23/11/2017 The View

Tonight...

More cracks are appearing

between the British and Irish

governments over Brexit.

And, a proposed amnesty

for soldiers deepens the rift

between the DUP and Sinn Fein.

Welcome to The View.

Are proposals for an amnesty

for soldiers likely to push the DUP

and Sinn Fein even further apart?

We'll hear from both sides.

Sinn Fein's Alex Maskey

and the DUP's Emma

Little-Pengelly are with me.

Although they say they don't do

coronations, there seems

to be an heir apparent

to the Sinn Fein presidency.

I admire her for being in a male

environment, as being gutsy and

straight-forward and upfront.

Has the issue of the

border become a game?

This week the DUP leader accused

the Taoiseach of being reckless

and playing around with Northern

Ireland.

So can London and Dublin fight

fair with each other?

We'll hear a Westminster

view from the former

Tory Cabinet Minister,

Peter Lilley.

And back again with their thoughts

on another busy political week

are columnists Fionnuala O Connor

and Alex Kane.

Hello.

As if there weren't enough obstacles

to a return to Stormont,

another one emerged this week

when Sinn Fein accused

the British Government of bad faith

for considering what it says

is an amnesty for soldiers involved

in Troubles-related killings.

Or is it simply, as the DUP

would say, drawing a line under

the past for those who have

already been investigated?

Emma Little-Pengelly

and Alex Maskey are with me.

Welcome to you both, thank you for

joining us.

Emma Little Pengelly,

did the DUP know in advance

that this consultation

was going to include a proposal

on a statute of limitations?

Well, obviously there are a wide

range of issues in relation to

trying to find solutions of the

legacy of the past in Northern

Ireland. This had been discussed on

many occasions previously. It's an

emerging issue, not just in Northern

Ireland. It has to be placed within

the context of what is happening in

terms of Afghanistan, Iraq and

contemporary army activities around

the world. I would take issue with

the categorization as an amnesty. My

understanding what is being talked

about is a statute of limitations.

We haven't seen -

Kill answer that -

Hold on. It's not our proposal at

this point. There has been reference

to it previously and we talked about

reinvestigation and the

disproportionate reinvestigation.

Did you know that this consultation

was going to be included when the

paper was published last week? Did

you know that would be in it because

Sinn Fein clearly didn't?

As I

indicated there were a range of

discussions about what would be in

the paper. Sinn Fein and ourselves

wanted thes -

You are supporting the

British Government in Downing

Street, did you know that this

proposal for a consultation was

going to be included in this

document?

This is a British

Government document.

Did you know it

was going to be -

We weren't

involved -

You didn't know? We made

representation in terms of a range

of issues, as I indicated, including

on the pension issue. It's a

consultation to ask for views on

this matter. Give me a simple answer

to the question. Did you know it was

going to be fwh it or did you not?

Sinn Fein was clear we didn't know

it was in it. We are horrified. We

don't like it. You clearly do like

it. Did you know it was going to be

in the document?

We have had

discussions over the last yum of

years, as have Sinn Fein. It's a

British Government document. We were

not involved in what was going into

it or not.

In terms of influence

over the British Government. I'm

wondering were you arguing for this

to be part of the consultation? Did

you want to see a statute of

limitations included? Did you know

it was going to be included? That is

a really simple question.

I've

indicated we made representations on

a range of issues. We were not

involved in the process of what was

going into this consultation or not.

You didn't know?

It's a British

Government document -

You didn't

know.

We were in no different

position in relation to anybody -

You didn't know.

We made emarations

in terms of pensions and be other

matters to go into that document.

You won't give me a straight answer.

One last chance, did you know?

It

was a British Government document

released. We were not privy to what

was going into that document before

it was released.

I'm not sure if you

can interpret that. It seems it

might mean the DUP didn't know,

logically must mean the DUP didn't

know. You didn't know

We certainly

didn't know. The Irish Government

said they certainly didn't know. I

understand that the PSNI are saying

they didn't know anything about this

statement.

You couldn't be surprised

because, Emma Little-Pengelly has

made it clear that the DUP and

others would have been keen to see

this kind of thing in the

consultation?

