Episode 7 The Nolan Show

Tonight, an official enquiry has been announced into the sexual

exploitation of children. We will hear a disturbing account from a

former care home worker. I was absolutely as attended by this, that

this was going on. Nobody seemed to think that it was shocking. It just

seemed to be part of what went on in residential care, and that makes me

very sad. Also tonight, is Stormont really

facing meltdown? "Hey, you'll never guess who I've

just seen." And he's best known as Corrie's Les Battersby - Bruce Jones

will be here to tell his incredible story.

Good evening. Tonight will be a very different Nolan Show. This evening

we're looking at the sexual exploitation of children - that's

young people being abused here in Northern Ireland. You will have

heard in recent days a lot about children in care homes being

targeted. But of course this is a problem not just unique to children

in residential homes - it could happen to anyone. You are about to

hear from a former care home worker. She says in the past she has seen

men picking up children outside a home. The young people that leave

the home, at any time of the day, but often in the evenings, without

our permission, we would know where they had gone. We would try to find

out where they had gone, and they might be missing then through part

of that night and returned in the early hours of the morning. Or else,

maybe for a number of days at a time. Sometimes we would have hidden

so that we can get a number plates or try to find out whether they were

getting into a vehicle and get the number plate or a description of the

car that we can Passau. But always when I young person left without

permission, or any incident happened, we would contact the

police as a first port of call, to report the young people missing. And

we did have initially quite a poor relationship with the police,

because they found it difficult to understand why the young people

could just leave and why we couldn't prevent them leaving. They would

have always visited if we had a prevent them leaving. They would

suspicion that they were at a particular address. They would

always have acted on that. We would always have asked young people to

protect themselves. Quite often what appeared to be happening was that

they were being picked up by the same person or people. But the

person would come and pick them up, provide them with alcohol and/or

drugs, and then would expect one of the young people to repay that by

engaging in a sexual act. We were aware that the same meal was coming

engaging in a sexual act. We were and he was contacting other males to

come. No one would agree to press charges about this man. I would say

he knew that they were coming from a residential children's home. There

were always at least three young people he would pick up and

encourage them to recruit other young people to come out. Then he

would return them to the home. That would maybe be two to three in the

morning. It felt very hopeless because there were so little control

for us as carers to what we could do, how we could stop this from

happening. I was absolutely a standard -- is founded. It just

seemed to be part of what went on in residential care, and that makes me

very sad. I am sure it will make you very sad

watching this at home as well. That was a lady who worked in the care

home in the past, but I can tell you, I have been speaking to care

home in the past, but I can tell workers who allege that this is

still going on. But there are men who are deliberately trying to pick

up children and young people outside care homes. How should we feel about

up children and young people outside this as a community? It is not just

that lady saying this. I think, for the lady in question, there was a

sense of shock. I would share that shock and I think society should

share that shock. I suppose the shock and I think society should

issue is that there is a reality, to reiterate what you said earlier, I

think it is an important point both in dealing with this matter

particularly sensitively, but also to reiterate your point but this

does not just apply to children within the looked after system. But

you say you are shocked. Why are you shocked? I'm shocked because,

ultimately, we all want to see our children cared for and looked after.

Are you only learning about this recently? No, this has been an issue

for some time. Child sexual explication is a form of child

abuse. Child abuse has been around for generations. But specifically

abuse. Child abuse has been around about a vulnerability around

children in care homes. There are many decent care homes in this

country, and many, many children being loved and looked after and

country, and many, many children protected in care homes by fantastic

stuff. That is not in dispute here. What is in dispute is how long some

of the authorities have known this has been going on for. How long have

you, sir, known that there is a vulnerability around adults trying

to target, exploit, sexually exploit and prey on children from our care

homes? As a social worker with 30 years' experience, and from my

initial training, I would be aware of the potential for certain

individuals to exploit children. How long have you known about this

specific problem? I don't wish to talk about the current operation,

but the current operation has been highlighted to us this year. But we

have been aware that children, within the care system and wider,

can be vulnerable to sexual exploitation. I want to show us all

in Northern Ireland tonight, for example, back in 2009, maybe we can

see this graphic on-screen now, what was actually said in 2009. Can we

read together? Let's see it. This is a report from 2009.

