:00:28. > :00:29.A bigger scandal than De Lorean - the Renewable Heat Incentive scheme
:00:30. > :00:31.could cost hundreds of millions in public money.
:00:32. > :00:34.The Economy Minister says he's working on ways to reduce that bill.
:00:35. > :00:37.So how will Simon Hamilton tackle this red hot political issue?
:00:38. > :00:47.And how does he respond to calls for his leader to resign?
:00:48. > :00:51.I beg to introduce the abortion debate own foetal Albert Adomah --
:00:52. > :00:53.abnormality bill. As David Ford launches his
:00:54. > :00:55.Private Member's bill, an anti-abortion campaigner tells
:00:56. > :00:57.the former Justice Minister The border dispute dating back
:00:58. > :01:02.to partition that could be putting lives and livelihoods in jeopardy
:01:03. > :01:13.on Lough Foyle. If this was happening anywhere else
:01:14. > :01:17.in the course of Ireland, government officialdom would be done like a
:01:18. > :01:19.tonne of bricks, this is a free for all.
:01:20. > :01:20.And a free-for-all, too, in Commentators' Corner
:01:21. > :01:25.with Fionnuala O Connor and Alex Kane.
:01:26. > :01:28."Cash for ash" - that's just one of the nicknames for the Stormont
:01:29. > :01:30.scheme that's set to cost taxpayers here ?400 million.
:01:31. > :01:33.The RHI pays out more in subsidies than it costs to participate in,
:01:34. > :01:39.which means users earn more money by burning more fuel.
:01:40. > :01:42.The First Minister, Arlene Foster, who was the Enterprise Minister
:01:43. > :01:47.at the time, says she did not ignore warnings brought forward
:01:48. > :01:50.by a whistleblower in 2013 and passed them on to her officials.
:01:51. > :01:52.Earlier today, that whistleblower claimed just five minutes
:01:53. > :01:54.of research was needed to find serious flaws in the system.
:01:55. > :02:01.The Economy Minister, Simon Hamilton, is with me now.
:02:02. > :02:07.Welcome, thank you for joining us. Have you been speaking to the first
:02:08. > :02:13.Minister during her trip to China this week? Yes, I have been in
:02:14. > :02:18.contact with her before she went and during a trip to China. I will be
:02:19. > :02:23.speaking tour next week as well. Have you been talking to her about
:02:24. > :02:27.this controversy? I have been in contact with her about this. She
:02:28. > :02:34.sees the importance of getting to grips with this issue, it is very
:02:35. > :02:38.serious. I will not sit here for a second and say anything other than
:02:39. > :02:44.this is a shocking situation and one which needs to be dealt with. We
:02:45. > :02:48.have -- we are both aware of the need to get to get reverse and bring
:02:49. > :02:53.forward a plan which will mitigate the costs and significantly reduce
:02:54. > :02:59.the cost for the taxpayer. She is worried enough to talk to you during
:03:00. > :03:03.an important trip with China? I keep in regular contact with Arlene
:03:04. > :03:07.Foster at any week in the year so it is not unusual for me to be in
:03:08. > :03:12.contact with Earth. This is an issue she takes very seriously. She is
:03:13. > :03:17.showing leadership on this issue which is what you would expect. It
:03:18. > :03:23.is a monumental clock up and you seem to be left to sort it out, you
:03:24. > :03:28.either firefighter tonight? I was wanted to be a firefighter when I
:03:29. > :03:33.was young. This is a serious issue. I am in the portfolio to deal with
:03:34. > :03:42.this issue and that is what we're doing. We working intensely. This is
:03:43. > :03:46.the number-1 priority my department. We are very seized as I said about
:03:47. > :03:51.the importance of reducing the cost to the Northern Ireland taxpayer.