Well, you see, when

Emma doesn't give you an answer,

what she needs to do is tell the

public, the viewers, and

particularly all of those right

across the victims' community, as

they are called because all those

sectors are opposed to any notion of

an amnesty for anybody resulting

from a conflict. Emma was involved

as one of her leading party

negotiators on the legacy issues for

a number of years. I have sat in

rooms with Emma in discussions like

this along with other party

colleagues. She would have made it

clear there can't be a suggestion of

an amnesty. That is why we end up a

new investigation unit as part of

the Stormont House Agreement. The

question that needs to be addressed

tonight to your viewers is - does

Emma and does the DUP and will they

support this concept as flagged up

in this consultation? Furthermore,

Emma needs to explain why she put

her name with her colleague Jim

Shannon in Westminster recently to a

motion supporting this concept? On

the one hand Emma and her party have

been forthright for years around no

amnesty, no discussion of amnesty.

We have never supported an amnesty.

I want to place that very much

on-the-record. We are opposed to the

concept of it. Emma's party were

vocal on that. It would appear that

Emma's party, Emma at least, can

clarify that tonight, is supportive

of giving some kind of amnesty.

There can be nothing else other than

amnesty -

Do you accept that is the

case? If it walks like an amnesty

and if it talks like an amnesty,

it's an amnesty?

No, I don't. As

Alex outlined we have been clear we

are opposed to amnesty. We listened

to many victims from across all

communities in Northern Irelandle

they want the opportunity nor

justice. It's a statute of

limitations. As I indicated we were

not privy to what was going into

that document. We are not privy to

the detail of what is proposed. My

understanding is this came out of a

recommendation from the Defence

Select Committee.

Will you support

it?

At Westminster. I think it's an

interesting suggestion. I think it

is one that warrants a consultation

to ask people's views. It's very

important, first of all. Secondly,

it requires a mature discussion and

reflection about this. Although Alex

indicated that he and his party have

opposed amnesty, the reality of it

is -

You were in the negotiations

with us, you know. That

I will raise

the issue. I went through a

negotiating process with Sinn Fein

during the Haass process kr. It came

out Sinn Fein had done a deal on

on-the-run letters.

What did they

contain?

You have to be honest -

What did they contain.

It was

immunity from investigation and

prosecution.

Let us hear Alex's

response to that.

There is hypocrisy

here.

How do you respond to. That

you have done your own dirty little

deal and you are being hypocritical.

They were a statement of fact and a

comfort -

Between Sinn Fein and the

British Government. Isn't that

right?

Let me finish the answer when

you ask me a question. The

on-the-run letters were a comfort

letter and stated clearly if any

evidence comes up, those letters

will not prevent a prosecution.

Anybody who got one of those letters

could well be prosecuted tomorrow -

Comfort against what? Comfort

against investigation and

prosecution. That came out in the

courts because it was clear in the

courts that the people who received

them, it's clear the people who

received them believed they would

not be investigate and they would

not be prosecuted. They were used as

an abuse of process issue. It was

bad faith. What is bad faith is Sinn

Fein sitting in negotiations saying

justice is important, no amnesty. By

the way, by the way... We have these

letters.

No amnesty for anyone who

received those letters. They were a

statement of fact telling people

there was no basis for a

prosecution. It also told them if

there was a basis for a prosecution

that prosecution would proceed.

A

couple of things quickly. If you

think it heys no validity and no

legal expertise to say it's on thin

ice as a workable idea. We will come

on to that in a No, I have moment.

Not said it has no

are valdity -

You said that. Let me

ask my question, if you don't mind.

Let the consultation kill off the

idea. Have the consultation and see

what happens?

You heard reaction

from people across the victims'

community, as it is called, they

stated in their absolute opposition

to a concept. They don't want it for

anybody, state forces or anybody

else.

It's a consultation.

I will

repeat tonight, that would

jeopardise this additional concept

of this statute of limitations, an

amnesty by another name for Crown

forces. This actually will cast a

long shadow over the consultation.