And then, approximately 90% of the children we see who are going

missing on a regular basis are being sexually exploited in some way. 2009

this was written. And now the Minister is announcing an enquiry?

this was written. And now the The report was launched in 2011.

this was written. And now the That is a 2009 report. That is a

public report from 2009. Were you aware of it in 2009? We would have

been part of the discussions. We worked very closely. What has

happened in the last four years within? Quite a range of things have

happened. And yet in 2011, let's have a look at what was said in

2011. Another report. Let's get into that issue. There are

so many officials who have been good enough to come here tonight. Staff

saying that they were really concerned that they did not know how

to stop young, vulnerable people leaving care homes. Have you heard

about this? I have heard two parts of the story, I have worked with

staff, our organisation goes into residential homes all the time. We

have heard how they are managing children who are trying to leave

home. How they are taking down number plates of cars. How they then

go into communities and pass on the information. I have also heard, and

quite distressed, by the fact that some staff are feeling like they are

unable to act in the same way that some of those other units are. My

question is, if we know that there is a really good practice out there,

why are we not learning from that and bringing the other units and

giving the support and guidance to residents and staff to make sure

they know what to do at that point? Are you shocked? The type of abuse

we have heard about and the public have heard about is shocking. Am I

surprised? No, I am not. The chronology of how far this goes back

is important. In 2006, there was a child protection inspection report

that identify vulnerable children in care could be exploited. My

colleague raised this issue in assembly in 2008. She sought to

bring a private members bill, and that identified her concerns. What

alarms me is that public health officials indicated to her this was

not an issue. And that she was in danger of criminalising young

people. There was an attitude that Tim -- that time but didn't

recognise the concerns of young people. In October 2011 on the

report, was anything done a month later? There were five

recommendations that were made. All five of them are being implemented.

We set up the safeguarding board. He is funding counselling services for

children that have alcohol and drug abuse. And I have parents and care

workers, yet, within the system, telling me there is utter confusion

now, tonight. But there are 14 and 15 and younger children in care

homes, and if they want to leave those care homes, and if the staff

feel that that child is in danger, they still cannot stop them. And

that concerns me. When you hear that the police in their investigation

say that ten of these children collectively went missing over an 18

month period, that should be raising alarm bells. They could have raised

them a long time ago. That is correct. We need to ask those

questions about why that happened and have lessons been learned from

that? What we need to focus on are the systems that are operating

today, are they best practice, or the robust, RV properly resort? Is

that again remotely acceptable, when we think of those children who the

that again remotely acceptable, when police suspect were abused? Some 22

children went missing 437 times. In terms of a context, it's important

to understand how complex this issue is. We have numbers of these

children, we need to be clear about the sensitivity of some of this is

handled -- of how some of this is handled. The issue of engaging with

children within the looked after system is about establishing and

forging a relationship about staff utilising the skills and trying to

work with children. There are exceptional circumstances to go back

to your earlier point. There are exceptional circumstances when a

child is going to be an immediate risk and staff will be involved in

physical restraint. But those are exceptional circumstances. Why are

the exceptional? Because it is about trying to forge a relationship with

the child. Remember what they may have experienced prior to coming

into the care system. Physical maltreatment, prior to coming into

care. For staff members to use physical restraint on those

children, there is a different connotation. When can a staff member

restrain a child? When it is felt there is imminent risk of the child

being a danger to others or danger to themselves. Can you define

imminent risk? This is at the heart of the story. If it were felt, and I

do think things have moved on in terms of both guidance in terms of

missing children, the relationship terms of both guidance in terms of

with police. Particularly the relationship at a local level

between police public protection units and the children's homes. All

of that has improved. Tell a social worker or a care worker tonight,

because I am hearing from them, and they are telling me they don't know,

which is deeply worrying. Tell them tonight under what circumstances

they can restrain a child. I have indicated. If it was considered, let

me give you an example, a 14-year-old child. Who has gone

missing many many times, and has a trend of going missing, wants to

leave the home at 2am in the morning. Can they just walk out or

is the staff allowed to restrain them? It would depend on the

circumstances. There is a 14-year-old child wanting to leave

that home at two o'clock in the morning and the staff have no idea

where they are going. You would be looking for the staff to utilise

their skills to engage and communicate with that young person.

