30/11/2017 The View

As the Brexit clock ticks

towards its next deadline,

is a deal on the border any closer?

With reports that the ground has now

been laid for political agreement,

why has the DUP warned

Theresa May its support shouldn't

be taken for granted?

Welcome to The View.

The DUP warns the Tories not

to take their Westminster confidence

and supply agreement for granted.

And the former First Minister

Peter Robinson says the Republic

needs to "wind its neck in".

So where are we tonight

on the Brexit talks and the border?

I'm joined in the studio

by the DUP's deputy leader,

Nigel Dodds, and from Dublin

by Fine Gael senator

Neale Richmond.

Also tonight...

Caught in a Twitter storm.

Lord Kilclooney caused uproar

online when he called

Leo Varadkar "the Indian",

but insists he has

nothing to be sorry for.

Didn't have to apologise. It was a

misunderstanding of what I was

saying.

And there'll be no misunderstanding

over what our commentators

are saying - hopefully -

with journalists Alex Kane

and Alison Morris both

on their best behaviour.

Hello.

Are British and EU officials

about to agree on how to avoid

a hard border here after the UK

leaves the European Union?

The very prospect of it has prompted

the DUP to warn that its support

for Theresa May's minority

government shouldn't

be taken for granted.

So how close are the two

governments to reaching a deal,

and is there any chance it's one

that will command

widespread support?

Let's hear first from our political

editor, Mark Devenport,

who's been following the many twists

and turns of this story all day.

This whole situation revolves around

today's report on the front

page of the Times.

I think the reason it captured a lot

of attention is that it promised a

breakthrough on what is the

outstanding issue at the moment

which is holding up negotiations

between the UK and EU moving from

phase one, this kind of introductory

phase that we are stuck in, two

phase two, fully fledged talks

trading relationships between the UK

and the EU after Brexit. The Times

said the crunch issue could be at

the point of being resolved. With

greater moves to cooperation between

North and South. We have heard a lot

about entrenched in the Good Friday

Agreement in any deal. British

officials were saying they were

willing to devolve it package of

powers to Northern Ireland which

would allow for Customs convergence

in areas such as agriculture and

energy. Some of that was not

surprising in as much as areas of

agriculture and energy have been

talked about for some time, but the

notion of customs convergence or

Northern Ireland staying with an EU

model in relation to standards as

opposed to going with the UK, it

obviously provoked strong political

reaction, particularly from the DUP.

Why is the DUP seemingly so annoyed

at what's in that report?

When you talk about convergence of

regulations, Northern Ireland

following the EU model, the DUP says

it is opposed to anything which

would cause problems with the UK's

on internal domestic market is then

Northern Ireland will be treated

differently and might not benefit

from any opportunities created by

Brexit. The DUP campaigned for

Brexit. That is why we saw that from

the DUP. We saw them seeking a

meeting with conservatives and

government officials in London,

saying if there was any move from

the central element, it could have a

destabilising effect on their

confidence and supply deal. Sammy

Wilson spelt that out when he said

they have our faults but if they

remove -- if they move then it could

be different.

But there's long been an awareness

of the need for areas

like agriculture and energy to be

dealt with on an all-island basis.

Because the aggro food --

agriculture market goes across the

border, it has been recognised that

Brexit could cause serious problems.

That is referenced but in the UK's

paper and in a joint letter which

Arlene Foster signed together with

the late Martin McGuinness on that

score. Both of those documents

pinpointed energy because we have a

single energy market which operates

on an all Ireland basis. Things are

connected in the North and South in

terms of gas and electricity

supplies. Often. Commence, the joint

letter and the British government

position, they set out that these

may be dealt with in a particular

way.

This is all predicated

on devolving additional powers

to a Stormont Executive but,

of course, there is no such

Executive at the moment.

That is one element which gets heads

scratching about the Times report.

One professor said they aren't

giving extra functions to an

assembly that doesn't exist. The UK

Government have been resistant,

there is a battle with Scotland and

Wales, about what functions should

be devolved, with a fifth year in

London being that if they disrupt

their own internal market after

Brexit, they will not be able to get

trade agreements with other

countries because standards in one

part of the UK could be different

from others.