It will make it more difficult to

get an agreement because in the

context of people trying to build

good faith through negotiation and

discussions this throws a real big

spanner in the works.

OK. Emma

Little-Pengelly you are a barrister.

When you read that expert

assessment, which you will have red

from Kieran McEvoy and Peter Rowe

will need to apply to state and

non-state actors. It could leave the

UK open to state impunity. Do you

ignore that?

You nude need to look

at the detail of the complexity of

the issue. There is a strong view

out there. Which I share, there is a

disproportionate way of dealing with

the pass a.

Quantify that.

Everybody

someone in the IRA arrested,

including when Gerry Adams was

arrested there were rallies by Sinn

Fein for him to be released. Justice

is a concept for Sinn Fein that only

applies to others.

It's applicable

to everybody.

There has been a

disproportion anyway focus -

Can you

quantify that?

Has there? The police

say that is not the case. You

dispute those figures, do you?

The

statistics that the police release

show in themselves there is

disproportionate -

Do they?

They do.

90% of the killings during the

Troubles were by paramilitary

organisations 10% by the state. On

the figures it's more than 10% in

terms of the focus -

Let us see if

that stands up. PSNI legacy

investigations 1,118 killings. 530

ariped to Republicans. 271 to

loyalists. 354 to security forces.

RET completed investigations. 1,615

cases. 1,038 to Republicans. 536

tole loyalists, 32 to the Army. It

flies in the face of what you have

just said.

Those statistics, do

quick percentages. The numbers you

have indicated they are not a 90/10%

split. They are not.

There are fewer

cases of investigation into killings

by Crown forces than by others?

Not

10%. It's disproportionate.

1,038

investigation into Republican

killings. 32 into the army.

And the

previous you mentioned as well.

1,118 killings. 530 to Republicans.

271 to loyalists, 354 -

It's more

than 10%.

Another important

perspective on this.

Briefly. I need

to ask you something else.

Republicans have actually served

thousands of years in prison. A very

small tiny handful of members of the

British forces have served a day in

prison. Most of those on one hand

have been released from prison in a

short period of time. Brought back

into the armed forces. And, more

often, promoted. That's not -

Early

release of prisoners. On-the-run

less letters. There has been a

special package put in place in

terms of paramilitary organisations

Walked away scot free.

You want a

special package for the other side

of the House?

We need to reflect

about a tailored solution to a

particular problem. The statute of

limitations is not an amnesty.

We

will not get you to agree. OK.

I think we have exposed the nature

of the gulf between the two parties

on this issue., if you don't mind, I

need to ask you very quickly the

former Ulster Unionist Party Lord

Kilcooney.

No longer part of the Ulster

Unionist Party. Coming under a lot

of criticism tonight for referring

to Leo Varadkar on Twitter as "The

Indian". What do you think about

that?

I understood he has referred that,

which is the right thing to do. We

should not be referring to anyone in

that way.

I said earlier on that I think it is

something racist, but it is also

criminally reckless. Sitting in

Belfast, in recent weeks, people

have been put out of their homes,

had cars burned, had their homes at

five because they were Catholic or

Protestant families. This behaviour

from a senior political

representative, albeit yesterday's

man, although he still has a high

profile, I think is remarks are

unacceptable.

I don't think he would accept the

connection you have made with what

he said on Twitter, which he has now

withdrawn.

Senior civic figure makes racist

remark like that, he cannot escape

it.

He has now withdrawn that. Which

you would welcome, presumably?

He

should put his phone away forever.

And quickly on Dublin's emergency

meeting tonight, the deal between

Fine Gael and Fianna Fail falling

apart, ie ready for an election?

We are, and I'm sure a lot of people

will welcome an election, because

this current government has failed

people come and look at the level of

homelessness, the health service in

the 26 counties. We think a problem

we have here...

You will be interested to hear this.

We have just received a line from

one of our colleagues, who has been

a crust of elements in Dublin, and

the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has said

Frances Fitzgerald will not be

standing down as, so the stand-off

continues.

It looks like an

election.

It does, as we speak.

We are ready for it. We will leave

it there.

Thank you both very much indeed.

