18/01/2018 The View

After 12 months of deadlines,

what difference will one more make?

The new Secretary of State

says the Stormont talks

are worth one last shot,

but does anyone else think so?

Welcome to The View.

Karen Bradley says

the gaps between the DUP

and Sinn Fein are narrow -

so how can she then say

there are still significant

differences to overcome?

We're about to find out

where the reality lies

in the next few weeks.

And tonight we'll get

a taste of what's to come.

We'll hear from three of the five

parties involved in the talks.

And if you think no

Stormont means you don't

have a voice, what about copying

the Citizens' Assembly

in the Republic?

I think something like this would be

very timely in Northern Ireland. You

have this vacuum right now. Why not

use this opportunity the vacuum has

created to try something like this?

And bringing you the voice

of the people in Commentators'

Corner - Allison Morris

from the Irish News,

and the News Letter's Sam McBride.

So, ten days into her

new job and Karen Bradley

has announced a fresh talks process

aimed at getting Stormont

up and running again.

The Secretary of State said it

could be the last opportunity

to restore devolution,

though she refused to be drawn

on what options she might consider

if the negotiations fail.

The five parties and the Dublin

government are also signed up, and -

standing alongside Simon Coveney

earlier today - she outlined

the urgency facing the process.

Based on my conversations so far, I

believe it is possible to reach

agreement.

Progress must be swift.

It is clear that Northern Ireland

needs strong devolved government and

political leadership.

Are we talking

about weeks rather than months here?

I think it is fair to say this is

urgent. I think there is an

growing

realisation decisions need to be

made by people elected here. All of

our focus is on success, not

failure.

It must be a fair and

balanced deal, one capable of being

supported on all sides.

Clearly

there is no public appetite for long

drawn-out discussions so I think it

is important it is a short and sharp

negotiation.

Well, joining me now

are the Ulster Unionist Roy Beggs,

Dolores Kelly from the SDLP

and the Alliance

Party's Chris Lyttle.

We did ask to speak to the DUP

and Sinn Fein but we were told

no one was available.

Welcome to the three of you. Dolores

Kelly, first of all.

We've seen talks deadlines come

and go over the past 12 months -

what expectation do you have

that this time it'll be different?

I think in the backdrop of the

crisis within the health sector and

indeed education I think people are

starting to get very angry and

seeing what the absence of political

leadership and decision-making makes

to their lives.

What is the evidence

people are getting angry?

I see it

on the doorstep, and talking to

people daily. You see it in the news

columns, the editor's pages, people

starting to have their voices heard,

but I agree there is some way to go

yet. But certainly

yet. But certainly more and more

people are stopping me in the

street, talking to me all over the

place, and saying that basically

they want to see Stormont up and

running, looking at decision-making

and what is going on.

Are they not a

little annoyed and apathetic because

after a year of no Stormont, this

guy has not fallen in?

I wouldn't

agree. I think political parties

need a serious reality check. We

have serious problems in health

service, older people waiting on

trolleys in our hospital wards,

school budgets under serious

pressure, class sizes too big,

teachers being made redundant,

special education reduced. I think

the parties need to realise there

are serious issues. That we need to

get back in the address, the

restoration of the talks process. We

have constructive puzzles we will

put forward but we need a change of

attitude from the political parties.

The reality is we had all those

problems and more before the storm

and project fell apart, and there

are similar problems in health and

education in the Republic of Ireland

and in Great Britain. It is not the

absence of politicians working at

Stormont cause and those problems.

It doesn't help, but it is not the

cause.

I disagree. Those problems

are getting worse. We face the need

to put the budget in place by

February and that needs to be done

by locally elected representatives,

and we have a privilege and

responsibility to take that

ownership of those issues, and I

sincerely hope the political parties

take that opportunity given to them.

It doesn't need to be done by those

politicians. It could be done by

direct rule ministers.

It absolutely

does, direct rule ministers have not

taken the strategic decisions

necessary, they have sown. They

don't have the same accountability

Government ministers can be helped

and we very much need locally

elected ministers in place to deal

with these issues -- they have

shown.

You want that but it doesn't

necessarily have to be the case.

I

think it does. I have seen locally

elected ministers show greater

responsibility with those issues.

They are more accessible and

consecutive Secretary of States have

not taken the right decisions in the

absence of consent is with parties

here so we need to take that

ourselves.

Roy Beggs, do you think

it is desirable are essential?