:03:52. > :03:55.We're working on a plan and developing that plan, we are taking
:03:56. > :04:02.legal advice on the planet and I hope to bring forward the details of
:04:03. > :04:05.its very early in the New Year. I would like to talk in more detail
:04:06. > :04:09.about that in a moment but you hear about the reputation of the first
:04:10. > :04:13.Minister, why do you think she should keep her job because others
:04:14. > :04:17.are not least Mike Nesbitt who is the main opposition leader in
:04:18. > :04:24.Stormont says it is time prior to consider our position? It is hardly
:04:25. > :04:26.surprising that Mike would call for her resignation because she
:04:27. > :04:32.annihilated him in the election earlier in the year. Some of the
:04:33. > :04:37.things which have been said in the past 40 hours have been entirely
:04:38. > :04:42.party political. Mike Nesbitt and his party and the Alliance Party all
:04:43. > :04:46.voted to keep the scheme in place back in February when he had the
:04:47. > :04:51.opportunity to close at... They were not in full possession of the facts,
:04:52. > :04:55.that is the point. These are parties who said they were not in full
:04:56. > :04:58.possession of the facts but that did not look that might prevent their
:04:59. > :05:03.members at every stage of the progression of this scheme voting in
:05:04. > :05:10.favour of it and voting to keep the scheme in place. They voted in
:05:11. > :05:13.February to keep this scheme going, scheme and some of them have
:05:14. > :05:17.described is squandering public money. They were prepared to
:05:18. > :05:22.squander this money. Their point is that they did not know the details
:05:23. > :05:26.which have now become public. Let us talk about Arlene Foster's
:05:27. > :05:32.performance on this issue, she was the minister with oversight of the
:05:33. > :05:36.scheme. She knew in 2013 when she was contacted by the whistle-blower
:05:37. > :05:40.that there were potential problems with the scheme. She says she passed
:05:41. > :05:47.those concerns onto her civil servants and then what happened? She
:05:48. > :05:55.did. She received a letter from the whistle-blower who we want to thank
:05:56. > :05:58.for her contribution. I want to apologise to her that her complaint
:05:59. > :06:03.was not taken seriously by governments. It was taken seriously
:06:04. > :06:07.by Arlene Foster who passed the information onto tour officials
:06:08. > :06:12.which is the right thing. She did not keep a watchful eye after that
:06:13. > :06:18.point, that is the charge. The communication she received was not
:06:19. > :06:26.specific about the alleged abuse. I can say that... Have you seen the
:06:27. > :06:31.letter? I have seen it. Will you put the letter in the public domain? You
:06:32. > :06:36.can take my word for it that it is not specific about the abuse... With
:06:37. > :06:40.the greatest respect, I'm not prepared to take the words of anyone
:06:41. > :06:46.because the way to deal with it is to go for a full chance. Let us be
:06:47. > :06:53.the judge, put the letter in the public domain. I do not disagree
:06:54. > :06:56.with the premise of what you said... I do not disagree that we have to
:06:57. > :07:05.get the full facts of the situation clear. I am taking your word for it
:07:06. > :07:09.at the moment. That is the process this is going through and you know
:07:10. > :07:14.the Public Accounts Committee are doing our fact-finding
:07:15. > :07:19.investigation. But the complaint was appropriately passed on by Arlene
:07:20. > :07:22.Foster to her officials and they did not take it seriously. There are no
:07:23. > :07:27.permanent Secretary of the Department for the economy in his
:07:28. > :07:36.evidence said that Arlene Foster acted appropriately. She is his
:07:37. > :07:40.boss. She is not his boss. He is an impartial civil servants. He is
:07:41. > :07:43.giving evidence to the Public Accounts Committee on the record. He
:07:44. > :07:49.said she acted entirely appropriately. She acted
:07:50. > :07:53.appropriately by passing on information to our senior civil
:07:54. > :07:57.servants. The question is, people will wonder if she did the right
:07:58. > :08:00.thing by her failure to follow up and keep a close eye on what
:08:01. > :08:08.happened next because clearly she did not? Had officials did not come
:08:09. > :08:11.back to her with any complaint. She did not ask. There was no detail in
:08:12. > :08:19.the complaint for her to follow up on. In his evidence on the record,
:08:20. > :08:23.as I said, he said she acted entirely appropriately. Having had
:08:24. > :08:27.the issue flagged up, we did not have made sense for her to keep in
:08:28. > :08:32.contact with the senior civil servants there she met daily to ask
:08:33. > :08:35.about the woman who came in to speak to me about her concerns on the
:08:36. > :08:43.heating scheme? That seems blindingly obvious. The idea that
:08:44. > :08:47.Arlene Foster is not... I have heard it suggested she is not looking at
:08:48. > :08:55.this thing. You have interviewed her on countless occasions and you and
:08:56. > :08:58.her political opponents, even her opponents, could not say for the
:08:59. > :09:05.second is that she's not capable. I have known her for 20 years. She is
:09:06. > :09:08.an incredibly capable person and has done her job appropriately on this
:09:09. > :09:14.case. Some people with say she has fallen asleep at the wheel. Of
:09:15. > :09:20.course some people would say that. If she did not drop the ball then
:09:21. > :09:23.she needs to put all of the relevant correspondence into the public
:09:24. > :09:29.domain so politicians and the public can judge for ourselves? You know
:09:30. > :09:33.the Public Accounts Committee is investigating this, as they should.