Now, when Gerry Adams steps down

as Sinn Fein president next year,

it's widely expected that he'll be

replaced by Mary Lou McDonald.

The Dublin Central TD

is the front-runner and may take

over without a contest.

But what do we know about her?

Will she change Sinn Fein's

political direction and can

she broaden the party's appeal?

Stephen Walker has been to Dublin.

Mary Lou McDonald's story is very

different from the Sinn Fein

politicians. She comes from a

middle-class background and was

brought up here in rat Park, one of

Dublin's most desirable suburbs. --

Rathgar. As a child she went to a

private fee-paying school. In her

teens, she became interested in

politics, but it was not Sinn Fein

that caught her eye.

In the late 1990s, Mary Lou McDonald

joined the enough oil in Dublin

West, and political opponents say

she was anxious to claim the

political ladder.

She was certainly a very active

Keanu fail member, and within a

couple of years, -- Fianna Fail

member, and in a few years, she had

changed sides and join Sinn Fein.

The understanding locally was that

she wanted to run for Fianna Fail,

but there was no vacancy.

But she says her switch to Sinn Fein

was more about policy than personal

ambition. This Dublin TD, who is now

a minister, says she felt let down

by Fianna Fail.

She felt that they were going away

from the whole idea of Irish unity

and independence, and I think she

was looking for a party that would

reflect that view.

How you doing? Nice to meet you?

In 2002, she was Sinn Fein's

candidate in Dublin West. She failed

to get elected, but in 2004 made

history by becoming the party's

first NEP. Her role in Europe gave

her a profile, and in 2011, she

became a TD for Dublin Central.

I think Mary Lou McDonald will prove

to thought to be a Marmite

politician. No one is neutral on

her. You either love her or you hate

her. She is a very, very forceful

personality.

Marylou McDonald's style has won her

support from across the political

spectrum.

I admire her for being in a male

environment, which the Dail is, and

being gutsy and straightforward, and

up front, and those are qualities

which stand to one in any

environment, but in a male political

environment, she sure uses them and

need them.

But despite the praise, Mary Lou

McDonald says her judgment -- say

her judgment sometimes let her down.

Some site her reaction to the case

of Maria Cahill, the Belfast woman

who said she was raped but then that

the IRA covered it up.

I was deeply disappointed and how,

for instance, she responded to the

revelations about Maria Queheille,

and the fact that she had been

abused. I thought she saw very

little empathy, whereas in the Dail,

on previous occasions, she has been

extraordinarily sympathetic to women

who have come through difficult

situations.

At the time, Sinn Fein insisted they

did everything they could to help

Maria Cahill, and say there are

political opponents try to exploit

the situation. Sinn Fein are now

preparing for life without the man

who has let them for three decades.

So what will a Marylou McDonald

presidency look like?

She is urban, a woman, young, and

would have her own ideas about what

may be the party should do and where

it should go. I'm sure she will

ruffle some feathers.

But will her approach to Northern

Ireland change?

Really, the concerns of the people

in the Republic are quite different

from concerns of people in the

north, and she represents... She is

a TD for Dublin Central, and the

concerns of people there would be

very different from people in

Northern Ireland, so there are

various issues she would have to

very skilfully manage. Abortion is a

big one. She would have a particular

view which might not be widely held

in Northern Ireland.

Last weekend, the party talked about

going into government, despite the

fact that both Fine Gael and Fianna

Fail have ruled out in coalition. So

is Sinn Fein ready for Marylou

McDonald to be in power?

I think they will find it difficult

to transition to being in government

and part of a coalition which goes

with all the collective

responsibility which goes in

Cabinet. So they have a bit of going

up to do, and I think there will be

a very steep learning curve, but I

think Marylou will be up to the job,

yes.

Would Marylou McDonald make a good

leader?

I think she would make a feisty one.

Some question whether Sinn Fein's

current deputy president has the

right experience.

She has never held office in the

sense of being a minister or having

a role to carry out where she has

had to make decisions other than,

obviously, decisions made in the

context of Sinn Fein and the

republican movement as party. So she

is untried and untested in that

sense.

Others insist that the Dublin TD has

the right skills.

