the DUP.
:12:19. > :12:22.Your partners in Government are currently refusing to do that. Which
:12:23. > :12:28.is that we've your relationship with the DUP? It has become quite clear
:12:29. > :12:31.to me in terms of the request that Kim and a member I met with the Lord
:12:32. > :12:36.Chief Justice as did the First Minister, it became clear to me that
:12:37. > :12:41.there appears to be an attitude within the British Government that
:12:42. > :12:47.we will only resolved the freeing up of that money to the Lord Justice
:12:48. > :12:54.around the establishment of the H I U, the information recovery, right
:12:55. > :13:01.now we want to get the solution. I am very determined and I met James
:13:02. > :13:05.Brokenshire several days ago. I am determined with the First Minister
:13:06. > :13:09.to find a solution to that. Is your bottom line that the UK Government
:13:10. > :13:15.should ignore the signs of the DUP and release the money anyway? I do
:13:16. > :13:19.think that what I have said to you just prior to this, it appears to be
:13:20. > :13:22.that the British Government are not going to do that. What we now need
:13:23. > :13:27.to do is get a solution and the only way we will find that solution is if
:13:28. > :13:33.we get negotiators and it all can be done on a very short period of time,
:13:34. > :13:38.who are involved in this process to sit down and try and find a
:13:39. > :13:44.solution. Of course, it will involve more parties than just Sinn Fein and
:13:45. > :13:49.the DUP and the British Government. Can be done by the first
:13:50. > :13:53.anniversary, next month? I think it would be absolutely disgraceful that
:13:54. > :13:56.Martin McGuinness speaking to me earlier.
:13:57. > :13:59.Planned electoral boundary changes could be defeated at Westminster
:14:00. > :14:01.because a number of Conservative MPs are refusing to back them.
:14:02. > :14:04.Several Tory MPs have told The View they will vote against the changes
:14:05. > :14:07.which would see Northern Ireland lose an MP and Belfast go down
:14:08. > :14:10.Our political correspondent, Stephen Walker, has been
:14:11. > :14:12.investigating with the help of the Irish News
:14:13. > :14:23.The boundaries are being redrawn and the battle lines are becoming clear.
:14:24. > :14:28.Northern Ireland is set to lose an NP, going from 18 to 17
:14:29. > :14:38.constituencies. Well-known conceits could also disappear, and there
:14:39. > :14:42.would be new names such as here, stop the move is bad news for Tom
:14:43. > :14:45.Elliott who can see is the man and south Tyrone seat switch from being
:14:46. > :14:52.a unionist constituency to a nationalist one. You fell for your
:14:53. > :14:58.seat. You must, surely? I think overall in Northern Ireland I feel
:14:59. > :15:01.for seats for unionism. You only have to look at the proposals in
:15:02. > :15:05.Belfast as well was quite clearly what we have is radical changes but
:15:06. > :15:10.they are obviously slanted towards a better proposal probably for
:15:11. > :15:15.republicans and nationalists stop but that's what we have to take on
:15:16. > :15:18.at the moment. Nigel Dodds's also believes that the boundary changes
:15:19. > :15:22.will have a detriment to affect on unionism. Sinn Fein wonder what
:15:23. > :15:28.impact any changes agreed in London will have on the size of the
:15:29. > :15:32.assembly, a point shared by Alastair McDonnell, whose south Belfast seat
:15:33. > :15:36.could disappear. This would mean that not only we lose an MP reuse
:15:37. > :15:41.five assembly members come the next election. How fast will be
:15:42. > :15:49.downgraded, and we restrict APSAC -- abstract places called Antrim, west
:15:50. > :15:52.down, go an entity with no community identity or cohesion. Some might say
:15:53. > :15:58.that is all about self preservation. You wanting to be the MP for south
:15:59. > :16:05.Belfast. I want to see Northern Ireland work and I believe botching
:16:06. > :16:09.the boundaries and carving up the constituencies will make more
:16:10. > :16:15.difficult for Northern Ireland to Worksop in recent weeks, as part of
:16:16. > :16:19.the compensation process, places have given their opinion about the
:16:20. > :16:23.changes. Members of the Boundary Commission have organised a series
:16:24. > :16:25.of events so they can hear people's concerns about the changes. The plan
:16:26. > :16:30.is not the biggest overhaul to Northern Ireland's parliamentary
:16:31. > :16:34.constituencies in a generation. But the final say does not rest here
:16:35. > :16:40.stop instead, that rests with politicians hundreds of miles away.