To put themselves in front of the young person, and daughters will be

locked at night in children's homes. -- and doors will be locked. In

circumstances where it is felt there are going to be significant risks.

It depends where the child is going and what the risks are. Just say you

don't know. It depends on the context. If you have a child, and by

the way I understand how complex this is, I really do. There is a

grey area here. We do not want to be this is, I really do. There is a

locking children down. But at the this is, I really do. There is a

heart of this story, if you do not know where 13, -year-old child is

going, would you recommend now, send a public message out, if you don't

know where that child is going, are you allowed to stop them? I would

recommend staff trying to use all within their power to stop that

child leaving the vicinity. That is not something staff can undertake.

It is difficult to look at these things without a context, without

being there. It is not possible for me to give a verdict to say in any

situation where a 14-year-old is going to leave a care home,

physically restrain them, because there are all kinds of connotations.

If it is felt there is going to be there are all kinds of connotations.

genuine risk, if there is adequate staff, if they feel they can

physically restrain a young person in an appropriate manner with other

young people within the facility not reacting to that, if the young

people are saying they are only going a short distance. There needs

to be a discussion within the system whether this imminent risk needs to

be change. What has struck me when I was talking to some of your staff

and the parents that if you think of the powers the police have, all the

blues need is a reasonable suspicion that an offence has been caused to

arrest someone. They don't need to be certain that someone is

committing a crime. They need a reasonable suspicion. I wonder if we

draw that as a parallel. The police can arrest someone with a reasonable

suspicion. But in order to stop a 12-year-old child leaving a care

home, there needs to be an imminent risk, so the threshold is up there.

I think it is about the professional judgement, whether you have

reasonable grounds there is an imminent risk. I think you have got

to believe there is imminent risk. We need to put this in context.

These children did not arrive one day in care, they have gone on a

very difficult journey, some of them day in care, they have gone on a

are going through foster care and the most convex cases are ending up

in care. We need to stop looking back at this stage and look at what

in care. We need to stop looking is important. We need to look at how

can we enhance better, critical early intervention that takes the

very young children who are not already indoctrinated and diverts

them? How can we take a criminal justice approach? The predator is

being isolated, named and shamed in public and treated as the child

abusers they are. I believe if we put more effort into putting these

young men on the Sex Offenders Register, you would have a mechanism

for critical intervention. If I say you are on the register and you

for critical intervention. If I say cannot engage with these children,

for critical intervention. If I say and you then do, I can arrest you.

for critical intervention. If I say Again, with some of the parents I

have spoken to, backed by care workers, there are situations in

Northern Ireland were some of these adults are standing on the bottom of

driveways of these care homes. The care workers have seen these adults

and the child was to leave the care home and the care worker is telling

me they cannot stop the children. If they say they want to go, they are

going. Children go missing every year from homes with parents and

siblings in them. This is not something restricted to care homes.