Not

essential but very desirable because

it gives them accountable

legitimacy. Undoubtedly we need a

budget in place. Not only to allow

the health service and other board

to ignite bodies to plan better for

the year...

Karen Bradley could put

a budget in place in consultation

with Northern Ireland's civil

servants, if she had to.

And if

politicians do not step up to the

mark and reach a sensible

arrangement something like that will

probably happen.

That is my point.

Well, actually the DUP and the

Tories are making the decision, that

is the problem.

One of the

difficulties in doing this, we will

not be able to draw them could use

of the additional money available.

We do need a local assembler, local

executive, to draw down and make use

of that money.

What money are you

talking about? Additional money? We

have had clarification on that

today. You

today. You don't need local

politicians at Stormont for that

money to be drawn down.

It can be

drawn down a lot faster and do a lot

more good if there are local

politicians taking the decisions

along with that.

The Secretary of

State made a bit of a mistake today,

firstly to Sam MacBride, and we will

speak to him later in the programme,

that local politicians had to be in

place to draw that money down, then

she had to issue a clarification on

the back of what Nigel Dodds was

saying on social media, that that is

not the case.

We have heard this

before. This was a story with James

Brokenshire, a similar story. Local

decision-making, the executive had

to come first, then they heard it

wasn't, and that shows the

relationship between the DUP and the

Tories. I think the last thing

people in the North want is for

Jeremy Hunt to making decisions

around the health service here in

the North. It should and must be

locally elected politicians.

Chris

Lyttle, do you believe the two main

parties actually want devolution to

be restored in Northern Ireland? Or

are we just going through some kind

of Charente where we need to be seen

to be giving a final role of the

days?

I sincerely hope it is not

awry because they are playing with

the lively diplomat of people right

across our community on the widest

range of fish as possible. I said

that they need a reality check --

they are playing with the

livelihoods of people. The budget

put forward as a result of the

confidence, and it is drop in the

ocean in terms of the savings and

reform that needs to be in Northern

Ireland -- on the widest range of

issues as possible.

When they say

they want to see devolution

restored, and they are serious about

that, at the same time they have

made it very clear time and again in

the past they are not prepared to

make the kind of compromises

necessary to secure that agreement.

The need to be willing to make, for

mice.

Where's the evidence they are

prepared to do that? We sit in this

studio week after week and we are

clear on the differences but when

you ask about the comp my

in no

small part that is why we have

called for an independent mediator

to chair the stocks.

Karen Bradley

says you don't need one.

We are

calling for one and we believe it

will bring the needed skills -- to

cheer the discussions.

She didn't

seem terribly well disposed to the

idea. Do you think she's capable of

being an honest broker?

We have seen

the approach of the two parties so

far and what that has achieved and I

think we should be responsible

enough in a negotiation, because it

is useful to have in an equation and

independent mediator to bring the

transparency and skills to their

other process.

To you all agree with

that?

Yes, we do. Can I say that in

this very studio, as I recall, Mr

Campbell said that the DUP were

prepared to compromise and

compromise would be needed? Before

Christmas they said they had

stretched themselves for the common

good. The problem is the public

doesn't know, and our party is

certainly don't know, what deal was

almost reached by the DUP and Sinn

Fein last year.

Norma, and you have

all asked for the position to be

published? No clarification as yet?

-- no, and you have all asked.

People need that in no way things

are, but the red line, we must get

our way, our issues, and nobody

else, those red lines must be

removed.

Do you see that equally of

both Sinn Fein and the DUP? .

Only

red lines I know are of Sinn Fein,

we

we must get A, B, C, D and E.

You

think Sinn Fein are being

unreasonable but the DUP are being

perfectly reasonable?

You could form

an executive today if everybody

allowed it to happen.

But it isn't

that simple, is it? If it was an

could've been done a year ago.

Who

is stopping it?

Well, who is

stopping it happen?

The real problem

is the failure of these two parties

to work collectively for the benefit

of all the people in Northern

Ireland.

Hang on, OK. That one way

of looking at it. Another way, Roy

Beggs, is to say 66% of people who

voted here in the general election

last June backed the DUP and Sinn

Fein, so those parties now have very

big mandate is not to compromise on

the key issues separating them?

Where do we go from the Allison?

It

is not up for me to tell you. --

where do we go from here?

It is not

up to me to tell you but I am asking

the question.

They have created the

barrier and they need to fix it.

