25/03/2014 Stormont Today

Hello and welcome to Stormont Today. Coming up in the next 30 minutes:

The First Minister reacts to concerns over the judge-led inquiry

into OTRs. I want to see this issue dealt with and dealt with

thoroughly. If at any time I feel it has not been dealt with robbery and

thoroughly I will try for you. There were rhyming couplets in the Chamber

as one MLA asked about poetry funding. Budgets, flags, parades, we

drop out one by one and only recently we have hovered on the over

those On the Run. And joining me to give his view on another busy day at

Stormont is political commentator, Alex Kane.

A row over On the Runs was threatening to derail Stormont just

a few weeks ago. The First Minister suggested he'd quit if he didn't get

a full inquiry. Now there's several inquiries including one by the

Justice Committee. It quizzed the permanent secretary of the

Department of Justice this afternoon. But let's hear first from

Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness.

The judge led inquiry demanded by the First Minister has been

criticised because Lady Justice Hallet will only examine a sample of

cases and won't consider whether the letters sent to Republicans classed

as On the Run were legal. I met with the judge yesterday. I

believe she will conduct a fair and impartial review of this. At a time

like this, all sorts of political agendas are trying to influence it.

My sense of it is she will not be influenced, she will stick to the

agreement. That is what she has got to do. Dominic Grieve, the Attorney

General, was a perfectly lawful process. All of the cases will be

reviewed whether they are reviewed by the police or by the judge is the

issue. As I understand it, the police are reviewing all 228 of

those who are involved in receiving letters. Many of them might have

been considered to be associated with multiple offences so we're

talking about many hundreds of case files. There are some nonsense,

political opponents are trying to make something of it, that this is

not a full review. If we had the kind of public enquiry that some

people are asking for this issue would go on for at least a decade.

That is not acceptable to me no visit acceptable to the victims of

terrorism in Northern Ireland. They want this issue dealt with quickly.

I am prepared to fold the delay until the end of June if that is

required. I want to see this issue dealt with thoroughly. If at any

time I feel it is not been dealt with properly and thoroughly then I

will cry foul. The Justice Committee began its own

inquiry today. The first witness was Nick Perry, the highest ranking

official in the Department of Justice. Mr Perry was aware of the

scheme when he was a director at the Northern Ireland Office. But did not

inform the Justice Minister when he moved over as this would have been

contrary to civil service rules. The justice minister has addressed

on a number of occasions many areas of confusion. I mention it again

because it is of a fundamental importance. Nor the Department of

Justice or any of its staff have had any involvement to the scheme dealt

with OTRs. There had been suggestions the department had been

implementing these arrangements without the Minister 's knowledge.

That is wholly incorrect. I don't see anywhere that explicitly stated

aim in -- administrative scheme will be retained. You make an assumption

that because of a delectable, this is a matter we are going to keep. It

is an issue you were going to close your ears to shut your eyes to

without getting any independent legal advice as permanent Secretary

of the Department of Justice. I find that not just remarkable but

incredulous that is the position you would take. I would repeat the

point. I do make the assumption, and it is a reasonable one, that the

division between devolved and non-devolved matters was taken on

the basis of legal advice. You may ask some other ministers what their

view is. If I was the Minister for Justice and you had withheld this

information from me, you wouldn't be my permanent secretary. It'd be a

clear breach of trust. Withheld this information based on nothing more

than your own assumptions. But isn't something I would tolerate from any

permanent secretary. I am entirety happy I worked within the guidance.

Have you find yourself in a situation when the Minister has

asked the question that if it goes and answered, you may have

information which could compromise? No, I haven't. Could you find

yourself in a position? I don't believe so. This issue will always

going to re-emerge. A blank man on a galloping horse would realise this

would re-emerge. I think that is what you should have briefed your

minister at the time but you fail to do that.