She would be very

competent, very professional, and I

could see her handling the situation

very, very well.

I am an

independent, and I am now in

government.

A lot of people thought

that would not happen.

Anything is

possible in politics.

If the political cards fall their

way, Marylou McDonald could soon

take their party towards government.

She wants Sinn Fein to be in power

quickly so she does realise Sinn

Fein is going to have to compromise

and is going to possibly have to go

into power as the minority party.

Mary Lou McDonald became a party's

first NEP. The Dubliner could soon

be making history again.

Stephen Walker reporting.

They've previously talked

about their "constructive"

relationship, but this week

Arlene Foster was accused

of slapping down Leo Varadkar over

the Irish government's "reckless"

position on Brexit.

Then came a leaked Irish government

report which branded

the British Government's position

one of "chaos and confusion."

And speaking before an Oireachtas

committee earlier today,

the Irish Foreign Affairs Minister,

Simon Coveney, didn't pull any

punches when he said Ireland

will not accept a bad

deal for Ireland.

So does Westminster

need to put more effort

The Taoiseach and I in particular

have been very clear in terms of

what we are asking for. That hasn't

changed for months. What has

changed, perhaps, is the expectation

that Ireland, maybe when we come

under a little bit of pressure, we

might back off in terms of that ask,

to a certain extent, or accent that

it would be deferred interface two

of the Brexit discussions. And some

people seem to be surprised that

that is not happening. -- into phase

two.

Maybe they were not listening and we

told the first, second, third or

tenth time. But I think people are

listening now.

For anybody who sees this from afar

as simply a trading barrier, you

know, they fundamentally

misunderstand the strength of

feeling politically in Ireland on

this issue, and I have made that

point very forcefully to some of my

counterparts and friends who are

negotiating on the British side. And

I think Michel Barnier, as I said

earlier, really understands that. He

has come here and spoken to people

and communities on the border and

really made the point that Ireland's

problems in Europe's problems in the

context of this process.

So does Westminster

need to put more effort

into solving the border issue?

I'm joined by former

Conservative Minister, Peter Lilley.

Thank you very much indeed for

joining us tonight.

Simon Kirby was not pulling any

punches there. The border is a

pretty big issue and the Irish

government is not at all satisfied

that the Irish government -- that

the British government is

approaching it with the kind of

commitment and sympathy that is

necessary. Do you have any simply

for that position?

Not a lot. I

thought it would be better that he

would respond to the concrete

proposals the British government has

put forward. I don't know what his

response is to the proposal that all

small, medium and micro businesses,

80% of the trade across the border,

should be exempt from any controls.

What is the Irish government

response to that? I don't know his

disposal to the proposal of larger

businesses being able to pay taxes

and quarterly intervals. What is the

Irish have an's response to that? I

imagine he is gearing up for an

election in Ireland and competing

with Sinn Fein for a sort of Irish

unity vote. That is not a really

good way of ensuring a good outcome

of the discussions on the border.

We had hoped to be hearing from the

Fine Gael Senator Neil Richmond this

evening. He was very keen to debate

this issue with you, but as we have

just reported, there has been an

emergency meeting of the Fine Gael

parliamentary party in Dublin

tonight, and Senator Richmond was

called to that, and it looks like

there could be an election, as you

have suggested, in the South in the

next few weeks. We're not sure about

that, but that is the way things are

shaping up. My understanding of the

Irish government position on the

issues you're just outlined is, it

may seems simple from your

perspective in London, but on the

island of Ireland, it is not that

simple. It is a lot more

competition, and they don't really

understand how a lot of the issues

that you think, and the UK

Government thinks, can be dealt with

in a very straightforward fashion,

will actually happen. It is a lot

more public later than maybe some

people across the water thing.

It is all very well to save his

competitive. Why don't they give a

public it'd respond to our

proposals? If they have completed

proposals as I understand it, the

Irish government has farmed out its

policy to Europe and is saying, we

will just do what ever Europe wants

us to do and borders. That is a very

sensible. There are countries in

Europe by Croatia and Cyprus which

have special arrangements of their

borders with third countries. Why

isn't Ireland 's pressing for

special arrangements on the border

with Northern Ireland, so that we

can have a sensitive border free

arrangement which does recognise

these sensibilities? I'm very well

aware of them. I was responsible for

Customs and Excise and the border

when the problems were still there.