It's not just the DUP that's unhappy

with the current state

of play, of course.

Whilst the DUP via Sammy Wilson and

the meeting in London were firing

warning shots across the

Conservatives, we had in the Dail,

warning shots to the Irish

government. They said they need to

stick within the customs union and

if they go to a more ambiguous talk

about regulatory convergence or

cooperation, they are selling out at

this stage. There was question Time

involving Simon Covey and Mary Lou

McDonald and she said they have to

use the veto.

Timing is key in all of this.

The big summit is on December 14th

in Brussels, but a lot has to happen

in the next few days.

Yes, it is called a summit, and to

use a mountaineering analogy, quite

often you get share powers --

Sherpas doing some of the listing

and there is a sense that they have

to do their work over the next few

days. There is a meeting involving

Donald Tusk with Leo Varadkar in

Dublin tomorrow. Theresa May is

having dinner with Michel Barnier

and then Jean-Claude Juncker on

Monday. If they can come up with a

formula they can send out to other

EU member states for ratification in

the summit in mid-December, these

few days are crucial.

We won't keep

you any longer.

Thank you, Mark.

I'm joined now in the studio

by the DUP deputy leader

Nigel Dodds and from Dublin,

Fine Gael senator Neale Richmond.

Welcome to both of you. Thanks for

joining us. Nigel Dodds, let's pick

up on some things we were

discussing. Who did you need from

the Conservative Party this morning

to discuss your concerns about the

story in The Times?

We don't give a

running commentary on meetings with

the government. We have many

meetings. We continue to have those

meetings. Very good meeting this.

Obviously the government are very

clear about where we stand and they

know our position. Just as we know

their position. The fact of the

matter is that the UK Government is

negotiating on the half of all of

the UK, including Northern Ireland.

David Davis, and the Prime Minister

had already made clear commitments.

Everybody knows what the issues are.

We go forward working with the

government to deliver a good,

sensible Brexit.

I am not looking

for a running commentary on every

meeting. I'm looking for a little

more on the meeting he had today.

Presumably someone of your stature

will be meeting some unlike the

Chief Whip Julian Smith or number

ten Chief of staff Gavin Barwell.

We

meet people like that regularly and

we continue to.

Was there a special

meeting today?

We had meetings

today, Tuesday, at the weekend,

Julian Smith was at our party

conference.

Was there a meeting

about the story in The Times?

No,

there was not.

I'm interested in the

meeting today.

There was no meeting

about the Times story today. That is

part of a series of regular meetings

about the exit with senior officials

in the British government and their

political masters. I heard that

officials will come to an agreement.

This will be a political agreement

at the end of the day. The Prime

Minister and Brexit secretary and

everyone else involved are very

clear and they have spelt out that

nothing will be done which will

jeopardise Northern Ireland's

constitutional position or in terms

of damaging their economic position

of Northern Ireland. Some of the

options put forward about creating a

border in the Irish Sea in terms of

customs would be devastating to the

economy. Whether you voted to remain

or leave, unionist or nationalist,

we don't want to lose jobs.

There

was no special meeting to discuss

the Times story today but obviously

it was discussed at whatever meeting

you did have. Do you think it is

accurate or not?

I don't believe it

is accurate because it talks about

customs union conversion and that is

nonsense. It has been ruled out by

the Prime Minister and everybody who

matters in terms of the British

government. It is not going to

happen. For the very good reason it

is not a political issue, unless you

want politics to trump investment

and jobs. At the end of the day, two

thirds of our agriculture and food

projects, produce is in the UK. 72%

of the trade through Belfast port

goes to the rest of the UK. Direct

customs barriers and tariffs or

create regulatory divergence between

Northern Ireland and our main

markets would be economically

catastrophic as well as being

politically unacceptable. The rules

we would have to follow in those

circumstances would continue to be

set by Brussels will stop we would

be out of the EU and there would be

nobody to represent what those rules

should be.