:09:34. > :09:40.All the information will be in the public domain in due course. It
:09:41. > :09:45.would be a great help to you, if there was nothing to hide, put the
:09:46. > :09:51.information in the public domain and this goes away. You are now being
:09:52. > :09:57.silly. You know that is an investigation going on with the
:09:58. > :10:10.public accounts Committee. Will she appeared before the committee? Will
:10:11. > :10:15.she? I am sure when she comes back she will address this issue. She has
:10:16. > :10:22.said she is accountable to the Assembly. She will be forthcoming.
:10:23. > :10:27.She has nothing to hide. Let me count the accusation she was not
:10:28. > :10:31.paying attention... In your view, should she appear before the Public
:10:32. > :10:36.Accounts Committee? If she phoned you from China and asked what should
:10:37. > :10:40.she do, what would you say? She is an struggle and accountable to the
:10:41. > :10:46.Assembly. I am confident she will come forward in due course because
:10:47. > :10:53.she has nothing to hide. If I can go back down is a question you asked
:10:54. > :10:58.three questions ago about charges, the policy direction was set by
:10:59. > :11:02.Arlene and it was a good direction. The implementation and design by
:11:03. > :11:08.so-called policy experts in the department was wrong. They relied on
:11:09. > :11:18.independent external consultants. You are telling me she did nothing
:11:19. > :11:22.wrong, the people running the scheme got it wrong? Is that what you're
:11:23. > :11:28.telling me? It is clear to me they got the design of the scheme wrong.
:11:29. > :11:31.The consultants they used a run that records at the Public Accounts
:11:32. > :11:38.Committee saying they got it wrong and apologise for that. At no stage,
:11:39. > :11:41.and something which has been confirmed by senior officials, no
:11:42. > :11:48.advice or recommendation was given to Arlene Foster to bring forward...
:11:49. > :11:56.She did not ask how that was going. No recommendation was brought about
:11:57. > :12:02.cost-control questions. People are asking she should resign, absolutely
:12:03. > :12:08.she should not resign... She was not in effective ministerial control.
:12:09. > :12:13.Who was running the department? There was no crystallisation of the
:12:14. > :12:20.problem during her time in office. At the early stages of the scheme,
:12:21. > :12:27.there was a ?15 million underspend. That is what we're trying to get
:12:28. > :12:31.through... That is my now. You talk about transparency, perhaps I can
:12:32. > :12:37.help you to deliver that. I will ask about your handling of the issues in
:12:38. > :12:43.she became minister in June. PwC was brought in to conduct a review. The
:12:44. > :12:48.site indexed -- investigations were conducted as part of the report,
:12:49. > :12:53.we're still waiting for the report to be published. Why is that? This
:12:54. > :12:59.is a very serious issue and we're giving it the serious attention it
:13:00. > :13:05.requires. Not long after coming in post I brought in PwC to carry out
:13:06. > :13:09.that independent investigation of site inspections. We are talking
:13:10. > :13:13.about 300 boilers and they have found evidence to show there has
:13:14. > :13:18.been some abuse of the scheme. We are dealing with that abuse. A very
:13:19. > :13:23.small number of fraud cases but certainly abuse of the spirit of the
:13:24. > :13:28.scheme. That has been abuse of the spirit of this scheme and some
:13:29. > :13:33.abuse. Proving fraud take some time. You will never recover all this
:13:34. > :13:38.money, ?400 million by just identifying cases of fraud? You're
:13:39. > :13:42.absolutely right but clearly we have identified cases of fraud and we
:13:43. > :13:48.need to bear down on that and have strong enforcement of that. A lot of
:13:49. > :13:53.people got involved in the scheme legitimately without any intent to
:13:54. > :13:57.abuse the system but be getting a return well over and above what was
:13:58. > :14:01.anticipated and that is what we're looking at. You need to get that
:14:02. > :14:06.report into the public domain as quickly as possible if you're going
:14:07. > :14:10.to reassure members of the public, you accept that? The first report as