And with his thoughts on this issue and more, I'm joined by the

Newsletter columnist, Alex Kane. What did you make of the revelations

around this judge led inquiry? I am not surprised. The minute as Oz

announced he had that in quietly and then another three, this is the

fourth one. They are all going to have overlap in all squabbling

remits. Peter Robinson says it is acknowledged Lord Justice Hallett is

as great a look at all of them. All of that is going to take months to

sort out. What if they come to differing conclusions? What if they

concentrate on different nuances? I do think you will be any clearer on

this OTR mess. The critics include Jim Allister. We had statement today

from Mike Nesbitt who said this remit is disappointing. The two

Robinson is making out these aren't just political opponents trying to

make a Beavis issue. -- Peter Robinson. He said he was going to

step down if he did not get a thorough investigation. He got the

fairness minimum he could get. -- their list. He is using the excuse

of five of the committees which even got ask for, he did not make the

resignation issue. They are saving his bacon. I would not be

sympathetic with Jim Allister and Mike Nesbitt but I think on this one

they are right. Do you think first -- the First Minister overplayed his

hand? He knew it was never is going to come to that point. The

government knew what he was going to accept. Nick Perry in the hot seat

there. Later, the chairman of the Justice Committee put out a

statement saying many people would have questions about the fact that

make that Nick Perry says he did not have the details or the content of

the legal advice the minister asked for on this issue. Do you find that

odd? I do find it odd cause we do know she knew the details but chose

not to pass them on to the Minister. He says that is normal ministerial

convention. Ministers are not supposed to give stuff other

ministers had. This department did not exist before. He could have

found a way of letting the minister now. Sinn Fein members on the

Justice Committee could have told David Ford about this. They said

they knew about this all along. Finally, it doesn't matter to the

electorate out there is it going to be issue? No, it isn't going to be

an issue. They have already made up their minds.

It's not often you would like our MLAs to be poets, but one MLA used

his poetic licence when asking a question of the Culture, Arts and

Leisure Minister earlier. Ulster Scots funding was also on the

agenda, but first we turn to mental health initiatives.

Can the Minister indicate if any thought has been given to ensuring

that a champion of people will mental health issues can be brought

forward to help promote those issues in terms of leisure pursuits and

active sports participation in that category? I thank the member for his

question. We are looking. We have a champion for soccer. We have a

number of sports personalities who have been proactive and genuine in

their support around this issue and a happy to give up their time. We

have Paddy Barnes in north Belfast. We have two boxes who went along

with the strap line of we have got your back, we have got to your

corner. We will roll it out across. We talk in anger and just, it is

tempting to give the very best. Budgets, flags, parades, we dropped

them out one by one. We hovered on the brink on those On the Run.

Minister, my supplementary is unconditional. We recognise that

poetry is traditional? Have you got the money to fund this expression

will you let it flow away in another depression?

And you did not wrap! I couldn't then the base for you. That is

probably one of the best exchanges we have ever, ever hired. -- had.

But the members point is right. We need to find poetry. We have a great

history and heritage of poetry in the North. We have marked the sad

passing of Seamus Heaney amongst others. We need to support them.

They will be exam plus four other poets, budding poets and other cases

including guitars. I have consistently asked the Minister to

bring similar programmes. I am waiting on those programmes and have

been waiting since September 2011. Whatever influence you have, it is

important that people from the Ulster Scots community see

ministerial investment and support in those initiatives. Can I have an

assurance that if the project is brought forward, whether it be

language history or culture for the Ulster Scots community across

Ulster, it should have full support and he resourced in terms of money

and people. I have already spoken to people and I appreciate that in

terms of the pressures of language from its not the same. What we do

need to do is look at cultural heritage. It is very important. So

many times I have offered my support and I have encourage initiatives to

come forward. The door is still open and I'm still waiting. I can assure

the honourable member and other members that when they are brought

forward, I will look at them with a view of giving them full support.