We should not, I think we need to be careful about stigmatising those

people doing a very difficult job. They need better training, better

support and there needs to be more clarity. Let's take that point and

put it beyond care homes. There are quite a few children in Northern

Ireland who are living in residential homes, they are leaving

your home, they are being groomed by other people in society, and they

are being abused. I have spoken to parents who are saying this

situation in which the children but not listen to mum or dad, they are

walking out in the middle of the night, and social services are

walking out in the middle of the telling them that they cannot stop

the child walking out of the door. That is what they say. Any parent

advocating their responsibility on that basis needs to risk -- reflect

advocating their responsibility on on their own position. We need to be

demanding clarity. The only people that will be sitting back and

benefiting from this debate will be the predators because they will be

listening to every word and they will change what they are doing and

how they are doing it and I think we need to be holding them to account,

we need to see them in court, and real deterrent will not be when we

we need to see them in court, and talk about holding people to account

but when we use the Sex Offenders Register. Yes, sir, go ahead. It is

paralysis by analysis for me. Where is the duty of care? We are in 2013

and we are still talking about this still happening. We are just talking

about what we are going to do. Where is the duty of care safeguarding

policy that is in place? You mention an ad hoc approach as well, people

are very clear of processes and procedures and all I am hearing is,

we don't really know, it is a convex issue. I agree it is a complex issue

but what is happening here and now to deal with this issue as opposed

to the joining up the dots policy and going back over the past? Where

is Terry Williams? URA retired social worker. What is your

experience? 21 years, 18 of which was residential childcare. And this

issue where there is a sense that it is clear what powers care staff have

two stop a child leaving a home? Is is clear what powers care staff have

that your experience? It is definition. It is one person's

definition of a risk. But they residential member of staff has got

to take that decision and take it in the light of the circumstances they

are in. Is there confusion on the ground? There is because it is not

clear. When you do your social work training, one of the things we were

taught by a barrister was that if you lay your hands on a child, that

is assault. Therefore, every residential social worker, they also

have to think of the possibility that they could be reported for

assault. Would it have been a regular occurrence that you did not

want a child to leave a home and they were leaving anyway? It would

be regular, yes. Do you think that is in the profession generally?

Yes, I believe people genuinely don't know where they stand. They

genuinely want to care for children, they do everything they

can, they don't just turn their back, but with regard to restraint,

I trained restraint, and to do a restraint correctly you need three

members of staff. Three members of staff are not on duty at 2am in the

morning. You could be criticised or taken to task for using a restraint

which requires three people but there are only two. There has been

another care worker telling me this no later than tonight that even if

they do want to restrain a child, there are two competing rules. How

have we got to this stage in Northern Ireland where you need

three staff in a care home in order to do it as the policy suggests but

there are only two staff on duty? How have we got to that stage?

Absolutely. Let me speak to the chair of the storm on health

committee. We are hearing tonight from former social care workers and

from people who have spoken to me and from the film, there is

confusion at the heart of this story as to when a parent can stop a child

leaving a home when they feel they are at risk and from care homes. I

think there is an issue about accountability in all of this. It is

shocking, the levels of bone ability, and I think that is a real

challenge for us collectively and for society. When we hear a lot of

these children and young people don't actually realise that they are

being abused. I would like to stress first and foremost that some of the

commentators have said this is ultimately about safeguarding and

protecting children and young people. However, we cannot lose

protecting children and young sight of the fact that 18 out of 22

of these young people left their care facilities over 400 times.

There is a failing in the system. I have to say I welcome, albeit

belatedly, the statement today in terms of the agreement that they're

now should be an enquiry because I firmly believe that there needs to

be, and the wider community and wider public need to get a sense of

what failed here. What part of the system failed here and what can be

done to hold that to account. Let's speak to the Children's

Commissioner. What is your message tonight? My core priority is to

Commissioner. What is your message ensure the safety of children and

young people and I think we find it difficult when we start to talk

about procedures instead of ensuring the protection of these children. I

am shocked like others, I think there is feelings in the system, but

hopefully the process that the minister talked about today will

help them identify some of those gaps. We need clarity about what our

care workers can do. But the ultimate aim is the protection of

these young people who are very vulnerable, not just in our care

homes but outside those care homes in our communities as well. Would

you support children being physically restrained if there is a

suspicion that they may come to harm, never mind immediate harm? I

am very concerned that we continue to victimise the victim further. I

am very concerned that we continue think we should put a lot of our

energies into catching these think we should put a lot of our

perpetrators and making sure these children are not put in any kind of

danger. I think there is a need for clarity around how care workers can

handle these situations and, as we have heard, they need to use the

skills and experiences they have. Part of these enquiries will help

clarify some of that. Can I ask one other question here. Tony Rogers,

let me give you another situation I am aware of. There is a father who

saw on social media that his child was receiving very graphic

pornographic images from other young people who were encouraging that

child to have sex and the child still wanted to leave the house in

the middle of the night and indeed did. Is that, in your view, an

immediate and imminent threat? Is that father allowed to restrain that

child? I would be seeking to support parents in discharging their

parental responsibility. Is that a yes? Yes, if that is what the parent

felt was required. It is important to look at the implication, and that

is perhaps what you want to get you in tins of clarifying the petition

-- position. We don't want to get to a stage where we see it as the norm

within children's homes where staff are retaining -- restraining

children. It is not the norm, it is not seem to be happening very much.