They went to the electorate and got

very solid support, much bigger than

all of you got, even combine, for

them to continue with their existing

positions.

But is it not irresponsible to go

forward with a manifesto which

blocks democratic progress in

Northern Ireland and democratic

accountability? Both have been

irresponsible and have created the

problems.

They don't think they have

been responsible. They thumped you

at the polls, Dolores Kelly?

Not me

personally.

Your party.

What they

presided over in their years apart

is actually creating a more divided

society and community. We have had

the fresh start. Where has that

gone?

Lets not go back. We are where

we are.

Yes, but Sinn Fein and the

DUP had a joint charge of all of the

bodies, the accountability

mechanisms such as the equality

commission in terms of protecting

the rights of citizens across the

North, so Sinn Fein and the DUP have

got us into this mess, and if they

have such a big mandates, where are

they to make? Why are they afraid to

sit on a panel with the other

parties and face the public?

We

asked them to take part and they

chose, as is their right, not to

come tonight. I can't tell you any

more than that but they are not

there. Maybe you'll hear what they

have to say next Wednesday and maybe

next week when the talks have begun,

or maybe you won't. Who knows? Where

do we go from here, Chris Lyttle? We

have seen it all over the last 12

months and it doesn't seem a lot has

changed. The Secretary of State says

there are significant divisions but

it is a narrow gap rather than a

weighed one. Is it credible?

We certainly hope so and we have

ourselves put forward significant

proposals over some of the issues

the DUP and Sinn Fein have presented

as sticking points, including

minority language, and we have

proposed freeing votes in the

Assembly on those occasions...

If

they wanted to reach agreement, in

your view, they could?

We believe

so. The Alliance Party we believe

has put forward constructive

proposals. We will have worked

constructively on their red lines

and the mandate you referred to we

believe require us to deal with

those issues to get on with the

pressing issues we face in our

community around health, education,

the voluntary sector and the

economy.

Briefly, optimistic or not

optimistic?

Always try to be

optimistic and certainly our party

going in with the construct of

mindset to make it work.

I hope

there will be transparency of where

they are and we can move forward but

we need a willingness and I have yet

to see that.

We will leave it there

and watched development as they

unfold with interest. Thank you all

very much for joining us tonight.

The View has learned that plans

for a Citizens' Assembly

here are advanced and organisers

hope the forum will be up

and running this year.

The unofficial body will be made

up of 99 people picked

randomly from the electoral roll

who reflect Northern Irish society.

They'll be asked to debate subjects

that the politicians

have failed to agree on.

But will it really achieve anything,

or is it doomed to become just

another talking shop?

Stephen Walker has

been investigating...

Malahide, County Dublin, and in this

seafront hotel and experiment on

democracy is taking place.

Set up in 2016 this

assembly is made up of

99 citizens who were

chosen at random.

Their job is to discussion

and debate political and

constitutional issues and come

up with conclusions.

They are talking about the fine

print of politics yet not one of

these people is a politician. This

Assembly is made up of 99 citizens

chosen at random. Their job is to

discuss and debate controversial

political issues and come up with

conclusions. Those conclusions are

then sent to the Government who must

then provide a response.

It is clear those who sit on the

Assembly find it rewarding.

I think

it works because it enables your

average person in the street to

become involved in the conversation,

at a political level.

It has outcomes because we are able

to make recommendations to

Parliament.

to make recommendations to

Parliament.

But those conclusions

are only advisory.

I suppose it is

all very well having a group of

citizens coming together and making

recommendations here about topics

but the critical part is what

happens next. Will something be done

about it, will our voices be heard,

will action be taken?

What will we

learn from this citizens assembly?

Would it provide a platform for

debate and discussion in the absence

of devolution? And with we establish

something like that what issues will

be discussed?

Very timely and I

think that is in Northern Ireland,

we have this vacuum

think that is in Northern Ireland,

we have this vacuum right now and

why not use this opportunity with

the vacuum created to try something

like this. We are focusing on issues

south of the border that can work,

why not try it north?

From this

Belfast office a citizen boss like

-- assembly is being planned. The

idea is to run this examined in

2018, with one signal topic and

functioning over two weekends so you

would have two week is where

hundreds of members of the public

would come together and discussed

with topics with Esler witnesses and

ask them questions and deliberate

with one another, and the key thing

here is talking to people who have

different views from them. To sum a

citizens assembly is a great way of

testing opinion.