I will bring Neale

Richmond in in just a second. I want

to remind you that the story in The

Times today was not the only story

to be suggesting some kind of

customs convergence. In the Daily

Telegraph, Nick Timothy, who was

Theresa May's Joint Chiefs of Staff

until earlier this year, said about

devolving more powers to Ulster and

the need for more all Ireland

governance agreements like the kind

existing on agriculture and energy,

and the need for technical solutions

about customs checks and tolerating

an increase in petty cross border

smuggling.

Nick Timothy is not in

the government and he is a

commentator and writes articles.

So

he is wrong as well?

P offered an

opinion. He writes his column. The

Guardian and BBC Newsnight also

covered this and neither caught

about customs convergence. These are

the clear issues. Northern Ireland

will leave the EU despite what some

critics may say, because of the

national vote. We are leaving with

the rest of the UK. There will not

be any special arrangement for

Northern Ireland which keeps us

within the rules of the customs

union or the single market because

that would be devastating to our

economy. This is not just a

political point. If you talk to

people involved in the agriculture

and food industry, manufacturing,

people who are advocates for

remaining during the referendum, who

run our ports, they will tell you

that once we are leaving we must

ensure that the guest market we have

within the UK continues to be

accessible to Northern Ireland

industry and manufacturing without

any increased tariffs or barriers

are anything of the sort. I have no

difficulty with the Irish government

advocating that because it is in

their interests and not that of

Northern Ireland.

Let's get the

perspective of the Irish Republic.

First of all, Neale Richmond, I want

your response that The Times story

is inaccurate and Customs

convergence is not on the agenda.

The story is interesting and it is a

snippet of the negotiations going on

in Brussels but one of the points

Nigel made, the Irish Government

haven't been looking for a Customs

border down the Irish Sea, we

haven't been pushing through a

united Ireland or four Ireland to

remain in the customs union outside

of the United Kingdom. What the

Taoiseach said in August was we

believe there could be a way forward

for the UK as a whole. We have no

intention of splitting Northern

Ireland from the rest of the UK and

we respect the constitutional

integrity of the United Kingdom but

for the UK to come to a new customs

arrangement with the European Union

as a whole. This isn't a north,

south discussion, this is an EU, UK

discussion and ongoing negotiations

in Brussels and London and

everywhere else are terribly

important stage. We already missed a

deadline last October to get the

first three issues ahead. We can't

push through until we get details

and we are starting to see detail

from the British Government in what

they see in the post-Brexit deal.

What did you make from the response

from others in the DUP? Peter

Robinson, the party leader,

suggested the Republic should bind

its neck in keep its nose out, made

its own business.

That's a reckless

statement. This is our business. We

have a commitment under the Good

Friday Agreement but most

importantly, although I remaining in

the EU, we didn't board for Brexit

by Brexit impacts as. We have a role

here, this is our business and we're

working as positively as possible to

make sure the European Union and the

United Kingdom get significant

progress of the summit in December

so we can move on to face two.

What

do you make of what Nigel Dodds said

about the economic disaster it would

be in Northern Ireland of the kind

of Customs convergence suggested in

The Times article today and hinted

at by Nick Timothy in the Daily

Telegraph was to come to pass? He

sees it economic with very different

from the way you do.

Brexit will be

an economic disaster one way or the

other. A hard Brexit, a soft Brexit,

any former Brexit will be economic

and negative to United Kingdom,

Northern Ireland and to Ireland.

Is

not inaccurate to say that he is

snorting his disagreement with what

you've just said, indicating his

disapproval. Welcome back to it in a

second. Why has he got it wrong and

we have you got it right?

I've

chosen to look at facts and I've

looked at the report from the

Central Bank of England and the

reports from every industry body in

the UK except for once we got

involved in the league campaign for

whatever reason. Every economic

expert, people might have had a lot

of expense but they play an

important role and of Nigel wants to

deny the facts that's fine, but he

will have to pick up the pieces and

explain to his constituents why

their incomes are down. However if

we let negotiations take their place

and become too sensible agreement we

can limit the impact on Northern

Ireland, on Ireland as a whole and

the European Union and the United

Kingdom as a whole but we have to

work together and using inflammatory

language does not help.