And, staying with the Culture Minister, she faced a call to work

with Environment Minister and sporting bodies to evaluate the

existing facilities in the 11 new council areas. The Sinn Fein-led

motion noted the lack of sporting facilities for people with special

needs and disabilities. If it sounds familiar, it is. At present, people

with disability exercise less than those without. Just 12% participate

on a regular basis in sporting competitions. This figure indicates

the problem. The most important legacy from the London 2012 Olympic

and Paralympic games was the increase in the number of people

wishing to but it abate in sport. -- to participate in sport. We heard of

the increased demand from people with increased disabilities.

Statistics show that disabled people are still half as likely to get

involved as somebody who does not have a disability. Given that 20% of

the population is considered to have a disability, this is a worrying

statistic. We have made great progress. You have only got to look

at the demand and the achievements of our athletes. It gives you an

idea that there is demand, but the more the elite athletes achieved,

the greater the demand. That is good and beneficial to all of us. We must

do to address the need. Now we need to do our part. One has been

accredited. 19 haven't even gone through any process. We need to

ensure now that this is the opportunity to get all of our

councils on board, to hammer the message home that it isn't good

enough to put up around here, a ramp there. Everybody has to have access

to our facilities. I believe it is a worthy debate. Like many other

ministers, I am prepared to work with our stakeholders. For me, that

includes our Minister for environment, our local authorities,

this sports -- disability sports organisations and the Minister for

health. In short, section 75 and the falling limitation of this

legislation is everyone's business. -- full implementation. The

seemingly successful Olympics 2012 heralded what was other time

considered a new dawn for disabled sports. The reality on the ground is

less tangible. The committee led with disabled athletes in

Jordanstown. -- met with. Like all elite athletes, disabled or

otherwise, they are the exception rather than the rule. Many more

stories exist of what is lacking. So is there enough being done to

facilitate those with disabilities who want to participate in sport?

Joining me now is Kevin O'Neill from Disability Sports NI. How would you

characterise the current state of sporting facilities? It is mixed. A

lot of our modern facilities are very good. The issue is they are not

designed for wheelchair users. If you go down to clubs, provision

ranges from quite limited to poor. If you were advising the Minister,

what would your advice be? It would be to improve across-the-board. The

most important issue is we need access to sporting opportunities.

One of the key reasons for a lack of participation if the opportunities.

One of the statistics was that 20% of people in Northern Ireland are

classified with a disability. Is there demand in that sector for

better facilities? We noticed that after 2012 was a marked increase in

people participating in sport. People want to participate in

recreational activities. There is definitely a demand. The issue at

the moment is the supplier isn't there. How concerned would you be

that MLAs are merely paying lip service to this issue? The issue for

us is that there is political will. We have no doubt there is political

support. It is how we can form the support to grassroots opportunities

on the ground. We are about to launch a strategic plan for the next

period. We hope to get support for that. I am sure we will. Let's see

what happens. Can you give me some of the details? It is

across-the-board facilities. Coaching? In general, we need our

coaches to be more inclusive of people with disabilities. The key

issue in most areas of Northern Ireland, there is nothing for you

fully. We want more grassroots opportunities on the ground. In a

word, will the fact there are going to be these local authorities and

opportunity? It is easier to have a conversation with 11 authorities

than 26. Sport NI have improved things dramatically in recent years

but we need to keep the momentum going. Thank you.

Our MLAs looked beyond our borders today to discuss the plight of 33

Christians condemned to death in North Korea. The DUP motion called

on the Westminster government to use its influence to secure greater

freedom of religious belief and worship throughout the world. I have

said that we have relatively limited powers in this field. Foreign

affairs is an entirely reserved matter at Westminster. We have no

direct input into these issues. But I think we can use our influence as

an integral part of the UK to bring pressure on the Department of

foreign affairs who do all it can through the UN and through

international diplomacy to try and bring some relief to the torture and

ill-treatment of all those Christians in this renegade state.