But if it was suggested that should move to the norm. What children have

experienced prior to coming to that has got to be borne in mind as to

how those children should be responded to. I have heard Jim and

Patricia about the emphasis and focus being on those who pose a risk

to those children and that is where I think we should be turning our

attention. Roger Bailey, you are a clinical psychologist. What is your

view? One of the issues to me which does not appear to be servicing

right now is that the children, when they come into care, they have

already been abused, they have already suffered emotional,

psychological, deprivation, physical abuse. One of the key issues here is

that that changes the way these children see the world, the way they

interact with other people. The fundamental capacity to trust has

been damaged. When we are talking about using our skills to stop them

leaving, we are talking about a trusting relationship which means

something we can use to stop them going through the door. The fact is,

we know that is already profoundly damaged. The children often have a

sense of worthlessness and hopelessness, they live for the

moment, they often self-medicating hopelessness, they live for the

with drugs, they go to parties, they get given drugs, they get abused and

it becomes the norm. What we need to do is to think, how are we managing

our treatment and our care of these kids to prevent them getting to this

position? They have these very severe psychological disorders.

Now, if you've been affected by any of the issues we've been discussing

The minister has said that he has announced an enquiry today. Do you

feel that there is a need for an immediate, as in this week,

clarification, as to when a child can be stopped from putting

themselves in danger? I think the question you pose, you are seeking a

yes or no answer. The reality of the situation is that every situation

does need to be taken in its own context. Let me give you a couple of

examples. The very first thing, as everyone else has said, what we do

not want to do is see a context where children themselves are

further locked up. Where the relationships that children have are

further damaged. But that does not mean to say that from time to time

it is not appropriate for authorities to consider the use of

secure care. But what we must not do is adopt the social policy that

essentially says these children, because of their own vulnerability,

we are going to further, in order to protect them, cause them more

potential damage. What we must do... But this is where the gap is,

because some of those children, all of those children are decent

children, that's a given. A lot of those children are damaged through

no fault of their own, but they are vulnerable if they are not in a home

at night. That is what any decent parent would say. If a child is out

at night. That is what any decent in the middle of the night, they are

vulnerable. Correct, I believe that's right. And from what I hear,

this is happening too often. I believe what this requires is a

fundamental review of the system. To take into consideration how we can

ensure, not only that children's homes, but parents in their own

home, know what they can do. The reality of that situation, and I do

agree when he says any parent has the right to try and restrain his or

her child, and that includes a corporate payment -- corporate

parent. But there is a context for actually doing that based upon a

relationship. It is actually based upon the sense of trust. Thank you

for that. I want to say thank you to all of you on the panel tonight.

Please, and I want to take the time to say this evening, I said at the

top and I'm repeating myself deliberately, there are fantastic

care workers who do their very best. There are executives doing their

very best. This is a complex issue, There are executives doing their

that there is no doubt that in society we need to take this

seriously, we need to help the police, help social services. We

need to watch out for the perpetrators. If you have been

affected by any of the issues there will be information about sources of

support immediately after the programme. If our guests a road of

applause. -- give our guests around of applause.

Now, my next guest barely needs an introduction. For over ten years he

played the main man in Coronation Street's "family from hell". Here's

a reminder of one of the many scrapes his character got involved

in. Oh yeah, that. I took that few at Doncaster, 1980 summit. Leave him

alone! Boy, France's, leave it. He is not worth it. You all right,

mate? Status Quo beat me up. But behind the mask of Les

Battersby, he was battling alcoholism and depression. He has a

remarkable story to tell. Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Bruce

Jones. Good to see you. I see we have the same tailor. What are you

trying to say? We just look smart, the pair of us. What's it like when

you walk out? Obviously you have got that fame and everybody knows you.