:14:11. > :14:14.with the Public Accounts Committee. They will make that public in due
:14:15. > :14:19.course and that is the right and proper place for it. You are wheel
:14:20. > :14:25.of the conventions and they will publish it in due course. -- you are
:14:26. > :14:31.away. Why have you taken no steps at this stage to reveal the names of
:14:32. > :14:38.the beneficiaries of the scheme? This is an issue I have been asked
:14:39. > :14:41.about. You know that people who signed up to the scheme did not
:14:42. > :14:47.agree to have their names put forward. Colum Eastwood says we need
:14:48. > :14:50.to know who benefited. There are hundreds and thousands of people who
:14:51. > :14:58.benefited in terms of having support to the scheme but the data
:14:59. > :15:03.protection act prevents, even if I wanted to, prevents me putting the
:15:04. > :15:08.names out there... Farmers to receive single farm payments,
:15:09. > :15:13.lawyers who do legal aid work, these details are published every year so
:15:14. > :15:18.this does not stand up. It does. I could go out and do it and I could
:15:19. > :15:23.be prosecuted for doing that myself because these people have not
:15:24. > :15:28.consented. If they have nothing to hide. People have not consented.
:15:29. > :15:33.They have not contain -- consented to do this and are protected by the
:15:34. > :15:37.data protection act. You can tell people if they want to remain
:15:38. > :15:41.recipients of this benefit that their details will be published so
:15:42. > :15:43.they have a choice if they want to remain anonymous, they take
:15:44. > :15:50.themselves out of the scheme, that is the way of doing it? I think this
:15:51. > :15:55.is a distraction. The issue at hand is getting to grips with the problem
:15:56. > :16:00.we have which is the overspend, the ?400 million you mentioned earlier.
:16:01. > :16:06.That is what I and Arlene are focusing on. That is concerned. He
:16:07. > :16:09.is a concern, your reluctance to put that information in the public
:16:10. > :16:12.domain could be because there are names on that list which could be
:16:13. > :16:18.embarrassing for your party, is that the case? I do not know the names on
:16:19. > :16:25.that list. Your name could be on the list. My lane -- my name is not on
:16:26. > :16:29.the list. That is not the case. The names on the list, the people who
:16:30. > :16:33.received it have not consented to the names going forward so are
:16:34. > :16:40.protected by the data protection act and so we cannot do that. So you are
:16:41. > :16:44.starved? You talk about transparency and you're going to fix this, tell
:16:45. > :16:48.me in 30 seconds what you would do to fix this? You're asking for the
:16:49. > :16:52.names but what we're doing is investigating sites and that is
:16:53. > :16:57.something I initiated coming into this job. I initiated the PwC
:16:58. > :17:03.investigation which has investigated 300 of installations. It is a start,
:17:04. > :17:07.a small start but it is a start of a process which we are bringing
:17:08. > :17:17.forward and a plan B are working on. That is the first phase and more
:17:18. > :17:19.work will be done. Our plan will reduce... You cannot guillotine this
:17:20. > :17:23.scheme at the moment because you're concerned about fraud and you are
:17:24. > :17:27.concerned about an overspend and a cost to the public purse of ?400
:17:28. > :17:31.million, you do not have the power to stop the system where you
:17:32. > :17:39.investigate? Nobody else has been allowed on the scheme. It will not
:17:40. > :17:43.stop the ?400 million overspend. It will not and that is deeply
:17:44. > :17:49.regrettable. But my number one priority is to reduced the cost to
:17:50. > :17:55.Northern Ireland taxpayers. We are working on a plan and taking legal
:17:56. > :18:00.advice. We want a plan that works and provides a significant reduction
:18:01. > :18:04.in the cost to the Northern Ireland public purse. We will continue to
:18:05. > :18:08.keep a close eye on how you do that. And we will hear from the first
:18:09. > :18:13.Minister no doubt in due course. For now thank you very much.
:18:14. > :18:16.Government officials from north and south have been meeting this
:18:17. > :18:19.week to try and break the stalemate over who owns Lough Foyle.