I am probably more aware of it than

he is.

It is actually your problem to come

up with the solutions are, in their

view.

We have!

To come up with

workable solutions, because you are

the people who want to Brexit.

What

is his response to our proposals?

Well, the responses they don't think

they are workable, and it is not

just the Irish government. Managers

quote this to you. Last week is very

programme, your former Cabinet

colleague Ken Clarke, still an MP

said he does not understand how

Conservative ministers can hope to

deliver a seamless, frictionless

border in Ireland post Brexit if it

leaves both the customs union and

free market. He says that he has in

the first notion of how they can

deliver what they say they will

deliver.

Ken has a unique position in

Parliament. He voted against Article

50, he is trying to do all he can to

reverse the British government's

decision, the British people's

decision to leave the European

Union. He will say anything

reinforces that. I don't think he

really added much to our knowledge

of how to reach a sensible solution

on the Irish border. I agree that it

is important to get a good one. I

don't know what the details problems

the Irish government see, the

concrete proposals the British

government has positively put

forward. Just saying not good

enough, it is... You know, we don't

agree, it is not helpful. What

specifically is wrong? Why don't

they were?

I don't think they see

them as concrete.

It is a very

concrete proposal.

I'm sorry they

are not here to make the case. It is

not for me to make the Irish

government case, but they have

talked about chaos and confusion.

His point is that the proposals from

the UK Government are not concrete.

They are concrete. Let me repeat.

One of them is that 80% of trade

across the border, carried out by

small, medium and micro businesses,

be exempt from any controls

whatsoever and not counted by

international trade.

How would you

believe that?

Well, you wouldn't,

because it would not be counted as

international trade. Then the 20%

that does count as serious trade,

they would all be exempt from any

requirements which normally occur at

third borders to provide prior

notification of goods crossing the

border. They just had to do with

that regular intervals when they pay

their taxes, if there are customs

duties, or any other taxes they have

to pay. That would avoid the need

for border controls. What is wrong

with that? Have we heard any

concrete criticisms of that

proposal?

You do realise it is a

very long and very porous border

with many, many hundreds of

crossings?

Yes.

So how would you

deal... Revenue Commissioners and

customs officials in the south have

looked at this in some detail and

published some interesting reports.

They have said that actually,

dealing with the volume of traffic

that you would have to deal with

would be virtually impossible.

We

have put forward proposals where

they wouldn't have to be dealt with

at the border also how would you

deal with the issue of smuggling

across the border, which as you will

know very well, has been an issue

promised 100 years? Yes, indeed, an

issue when I was there. So,

smuggling, avoiding what kind of

tax?

There Reds a problem with

smuggling fuel, for a start, and

livestock.

How would you deal with

it differently from how you do at

present the macro it is not for me

to tell you how I would deal!

It is

for the Irish government to say, how

would you deal with it? It is your

administration that wants to effect

this change. What are your concrete

proposals were dealing with the kind

of issues that will need to be dealt

with? They are not my words, they

are those of the Irish government. A

chaotic and confusing approach.

Which is a very vague and unspecific

response. We have said we will not

have any hard border controls. We

understand, of course, that the EU

normally does put hard border

controls on any third country, and

if they choose to treat us as a

third country, then it will be a

question of the Irish Republic

agreeing with European laws. We have

suggested ways that could be

avoided.

So you would just say, if

there is a hard border, to the Irish

government's fault?

No, we're

selling our document we appreciate

we need to put forward a puzzle that

will help the Irish government,

avoid having as border controls. We

won't have any border controls. We

have put forward as proposals and

not had any concrete response. All

they have done is league third rate

to full title from second ranking

diplomats. -- leak. From a

government which is this week,

wobbling and not fit.

Is this is a government that you

have to do business with. You are

supposed to be on good terms with.