First of

all, inflammatory language, we have

had national politicians,

Republicans and people from the

Irish Republic talking about

writing, civil disobedience,

violence on the border and that

should be denounced because it is

inflammatory.

One representative

talked about civil disobedience, he

didn't talk about writing.

Chris

talked about rioting. Secondly, the

reality is, in terms of facts,

there's no point fighting a

referendum on Brexit open again. The

decision has been taken, Britain and

the Northern Ireland are leaving.

Let's talk about how we move

forward. He denies that Northern

Ireland are leaving. The reality is

that they did put forward a

proposal. Their first option would

be to keep the United Kingdom in the

customs union because it benefits

trade, that's a legitimate point of

view and British politicians

identify with the difficulties, we

would be subject to rules on free

movement over which we have no

control because we would be out of

the EU so doesn't make any logical

sense but the other position

advanced by the Irish Government

since then is if that doesn't

happen, at least Northern Ireland

should stay with the single market

and Customs union. Leo Varadkar said

this in terms, or if we didn't stay

within it, at least follow the

rules. That would be damaging to the

economy of Northern Ireland because

that was separate us from our

biggest market and our most

important market. Neale talks about

what is for the benefit of

everybody. We want co-operation

north and south and there are areas

in which we can cooperate north and

south but there's got to be a

recognition that you've got to

respect the fact that we need to be

able to trade with our biggest

market. We're not going to be cut

off from it and if the Irish

Republic were really interested in

saying, we're not going to do

anything that separates the public

from Northern Ireland, then why is

it that following the Belfast

agreement in 1998, the Republic

decided to break party over the

currency? We now have a border.

Lets

keep it in 2017. There's plenty to

talk about today.

We're talking

about convergence. Today, not 20

years ago, there is a currency

border in Ireland because Neale

Richmond's colleagues and people in

the south decided to break.

You

accuse Nationalists of stirring

things and using inappropriate

language. Why did Peter Robinson

suggested a public should wind its

neck in today? Why did he say over

recent weeks, ministers and the

public seem to be clambering over

each other to instil fear in

Unionist minds and expressed at

sleep offensive anti-Brexit

rhetoric?

I can't speak for Peter

but he is in very sensible terms

spoke about the good cooperation.

Neale Richmond said the public

winging its neck and was reckless.

When you put forward solutions like

Neale Richmond and the Taoiseach and

all the rest of them are doing,

which is not just politically

damaging to Northern Ireland's

relationship with the rest of the

United Kingdom, which is concrete to

the Belfast agreement, it also puts

four propositions which he must now

are devastating to the job

prospects, investment, employment

and prosperity of the food industry,

of manufacturing in Northern

Ireland. That is why it invokes such

a strong response.

That is why

unionists, according to Nigel Dodds,

are so unhappy and maybe the

language Nigel Dodds is suggesting

that some Nationalists have used is

inappropriate and has spooked them.

There's a number of issues I want to

pick up. We didn't break currency

convergence in 1988. It was 10p

lower than the British pound for a

long time prior. We made economic

decision as was our right. It was

nothing to do with Northern Ireland.

You diverged from Northern Ireland.

Nigel is trying to rewrite history.

He keeps going on about Ireland

wanting to put in a new Customs

union, removing Northern Ireland

from the United Kingdom and down the

IDC. We have said on the record at a

speech at Queens University in

August by the Taoiseach, we see the

chances of getting to this period by

a new customs union between the

entire United Kingdom and the entire

European Union. I don't know what's

wrong with that language, I think

there's an awful lot to work with.

We're not trying to split Unionists,

were trying to work as best as

possible but ultimately the

Brexiteers never set out what their

Brexit vision was and we are now

getting to the stage we have missed

one deadline and we had only just

seeing some details on the United

Kingdom Government. I have to ask

Nigel, where were the DUP in that?

When you wanted to leave, why didn't

you set out what Brexit means? Why

didn't you set out your vision of

Ireland post-Brexit? We are prepared

to listen and engage.

You obviously

haven't read the Government paper

that was published in August.

We did

read it, there was a lack of detail.

Thing you do know what our position

is and our vision is.