Did many people recognise you? Yeah, Manchester Airport, everybody

recognised me there. I must say, I love Belfast. It is great. The

people of Belfast are absolutely fantastic. Let's see if you're

saying that by the end of the show. I will be. They are pretty straight

talking here. Many people, of course, will know about your

appearances on Coronation Street, and as is often the case in life,

many of us have back stories. You have got one hell of a story. I

started out as a kid as an actor. I have been in every TV show going, I

started out as a kid as an actor. I ended up in Coronation Street for 11

years. I couldn't get out. I wanted to go in for six months because I

promised my grandmother one day if I was an actor I would be in

Coronation Street. My grandmother and I used to watch Coronation

Street. I promised her I would be in it. She was from County Court. Every

night I would watch it. And then I ended up in the thing. A lot of

pressure. At first, when I got the job, I was doing it 20 47 with Bob

Hoskins. Then I got the show to go to Granada. I had to be there at

6:30pm on a Friday night. I had a rare weekend off to visit my wife

and kids. But I got to Granada at have passed six and I said to the

casting director, why am I here? I auditioned before I started the

film, for a new series Granada were doing called The Chain Gang. I

film, for a new series Granada were thought it was for that. And

behind-the-scenes, you were battling with drink? Not then, never then.

That came later. They wouldn't tell me what I was therefore. They took

me to the hotel that was next door. I had a pint of Guinness with the

producer, I said what I here for? Why am I here? I need to go and see

my wife. He told me this story about this family. I said, where you could

put this family, they sound horrible. And I've got there at have

passed six, I was still there at half past ten, still not knowing

what I was therefore. And this was half past ten, still not knowing

the family from hell. There is so much of your story I need to get

through in the next few minutes. It will shock people. For example, very

serious trauma that you had as a child that went on to trouble you

for the rest of your life. How could child that went on to trouble you

it not? Obviously, as a young child and a young man on the River. Like

every kid, wherever you live in the world, you run in a gang. In every

gang there is a weakling. This child was the youngest of the mother and

father who couldn't have any more children. We used to play a game on

the River, a day game. At five o'clock, we have to be home. Your

tea was there. If you weren't all you got a right crack off your mum

and dad. You couldn't get away from it. He would not come home with us.

He would not come home from that river with us. We left. At about

nine o'clock the police knocked on the door, they did not know where he

was. So we went out as kids and parents looking, and I turned around

to my mum and said we left on the river. And my mum looked at me and

said you didn't leave a river? I said yes. They found in dead. He ran

away without us being there. And said yes. They found in dead. He ran

they found him dead. Did you blame yourself? Yes, for a long time. I

ended up in hospital for two years with rheumatic fever and I think

that was me paying for what I did wrong, for leaving that kid. I went

through a series of things as a child. I was two years in hospital

with rheumatic fever. Lying on an isolation ward. There was me and the

girl. They used to shut the curtains when they drove the trolley past.

You're next. Your number eight, number nine is the girl. And one day

they came in with a needle. They number nine is the girl. And one day

said if this doesn't work it is curtains. My dad never came to see

me. Or my grandfather. They thought curtains. My dad never came to see

I was quick to die young, they gave up. That story of the child on the

river, did that trouble you? And lead to you suffering from

depression? Later on in life, it got worse. In my late 20s I lost my

marriage, but I got married again. I have a great wife now. Finding the

body of a victim of the Yorkshire Ripper? Yes. Oh, my God. I wheeled

my wheelbarrow over six times, five times, and he was in the bushes. You

suppress all of the stuff in the back of your mind. I never spoke

about it. My first six months on back of your mind. I never spoke

Coronation Street, we were hated. back of your mind. I never spoke

The Daily Mirror put a big thing up, Bruce Jones has a dark secret. I

remember getting in trouble with Coronation Street. You're supposed

to tell them everything so you can protect yourself. I turned around

and said why should I tell you? I don't want to know. You have seen

and said why should I tell you? I the body. My wife didn't know about

it until it came out. I don't want the nightmares again. Everything was

going great, films, movies, houses whatever. Then it started to hurt.

Why have I got... How can I say, honestly? How can you have a life

like I grew up? The life of being a TV star, a film star, all this

baggage in the back of your head, and deal with it? And it started to

hurt me. Later on, not when I started out... When I got the

success of where I was coming to an going... This led to serious

depression? Depression, believe you me it's hard. Depression and drink

depression? Depression, believe you go hand-in-hand. I never took

drugs. I won't even take antidepressants. You were drinking

heavily. Yes, to suppress what I was feeling. I get a sense of that pain,

Bruce, when I hear about the story of how you were travelling along the

road. This is an incredible story. I have had enough, it was time to go.