It is not right to threaten the execution of Christians in North

Korea, burned churches in need, to massacre Christians in Sudan or

Pakistan, or to burn people out of their homes because of their

religion. It is not acceptable in this day and age. During the Crimean

annexation recently, three Catholic priests were questioned and abused

by pro-Russian forces. Given that we want freedom for all religions and

given that the DUP are standing up for religious belief, I await with

great extirpation their condemnation of anti-Catholicism, where it

occurs, challenging... I won't give way... Challenging the Orange order

when he steps out of line. Maybe they will no longer stay silent on

the more recent behaviour against Christians at St Patrick 's Chapel

in Belfast. In countries like China, there have been far too many

incidents of denials of human rights, including rights in regard

to freedom of worship. We in the West very readily do business. As an

MEP, I often raised issues like this with the foreign affairs

Commissioner. There always was an empathy but one always got the

impression that it was tempered by their desire not to upset the trade

opportunities. We would ask from this House today that a very strong

message goes to our government that this assembly a pause of the

persecution of Christians in North Korea, and right across the world. I

also welcome the fact that his colleague, also a minister in the

FCO, in his response to a member asking a question, said he takes the

opportunities to go and visit Christian communities, whether they

are in Egypt or Algeria, and I think that is a changeable way of --

tangible way of showing support to Christians who may feel under threat

or might be prosecuted by authorities. When I been on trade

missions, I have taken the opportunity to visit Christian

communities, just to say to them that we are supporting them. -- when

I have been. Enterprise Minister Arlene Foster,

speaking in that debate from the back benches. Education Minister

John O'Dowd also faced questions today and the agenda was dominated

by his proposals for the future of the Common Funding Formula. Ulster

Unionist Robin Swann asked the question. On 13 March, after

consideration, I announced my final decision on changes to the common

funding scheme. I maintain this was a genuine consultation. I was

delighted with the level of response we have seen and I have listened to

the views from all who took the time to respond. I have made a number of

proposals. I want to insure that resources remain. No school will

receive less funding this year than it would have done if I had made no

changes to the Budget or formula. There is a fund available for these

schools whose budgets... Schools have received notification of the

delegated Budget for the coming year. I thank him for his answer and

recognising that the first former didn't work. Does he recognise that

a transition makes it hard for principles to Budget into the

future? It is the nature of the Budget system. I don't know the

Department for education but not Budget, so I can't make any

commitment under the guise of education beyond the current

financial year. I can assure the honourable member that I will

endeavour to secure whatever funding I can for the provision of education

going into the future. I will take a serious look at the transition from

going into the future for those groups may have lost funds as a

result of the changes I have made. Members will recall that I was not

satisfied that the exiting scheme was fit for purpose. I set out with

an objective which remains. As I said in response to the original

question, I have taken on concerns raised, but the objective remains.

Schools have received money. I have also committed to putting in place

tracking to make sure the money spent to reduce educational

underachievement for all pupils. Now back to Alex Kane with his

five-month -- with his final fours today's proceedings. That debate

today on the persecution of Christians. Do you think would it

was appropriate for the -- it was appropriate for the Northern Ireland

assembly to delve into that issue? It was not. To spend an hour on a

motion like that which doesn't make the blindest bit of difference to

anybody, any constituent in Northern Ireland, it does a disservice to the

people. They would argue they are putting pressure on the West must

the government ahead of its debate. They are putting pressure but MPs

can do the debate there. They talk about Christianity across the

world, but no matter what the issue in Northern Ireland, it always comes

back to the dreary steeples -- stable.

He has no choice now. If he doesn't stand, the DUP are going to mock

him. They are going to say, oh, Jim, what of the -- is the point of

taking this on? He needs to be the one who provides the trickle down.

They are not getting it anywhere else. They are not getting it in

their own right. The party keep telling us an announcement on this

issue is imminent. Have you heard any news? They have said April the

3rd. We have to leave it there. That's all we have time for tonight.

Mark Carruthers will be back with The View on Thursday night at 10:35

on BBC One. Goodnight. At 11:20, British forces were sent

the fateful telegram