:16:41. > :16:45.This is where the battle for the boundaries will be won or lost. And
:16:46. > :16:50.numbers are key. The Labour Party oppose the move, and since Theresa
:16:51. > :16:54.May has a very small Commons majority, it would only take a
:16:55. > :17:01.handful of Conservative MPs to rebel and these plans could be in trouble.
:17:02. > :17:05.It's gesture politics really. We are getting rid of MEPs, all of the
:17:06. > :17:08.powers are coming back to the UK Parliament after Brexit and also
:17:09. > :17:13.there is no justification do reduce the number of MPs, no. Other Tories
:17:14. > :17:16.agree, and feel it is wrong to shrink the House of Commons was more
:17:17. > :17:19.people are being appointed to the House of Lords. Then a macro we are
:17:20. > :17:22.talking about reducing the number of people elected at the ballot box
:17:23. > :17:27.while stuffing the House of Lords with yet more people. That simply
:17:28. > :17:29.cannot be right in a developed democracy. As of today, you would
:17:30. > :17:34.vote against? CHEERING If it came to the house today I
:17:35. > :17:43.would vote against it. Those behind the change would see it right as
:17:44. > :17:47.having the same size constituencies. It is a manifesto commitment, let's
:17:48. > :17:51.motion passed by Parliament it is important, not about individual MPs
:17:52. > :17:56.but about ensuring we have equal sized constituencies and our
:17:57. > :17:58.democracy is fair and representative. Other critics
:17:59. > :18:02.suggest that the boundary changes will benefit the Conservatives, and
:18:03. > :18:06.put them in power for the foreseeable future. To give one
:18:07. > :18:14.political party, the Conservative Party, a majority of 80 to 90 for
:18:15. > :18:16.the indefinite future I find it worrying, troubling me greatly. It
:18:17. > :18:22.is unhealthy in a democracy do have one side that knows it's going to be
:18:23. > :18:26.perpetually in government. But suggestions of political opportunism
:18:27. > :18:30.have been rejected. When it comes to the timing of the actual review this
:18:31. > :18:34.was decided by Labour and Lib Dem MPs in the previous parliament and
:18:35. > :18:37.they devoted to delay be changed by an initial five years. This was
:18:38. > :18:41.proposed in the previous parliament and legislated then and would have
:18:42. > :18:46.happened by the 2015 general election and gone to plan. After the
:18:47. > :18:48.cause of this process the final boundary changes will ultimately
:18:49. > :18:53.come before Parliament, and until then this debate has much time to
:18:54. > :18:55.run and those seeking reform know they have much persuading to do.
:18:56. > :18:59.And with me now are the DUP MP, Ian Paisley, and the Alliance
:19:00. > :19:01.Party's interim leader, Naomi Long.
:19:02. > :19:04.Ian Paisley, why are you so opposed to the Boundary
:19:05. > :19:16.I think the proposals are a dog 's breakfast when it comes to how they
:19:17. > :19:24.have been drawn up. I am all for gradual change to boundaries, which
:19:25. > :19:27.recognise population shifts, which recognise how communities have
:19:28. > :19:33.developed, but whenever you take a scalpel to Northern Ireland and hash
:19:34. > :19:38.the province up in such a way that it actually cuts through
:19:39. > :19:44.communities, cuts through towns. Take a town like Glengormley. With
:19:45. > :19:47.these proposals, that town will be in for constituents. Had either side
:19:48. > :19:51.us that it is not about DV self-interest? People will say of
:19:52. > :19:55.course you will be concerned because you might lose seats? I could be
:19:56. > :20:00.really selfish and keep my head down and do nothing. My constituency has
:20:01. > :20:06.been cut in half. Frankly, my party could select me to run in the new
:20:07. > :20:11.west Antrim constituency, I'd be confident, they wouldn't select me
:20:12. > :20:15.in another island also be confident. I could still have a job and a seat
:20:16. > :20:28.but it is not about me. Because being selfish that was I was do. It
:20:29. > :20:32.is about the constituents. The main towns are being separated from
:20:33. > :20:35.villages. People don't define their lives by parliamentary constituency.