What happened? I just finished work... I woke up that morning and I

didn't want to get out of bed. I had had enough, it was time for me to

go. My mum had died two years earlier, and I wanted to see my mum

again. I remember getting in the car, I had been in the pub all day.

I remember getting in the car and driving down the A55 and North

Wales. I turned the car, and how I didn't kill... You tried to kill

her, Bruce? Yes, I got in trouble for that. I was sent to a rehab

unit. I would not talk about what for that. I was sent to a rehab

was wrong with me. I can talk about it now and sometimes it will upset

me. But then I couldn't. Now it is all out in the open. I co-wrote a

play. Now it is how to beat it. How do you beat it? You talk about it.

play. Now it is how to beat it. How At first when I went to rehab, I

thought, what do you know about me? That is how I felt. I am talking to

you now because it is all out in the open. I cried for a week, I poured

it all out. My wife came to see me and my kids came to see me. I did

not know I was ill. I did not know what was wrong with me. Are you

better? I am fine now. I can have a pint with the best of them. You lost

a lot of money. I am glad. I came from a council estate and I still

a lot of money. I am glad. I came see friends there. Money is great,

but it is not... I have got more values in life now. You know the

amount of charity work I do. Are you happier now that the money has gone?

Yes. But the money has come back now. I have just got two films. I am

back now to where I was five years ago and I am so happy to be back

doing the films, making people happy if I can. Hopefully I can. I have

just done a new Christmas record. It is unbelievable. I am going to Los

Angeles, I have got to movies to go to. I have got a great team around

me now. My wife is part of that team. And

me now. My wife is part of that screaming in my ear that we

of time. But what a compelling story you have. Hang on to what you have

said tonight, you are back, and I am glad there is a big smile on your

face. Give Bruce a big round of applause.

Well, it all kicked off on the Nolan radio show this morning. We've been

hearing all these whispers about growing tensions between the DUP and

hearing all these whispers about Sinn Fein. It was all laid bare on

the show today. Gerry Kelly told me power-sharing is in crisis.

Nobody should be surprised at what I said this morning. Is there a

crisis? Of course there is a crisis. It is seen on the streets, we have

had months of sectarian violence, organised. We have had the first

minister missing. When there were issues around the dissidents, he was

the first out. He is defending the way forward. He was not on his own.

By the representatives of the DUP were keeping very quiet in that

period. The DUP says, what crisis? Joining me to discuss this is the

TUV's Jim Allister and Naomi Long from the Alliance Party. The DUP and

Sinn Fein were invited to take part in the discussion, but guess what.

They said no. Good to see you. Is power-sharing in crisis? I think the

executive is in perpetual turmoil. There is no surprise about that

because the system of government we have is incapable of working. If you

don't have to be agreed about anything before you are in

government, it is no surprise that when they are in government they

can't agree about anything. That is the floor of monetary coalition. You

have not agreed a programme of government, you are there as of

right. But United, don't you? You preferred direct rule. You want to

sit in the background and whinge about absolutely everything. Maybe I

learned that from you! APPLAUSE

. No party is big enough to form a government on its own. It is going

to have to be a coalition. I want the parties to negotiate to see who

can agree about what. Those who can agree about health, the economy, all

those important things and who can command the requisite majority, they

form the government whoever they are. Those who can't, they form the

opposition. You see the fantasy politics, can we park it for a

second? Would you rather have direct rule? I would rather have rule that

worked. That is not and so the question. Is this audience getting

is a risk from their government? I think not. Let's be very clear, what

you are advocating is that the people of Northern Ireland should be

the only part of the Western democratic world whereby all they

are not around to change their government because they must have a

monetary coalition, by law they are not even allowed to have an

opposition. What sort of system is that? And he wants to bring it all

down. You have a problem with the that? And he wants to bring it all

leadership in the country. I think it is more congregated than that.