:18:20. > :18:21.The Irish government has rejected claims by London that
:18:22. > :18:25.Meanwhile, oyster fishermen have been cashing in on the political
:18:26. > :18:27.confusion, placing thousands of metal oyster trestles
:18:28. > :18:30.That's raised concerns for the safety of boat users -
:18:31. > :18:31.as our political correspondent, Enda McClafferty,
:18:32. > :18:38.Londonderry harbour National Health Serviceed 16 U-boats. It once
:18:39. > :18:42.provided the backdrop for a memorable surrender when the German
:18:43. > :18:47.U-boat fleet sailed up Loch Foyle at the end of the war in 1945. Today,
:18:48. > :18:53.Loch Foyle is at the is centre of another battle. And there is no sign
:18:54. > :18:59.that either side is prepared to surrender just yet. As James and
:19:00. > :19:04.Charlie made clear last month, with claim and counter claim. But while
:19:05. > :19:08.the Government's duck and dive over who exactly owns Loch Foyle there is
:19:09. > :19:15.a big problem lurking beneath the surface. And this is it. Oyster
:19:16. > :19:18.farms have been popping up along the coast, because of the political
:19:19. > :19:23.deadlock they don't need permission or a licence, all they need are
:19:24. > :19:28.plenty of metal trespassles. And this is what they look like up
:19:29. > :19:33.close, these are the trespassles where the oysters hang in bags until
:19:34. > :19:38.they are ready to be harvested. There are 30,000 of these now dotted
:19:39. > :19:44.all along the Loch Foyle cost. The agency tell us they are posing a big
:19:45. > :19:48.risk to boat users but they are powerless to do anything about them
:19:49. > :19:52.because of the political stalemate. It is outrageous this should be
:19:53. > :19:55.allowed to happen, if this was happening anywhere else around the
:19:56. > :20:00.coast of Ireland Government officials Tom would be down on this
:20:01. > :20:05.like a tonne of brick, there are thousands of them, unregulated,
:20:06. > :20:12.unlicensed, this is free-for-all. A conDyke. But Enda Craig is is more
:20:13. > :20:16.concerned about the hidden danger they pose for boat users At low tide
:20:17. > :20:19.they are visible, you can see all they are made of, iron and steel,
:20:20. > :20:24.adds the tide comes in they are covered over, if you were a stranger
:20:25. > :20:30.here or if you weren't too aware of where they were, you could become
:20:31. > :20:35.sitting six inches below the surface of the water, you have steel waiting
:20:36. > :20:42.on your boat coming up. You don't enjoyed to be a genius what would
:20:43. > :20:49.happen. There is a massive safety implication here. This coal ship did
:20:50. > :20:53.sing 35 years ago, attacked by the IRA, Margaret Thatcher restated the
:20:54. > :20:56.UK's claim on Loch Foyle and the ship's owners looked for
:20:57. > :21:02.compensation n the end both Governments paid out. Now London and
:21:03. > :21:10.Dublin are locked in a bigger Brexit debate about where the border lies.
:21:11. > :21:14.If James Brokenshire is right I have stepped from the Irish Republic and
:21:15. > :21:18.am standing in the UK. But how does all this work in practise? Who
:21:19. > :21:26.polices that patch, and who polices this patch? Christopher Murdoch
:21:27. > :21:31.found that out when the local Garda Sergeant discovered his stolen boat.