I hear politicians

he volley say all the time most

people say... They don't know what

most people say, but a citizens

assembly as ways of finding out

about.

Why do you think it would

work?

It would work can be helpful

and I think it is the only proposal

that I can see that would get an

assembly back up and running. In the

medium term.

Last week and Steven

Agnew joint politicians and observed

the assembly south of the border.

Our concern what they Northern

Ireland version would consider.

In

the Republic it has been used as a

sounding board for controversial

social issues such as a redefinition

of marriage and changing the

abortion legislation. I think

there's the decisions there that

should be made by educated

assemblies, and they are important

and made by elected representatives,

rather than a unanswerable group.

Creating a new assembly for the

debate has been tried before. Back

in 2000 a Civic Forum was set up

with people appointed from different

sectors of society. So is there any

room for a fresh body?

We have our

own Northern Ireland assembly, we

had a Civic Forum in Northern

Ireland until 2000 and. It does golf

for 15 years and no one seems to

have missed it. What we need to

decide is whether there is a need

for a third tier of government

somewhere.

Supporters say a citizens

assembly is not the same of the old

Civic Forum.

This is very, very

different and is asking ordinary

people as opposed to representative

bodies to come together and give the

example shown in the south that it

works. It shows it can be done

quickly and the costs are absolutely

marginal.

A pilot scheme will cost

around £200,000. Half of that money

has already been pledged and a group

has been appointed to run the

operation. Topics for debate have

you not yet been chosen but could

include issues like the transfer

test for organ donation. Or

political deadlock.

I think you will

be surprised how 100 ordinary people

could very quickly come to

practical, pragmatic, achievable

solutions and the politicians could

be very grateful for that help.

So

later this year 99 citizens and a

chairperson will meet. It will be an

assembly, albeit an unofficial one

looking for some like in a political

landscape that for 12 months has

been shrouded in uncertainty.

Stephen Walker reporting.

And joining me now with two very

different perspectives

on a Citizens' Assembly

are the Green Party's Steven Agnew,

who appeared in that

film, and in Manchester,

Professor Jon Tonge.

Jon Tonge, you aren't

persuaded that this kind

of exercise is useful in fact -

why not?

Well, I don't see where it would get

us. It won't break the deadlock. Why

has there been a deadlock over the

last 12 months question at the pit

bull with has been disagrees with --

disagreement over the last month

with a Irish language act. There

were 1200, not 100 voters would be a

more representative sample. One

third of people said yes one third

said no and one third said they

don't know. If you put 100 people in

the room, all we have is a other

dysfunctional assembly. We can't

have consensus out of a citizens

assembly. I agree it has worked

quite well in the Irish Republic but

the Irish Republic doesn't have the

problems that Northern Ireland has.

You can't export the model from the

Republic to the north and expected

to work as well.

You can't export

the model from the Republic and

Northern Ireland because we have

additional political sensitivities.

Did you buy that? The reality is the

assembly, as we know the assembler

assemblies dead. We have a talks

process coming up which is a

repetition of what we have had

before. No new independent chair,

nothing really different. It is the

definition of madness, doing the

same thing over again expecting a

different result. We are in a place

where need throwing to try something

different. What we ignore is that

the presence of the citizens

assembly, perhaps if you sampled

people now and ask them for their

views you would get the type of

division he talks about at the

advantage of something like a

citizens assembly if the

deliberation, the days in between

where people start with their

interview, hear the experts can hear

the arguments, and they start to

change their mind and when I was

part of the old constitution

convention, the forerunner to the

citizens assembly I sat and watched

people change their mind every day.

It is something political parties

can do. If I check my mind I have to

go up to hundreds of members, asked

them if they agree, and put it

through debate and conforming.

What

is the point in doing that if they

have no say at the end of the day on

policy? Interestingly Jim Wells

talked there about there being no

need for what he described as a

first tier of government. This

wouldn't be one of those, there

would be no authority whatsoever so

any deliberations would be

completely irrelevant, at the end of

the day.

It isn't in the interest in

some respects do the DGP to almost

hand over par but I am a believe it

first thing is, one of the first

things you should do in power is

share it.

They have been given power

by the elected in the first place.