For once, Jim and I are on common ground. I think a ball and

recuperation would be better than ground. I think a ball and

what we have at the moment. But I am a realist and I believe devolution

is better than not having devolution. All I can say is, having

is better than not having sat in Westminster and watched how

the government there treats Northern Ireland, I would prefer to have

devolution, but I would like to have it with politicians who Mitchell and

show some leadership. There is a crisis. The crisis is not the

pantomime that goes on between the crisis. The crisis is not the

DUP and Sinn Fein, which they switch on and off like a tap. Where they

have a president coming to Northern Ireland, they are best buddies. That

is a pantomime. The real crisis is the effect it is having on the

general public's confidence. 44% of people in a recent poll said they

would not vote. If that is not a democratic crisis, I don't know what

is. What a pity the DUP and Sinn Fein will not come into the studio

and talk about this tonight. This is what Peter Robinson said earlier

today. I have been involved in a number of

crises over the years and our present circumstances don't have

that feel about them at all. There are big problems and we have got to

address those issues and it is important that we do. There are

matters were Sinn Fein are disgruntled about issues, we are

disgruntled about issues, but we have always talked about those

matters. We have had conversations yesterday and today and we will

continue to do that. How you describe something is one thing,

what they actually are is another. One man's crisis is another man's

what they actually are is another. problem to be solved. Go ahead.

Where Sinn Fein and the DUP is concerned, these two parties...

These two parties in election mode at the minute and not one of them is

actually going to pull back and say that is not happening, we will give

in. At the end of the day, we have a crisis, because what is happening is

these politicians are not listening to the people. About what? About

anything. The flags, the parades. I tell you it will happen next time.

You never represent the people in east Belfast.

That is not the case but you are entitled to your opinion. Let her

finish. I am in the constituency consistently doing that work,

including in places where people claim I never am. That is people's

view, you are entitled to that, but the issue here is about democratic

representation. If you don't like what I do, you have the right to

vote for someone else. That is everybody's right, democratic right.

I did say she will. But I am willing to come here tonight and put the

case for devolution, and for leadership. We have at least shown

leadership. We have taken decisions, we have followed them through, we

have argued the cause for them. Other parties refused to take the

argument or to listen to what people have in terms of their concerns.

Chris Donnelly, is there a crisis? I don't think there is a crisis that

is going to cause the downfall of the institutions in the short-term.

I think Sinn Fein and the DUP realised that were to happen, they

would be conceding authority to their political opponents on the

outside and that is in neither of their interest. Having said that,

the fact that even the facade of a workmanlike relationship has now

been shattered doers indicate how bad things have become and allows us

to reach a never of conclusions about the short-term period ahead.

Firstly, it is likely to be characterised by elective discord.

Secondly, the outside prospect of their even being a papering over the

cracks deal has become even more remote. Thirdly, and most ominously

in the short-term, the likelihood of remote. Thirdly, and most ominously

intermittent violence through street protests is going to remain. Go

ahead. I have got to disagree with you. I live in east Belfast and I

have been to my own me personally you. I live in east Belfast and I

and she has dealt with my issues. My main concern is I have six young

children at integrated schools and this power-sharing is not worship --

working. What is that showing them? I want everybody to live together.

Go ahead. As a young politics student, I don't think there is a

crisis at all. I think the comments made today were particularly

opportunist. The fact we are talking about this on the show shows how

quickly comments like that can be blown out of proportion. A senior

member of champagne, one of the largest parties in Northern Ireland,

repeating that there is a crisis in the power-sharing institutions --

Sinn Fein? You think that is not a the power-sharing institutions --

news story? I agree it is a news story, but I think it is completely

irresponsible. He was not even able to qualify it with anything that

seemed substantial to me and that is embarrassing.

I think there is a subplot. Sinn Fein are trying to add the auntie.

The nature of this process is that for Republicans, it is always

The nature of this process is that required that the media needs to be

fed with more and more concessions, and I think they are tapping the

auntie to try and claw back. That is politics. This whole process, which

never was a settlement, and every time it is in crisis, so-called, the

unionist people are told, you need to make a few more concessions or we

will lose the process. I am sorry, to make a few more concessions or we

Unionists have no more to give. 20 seconds. Any objective observer

would say Unionists when the war on this. We are still in the United

would say Unionists when the war on Kingdom this evening. For you to say

that is just building on people's fears and concerns. The talks are

not going to start tonight because we are out of time. Good night

everybody.