:21:32. > :21:37.It was about 10 feet from the path, and rocking in the waves on the
:21:38. > :21:43.rocks, and I asked them to help me lift it off, into the water, he
:21:44. > :21:49.refused, because it was outside his jurisdiction. He said if I needed
:21:50. > :21:53.help, from police, to call the PSNI from across the other side. And they
:21:54. > :22:00.would then deal with it. What did you feel about that? I was
:22:01. > :22:03.very surprised and a bit back on my heel, wondering why he couldn't at
:22:04. > :22:08.least put one foot on a rock and give me a lift wit. But no, he won't
:22:09. > :22:12.do it. That would suggest the UK holds the
:22:13. > :22:16.upper hand, but why does it still feel the need to claim all of Loch
:22:17. > :22:23.Foyle? Who better to ask than this man, he is a law lecturer, historian
:22:24. > :22:26.and regular sailor on the Loch. The difficulty for the Secretary of
:22:27. > :22:29.State is the Na investigation of the Foyle is not in the centre, in order
:22:30. > :22:33.to navigate it you have to go through the Irish side. If you are
:22:34. > :22:38.trying to access the port of Londonderry you have to go through
:22:39. > :22:46.the Irish side of the channel. To the point where you are hogging the
:22:47. > :22:51.peninsula. Navigating a way around Brexit was the focus at this
:22:52. > :22:55.conference in Donegal this week and fishing rights were on the agenda,
:22:56. > :23:00.this Senator says the Government needs to put their differences aside
:23:01. > :23:05.and find way to protect Loch Foyle. The oyster fisherman I know that I
:23:06. > :23:12.have dealt with are people you know, that understand the need to protect
:23:13. > :23:16.and sustain what is there, clearly, unfortunately there are some who are
:23:17. > :23:20.taking advantage of this opportunity, in a reckless way but
:23:21. > :23:24.what we need to do, is both Governments need to understand their
:23:25. > :23:29.responsibility, they can give the agency the strength they require,
:23:30. > :23:32.and that then needs to be done in partnership with the responsible and
:23:33. > :23:36.sensible oyster fishermen that he are there.
:23:37. > :23:41.This week, Government officials from north and south met to try and
:23:42. > :23:45.smooth the waters. But there is no sign they are any closer to
:23:46. > :23:49.surrendering their claims on the disputed Loch. It is time to stop
:23:50. > :23:56.hoodwinking the people and man up to the situation and get a resolution.
:23:57. > :24:01.Hiding it and pretending it doesn't exist and pretending the elephant is
:24:02. > :24:05.Enda McClafferty reporting from Lough Foyle.
:24:06. > :24:08.Now, as MLAs wait to see proposals from the working group looking
:24:09. > :24:10.into abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality,
:24:11. > :24:14.the former Justice Minister, David Ford, has brought forward
:24:15. > :24:18.a Private Member's Bill which seeks to legalise
:24:19. > :24:22.His last attempt was blocked - so what chance has this
:24:23. > :24:28.I'm joined by David Ford and Marion Woods from Life NI.
:24:29. > :24:33.David Ford, when you with here three months ago, you said there was a
:24:34. > :24:36.potential for majority the assembly voting in support of your bill, you
:24:37. > :24:41.think that is still the case? I think that is still the case. It
:24:42. > :24:45.depends on the behaviour of two arties which whip their members
:24:46. > :24:48.against the similar proposal before the election, the DUP and SDLP and
:24:49. > :24:55.how they react, whether they allow a free vote. Have you any indication
:24:56. > :24:58.how that is likely to go? Any indication the new intake of MLAs
:24:59. > :25:02.might be more sympathetic to what you are trying to do? They certainly
:25:03. > :25:06.think from some conversations there are some who have clearly replaced
:25:07. > :25:11.people in a way that is more likely to support the proposal, but we will
:25:12. > :25:15.have to see specifically about those two parties we have named. You don't
:25:16. > :25:19.like the term fatal foetal abnormality. Let us go with the more
:25:20. > :25:23.detailed description of allowing a woman to choose abortion in cases
:25:24. > :25:28.where two doctors certify there is no chance of viable life. Have you
:25:29. > :25:33.kept an eye on where they are on this? Do you think David Ford's
:25:34. > :25:38.Private Members Bill could succeed? We hope it doesn't. I think the DUP
:25:39. > :25:42.made it clear in their mandate, that they were going to continue to up
:25:43. > :25:46.hold the law, as it currently stands and they wouldn't see any legal
:25:47. > :25:52.change. We are very concerned about the title of the bill because it is
:25:53. > :25:57.a very harsh term, it is upsetting, many parents whose babies have maybe
:25:58. > :26:01.passed away shortly after birth, or whose babies are living with
:26:02. > :26:06.conditions that would be deemed to be under this category, we prefer