:20:36. > :20:39.Yellow macro but they do define their lives by the communities they
:20:40. > :20:47.live in. For example the west Antrim constituency, geographically, is
:20:48. > :20:53.block neigh. The west Antrim constituency drawn does not include
:20:54. > :20:58.the most westerly part of Antrim. Parts of that constituency are now
:20:59. > :21:04.part of north Belfast. Is it a dog 's breakfast, Naomi Long? I don't
:21:05. > :21:07.think it is a good idea into these equal sized population
:21:08. > :21:11.constituencies. I say that every five years. I do think there should
:21:12. > :21:14.be reformed but the reform I supported with actually accompanied
:21:15. > :21:18.by a change to proportional representation voting, which then
:21:19. > :21:23.did not come through. Not happening. When it turns out that we are today
:21:24. > :21:26.giving a set of criteria are drawing boundaries around communities, I
:21:27. > :21:31.fail to see how they could have drawn them any differently. We can
:21:32. > :21:33.only have 5% plus or minus in difference in population per
:21:34. > :21:38.constituency in terms of who is on the register. Belfast only has 2.8
:21:39. > :21:42.quotas, so it can only have three seats, so when you start from that
:21:43. > :21:45.position and you work out and it is normal that you would start in
:21:46. > :21:48.Belfast and work out it is hard to see how you could draw lines on a
:21:49. > :21:52.map anywhere else that didn't equalise the population in each
:21:53. > :21:55.constituency. Your critical look at this and say the Alliance party is
:21:56. > :21:59.not terribly bothered about this because of self-interest, because
:22:00. > :22:03.you might do well in new seat, south-east Belfast? That is not the
:22:04. > :22:07.issue. To be blunt, I won the constituency of east Belfast in some
:22:08. > :22:11.of the worst boundaries on an airline 's perspective we have ever
:22:12. > :22:15.had. I am willing to take the previous loss on the chin. I won it
:22:16. > :22:18.fair and square in the first election and the worst boundaries we
:22:19. > :22:21.have ever had. Boundaries don't win elections. What wins or loses
:22:22. > :22:26.elections is the calibre of candidate and how long and how well
:22:27. > :22:29.they do the work. I don't think Conservatives are right and how they
:22:30. > :22:34.have set this up but let's be honest this. This is the second attempt now
:22:35. > :22:37.at electoral reform, and bizarre to hear Conservative MPs claiming they
:22:38. > :22:41.want to see reform but don't want to see the House of Lords continued to
:22:42. > :22:46.grow. They blocked reform of the House of Lords, and would have
:22:47. > :22:50.prevented that anomaly. I think we can dance Kelbie House of Lords and
:22:51. > :22:53.we can also reduce the number of MPs. Into what adjustments about the
:22:54. > :22:58.mood in Westminster? We heard in Stephen Walker's report from two
:22:59. > :23:04.Conservative MPs. They say that they can't support the current proposals.
:23:05. > :23:06.Will be be prepared to rebel insignificant enough numbers to
:23:07. > :23:12.actually holds to read a inner tracks? I will make two points.
:23:13. > :23:16.Boundary changes first of all should not be radical and explosives, they
:23:17. > :23:18.should be gradual. There is a blueprint there for 17
:23:19. > :23:25.constituencies will be a gradual change that people could accept. I'm
:23:26. > :23:27.exactly both parties, all parties in Northern Ireland could sign up to
:23:28. > :23:32.that, persuading the Boundary Commission to move forward. The
:23:33. > :23:35.issue about what is else going to happen, with this dog 's dinner as I
:23:36. > :23:42.have mentioned of how the boundaries luck, I will now use and the other
:23:43. > :23:45.-- another metaphor I will use. The Westminster proposals themselves are
:23:46. > :23:54.a dead duck. This is because of Conservative revels -- rebels. In no
:23:55. > :23:56.certain terms will they vote for boundary changes, and these numbers
:23:57. > :24:02.won't affect them radically. They are losing seven tree three MEPs
:24:03. > :24:07.across the whole change. Some would like to get back into the witness
:24:08. > :24:11.the parliament. The massive House of Lords needs radical reform and
:24:12. > :24:14.rejection in size and scale. You opposed House of Lords reform in the
:24:15. > :24:21.last parliament. Yellow macro I opposed the form on the table, and
:24:22. > :24:25.I... Ian Paisley, you of course say that there are are these MPs who
:24:26. > :24:30.will not back the changes. We don't expect the Labour Party to back them
:24:31. > :24:33.because of course there would be an in-built majority, seven Herman
:24:34. > :24:37.saying there, of 80 to 90 for the Tories will the pitiable future. You
:24:38. > :24:41.could not think that is a good idea for democracy? The issue is not
:24:42. > :24:45.about democracies and drawing boundaries in a order to a beats
:24:46. > :24:50.Conservatives to retire their MEPs to gain cushy numbers in west Mr. It
:24:51. > :24:55.is not about shooting parties. It is in sharing... Did not dangerous for
:24:56. > :25:00.democracy? Of course it is, which is why Boundary Commission is dependent
:25:01. > :25:04.of government -- independent. These are drawn up for a very good reason,
:25:05. > :25:06.drawn up by an independent body that actually has the meet the criteria
:25:07. > :25:10.that was put in front of them, and they have done that do the best of
:25:11. > :25:16.their abilities, and I am not sure they were given a good starting
:25:17. > :25:19.point. People want Brexit properly reviewed by the west with the
:25:20. > :25:26.parliament and that is where all the par is going to be. -- power.