But I believe in the deliberate

nation of -- deliberation of

democracy. It is about a continuing

conversation will stop as I said in

the peace we hear politicians say

all the time that they know what

people think but we don't come and

we need to keep that engagement

going. And what I would say... The

process I think does need political

meeting, a series of meetings with

the parties in terms of putting this

board I think this should be used to

review and reform and writer leaves

the Good Friday Agreement is, to get

new institutions reformed

institutions and coming up 20 years

on, I made this point on the 15th

anniversary, that if we don't review

and reform the Good Friday Agreement

it will collapse. That was almost

five years ago, now, and we are

faced with the 20th anniversary, no

assembly, we have to get something

back on the ground so the poor

decisions that were discussed

earlier can be made and can be taken

by local bulimic or local represents

this.

Jon Tonge, we have a political

vacuum to my hiatus in Northern

Ireland. Maybe our politicians just

need a little extra bit of help to

focus their minds and to comment

their deliberations and maybe the

general public would take to make

positive out of the exercise as

well?

There are means of doing that.

You can go for outside assistance to

mediate talks, a replication of

Senator George Mitchell's role in

1998 on the 20th anniversary of the

Good Friday Agreement might not be a

bad idea. You could ask that, ask

for control, but would talk about a

citizens Emily, there was one in

2000 deemed an 815,000 voters went

to the polls and 56% of them voted

for the DUP and Sinn Fein, adding

that Seri that we did of the 200

voters the fact is they supported

the is that we did of the 200 voters

the fact is they supported the is

the tuition which you have to have

consent in both communities to get a

measure through Stormont. That might

be a recipe for paralysis but the

public supported it. Those checks

and balances put in in 1998 were for

a reason, you could argue they have

been abused or misused but they had

a reason behind them. The issue here

is not about creating a new assembly

that would work in the same way that

the Civic Forum earlier didn't work

and I except there are differences

between the form and the assembly.

It is about getting Basson additions

-- politicians de Kock miles. Last

week Edwin Poots said his own

community and party had to be

prepared to make compromises and the

same needs to be reciprocated from

Sinn Fein. That is the way forward.

But getting more deliberative bodies

which was simple reed disagreed. --

simply disagree. The idea that one

third can miraculously change and

other third's views is far too

optimistic. All that would happen

would be that the citizens assembly

would pork back an impasse to the

politicians who would take that as a

further mandate to entrench their

own views so it could potentially

make things worse.

Any deal that

might be done but said last week to

be difficult to sell the members of

the party and party supporters. That

is the exact quote. I wonder what

you think of the other idea floated

today just beautifully, a group of

three former Good Friday Agreement

negotiators, for June this year, did

you throw your weight behind that?

That is an aberration of this

possibility. Politicians have to

take tough positions in Northern

Ireland and if they can't take them

you have too wide of the simile. I

have said for the longest time that

a cut in salary or removal of

salaries might concentrate minds the

previous entry estate kept putting

off decisions. It might be

interesting to see if the new one

can take tough decisions.

Would you

throw your weight behind that

referendum?

I don't think it is the

way. I am approaching it in a

similar way as he is but the problem

with referenda is that they get

divisive and you don't get that

proper, calm deliberation that the

light of a citizens assembly throws

up. John says the public of

Ireland's isn't as divided a country

as Northern Ireland but if you take

the issue of marriage equality, a

divisive issue, it was discussed

calmly and rationally and assessed

in the assembly with a significant

majority coming out in favour of it.

And then it was put to a referendum

after that considered conversation

had been had and. That is the

advantage that you can take somebody

through that process and through

respectful dialogue around a table

like that, with people who don't

know each other, have a

conversation, know each other's

views and with respect come to a

conclusion. But every issue was

there a definitive answer but let's

face it with the number of issues we

could be faced with, I believe the

discussion of the institutions, how

they would work, the coalition, the

petition of concern,

petition of concern, this is done in

Northern Ireland, and then

politicians might have the framework

to make those tough decisions which

they aren't doing in the first

place.

I suspect we will come back

to this in the weeks and months

ahead. Thank you very much both for

joining us today.

Let's hear what

tonight's commentators

make of what we've been discussing.

Allison Morris and Sam McBride

are with me again...

New talks?

Short, sharp, process, beginning

next Wednesday. Are you heartened by

anything you have heard is denied

that this might concede bulimic and

succeed where others have failed

question mark no, absolutely not.