:26:07. > :26:10.the term life limiting condition because we think that term is more
:26:11. > :26:16.indicative of what these conditions are, they are life limiting. No
:26:17. > :26:21.doctor and Jim Dornan was on the show last year, 2015 and he said
:26:22. > :26:24.that no doctor can say when the life of a baby will end, and that is very
:26:25. > :26:29.important, and what we would be saying is we need to support women
:26:30. > :26:32.to help them to continue with their pregnancy, to bring their child as
:26:33. > :26:36.far as possible, in the pregnancy, and then give every affordable care
:26:37. > :26:39.after. So what do you say to David Ford who takes a different view? How
:26:40. > :26:44.would you seek to persuade him he has got it wrong. You can speak
:26:45. > :26:49.directly to him. I think our concern is why are you not listening to you
:26:50. > :26:55.know, there was a consultation several years ago, it was very clear
:26:56. > :26:59.that the proposals were rejected. In February of this year, there was
:27:00. > :27:03.another attempt to bring in a law changes, tacking it on to the
:27:04. > :27:09.justice bill, as an amendment and yet it seems you are intent on
:27:10. > :27:15.forcing this issue through. It would concern us you are doing it as
:27:16. > :27:19.opposed to focussing on perinatal care in the NHS and supporting a
:27:20. > :27:23.charity like our own, we believe that both lives matter. We are
:27:24. > :27:27.concerned about the woman and the child at the centre of this. One of
:27:28. > :27:31.the key things a that section two makes it clear, that a woman must be
:27:32. > :27:35.supported medically whatever decision she takes, so given that
:27:36. > :27:40.this is a bill dealing with the criminal law, I put in that specific
:27:41. > :27:43.issue round medical care, but I take a different view from you, I think
:27:44. > :27:49.there are circumstances where there is no prospect of a viable life and
:27:50. > :27:54.no treatment could be offered, if it went to full term, that is in a
:27:55. > :27:58.entirely different situation from other issues relating to abortion,
:27:59. > :28:04.that is following on from the work the Department of Justice did. The
:28:05. > :28:08.organisations that opposed to the, showed there was significant support
:28:09. > :28:14.for making the change and public opinion polls have showed there is
:28:15. > :28:19.support for that narrow area. They have told us that termination should
:28:20. > :28:24.never be solely for the condition that the child may have, and
:28:25. > :28:29.whenever you make law, and the problem we have as well is that the
:28:30. > :28:37.word likely in this law is very broad. Nobody can say... Likely is
:28:38. > :28:41.the civil law definition of balance of problem builts, that is explained
:28:42. > :28:46.so it is not ambiguous. The difficulty is surely that you take a
:28:47. > :28:49.view and you are entitled to take your view, there will be people who
:28:50. > :28:54.are watching who will agree, there are other people and David Ford is
:28:55. > :28:57.clearly among them, who take a contrary position, which is that
:28:58. > :29:01.people who find themselves in this very difficult condition, and David
:29:02. > :29:06.Ford is the first don seed that is the case, should be allowed the
:29:07. > :29:11.choice do things differently. We agree these are very traumatic
:29:12. > :29:15.situations. Everybody agrees on that We stand in solidarity with women
:29:16. > :29:18.and families who find themselves hearing the news their baby has a
:29:19. > :29:23.condition which may be terminal, but what we are saying this is a human
:29:24. > :29:28.life, we can't dispute this. Science shows us this is a human life. So
:29:29. > :29:31.what we are saying this life has to be allowed to continue, as far as
:29:32. > :29:37.possible, through its own development. That baby may pass away
:29:38. > :29:41.before birth, that baby may live for several days months hours and the
:29:42. > :29:45.very important thing is that if we can provide care and support women
:29:46. > :29:50.and families through that, most women and most families would choose
:29:51. > :29:55.to continue with the pregnancy. I am not telling anybody who wants to
:29:56. > :30:00.continue, I am saying for women who cannot face that, who find it too
:30:01. > :30:05.traumatic, they should be given the option... It is early days as far as
:30:06. > :30:08.the proes dress of the bill is concerned but you are confident you
:30:09. > :30:12.can persuade enough people to support that. I believe there is the
:30:13. > :30:15.potential for it but we will have to see how people decide when we come
:30:16. > :30:20.to the second stage of the bill. All right. There is lots more to discuss
:30:21. > :30:21.on this. Thank you both for coming in to join us.
:30:22. > :30:24.And let's head back to Commentors' Corner for the final
:30:25. > :30:29.time in this 2016 run - Fionnuala O Connor and Alex Kane.