Is very vague.

The reality is that Neale is in

complete denial about the fact that

the Taoiseach put forward a proposal

with Simon Coveney saying that

Northern Ireland should stay in the

customs union and single market or

at least follow the rules. That is

fact and he seems to be denying it.

You said this The Times story is

wildly inaccurate. If it's not

accurate, tell me why Sammy Wilson

was so quick out of the blocks in

suggesting the confidence and supply

arrangement between the DUP and the

Tories could be in jeopardy? Why did

he apply like that to something

which isn't even happening?

He's

just stating the obvious, the

Government now our position and we

know there is. If he wants to see

the DUP is impudent, he has been

proven wrong like he has in many

other things. The Government knows

our position. Sammy was simply

selling a Mac spelling it out.

Would

you pull the plug on the deal if you

thought the Tories were doing

something with the EU that didn't

mean...? Would you risk another

election?

No, calm down, we're not

need another election. If any

Government decided to inflect

constitutional damage on the United

Kingdom, or decided to see that one

part of the United Kingdom should

have its economy devastated by

having some kind of difference

between itself and its industry,

it's agriculture and food business,

any Government places itself in

jeopardy by doing that. I'm very

confident that the Government will

not do that and I have every reason

to believe...

Would you fire the

nuclear weapons and lose the

influence you currently have?

You

are trying to put words into my

mouth which are very explosive and

very reckless and you have chastised

me for trying to do that with

others, so let's not indulge in

that.

Fit enough. Thank you both

indeed. -- fair enough.

Donald Trump isn't the only

politician to have landed in trouble

over his Twitter account.

Lord Kilclooney was forced

to withdraw a tweet he posted last

week referring to the Taoiseach,

Leo Varadkar, as the "the Indian".

The former Ulster Unionist deputy

leader has given his first interview

to The View about the tweet.

He told us he has no intention

of apologising for what he said.

We also learned this week

that the DUP leader, Arlene Foster,

no longer posts her own tweets.

So what are the lessons

from a stormy week on Twitter?

Enda McClafferty has

been investigating.

Welcome to the world of Twitter,

where every second and more

importantly every word counts will

stop say the wrong thing and as you

can see, there is nowhere to hide.

Just ask Lord Kilclooney who has now

stepped out of Twitter to defend

calling the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar,

"The Indian." Hull you're limited on

what you can see on Twitter and in a

rush, I can remember how to spell

the new Prime Minister of Dublin's

name. It's an Indian name, so I just

said the Indian. It wasn't meant to

be offensive in any way, certainly

not racist.

But that's not how others saw it as

to beat after tweet accused him of

being racist -- Tweet after Tweet.

This is what one former Unionist

leader posted.

When I realised the

term Indian was upsetting some

people, and I work hard for the

Indian community in London, which

they didn't realise, I immediately

withdrew the statement because I

didn't want to upset people.

So has

he now sent a personal Twitter

message to say sorry?

Not in the

least, there's no question of

apologising. It's something that was

not racist and something which even

the leader of the Indian community

in Belfast said was not racist. I

stand over every word of it.

Lord

Kilclooney is not the first

high-profile figure to struggle with

his character account and making his

point. Remember this online apology?

I've clearly caused some offence by

what I've said and for that I

apologise. I'm hugely proud of the

officers and staff who go out and

serve the public every day. I want

to encourage and support them. I

accept that my comments last night

when not conveyed that support. For

that I am sorry.

That folder Twitter

exchange and the Chief constable

told a serving police officer to dry

your eyes, do the job or move on.

And remember this Tweet from Gerry

Adams? He apologised for using the N

word.

The Internet never forget so

it only takes two seconds to screen

shot a comment so even after you

have deleted something on Twitter

very quickly, someone will

inevitably have taken a screenshot

and will bylaws of the best advice

for any politician is if you're

starting to get angry, put the phone

down and have a cup of tea.

Or you

could take the Arlene Foster

approach, getting someone else to do

the posting, as we learned this week

after the mix-up with the Princes.

But there is a darker side to

Twitter, with the DUP reader knows

all about trolls Rome searching out

high-profile victims -- trolls roam.