I

don't think there has been any real

major change. We had a Christmas

break and in fact New Year and we

come back with a negative story and

things are even more divided. What

we have at present is Sinn Fein

currently doing the rounds of

voters. , they are going round their

constituencies and saying they are

taking on board what people are

saying and that they changing views

since Martin McGuinness step down a

year ago. I can't see them moving

from their position, going back on

these red lines, they say to a

prearranged agreements, and whether

that leave us customer the DUP I

don't think at this stage are in a

position to, either. They have held

those shoes for so long and they are

also partners with weapons that. I

think with the MPs, the ones

currently holding that part, a lot

of the people are involved in the

Good Friday Agreement anyway,

opposed to devolution back in the

Paisley days and I think they see

that a situation where they have a

Tory Prime Minister they would have

more aprons over them than they

would over another.

All the parties

have at least bought into the

process. There is a question mark of

Sinn Fein getting back into talks,

suddenly engaging with meaningful

talks but they are back in there,

Michelle O'Neill says she will

participate. Do you believe that

those two main parties actually

wants to see devolution restored, or

do you think they are simply going

through the motions?

I think they

both wanted this board but on their

terms. -- restored on their terms.

It pretty much goes on with the DUP

when it collapsed, and Sinn Fein

want radical change. Reject gay

marriage for example. A very long

list of things. We can do this if

voters are prepared compromising.

The fundamental issue here is that

there is no sense from the

supporters of the DUP or Sinn Fein

that they want this change and at

some point if there is a period of

direct rule, it is unpopular, a

crisis going on for protracted

period in the health service perhaps

that might build but it doesn't seem

anywhere near this point.

Three

smaller parties, are facing the

spectators?

I think it is

unfortunate but regardless of what

they say and they do have a mandate

at this time, this is a talks

process between the British

Government and DUP and Sinn Fein.

They are on the periphery and won't

have too much influence I don't

think. The Secretary of State seem

to have a different personality from

the previous secretary of state and

keen on getting the talks going but

that doesn't mean there will be any

difference as to what Sam said,

every has changed their position.

The lines are still there and

Straughan and the voter base, they

say that is what they want, and they

have helped this stage for too long.

They are saying no compromise now.

Both the DUP and Sinn Fein are

unlikely to be truthful with their

supporters.

I don't think this is

dishonest, but it is what people are

genuinely telling us. If you take it

at face value, it is about simply in

in past agreements. The big question

is what is there to talk about? What

is there to negotiate? That is one

of the fundamental difficulties.

Karen Bradley seemed to be very

positive today about the prospects

for success, she believes she is an

honest broker and it can be achieved

with that incite any evidence for

why suddenly the two main parties

will do a deal?

And I think when it

was put to what has changed, causing

the parties to come back in, it was

Simon Coveney who jumped in and

could see it when she couldn't, she

is different. And I think if she is

a different person, that will be how

we will see fundamentally what will

change it.

And she dropped the ball.

You asked a question and she got the

answer wrong.

Yes, and I have

sympathy for anyone fresh off a

plane in Northern Ireland, doesn't

know the situation, but if she is

not on top of her brief, and can she

actually be on top of it in such a

short time, no matter how good she

is an hard she works? Is she simply

at the mercy of her officials and

advisers etc?

And the citizens

Assembly?

On the face of it you can

see it has worked very well,

policies on the referendum, same-sex

marriage, and there will be the

abortion referendum later on this

year. But this place is completely

different. Firstly we are much

smaller and also there is too much

division here, so when they come to

randomly select these mentioning

people, you know what will happen?

The whole 19 A will be dissected as

to what section of the community

they come from, whether Loyalist or

Republican. -- the whole 99 will be

dissected.

Central to it is to

select these people. If we are

giving these people lots of power we

need to be clear on that.

OK, thank

you very much indeed.

That's it from The View

for this week.

Join me for Sunday Politics

at 11.35 here on BBC1 -

but before you all head off

to the land of nod, spare a thought

for the Tory MP, Sir Desmond Swayne.

Not even Ken Clarke could keep him

awake on the green benches -

mind you, it was the 11th day

of debate on the EU Withdrawal Bill.

Goodnight, and sweet dreams.

I was a supporter of the Treaty of

Lisbon and I voted against my own

party with the then government quite

frequently throughout those

proceedings, and I thought the

treaty was highly desirable. I'm

glad to see when we came to power we

showed not the slightest sign of

wishing to undo any of it, but the

Charter of fundamental rights is the

bit I was least keen on.

Sir Desmond

Swain!

LAUGHTER

Order, order, the Right Honourable

gentleman is extremely alert! And

I'm alert to what he is going to

say. So Desmond!