This is a government that has a veto

and Simon Coveney has indicated if

he's pushed he will use the veto. He

will exercise the veto and where

does that leave anybody? That would

leave them where they presumably

don't want to be.

They would be forced to impose a

hard border with customs. We

wouldn't do so. They would put

themselves in that position. I don't

believe the Irish government will do

that. I think it's a threat made

ahead of elections because they are

worried about losing votes to Sinn

Fein. We will leave it there. Thank

you very much indeed for joining us

tonight.

Let's hear what tonight's

commentators have to say about that.

Alex Kane and Fionnuala

O'Connor are with me.

I wish we had 20 minutes. Have a

quick word about what Peter Lilley

said. I didn't see that coming at

the end. Did you?

Yes, it's just

silly. It's an ex-MP. I don't know

if we should spend very much time...

Former Cabinet Minister.

He's

former. He's one of the gang of four

who a month ago, led bio Wen

Patterson and John Redwood who wrote

a letter to Theresa May trying to

undermine her further by saying she

must prepare for a hard Brexit,

effectively.

He is a former MP. You

are absolutely right about that. I

suspect his views represent the

views of some of those in the UK

negotiating team. Is that fair to

say? I think they probably do.

Generally speaking, it was mostly

nonsense thatter interview. He told

you twice he knew about customs

because he had been responsible for

customs and the border. He was never

responsible for the customs and the

border when the two countries were

in different places. Everything he

said there.

It sounded colonial at

one point. We will tell you what to

do. Get a move op. Why can't you

just do that. There was nothing

there.

The last line, worried about

losing votes to Sinn Fein. Where did

that come out of? Lucky there is

this election. It made it sound

marginally less like a lunatic.

There is an unfolding situation in

Dublin the emergency meeting tonight

is Francis Fitzgerald is going

nowhere. If she stays and they

deploy the missile that is going to

bring the government down?

It is.

His backing for Francis Fitzgerald

sounds stronger at the minute than

it did earlier today and over the

last two three days when he

certainly wasn't fulsome. I imagine

he hoped that she would walk. She

has said she's not walking. He's

been forced

d He can't win an

election.

He can't. The weather has

changed. An election before

Christmas is the opposite of what

they want.

Is it an election called

through a no confidence vote. Which

is lost, that would be the case in

this instance, it has to be held

within three weeks. That would be up

the 22nd November?

Nobody wants a

Christmas election.

December.

The

other thing about this Mark, all the

stuff we have been talking about the

border and Brexit talks. If there is

going to be an election that will be

on hold we will not know until three

weeks time if Sinn Fein are in

government. All the dynamics will

have shifted within three weeks.

Let

us talk about Lord Kilclooney's

tweet. Referring to the Taoiseach as

"the Indian."

Very smart man John

Taylor, I'm amazed to discover he

thinks "the Indian" is short hand

for Varadkar. Someone pointed out

there are eight letters in one and -

Yeah. Leo Varadkar is eight The

Indian is ten, not longer.

Sad.

I

haven't seen a Twitter storm like

that for a long time, if ever.

Twitter was going mad tonight?

It

was. Understandably. My partner who

loves me says to me on the phone,

"put it down. Put it away. Do not

tweet a response to that." Someone

should have come to him quiet and

said, "stop it. Don't push it." He

apologised an hour later. On Twitter

you cannot afford...

He loves

attention.

He's a canny politician.

He doesn't like this attention.

We

will leave it there. Thank you very

much. Busy programme.

That's it from The View

for this week.

Join me for our coverage of the DUP

Conference on BBC Two at 3.00pm

on Saturday afternoon and,

of course, Sunday Politics

is at 11.35am on BBC One.

But it was another busy

week at Downing Street,

so we sent our top man Gareth

Gordon.

What we didn't realise

was that he has the power to control

Government officials.

Just keep an eye on

Number Ten's front door.

Good night!

Yes I can hear you. Can you hear me?

Were there any signs of progress

made this morning in your view?

As

so often with the Northern Ireland

peace process it's one step forward,

two steps back. I'm not sure we even

had a step forward this morning, but

the interesting thing, first of all

out of that Theresa May...