I am thankful my mum is not on

Twitter so she doesn't have to see

the levels of heat and abuse at

times. However, in terms of relation

to what Arlene Foster said, the

younger generation, her children, my

stepchildren and others that are on

those platforms, it can be very

difficult to see that type of abuse.

But whether the Twitter boundaries

and who patrols it? It reported, the

police say they will prosecute and

if there is evidence of harassment

or intimidation but they also one

that social media users are

personally responsible for the

content the post and there can be

both criminal and civil law

implications to posting comments

online. But this expert in cyber

security believes Twitter has some

big questions to answer.

How many

polls have you taken down and how

many people have you banned? Give us

more transparency and what other

recommendations from the home

affairs committee? They want to see

more transparency from sites like

Twitter.

Lord Kilclooney might feel

he has weathered the Twitter storm,

but this may not be the end of the

matter. He may yet face questions

from the House of Lords Commissioner

for standards.

Enda McClafferty reporting.

And with me now to reflect

on another busy week

are columnist Alex Kane,

and the Irish News correspondent

Allison Morris, on her first visit

to Commentators' Corner.

Let's talk about the EU

conversation. So much happening

today. Nick Timothy, The Times, the

Guardian. It has been leading the

news agendas. What did you make

about the encounter between Neale

Richmond and Nigel Dodds?

This is a

negotiation and clearly they are

looking at sort subways to have --

it seems natural that that would be

a solution. I can see the Irish

government have changed their

language and they're trying to use

more moderate language when dealing

with Unionists but from the Peter

Robinson statement you can see it is

not being reciprocated.

Why did he

get involved?

At the beginning of

the day, around ten o'clock, Arlene

Foster issued a statement to say

don't worry about it. Sammy Wilson

then said if they do this then we

will walk away. Then Peter Robinson

wades in. I think that they're

worried that the government is going

to do something. We are seeing that

they saw this in the run-up to the

Good Friday Agreement, they are

worried.

When you listened to Neale

RIchmond and Nigel Dodds talking

about Brexit, one talks about the

amazing opportunities that it will

afford businesses and people in

Northern Ireland and the other about

how it is a step off a cliff edge

and will be a disaster for everyone

in Northern Ireland and potentially

the Republic. People will be

scratching their heads.

If they

can't get to the second phase

because they can't get a solution to

the border, and no one knows how it

has come to be placed, whether or

not there will be special

circumstances for Northern Ireland,

you can call it what they will

because they will have to be some

kind of special negotiations,

because we have a land border with

EU, the DUP don't want to hear it.

They're stamping their feet like

petulant children. There will have

to be special circumstances. They

might not colic that but it will

have to happen otherwise it will be

a complete economic disaster.

Why

would Nigel Dodds wave the flag to

the British government to say just

watch yourself because we can pull

the plug? Why would you threaten

that?

They are worried. There is

nothing there. If they force an

early election, there is no

guarantee they will get the same

parliamentary arithmetic, there will

be a very discontented Conservative

Prime Minister if they win, and that

Labour gets in, they have nothing

there. It is back to the usual.

Instead of thinking, they did not

expect outcome. They should have

documents about the impact it will

have in the UK and Dublin. We

haven't got that and they are

resorting to threats.

Are they going

to pull the plug at this stage when

we only have 20 million of the £1

billion allocated?

We don't even

have an executive so why on earth

would they give up the power they

have in Westminster?

If it is going

to be pulled, the plug will be

pulled by the Prime Minister.

That's it from The View

for this week.

Join me for Sunday Politics

at 11.35 here on BBC One.

With all the talk of the border

today, we cast an eye backwards

to the Second World War

when it was also an issue,

though in that instance

it was a fear of spies that

saw security heightened.

For now, though, bye-bye.

Travel facilities between Great

Britain and Northern Ireland are

monitored. The trailers pulled up by

military police and Constabulary. --

the train is. Germany and Japan are

no risk factors of neutrality.

Bracelet -- slipping spies over the

border was far too easy. The North

South border is sealed. Credentials

have to be right. Britain and

America take this step