:25:27. > :25:30.Actually, when the powers come back to the UK many of them will return
:25:31. > :25:34.to the assembly, and your party has agreed, along with the rest of us
:25:35. > :25:39.that the assembly should be downsized. Many powers are devolved.
:25:40. > :25:45.Ian Paisley, I would like to ask you whether and certainty over Brexit
:25:46. > :25:50.imperilling funding for York Street Interchange sized projects. I have
:25:51. > :25:55.listened patiently to the media since the 23rd and 24th of June, the
:25:56. > :26:00.radical reform of our community. We are getting freedom back as a
:26:01. > :26:05.kingdom. I have listened to all the bad news. Is Brexit causing
:26:06. > :26:09.uncertainty? All of the bad news that emerges from the 23rd of June
:26:10. > :26:18.until today's decision now about the Interchange in Belfast... Is this a
:26:19. > :26:25.hazard? Della macro or bad news is apparently the fold Brexit. That is
:26:26. > :26:30.totally wrong. If it is good news, we don't hear it because it isn't
:26:31. > :26:34.the folder Brexit because we haven't left. Glad of the matter is that
:26:35. > :26:44.people in all parties on the remain and leave side, ... How dismissive
:26:45. > :26:49.of 56% of people of Northern Ireland come to say they are moaners because
:26:50. > :26:53.they have concerns. What arrogance. They are moaning about this. They
:26:54. > :27:00.are not moaning about this. Do they have genuine concerns? I've got a
:27:01. > :27:04.legitimate concerns. No, apparently we aren't allowed to raise issues
:27:05. > :27:11.will stop it is how it has been put forward. Let's be very clear. I
:27:12. > :27:14.don't believe that Chris hazard's decision today has anything to do
:27:15. > :27:21.with Brexit. Yellow macro thank you. I still object strongly to Ian's
:27:22. > :27:28.suggestion that anyone asking questions about the future are
:27:29. > :27:32.moaners. He used this as an insult to the people. No, that is not an
:27:33. > :27:38.insult. Moaning about it is the insult. Tiburon going on telling
:27:39. > :27:42.people... People who went for remain are as entitled to express their
:27:43. > :27:48.opinions and to continue to do so vociferously as anyone else. At what
:27:49. > :27:53.point do you have do except that there was a vote and that vote was
:27:54. > :27:57.lost? At what point in democracy do we decide that having an alternative
:27:58. > :28:03.opinion do the majority view no longer count? This is no longer a
:28:04. > :28:07.democracy if so. A minority opinion still counts, and in the days of
:28:08. > :28:13.Northern Ireland majority opinion counts. 56%. When I raise issues
:28:14. > :28:23.around the issue of exit, Ian... Ian, manners. When I raise issues
:28:24. > :28:26.about the exit of the European Union, I am doing it with a view
:28:27. > :28:31.that we are better prepared for that, not about moaning about the
:28:32. > :28:34.outcome but the concern for our economy and our well-being, and our
:28:35. > :28:42.starters in Northern Ireland and our ability to change them and that is
:28:43. > :28:47.my job. Huge moaned since 2013. And your party never moaned about
:28:48. > :28:57.anything will stop do not judge -- do we not judge the democracy by the
:28:58. > :29:02.way it listens to the minority? I have listened to the majority here.
:29:03. > :29:08.But there is an issue of Northern Ireland... Theirs is a position that
:29:09. > :29:14.is held when ever bad news comes out it is the folder Brexit. I have it
:29:15. > :29:18.wasn't. Every time it is good news, well, this because when we haven't
:29:19. > :29:22.left yet. I have said that is not the case. Yellow macro people out
:29:23. > :29:28.there are sick of not negotiating the deals. You have nothing to do
:29:29. > :29:32.with negotiation of the deals. We need to push the issue that are
:29:33. > :29:37.important to Northern Ireland. You may well have done, but James broken
:29:38. > :29:41.Shire will not be at the Cabinet when they are discussing these
:29:42. > :29:44.issues he will not be sitting on a Cabinet committee and frankly you
:29:45. > :29:48.will not have a site at the table either Ian. It is entirely
:29:49. > :29:53.appropriate for us to raise concerns, and if Ian dismisses those
:29:54. > :29:56.concerns, and says that just moaning, then how can any person in
:29:57. > :29:58.Northern Ireland have confidence in him to go and talk to David Davis
:29:59. > :30:14.and broker these concerns? Why would the DUP not take a seat at
:30:15. > :30:26.the table in Dublin to discuss the issues for the whole of Ireland? It
:30:27. > :30:30.is not about the whole of Ireland. That conversation will happen within
:30:31. > :30:35.the formal apparatchiks, agreed by all of the parties and signed up to
:30:36. > :30:40.buy all of the parties. What would you have to fear from a competition
:30:41. > :30:46.like that? That is just a circular argument. This is about putting the
:30:47. > :30:52.best pressure in the best places, that will be done at Westminster. It
:30:53. > :30:56.cannot be done over dinner. Busted mag that is nonsense. There is a
:30:57. > :31:00.real opportunity for us to have two voices at the table, one on the
:31:01. > :31:06.inside and one speaking for us formally in the British Government.