:30:30. > :30:37.Oeuvringening both. Lots to discuss, let us start with Simon Hamilton,
:30:38. > :30:42.what did you make of his defence of Arlene Foster. Arlene could want no
:30:43. > :30:48.more, but he couldn't do anything more than he did do, and I was
:30:49. > :30:51.struck by him, the note, the tone throughout, especially at the
:30:52. > :30:55.beginning, this is very serious, the first issue on my plate, the main
:30:56. > :30:59.thing I want to focus on, that is entirely different from the focus
:31:00. > :31:03.and from the tone that Arlene Foster greeted this with, because from the
:31:04. > :31:08.beginning it was very much not my bids, can't expect me to notice
:31:09. > :31:13.every detail. The officials were wrong, the civil servants o who were
:31:14. > :31:17.wrong, there is a different tone, be lately the DUP have realised Arlene,
:31:18. > :31:22.we have to make up for her tone, we have to make it clear this was a
:31:23. > :31:26.mess. It would be interesting to see what her tone is like if she does
:31:27. > :31:30.another interview with ourselves when she gets back from China. Do
:31:31. > :31:35.you think she can keep her job? I think she will, simply because there
:31:36. > :31:40.is no incentive for the DUP or Sinn Fein to force what... Should she?
:31:41. > :31:46.Sinn Fein will push her out. They are being kind. They are not going
:31:47. > :31:50.to put her out. I think it was a woeful performance, all this we have
:31:51. > :31:54.to get to grips, we have to get a plan, the, but there was nothing
:31:55. > :32:01.there, what he miss, what she misses, the DUP misses is the scale
:32:02. > :32:04.of the ineptitude, the deParliamental blindness, the
:32:05. > :32:08.arrogance and there was from Simon attacking Mike Nesbitt. The
:32:09. > :32:12.opposition this is a huge, ?400 million. It isn't something behind
:32:13. > :32:16.the sofa, they have taken this arrogance because they know she will
:32:17. > :32:20.survive. Know matter what comes out she will be allowed to survive. What
:32:21. > :32:23.about the issue of transparency in terms of locking at the
:32:24. > :32:27.correspondent between the whistle-blower and the department in
:32:28. > :32:31.terms of seeing who the beneficiary of the scheme are, as column
:32:32. > :32:37.Eastwood... He waffled more at that point than any later on, anyone
:32:38. > :32:41.later on, in fact I wondered if he overspoke and said there is nothing
:32:42. > :32:46.specific in that let eo so if it comes out will it be embarrassing.
:32:47. > :32:51.They have no qualm, the DUP or Sinn Fein about denining transparency,
:32:52. > :32:54.that is a shared mow teach. I want to touch on one thing, Gerry Adams
:32:55. > :33:02.is increasing pressure about his past. He is. I think in a case 33
:33:03. > :33:05.years, that is waiting for truth, for justice, for clarification, he
:33:06. > :33:09.will get none of that. I have no idea why he got involved in this,
:33:10. > :33:14.because he was never going to give Austin Stack what he needed. Part of
:33:15. > :33:19.Adam's psyche which makes it look as if he has do this practised to make
:33:20. > :33:23.it look as if he cares. I don't know, I think there is something
:33:24. > :33:30.else there. I wonder if actually, now, he did drop the ball, he
:33:31. > :33:36.missed, he actually thinks that, believes that Steve McClaren gave
:33:37. > :33:41.him those names and has -- Stack has muddled it. Up. He is demonstrating
:33:42. > :33:45.it is time for him to go, way past time, I haven't been sure of that
:33:46. > :33:49.until this. I thought he brings them enough. Now he looks wobbly.
:33:50. > :33:56.Interesting to hear your thoughts. Thank you both very much. That is it
:33:57. > :34:02.from The View and the year. In the meantime if you need a suggestion
:34:03. > :34:09.for Secret Santa here is an idea. From even in the team, bye. Now
:34:10. > :34:14.that's what I call sectarian. # Stones are falling
:34:15. > :34:21.# All around me # Children making
:34:22. > :34:24.# Petrol bombs # We're saying a rosary this
:34:25. > :34:31.Christmas # Till the Queen's Speech is over
:34:32. > :34:41.# Last Christmas I gave you my sash # But the very next day
:34:42. > :34:45.# You gave it to Taigs. Over 1690 of the bigotry Christmas hits ever
:34:46. > :34:51.recorded. # Prods like to call it Orangefest
:34:52. > :34:57.# But really it's the 12th # Well I wish it could Christmas on
:34:58. > :35:01.the 12th # Now that's what I call sectarian