:31:07. > :31:12.Who would choose one voice over two when things are so crucial? I'm
:31:13. > :31:14.sorry, thank you both for joining us on the programme tonight.
:31:15. > :31:16.And joining me now with their thoughts on redrawing the boundaries
:31:17. > :31:19.- and on Brexit, road-building and resolving those legacy issues -
:31:20. > :31:20.are Newton Emerson and Deirdre Heenan.
:31:21. > :31:32.Let's talk about redrawing the electoral boundaries first of all.
:31:33. > :31:43.What do you make of the party conference on Saturday?
:31:44. > :31:50.People have been hugely disappointed. There are many issues
:31:51. > :31:54.that people want the opposition to hold the Executive to account for.
:31:55. > :31:58.It has to be much more than a gesture. We want to see their
:31:59. > :32:01.policies and alternatives. They couldn't make a difference when they
:32:02. > :32:07.were in Government, but they have to show they are relevant, can make a
:32:08. > :32:14.difference as a coherent opposition. It will be the first time and SDLP
:32:15. > :32:18.leader has addressed them? There has been lots of criticism that the
:32:19. > :32:22.parties are not working as closely as people thought. Do you think this
:32:23. > :32:29.will be a tangible sign of corporation between the two parties?
:32:30. > :32:35.It is an important cosmetic exercise, but can only be a cosmetic
:32:36. > :32:37.exercise. I think it explains some of the aggressive language that
:32:38. > :32:43.Colum Eastwood has used over the last few weeks I'm a holy water and
:32:44. > :32:48.papist conspiracy is about going down to Dublin and pretending the
:32:49. > :32:53.door of number ten can be kicked in. I think he is trying to balance
:32:54. > :32:57.those two off each other, which is disappointing. Would you make of the
:32:58. > :33:07.exchanges between Ian Paisley and now you'll meet longer? -- Naomi
:33:08. > :33:10.Long. They're interested in their own electoral fortune, their own
:33:11. > :33:15.parties. We should not be surprised by that. None of them asked whether
:33:16. > :33:20.it make for good governance or whether it is better for the
:33:21. > :33:24.country, whether we help will have a better price. Our local system is
:33:25. > :33:29.acting much more nonsensical if you look at the boundaries drawn there.
:33:30. > :33:34.These are quite sensible, given the constraints that the Boundary
:33:35. > :33:39.Commission had. Do you agree? Yes, when you look at the map they are
:33:40. > :33:44.rational and fair. You cannot dispute the principle of equal size
:33:45. > :33:48.constituencies and you cannot debate basing them on the electoral
:33:49. > :33:55.register. Anita Askey about Martin McGuinness and his comments on
:33:56. > :33:59.Brexit, particularly the comments about pitting the York Street
:34:00. > :34:05.interchange on hold. It was clear from that interview this is not a
:34:06. > :34:11.priority. He said that. He said yes, it is important, but not a priority.
:34:12. > :34:18.It is smoke and mirrors. There is a deal going on. It was a key part of
:34:19. > :34:22.the background deal. They have agreed to agree on that and everyone
:34:23. > :34:27.else can run departments accordingly or otherwise. They have not made it
:34:28. > :34:29.a priority and that is the issue. There is a bit of smoke and mirrors
:34:30. > :34:30.going on there. That's it from The View
:34:31. > :34:32.for this week. Join me for live coverage
:34:33. > :34:34.of Mike Nesbitt's speech to the Ulster Unionist conference
:34:35. > :34:37.on Saturday from noon on BBC Two. And as we sign off, have
:34:38. > :34:39.you ever asked yourself who our political parties would be
:34:40. > :34:42.if they were characters in one of the most successful
:34:43. > :34:45.TV shows of all time? Here's what Lad Flag made of
:34:46. > :34:47.that challenge.